Lol wut? One person objects here and you drop it? We had a consensus with dozens of NPPers when drafting the list of things to request, before we ever went to the Wishlist, which is ANOTHER consensus. Otherparent much?

Where can I find information regarding who in the community is working on this further. This is one of the most important things for me regarding use of the deletion tools (I will not use the page curation tools without CSD and PROD log functionality added). I was disappointed to see a bare minimum done with the expectation that volunteers would have to finish it after you added the 'hooks',whatever that means (All I know is that it doesn't WORK). Let me know who I should be talking to regarding who is likely to finish this.

Where can I find information regarding who in the community is working on this further. This is one of the most important things for me regarding use of the deletion tools (I will not use the page curation tools without CSD and PROD log functionality added). I was disappointed to see a bare minimum done with the expectation that volunteers would have to finish it, but if so let me know who I should be talking to.

This works great, but there is a major bug with this that is going to result in a lot of errors. If you click review, or otherwise tag an article, it will list YOUR name as the previous reviewer, by default, rather than the author. So when trying to send messages to the author, I have inadvertently been accidentally adding messages to mt own talk page instead. The tool should not display your name to you if you were the one who reviewed it, this will only result in accidental sending of messages to yourself instead of the author.

It's better than nothing for sure. If the links edit filter part can't be done it can't be done I suppose. Support the name change as a result.

Just wanted to drop by to make a reminder that this was intended to be tied into the 'info tab so that these messages also get flagged for reviewers to follow up on in the info tab. (detailed in task T207452) It isn't specifically mentioned in the summary above.

I think in general having a button to add pages to the Queue would be an improvement. Yes it could lead to people re-adding too many pages and creating duplicate work, but that is something that the NPP community can make rules for how/when it should be used and there will be a relatively small community of people with this ability. Small enough to not be a problem. The benefit outweigh's the risk.

In T157046#5197807, @dom_walden wrote:

@Niharika @joeroe @Insertcleverphrasehere Just to check I have understood the problem and that you are happy with our solution:

After T157046#5155012:

1. Article is redirect.
2. Article gets marked RfD (either via the Curation Toolbar or by adding "{{subst:Rfd-NPF}}" to article).
3. Article no longer counts as a redirect; does not appear in NewPagesFeed when filtering for redirects (this was the case previously).
4. Article appears in NewPagesFeed only when filtering for "Nominated for deletion", with black Trash icon. On the article, the Curation Toolbar displays the Trash icon in black.

Would you also like the "Redirects" which appears next to "Showing" to be renamed "Redirects (not RfD)" as well?

Yeah we want AfDs marked as reviewed. If you check the original discussion where this was endorsed, everyone agreed that AfDs should stay reviewed as either way the AfD ends there is nothing more for New Page Patrol to do.

In T208685#5185356, @dom_walden wrote:

@Niharika Already reviewed pages which are marked for deletion now become unreviewed. I'm guessing that is good?

Awesome work folks!

@Niharika Might as well load up the 'appreciation' section as well as tagging and deletion.
Would the page info section still be able to load even without the extra metadata? It is useful to have the info tab as well, as it gives the author info and page history without having to navigate away from the page and also ties into other NPP tools such as the copyvio check script (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:FR30799386/copyvio-check), which loads its output at the bottom of that tab.

On a side note, we did notice that the 'no references' flag doesn't look for alternate citation styles, only </ref> tags. So it will flag an article that uses an alternate citation style (such as https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Get_to_the_Boat) as having 'no references'. Thought it worth reporting the bug, even if it is a relatively uncommon occurrence.

@Aklapper Fair enough.
My understanding is that the deletion sections are hardcoded, while the tags section can be modified by changing on-wiki .js pages. (if this understanding is incorrect please let me know).

The feature appears to be working as expected yes! I have seen flags for 'Orphan', 'No categories' and 'Blocked Users' are working (the stuff that was originally intended to be implemented). And it is pulling up a red number next to the 'I' symbol related to the number of issues, which is perfect.

In T157046#5016329, @Niharika wrote:

@Insertcleverphrasehere @joeroe Can you confirm that the task description accurately reflects what the need is? Thank you.

For new page patrollers: Without reviews in all public logs it can be difficult to figure out the timeline of who reviewed an article when checking to logs.

See Cohaf's comments on the discussion page (talk page).

In T50552#4803223, @Liuxinyu970226 wrote:

@Insertcleverphrasehere

Other wiki's particularly zh and de seem interested.

[Citation needed]

This ticket has been identified as a priority item for Page curation and New Page Feed improvements currently being discussed on the community wishlist survey. Other wiki's particularly zh and de seem interested.

It seems to me that the obvious solution is to make less of the tollbar hardcoded and more of it customisable via on-wiki .js pages. The 'tags' section currently works this way, and if the deletion section was changed to work via on-wiki .js pages, then it too would be customisable for each wiki however they need it to work for their deletion processes. Future work on the toolbar and New Pages feed should also focus on being Wiki-Agnostic as well, or at least keeping as much as possible on-wiki in .js pages that can be customised for each wiki as they see fit.

Twinkle has been updated to not mark CSDs as 'reviewed', (It never did mark PRODs as 'reviewed' in the past, for exactly this reason). Page Curation needs to follow suit. I've been informed that this cannot be done through on-wiki customisation of the .js pages.

@WingedBladesofGodric I disagree strongly. Redirects are a core part of NPP, and many new NPR rights holders don't know because they aren't ticked by default at Special:NewPagesFeed. If those editors don't enjoy reviewing redirects, they can feel free to untick it of course.

This has been completed on-wiki using some clever tricks in the .js files by @Winged Blades of Godric

@Tgr There is still a use case for it. See T207446

@kostajh That would probably work totally fine. There is already a button to add the article to the queue (the review/unreview button). I don't think that would often be necessary, but it might come in handy to enable flagging of articles for other reviewers (especially in combination with the reviewer notes system (T207452) that is proposed as part of the upcoming community wishlist proposal).

OK thanks very much Aklapper, Just a confirmation that this is in the process of being fixed and that we shouldn't need to request this as part of our community wishlist proposal?

Not sure why this task was ever closed. It definitely isn't a duplicate of the one suggested but an entirely different issue.

What about making the 'curate this article' link available on any article so that the Page Curation tools are not relegated to only pages in the New Page feed? T207485

Bug is still an issue: (See: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&action=view&page=Geology_of_Afghanistan).
Not sure if the patch above has just not been implemented yet?

In T207761#4689146, @Aklapper wrote:

(assuming this is a request about PageTriage)

The best solution would simply to have a little check box show up there when ureviewing with "notify previous reviewer?" and a text field to fill in. It should probably be unchecked by default as most reviewers regard this automated message as a nuisance. It could be useful for pointing out errors in reviewing however.

The script could either look for a certain header, or we could have a template {{reviewer comments}} that it searches for. Either way would work.

This will continue to be an issue until it gets fixed. Essentially the issue is that when a redirect is converted to an article, it gets sent to the new page feed. But if this action is reverted back to a redirect, it stays in the new page feed (but shouldn't).

Are you serious? @WingedBladesofGodric is one of the few people who has been willing to actually help us out over at New Page Patrol with the list of tasks that have languished for years (some of which are apparently very simple to accomplish). We are all very sick of being pointed in the direction of the Wishlist even for fixing bugs which have existed in the software for years (like the one that makes using it for AfD impossible on second AfDs).

Listing #80 is for T207485. This task is for listing #79

Good to know. I'm pretty much done at the moment, But I wanted to flag all of these as they are all potentially part of the NPP Community Wishlist Proposal.
A lot of the other tags at the link below might also need the MediaWiki-extensions-PageCuration tag too.

Recently people were having trouble getting it to load and the WMF released a fix, but this now means that it auto-loads whenever you open a page from Special:NewPagesFeed. The old way was ''OK'', but it often was not clear why the Page curation toolbar wasn't showing up, and we got a lot of annoyed messages from reviewers trying to figure out how to get it back. I suspect some reviewers probably couldn't figure out how to turn it back on again and stopped reviewing.

This discussion is relevant to this task.

Requested here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Page_Curation/Suggested_improvements#15._Jumpback
and here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Page_Curation/Suggested_improvements#51._Allow_users_to_override_infinite_scrolling_of_the_feed