Page MenuHomePhabricator

Update enwiki customizations for page triage notification
Open, Needs TriagePublic

Description

The enwiki community made customizations to the Pagetriage notifications. The updates we're making to those notifications in T125693 won't take effect until those customizations have been updated as well.

Event Timeline

jmatazzoni updated the task description. (Show Details)
jmatazzoni raised the priority of this task from to Needs Triage.
jmatazzoni added subscribers: jmatazzoni, SBisson.
Restricted Application added subscribers: StudiesWorld, Aklapper. · View Herald TranscriptFeb 12 2016, 7:38 PM

What does it mean technically?

Any message in the MediaWiki namespace (e.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MediaWiki:Pagetriage-notification-mark-as-reviewed2) will shadow the i18n files. The on-wiki message (if any) takes precedence.

In this case, the enwiki community created on-wiki messages to use the word 'patrolled' instead of 'reviewed'.

Our changes will not have any effect due to the shadowing, so if we want them to, we need to change the on-wiki messages.

See https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=MediaWiki:Pagetriage-notification-mark-as-reviewed2&diff=689375940&oldid=627667658 for an analogous past case corresponding to rEPTRb3911874d607: Make review notifications less scary by explicitly saying they're about a page.

Given that enwiki is the only user of PageTriage, should we use 'patrol' instead of 'review' and get rid of the customization?

Given that enwiki is the only user of PageTriage, should we use 'patrol' instead of 'review' and get rid of the customization?

Makes sense, unless/until we generalize it to be truly configurable for other wikis.

Actually, the keys have changed since those messages were customized on enwiki. As far as I can tell, none of the header messages[1] are shadowed right now.

The rephrasing of notifications was merged on Feb 18 and not yet deployed.

I propose we go ahead and use patrolled instead of reviewed to respect the existing consensus in that community while avoiding the unnecessary complexity of shadowing.

@jmatazzoni , @Pginer-WMF , @Catrope what do you think?

[1]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MediaWiki:Notification-header-pagetriage-mark-as-reviewed
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MediaWiki:Notification-header-pagetriage-add-maintenance-tag
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MediaWiki:Notification-header-pagetriage-add-deletion-tag

The new spec phrases the pagetriage messages as follows:

  • The page Moai has been reviewed.
  • A reviewer suggested improvements to the page Moai. Tags: prod, afd, linkrot, speedy deletion-vandalism.
  • The page Moai was marked for deletion. Tags: prod, afd, linkrot, speedy deletion-vandalism.

So, as you can see, only one of those messages even mentions the word "review." We could rewrite that one to say:

  • The page Moai has been patrolled.

But that could sound a little creepy and mysterious. The user might think the government was surveilling them.

I like what we did with the other messages, where we jumped past the action of patrolling to the determination of that review ("suggested improvements" and "marked for deletion"). What would describe -- ideally in an encouraging way -- the determination that was made? "Validate" sounds like fact checking.... Maybe something along these lines?

A reviewer approved the page Pagename
A reviewer checked and approved the page Pagename
A reviewer verified that Pagename meets community standards.

A little help please. @Quiddity? Anyone?

'review' vs. 'patrol' was discussed in T114415 a few months ago, if it can be of any help.

Let's go with this one:

A reviewer checked and approved the page Pagename

So the decision here is to change the mark-as-reviewed to be closer to community consensus and avoid the use of shadow messages.

The message notification-header-pagetriage-mark-as-reviewed should be changed
From: The page '''$3''' has been {{GENDER:$2|reviewed}}.
To: A reviewer {{GENDER:$2|checked}} and {{GENDER:$2|approved}} the page <strong>Pagename</strong>.

Let me know if this is correct and I will update the task description.

Actually, this change[1] has been deployed to enwiki on March 3rd[2], so just over a month ago. Have we received any feedback that the current text is not acceptable? @Quiddity @Trizek-WMF

[1] https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/#/c/268691/
[2] https://wikitech.wikimedia.org/wiki/Deployments/Archive/2016/02

Actually, this change[1] has been deployed to enwiki on March 3rd[2], so just over a month ago.

? It's still the original message at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MediaWiki:Notification-header-pagetriage-mark-as-reviewed

Have we received any feedback that the current text is not acceptable? @Quiddity @Trizek-WMF

No comments in the obvious locations (WT:Echo, WT:PageTriage, WT:NPP).


[...]
A reviewer checked and approved the page Pagename

A little help please. @Quiddity? Anyone?

Agreed, that seems clearer than the previous. (Sorry I didn't see this earlier. Phab mail deluge still)

Actually, this change[1] has been deployed to enwiki on March 3rd[2], so just over a month ago.

? It's still the original message at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MediaWiki:Notification-header-pagetriage-mark-as-reviewed

I actually meant: We have changed the page-triage messages to use 'review' instead of 'patrol' a month ago. We have apparently received no feedback about it. I suggest we defer the current ticket until needed.

I suggest we defer the current ticket until needed.

Apparently I had a misunderstanding. I thought I'd been told that it didn't matter what we wrote in our message because the local wiki would override that language. And since the old message isn't in the new format, then that would be inappropriate. Is that not correct? @Etonkovidova, can you please show us what the current state of PageTriage messages are? Was there already a ticket for that? Thanks.

Here's my understanding of the various elements of this problem.

  1. We have changed the page-triage messages to be consistent with everything else in the spreadsheet in T125693: Update PageTriage notifications to new language and format
  1. The current ticket was created with the assumption that the new messages would not be seen because they are shadowed on enwiki. It is actually not the case because the messages were renamed so the old messages are shadowed but the new ones are not. Therefore the messages we have created are visible.
  1. Then the conversation in the ticket became: "We use the word 'review' in our new messages but the enwiki community prefers to use 'patrol'. They won't be happy, we should change it".
  1. It has been out for a month (with the word 'review'), no feedback. I suggest we wait and see.

Thanks for the clarification Stephane. I'm fine with the proposal to send this to the backlog. Anyone object?