Wiktionary talk:Whitelist

• Discussions from 2010 and earlier are in this archive. No discussions took place in 2011.

Auto-refresh of Special:RecentChanges

One feature that User:Connel MacKenzie/patrolled.js offered was the ability to automatically refresh Special:RecentChanges every so often. I imagine that this was mostly useful when it was the only automated form of patrolling (i.e., before we started adding people to the "autopatroller" group), but I figured I might as well ask — is this a feature I should add to MediaWiki:Gadget-PatrollingEnhancements.js? (I'm thinking it would be off by default, but admins could add something like GPE.refreshEveryNMinutes = 5; to their Special:MyPage/common.js if they wanted it.) Would anyone use that, or should I not bother? —Ruakh_TALK 23:01, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

I wouldn't use it; when I patrol, I tend to pull up Recentchanges, hide patrolled edits, set it to 500 items, turn on Lupin popups and take my time going through things, refreshing manually when necessary. - -sche (discuss) 00:24, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

Rollbacker

Er, what are the rules for making a rollbacker on here? Personally, I like that this isn't too ruly, but I feel like I don't always know what's going on. --Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 15:07, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

I don’t think there are any rules about it. It doesn’t come up very often. Usually if someone is ready to be a rollbacker, he’s ready to be an admin. I seem to remember only one case where someone wanted to just be a rollbacker (he wanted to fight vandalism, but didn’t care to make edits or do any other kind of work). It wasn’t a problem, and it doesn’t require a vote. —Stephen ^(Talk) 04:14, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

only sysops?

In steps 1,2,3 could we change "sysop" to something like "sysop or bureaucrat", maybe even allowing autopatrollers and rollbackers to have a say? SemperBlotto (talk) 15:28, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

I wouldn't go as far as autopatroller. Otherwise, sounds good. (You know, you could just act as if you're still a sysop and no-one would complain. We miss your patrolling.) —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 01:04, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

The use of "sysop" is not so much an expression of policy as a statement of fact: the page is protected so that only sysops can edit it. (Naturally, we could change that protection level if we wanted, but the next level down is "autoconfirmed", which basically just means that the editor has been around a few days. Unless there's a strong reason to open up the page to non-sysops, I think we're better off leaving it as it is.) —Ruakh_TALK 02:56, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

I think lowering the protection level would be reasonable. There are a number of editors who have been around quite a while but are not admins for whatever reason. I don't think it's really necessary to limit the procedure to admins, as it's not exactly something likely to be abused. --Yair rand (talk) 04:15, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

Request for autopatrolled flag

I think being in the autopatrolled group might solve this problem (permalink) for me. Is someone willing to nominate me on this page? Mathonius (talk) 03:45, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

Nomination suggestion

I suggest adding Taokailam (talk • contribs) to the autopatrolled group, a Hebrew editor that has been doing good, careful edits with overly descriptive summaries for a while now. —Enosh (talk) 10:42, 20 November 2016 (UTC)

Request for template editor rights

If I may, I would like to request that template editor rights be granted to my account. (On a related note, I get the feeling that there are probably more accounts that could also do with these rights here and that the "template editor" user group is currently underused.) —suzukaze (t・c) 10:45, 31 December 2016 (UTC)

Never here

So, I'm still not allowed on the Whitelist, huh? What's up with that? --Lirafafrod (talk) 19:52, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

You've only been editing a very short time (a week and a half). Usually it takes a bit longer than that before other editors are comfortable with you. I believe the time period is typically one month. Also, you should add a Babel box to your user page, such as {{Babel|en|es-4|de-3|fr-3}}, indicating your self-assessed competence levels in any languages that you will work in (even if it's only English). In this Wiktionary, the Babel box is considered important. The other editors want to feel that you know what you're doing when you add entries in a given language. Then the last consideration is a good track record of formatting the entries correctly (the correct templates, correct ordering of sections, correct linguistic information, and so on). So it shouldn't be long before someone nominates you for Whitelisting. —Stephen ^(Talk) 21:49, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

@Stephen G. Brown: Lirafafrod is WF. Does he still commit acts of vandalism btw, or does he just ask to be blocked when he's bored of a pseudo? --Barytonesis (talk) 21:52, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

As far as I know, WF has not been committing acts of vandalism when he gets bored. I could be wrong, but I think he's finally past that phrase. —Stephen ^(Talk) 21:56, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

@Stephen G. Brown: I see. Isn't it annoying to have to patrol all his edits just because of frequent changes of pseudonyms? --Barytonesis (talk) 22:03, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

Yes, it is. I was wondering how this new editor was able to create lots of new entries with good formatting and correct (if incomplete) information. —Stephen ^(Talk) 22:16, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

@Stephen G. Brown, Barytonesis, he created some vandalistic entries when he gave up on his previous account ([1]), and even on his best behaviour, WF shows little care for formatting and clarity of information, preferring instead to rush and create entries as fast as possible. — Ungoliant ^(falai) 11:13, 4 December 2017 (UTC)

I really wish he'd stop with that stuff. I like him and would like to see him finally come around. I have never understood what makes some users (not just WF) insist on being blocked when they decide to quit or take a break. What's so hard about just stopping for as long as one wants? (I wonder if it has anything to do with the weird irrational notion that some anons have that makes them fear registering a username.) —Stephen ^(Talk) 21:31, 4 December 2017 (UTC)

Not wanting a user name is perfectly reasonable. I didn't want one when I started here, avoided having one for months, and only got one because I kept being wrongly blocked as WF by Blotto. Some people find it tiresome to have to sign in all the time. I personally loathe typing passwords, but am also unwilling to stay logged in, in case others use my computer. Equinox ◑ 02:21, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

All good reasons to keep WF off the Whitelist. --Lirafafrod (talk) 17:28, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

Image Request

Icon that typically represents the autopatrolled user right on Wiktionary

Add the logo for Wiktionary Autopatrollers to this page. —Eli355 (👄👄👄👄 • 📜📜📜📜 • 🍩🍩🍩🍩) 18:04, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

But… why? It seems like extra clutter without much benefit; I’m not sure what purpose having a logo for autopatrollers could serve. — Vorziblix (talk · contribs) 13:19, 29 November 2018 (UTC)

Shouldn't they be called "autopatrollees"?

I mean they get patrolled automatically. They aren't doing the patrolling ("autopatroller"). Equinox ◑ 03:12, 12 June 2023 (UTC)

Autopatroller means "self-patroller", i.e. one who patrolls oneself. When editing, you should still make sure you don't do anything stupid, so you patrol yourself. Thadh (talk) 09:08, 12 June 2023 (UTC)