HRWiki talk:Recent changes patrol

From Homestar Runner Wiki

Revision as of 23:49, 12 May 2005

How do you join? -- The Real Zajac 11:32, 3 May 2005 (PDT)

Just add your name to the list and start patrollin'. Thanks for your interest. —JoeyDay (Talk) 18:42, 3 May 2005 (UTC)

I guess I already kind of do that... (Except for the marking pages as patrolled, I didn't know that.) What's the difference between just doing it and joining, except for that you HAVE to do it when you join? Kvb 20:41, 4 May 2005 (UTC)

There's not much difference, in all reality. We're simply trying to foster a feeling of belonging by forming these various committees. You're certainly free to patrol edits without adding your name to the list. — Joey Day (talk) 01:01, 5 May 2005 (UTC)

Well, I added my name anyways. I don't really have a feeling of belonging yet, though. We'll see... Kvb 10:40, 6 May 2005 (UTC)

Patrol a troll

Do you mark an edit as patrolled if it's a trolling edit? --Gafaddict 23:28, 3 May 2005 (UTC)

No. Instead, copy the URL of the diff from your location bar and use that in your entry on the HRWiki:WikiTroll page. -- Tom 01:19, 4 May 2005 (UTC)

Why wouldn't it get marked as patrolled? "Patrolled" just means someone has seen the edit, it doesn't necessarily mean the edit was a good one. If I'm looking down the list and see an edit that isn't patrolled, then see that it was trolling, I'm likely to head over to the WikiTroll page myself and add the guy again. Doesn't it make sense to mark those so we don't duplicate our efforts? — Joey Day (talk) 15:11, 4 May 2005 (UTC)

Yes, perfect sense. I just encountered a similar situation where someone had already reverted a bad edit. I needed to patrol both the bad edit, and the edit that reverted the bad edit. This way, neither show up in the hidepartolled display. -- Tom 15:16, 4 May 2005 (UTC)

Sorry, Tom, you lost me. Are you advocating marking all edits as patrolled, or do you think we should leave bad edits as unpatrolled? — Joey Day (talk) 15:58, 4 May 2005 (UTC)

Whoops, sorry. Yeah, you're right. Everything should be marked patrolled. After one has dealt with the situation (reverting the page, adding the diff to the WikiTroll list) they should mark the edit as patrolled. -- Tom 16:16, 4 May 2005 (UTC)

Marking new pages as patrolled

I found a couple new pages that weren't patrolled. It took me a while to figure it out myself, but it's a different process to mark a new page patrolled. Since there is no "diff" link from recent changes, you instead click on the article name. At the bottom right corner of the article, there's a link that says "Mark this new article as patrolled". Hope this is helpful. — Joey Day (talk) 15:59, 4 May 2005 (UTC)

Is anyone else actually doing this?

I just single-handedly patrolled over a thousand edits (about 4 days worth). Took me about 8 hours in between tech support calls (today was a slow day). The recent changes screen is BEAUTIFUL right now. Not a red exclamation point to be found. I don't want to have to do this again, so everyone try to stay on top of it from now on. Thanks. — Joey (talk·edits) 21:45, 12 May 2005 (UTC)

I've noticed that there's pages and pages of unpatrolled edits sometimes. Is there anyway to keep the Hide Patrolled option on? it's aggrivating to have to patroll an edit and then turn it back on every single time. mibluvr13 23:48, 12 May 2005 (UTC)

I do it everytime I see a red exclamation mark, but the past couple of days they have already been patrolled (by you, I'm guessing). →FireBird