[Engineering] What are the main edit-review tools?

Mon May 9 19:50:12 UTC 2016

Aaron,

French Wikipedia uses LiveRC
<https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikip%C3%A9dia:LiveRC> with a similar
behavior as you describe for Huggle: edits made with that tool are tagged (
example
<https://fr.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Legolas&curid=66404&diff=126026798&oldid=126026776>),
and people can use it to send invites
<https://fr.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Discussion_utilisateur:Paolo_Cremona&curid=9997766&diff=126025492&oldid=126025488>
to the "Forum des nouveaux" (the tea-house like on fr.wp). LiveRC is
avaliable on +10 wikis. If your tool is easy to use, we may have access to
more data and compare the different habits.

Same for Huggle on other wikis: we just have to identify the type of
messages we are looking for, right?

Benoît

On Thu, May 5, 2016 at 4:21 PM, Aaron Halfaker <ahalfaker at wikimedia.org>
wrote:

> For English Wikipedia, I could probably get you some basic stats in ~30
> mins of work.  In order to detect tool-based edits, we use patterns that
> the tools leave in edit comments.  E.g. Huggle leaves a link to the huggle
> docs: [[WP:HG|HG]]  My collaborators and I have build up mechanisms for
> matching these edit comments so that we can attribute tool to edit.
>
> Building this dataset up for other wikis would be hard, but I have a few
> ideas.  E.g. we can look for common patterns in edit comments -- especially
> those links that appear very often -- and do a little bit of manual vetting
> to identify those comment edit comment patterns that are related to tools.
> This would probably take a week or so to do for the first non-English
> Wikipedia, but the rest would be much faster, I imagine.
>
> Generally, I don't have much time to devote to this, but I'd be happy to
> advise someone else who can spend more time looking at it.  This could
> serve as valuable training for someone on your team.
>
> While I was looking around for recent data on this, I found some plots
> that provide some good food for thought.
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Warning_posting.monthly.enwiki.svg
> shows the introduction and sudden rise of warning template postings.
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Teahouse_invitations.monthly.enwiki.svg
> shows the more recent rise of teahouse invitation postings.  These are from
> a study that Jonathan and I are working on around the effectiveness of the
> teahouse.  See
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Teahouse_long_term_new_editor_retention
>
>
> -Aaron
>
> On Wed, May 4, 2016 at 7:23 PM, Joe Matazzoni <jmatazzoni at wikimedia.org>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Guys,
>>
>> We want to reach out and talk to people involved in creating the “main”
>> tools that are used for edit review, page review and vandalism fighting.
>> I’m sure I’m asking this question in the wrong way, but do you guys know
>> what that list of top tools would be? Put another way, if you wanted to
>> compile a list of the tools whose users would comprise 80% of the
>> patrollers using tools, what tools would be on that list?
>>
>> If you can identify the tools that are popular in languages other than
>> english, that would also be helpful. Or if you know who might have this
>> info...
>>
>> Thanks for your help!
>>
>> Joe
>>
>> _____________________
>>
>> *Joe Matazzoni*
>> Product Manager, Collaboration
>> Wikimedia Foundation, San Francisco
>> mobile 202.744.7910
>> jmatazzoni at wikimedia.org
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Engineering mailing list
> Engineering at lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/engineering
>
>

-- 
Benoît Evellin (Trizek)
Community Liaison
Wikimedia Foundation
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/engineering/attachments/20160509/a854e498/attachment.html>