Change Details

This card tracks a proposal that's currently part of the Community Wishlist Survey: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/2015_Community_Wishlist_Survey The Wishlist Survey voting phase lasts until Dec 14th. After the voting has concluded, the top proposals will form the backlog for the Community Tech team to investigate and address. **Proposal**: Background I am a fly-by-night-editor: Most of my edits are to pages I visit only once. Occasionally I get feedback for my edits in the form of a overt revert, but not very often. If I were an optimist, I would pat myself on the back and assume that my work has been accepted. But I am a realist and I know that many of the edits I made have been silently reverted once I have left the scene, when another editor simply edited over my edit rather than revert it. This is my definition of a silent revert. Silent reverts happen for two reasons I can think of: * The most common is probably done by another fly-by-nighter who parachutes into an page, knows nothing about its history and simply edits something that s/he believe needs fixing * There are also a few editors who revert silently deliberately on-the-sly. In my case these types are stalkers who for reasons they have never shared with me just do not like my edits. They know I do not watch pages I edit and take advantage of it. Tool request It would be nice to have a tool that one could use to analyze a sampling of articles one edited to easily spot silent reverts. Sorry for submitting this half-baked tool request, but it looks like time is running out on this survey. Ottawahitech (talk) 15:34, 19 November 2015 (UTC) https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/2015_Community_Wishlist_Survey/Watchlists#Tools_for_fly-by-night-editors_to_analyze_silent_reverts

I am a fly-by-night-editor: Most of my edits are to pages I visit only once. Occasionally I get feedback for my edits in the form of a overt revert, but not very often. If I were an optimist, I would pat myself on the back and assume that my work has been accepted. But I am a realist and I know that many of the edits I made have been silently reverted once I have left the scene, when another editor simply edited over my edit rather than revert it. This is my definition of a silent revert. Silent reverts happen for two reasons I can think of: * The most common is probably done by another fly-by-nighter who parachutes into an page, knows nothing about its history and simply edits something that s/he believe needs fixing * There are also a few editors who revert silently deliberately on-the-sly. In my case these types are stalkers who for reasons they have never shared with me just do not like my edits. They know I do not watch pages I edit and take advantage of it. Tool request It would be nice to have a tool that one could use to analyze a sampling of articles one edited to easily spot silent reverts. Sorry for submitting this half-baked tool request, but it looks like time is running out on this survey. Ottawahitech (talk) 15:34, 19 November 2015 (UTC) This card tracks a proposal from the 2015 Community Wishlist Survey: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/2015_Community_Wishlist_Survey This proposal received 4 support votes, and was ranked #91 out of 107 proposals. https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/2015_Community_Wishlist_Survey/Watchlists#Tools_for_fly-by-night-editors_to_analyze_silent_reverts

This card tracks a proposal that's currently part of the Community Wishlist Survey: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/2015_Community_Wishlist_Survey The Wishlist Survey voting phase lasts until Dec 14th. After the voting has concluded, the top proposals will form the backlog for the Community Tech team to investigate and address. **Proposal**: Background I am a fly-by-night-editor: Most of my edits are to pages I visit only once. Occasionally I get feedback for my edits in the form of a overt revert, but not very often. If I were an optimist, I would pat myself on the back and assume that my work has been accepted. But I am a realist and I know that many of the edits I made have been silently reverted once I have left the scene, when another editor simply edited over my edit rather than revert it. This is my definition of a silent revert. Silent reverts happen for two reasons I can think of: * The most common is probably done by another fly-by-nighter who parachutes into an page, knows nothing about its history and simply edits something that s/he believe needs fixing * There are also a few editors who revert silently deliberately on-the-sly. In my case these types are stalkers who for reasons they have never shared with me just do not like my edits. They know I do not watch pages I edit and take advantage of it. Tool request It would be nice to have a tool that one could use to analyze a sampling of articles one edited to easily spot silent reverts. Sorry for submitting this half-baked tool request, but it looks like time is running out on this survey. Ottawahitech (talk) 15:34, 19 November 2015 (UTC) This card tracks a proposal from the 2015 Community Wishlist Survey: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/2015_Community_Wishlist_Survey This proposal received 4 support votes, and was ranked #91 out of 107 proposals. https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/2015_Community_Wishlist_Survey/Watchlists#Tools_for_fly-by-night-editors_to_analyze_silent_reverts