MediaWiki talk:Ores-damaging-legend

Protected edit request on 7 November 2017[edit]

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

‹ The template Edit fully-protected is being considered for merging. ›

This is part of a proposal to change the wording of the watchlist legend abbreviation descriptions and to add an underline to the letter being used as the abbreviation. All changes but this one have been implemented since the initial request. See Template_talk:Watchlist_legend#Suggestion_to_trim_the_descriptions for the discussion that lead to this request. For this description, I suggest that the wording of the following description:

This edit may have problems and should be reviewed (more info)

be changed to:

Edit marked for review (more info)

Eric ^talk 15:13, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Eric: I'm not loving that - the verbiage "marked for review" makes me think this was an editor-driven marking, not ORES. I'm all for making it shorter. Perhaps one of these:

ORES review requested
ORES review
ORES marked for review
Edit flagged by ORES

? — xaosflux ^Talk 15:19, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Xaosflux, I see your point, good suggestion. Or maybe the original one I suggested, plus a link to ORES in "more info"?:

Edit should be reviewed for problems (more info) Eric ^talk 15:26, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
We can ditch the "more info" and just link one of the words, like the other legends. Just added some more options above. — xaosflux ^Talk 15:27, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Eric: I'm actually liking this one the best so far:

Edit flagged by ORES

— xaosflux ^Talk 15:28, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

They aren't really "marked" like an unpatrolled page is, there is no 'unmarking' action, etc. — xaosflux ^Talk 15:29, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, yes, that looks good to me. My motivation for not including the text "ORES" was that most people might not know what it is (I didn't). But then they would probably not be potential reviewers, I presume. Eric ^talk 15:44, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Done @Eric: OK this is live now, give it a spin - if this causes confusion we can always update it again! — xaosflux ^Talk 15:48, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note, this is also the legend box in Special:RecentChanges. — xaosflux ^Talk 15:49, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Great, thanks, Xaosflux! So your creation of the new interface page automatically usurped the old one? Cool. The only other thing that strikes me here is the "damaging" language, which do I see appears at the ORES tool page, but is not a term I've seen elsewhere in the Wikiverse in reference to vandalism. Not to be too nit-picky, but do you think it might be better to name the interface page something like ORES-vandalism-review ? Eric ^talk 15:55, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Eric: Yes, that provides a localized interface message, overriding the extension/mediawiki default. Changing the message label is not something we can control from the English Wikipedia, you would need to file a phabricator ticket and ask for it to be globally changed in the software. Part of the reasoning for that verbiage is in mw:ORES review tool, and I suggest you discuss any proposed changes at mw:Talk:ORES review tool prior to attempting a phab ticket. — xaosflux ^Talk 16:05, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, and thanks again for all the help! Eric ^talk 16:07, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]