Jump to content

MediaWiki talk:Recentchangestext/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3→Archive 5

Fundraising

Could we please not have fundraising attempts on Wikipedia:Recentchanges? Yes, it's a terrible disaster but this is not the place. --fvw* 14:52, 2004 Dec 31 (UTC)

What's more, everybody who uses Recentchanges is quite capable of finding the article on wikipedia that tells us how to donate, and we've all seen the news on the frontpage. The banner here is entirely useless and just gets in the way of those of us RC patrolling. --fvw* 14:53, 2004 Dec 31 (UTC)

Wikipedia frequently has fundraising drives on the RC page, generally to purchase servers and to fund our activities. In theory, we should be having one every 3-6 months. While this is not directly related to the Wikimedia Foundation, we receive millions of hits per day and are one of the most prominent sites on the web. We are getting especial attention due to our rapid, updated coverage of the disaster. For those people turning to us for that alone, it would be important for us to do our little part to contribute to the relief efforts by a small notice. Danny 14:58, 31 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Fundraising drives for Wikimedia are something entirely different to general fundraising. Also, the masses turning to wikipedia for information do not use Recent Changes. --fvw* 15:04, 2004 Dec 31 (UTC)

Actually, we would like to encourage them to use Recent Changes and become involved with the project. As for the difference between this and Wikimedia fundraising, yes, however, we also have a responsibility that extends beyond our particular mandate to pay for servers, and I say that as someone who is involved with the larger fundraising efforts. Danny 15:07, 31 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I see no harm in this, and a lot of good. We are a community as well as an encyclopaedia, this is something we can do as a community without affecting our primary role as an encyclopaedia. And this community pages is a better place than the main page (which I would argue against) for this message. After all, it's used for our own fundraising drives. Let's keep it I say. -- sannse (talk) 15:21, 31 Dec 2004 (UTC)

But the people using this page are already aware of both the disaster and the fundraising. Put the messages somewhere were a lot of people will see it infrequently, rather than a small group of people who have it using up screen real-estate every few minutes. --fvw* 15:27, 2004 Dec 31 (UTC)
I've got to agree with Fvw—this is pretty poorly placed. Wikipedians will know where to go. Nonwikipedians are going to see it on the main page, and if it gets removed from there (which I also think is appropriate), they're way more likely to click on Indian Ocean Earthquake in In The News and see it there than stumbling into Recent Changes. And anything that makes the terrible morass of RCP more difficult or even just more annoying should be looked at very skeptically. —Korath (Talk) 15:26, 31 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Well, I'm not totally convinced, but after talking to Jimbo, he feels it should go (but be included as a neutral link in "in the news") - so that's what's been done -- sannse (talk) 15:43, 31 Dec 2004 (UTC)

New Feature: Patrolled Edits

I noticed that recently a feature for patrolling edits has been added. I think this is a grand idea, but... I have no idea how to use it. Perhaps a link to a page explaining this would be in order? Ambush Commander 17:10, Jan 2, 2005 (UTC)

It's pretty self-explanatory I think. You click on the diff in recent changes and there's a link "mark as patrolled" there. If you click that, the ! in recent changes in front of that diff disappears. --fvw* 17:20, 2005 Jan 2 (UTC)
Savvy, I see it now. It's a kind of counterintuitive placing for the link, I guess (because it is placed where a Next Edit link would be). Thanks! Ambush Commander 17:26, Jan 2, 2005 (UTC)

Remove Cleanup?

Since the Cleanup process has completely changed, is there any point in keeping a link to the Cleanup page? RickK 08:32, Jan 18, 2005 (UTC)


Since wikipedia now has that international frount page do we still need all the links to other languages here?Geni 23:00, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Furthermore many other language wikipedias do not have these links [1][2][3][4]. On top of that the number of links has reached the point where anyone using the classic skin will no longer see the top line of the recent changes

Would it still be possible though to include a link somewhere to the other language encyclopedias? Just a single link to the portal will do. -- Francs2000 | Talk [[]] 16:30, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Doable but you need to be better than me at wikipedia markup to do it.Geni 16:42, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Which I'm not so we'll leave it to someone else... -- Francs2000 | Talk [[]] 16:44, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I liked being able to move back and forth between the Recent Changes pages of other Wikipedias. Main Pages aren't as useful to me, but now there's three or four steps to get where I want to go, rather than just one. I think we should put them back. Adam Bishop 00:19, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Bookmarks? That is how I move between wikiprojects (well ok I use firefox so can keep both open in seperate tabs).Geni 02:15, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Can the links to other languages please be restored. I found them very convenient and miss them. DJ Bobo 06:41, 26 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I added them back before realizing that the list had become bloated with links to empty languages. Before I had a chance to pare down the list so that it wasn't longer than the changes, the page was protected.... Can someone unprotect it so I can pare down the list to a managable number or otherwise do that themselves. Thanks DJ Bobo 04:44, 13 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Protection??

Please un-protect the page. It has a live link that needs to be removed. Georgia guy 20:04, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Asuming it's protected for a good reason I've changed the live link for a non-live one.-- Francs2000 | Talk [[]] 22:38, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)
The goatse has appeared on this page a couple of times recently.Geni 23:55, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)
I've just discovered what you were talking about. Eww... -- Francs2000 | Talk [[]] 04:06, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Protection, and edits I couldn't put in

Would admins who protect this page please be so kind as to put in an edit with a summary that says so, even if you don't add a big honking protection template for obvious reasons? I'm of course assuming that there were good reasons for protecting it, but it's sort of hard to see who did it, why, and for how long. Now that that's over with:

I could walk away and wait for someone else to undoubtedly make these edits without my suggesting so, but that would be, like, totally un-wiki. >:-) JRM 01:14, 2005 Mar 30 (UTC)

Edits are done/no longer relevant. Protection status of this page has been clarified at Wikipedia:Protected page#Visibility reasons. I'll leave this page to the admins, then. JRM 00:42, 2005 Apr 1 (UTC)

Requests

  • Songline — Gangleri | Th | T 11:30, 2005 Apr 5 (UTC)
    • I added it to the queue so it should be eventually put on the page --BrokenSegue 14:15, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Songline now has an article.
• Thorpe • 14:09, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • Highlight changes within an article.
    • When selecting a recently changed article, the article should show the article, but highlight the changes made within the article. This would allow a user to see instantly what has been changed.

Help

Hi, im from serbian wikipedia. I want to know how to add Wikipedia:Recentchanges to top of the page Special:Recentchanges. --Sasa Stefanovic 14:43, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Requests

I have created a page for a request but it is still listed on the page - why?

• Thorpe • 08:52, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Because no sysop has yet changed the list <it isn't automatic>. I'll do it right now. Thanks for pointing that out. BrokenSegue 12:16, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)

New requested articles list

The new way of displaying the requested articles here is ugly. What was wrong with the old way? Tuf-Kat 23:27, Apr 24, 2005 (UTC)

Um, seconded. Please don't do that again. I'm assuming Template:RAScroller was some sort of experiment. It failed. Aside from the hideous layout, please don't get fancy with templates for no particular reason. If it ain't broke, don't fix it. Hand-edited wiki wins out from templates in most cases, unless a consistent look across pages is required, or the template hides markup too fancy to bother with more than once, or a significant amount of simple but verbose markup needs to be replicated many times. The templates used here barely fall in the second category, and that only because they got deliberately fancy. JRM 23:45, 2005 Apr 24 (UTC)

dumb question suggestion

I can't help thinking I'm not the only person who has no idea what the blue triangles mean... and shouldn't there also be a footnote to explain the m & N ?? just a thought Erich 23:33, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)

What blue triangles? I don't see any? BrokenSegue 23:34, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)
It's what you get when you turn on "enhanced recent changes" in your preferences (under "recent changes and stub display"). Provided JavaScript isn't disabled, you can click on the triangle to "expand" multiple changes to the same article. Coalescing these changes makes RC easier to read. I'm guessing this isn't documented explicitly because the effect is rather obvious... Though the option is not.
Quoting the top of this talk page:

For an explanation of Special:Recentchanges, see Wikipedia:Recent Changes and m:MediaWiki User's Guide: The Recent Changes page.

The latter has all you need. Footnotes on the actual page would clutter it, especially since nobody needs these after the first viewing. JRM · Talk 07:51, 2005 Apr 26 (UTC)

do you think the page could be me a little more user/newbie friendly by having a link to explanation on the page the page itself rather than the talk page? just a thought....Erich 01:13, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I think that's a good idea. The page is protected, so a sympathetic admin will have to do it. JRM · Talk 01:40, 2005 Apr 27 (UTC)
I hope my addition of "How to understand symbols, purpose, and other aspects of this page" is what you folk wanted. Questions and requests were not at all dumb. I worked out only last week what the blue triangles did! Robin Patterson 06:15, 3 May 2005 (UTC)

I was not able to find "How to understand symbols, purpose, and other aspects of this page" The blue triangles are still not explained on the Recent Changes page, nor on the Help:Recent changes page. They should be. Wuzzy 12:24, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

RCScroller

{{RAScroller}}

Should look like Image:Rscroller.png. Maybe usable for showing a longer list of things. Based on Template:Scroller, which is customizable {{scroller|title(left div)|height|width}}. -SV|t 22:05, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Why does this page have no interlang links? I miss them strongly ... --Aphaea* 09:53, 6 May 2005 (UTC)

There was an edit war a little while back over this see [5] . Apparently the links take up too much space. I think that problem is only visible when you use a certain skin. BrokenSegue 19:58, 6 May 2005 (UTC)
Thanks for your information. I admit it is annoying in "default" skin ... How about having "Wikipedia:All recentchanges on Wikimedia projects" and several links to major projects? (Like meta recentchanges). --Aphaea* 03:34, 7 May 2005 (UTC)
I don't know if there is enough room for that. We want to keep it fairly short (in my opinion it's allready on the longish side). BrokenSegue 04:03, 8 May 2005 (UTC)

The problem appears in the clasic skin (it may appear in others I don't know) see this version for the problem http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Recentchanges&oldid=10254186 Geni 04:20, 8 May 2005 (UTC)

Please remove Translation request

Palm Beach Gardens, Florida has been translated, please remove it from the Recentchangestext page. Ambush Commander 20:20, May 9, 2005 (UTC)


doneGeni 22:01, 9 May 2005 (UTC)

Partial redundancy

This page is obviously a good idea. However, it's partially redundant with the (admittedly newer) WP:W. Should something be done about that? Radiant_* 12:27, May 20, 2005 (UTC)

Notm. This page is high profile which is why stuff that people feel needs to be high profile ends up here. This of course conflicts with the use of the page but there are enough people who stip out anything not requirted to keep the block down to a reasonable size.Geni 13:15, 20 May 2005 (UTC)
  • Could be either way - maybe WP:W would be better off merged here :) Radiant_* 13:30, May 23, 2005 (UTC)
This page works best if the text at the top is kept as minimal as possible.Geni 00:29, 24 May 2005 (UTC)

Interwiki

I miss interwiki links to other projects ... Wikiquote, Wikibooks ... and Commons ...... and I can't find any discussion on this removal. Is it temporal or decisive? --Larus.r 06:42, 23 May 2005 (UTC)

no they can be put back if there is a reason and people want them.Geni 10:18, 23 May 2005 (UTC)
I want them back. Why were they removed? Tuf-Kat 22:11, May 23, 2005 (UTC)
you got them back. They were removed because I was try to see if there wer any other ways to reduce the size of the page.Geni 00:26, 24 May 2005 (UTC)

Date of deletion principles poll

The date of the deletion principles poll has been the subject of debate on Wikipedia talk:Schools/Deletion principles poll, and the outcome has been the consensus view that May 25 is too early to hold this contentious poll while the content of the poll is still in flux. Please could someone either remove the date from Wikipedia:Recentchanges or update it to reflect the current date of June 4th? (I am not an admin so am unable to edit pages in the Wikipedia: namespace). Thanks, Lupin 14:17, 23 May 2005 (UTC)

  • As a side point, since when is it common practice to advertise a straw poll that doesn't even propose policy on WP:Recent changes? Especially as this one is considered by consensus to be a very bad idea. Radiant_* 14:59, May 23, 2005 (UTC)

We should add a link to recent changes tools and not just LiveRC. For example: CryptoDerk's Vandal Fighter Is an extremely robust yet small recent changes client with regexp functionality. But no one knows about it! You could also add a link to [[6]]. I'm all for keeping the top small, but this sort of stuff is the kind of stuff that needs to be stuffed up there! ;P Ambush Commander 22:52, May 25, 2005 (UTC)

I think a link from the RC patrol page would be better.Geni 22:56, 25 May 2005 (UTC)

Elections

The link is sorta just hanging around there. Make it a bit more visible and align it to the left (and be more descriptive), please. Ambush Commander 19:46, May 31, 2005 (UTC)

Enhancement request: show only new articles

Is it possible to have an option to show only new articles? (or to put it another way, a function equivalent to "hide all changes". There are just too many changes a day for this article to be of any use nowadays. --81.154.140.229 19:31, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I think you are looking for Special:Newpages.Geni 19:45, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Yes, that's it. So it must be easy for that to be made a standard option, same as "hide minor edits". --Red King 14:16, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)

live recent changes feed.

Where can I get a copy of the live recent changes feed to use on my own wiki? --Phroziac 15:41, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)

RSS Feed description

The system message Recentchangestext is not only used as the heading text for the RecentChanges page but also as the description in that page's RSS feed. As such, it should contain a short description of a few words - a sentence or two at most. The description is used as a guide by aggregators (RSS readers) and by RSS serving facilities such as Yahoo.

For this purposes of the RSS feed something like the default MediaWiki text of 

Track the most recent changes to the wiki on this page.

is just fine.

So something, somewhere, really needs to change since I don't suppose we want to lose the text currently held here but nor should we be bombarding people with over a screen full of garbled text as an RSS description! --Douglas 12:54, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)

One potential solution is to put hold the Recentchangestext text in a (locked) template. This template would be referenced from Recentchangestext. That way, at least the only 'garbage' being output would be the template code. For example:
The latest alterations to Wikipedia data. {{Template:Recentchangestext}}

Would we replace the current link to meta with a local one Wikipedia:Elections for the Board of Trustees of the Wikimedia Foundation? I'm afraid most of people who can vote on English Wikipdia aren't eligible on meta (and will fail to vote at that time). The document itself is identical to the meta version. --Aphaea* 12:10, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Would it be possible to discuss linking to a separate page that lists the recent changes pages of other languages/projects rather than having them all in the page with the other links? (Don't know if this has been discussed before) -- Francs2000 | Talk 17:32, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Update Requests

Admins need to keep updating the requests. If it's blue, it goes! It's not that complicated. If you run out of ideas, check out Wikipedia:Requested articles. Really. Superm401 | Talk July 3, 2005 21:43 (UTC)

rcnamespaces

Recent changes by namespace

All users
All
Main
Image
Category
User
Wikipedia
Template
Talk
Help
Portal

Anonymous
All
Main
Image
Category
User
Wikipedia
Template
Talk
Help
Portal

I have recently created the rcnamespaces template, originally for my user page. It makes it easier to access the new filtering options for recent changes. I have already caught a lot of vandalism with this template, so I am sharing it here. NSR 4 July 2005 13:22 (UTC)

When I read about the above survey on the mailing list I e-mailed one of the psychologists there and said I'd spread the message. I created a short article and made a link at the Main Page. Within 40 minutes or so, it was moved to the Recent Changes page. After some hours it was removed altogether by another user.

What is so awful about such an announcement? Where would the right place to put it be? <KF> 02:43, July 13, 2005 (UTC)

the village pump in theory. In parctice people create these surveys regularly and we never see the results. I wouldn't be to concerned abolt people miussing it there will be another along in 5 minutes.
So how come I have never before noticed a single announcement concerning such an online survey although I'm a regular contributor? Maybe because people like you keep deleting the notices? For a long time the Wikipedia community seemed to be awfully proud whenever someone else recognized our work. Now that academia has finally got round to dealing with Wikipedia on a scientific basis, all they get from us is an uncooperative attitude which they might conclude is a majority decision although in fact I don't believe it would be if there were a vote on this subject. Empirical surveys like the Würzburg questionnaire are based on induction and are thus dependent on a broad basis. Why make life difficult for them by preventing people from taking part? Just because you don't like such surveys?
You never see the results of such surveys? Could it be that you're not interested in them and that you just do not bother to look them up?
I'm not going to embark on an odyssey. I'm not going to post the notice at the Village Pump only to have it removed again by someone who, for whatever reason, thinks and feels like you. I also realize you have not met my request to put the notice back on the Recent Changes page, so that's that then.
I don't know any of the people who have prepared this questionnaire. If I told you now that the success or failure of the Würzburg survey is your responsibility you'd probably say that you can live with that. I wonder though how you yourself would react if you were dependent on other people's help and they refused to help you.
This has been a disappointing experience for me, especially because Wikipedia is a community where everybody works without getting paid for it—"for love", one might say. <KF> 17:58, July 13, 2005 (UTC)
You have a total of three places in which you can announce it. Wikipedia:Announcements (where previous survyes have been listed from time to time) Wikipedia:Village pump (news) (where I can't imagian anything being deleted) and in theory Wikipedia:Goings-on (but I wounldn't bother myself with that one). If you want to target rugalar users you might want to drop a note in at Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Newsroom. With all these option open to you I fail to see why we need to add a notice to the top of this page. This page exists primeranly to provide useful stuff for those who want to use recent changes.12:08, 14 July 2005 (UTC)

what happened to the IRC version of Recent Changes?

I'm just curious what happened to it. Revolución 21:22, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

It got linked to externaly and overloaded.

It is now at irc://irc.wikimedia.org/en.wikipedia

Can you put a link to it on the Special:Recentchanges again? ‡ Jarlaxle 01:04, July 30, 2005 (UTC)
The link irc://irc.wikimedia.org/en.wikipedia doesn't work. ‡ Jarlaxle 01:05, July 30, 2005 (UTC)
It probably won't work for most people. Try visiting #en.wikipedia after connecting to irc.wikimedia.org using an IRC client. -- Beland 23:42, 30 July 2005 (UTC)
So do we want the link there or not? --Dmcdevit·t 02:36, July 31, 2005 (UTC)

Wikimania

Hello, could some admin please remove the Wikimania stuff from MediaWiki:Recentchangestext please? It´s over!

User:Attackoftheshow

This project is sanctioned by User:Jimbo Wales [7].]. I'm adding it here because it has been deleted twice (once by me) because the ongoing editing there and at the talk page -- by people unfamiliar with Wikipedia -- is obscuring the note from Jimbo, and I see no way around this. It's a high visibility deal, apparently, and important to Jimbo. The Uninvited Co., Inc. 22:46, 16 August 2005 (UTC)

Why does this page exist at all?

Hmm... I just cannot think of any reason for this page – if the page was not protected, I would understand: MediaWiki:Recentchanges is protected by software, so this page would be a measure to allow all to edit the announcement.

But – as this page is protected, what is the point of having the content separately from MediaWiki:Recentchanges and only include it there?

--Mormegil 10:38, 2 September 2005 (UTC)

Historical reasons. For a long time it was not protected. What with one thing and anouther it is less trouble just to leave it here.Geni 11:03, 2 September 2005 (UTC)

Move this page

This page exists in this location and is transcluded from MediaWiki:Recentchangestext so it could be edited by non admins, as you cannot edit the MediaWiki space without being an admin. Now that it's been permanently protected for quite a while, there's no reason to leave it here. Why shouldn't we just move it back? --Phroziac(talk) 22:37, 14 November 2005 (UTC)

No objections after 6 days, so I moved it. --Phroziac.·ºo(talk) 23:39, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
You need to fix some double redirects.Geni 01:54, 23 November 2005 (UTC)
Hmm, what's an easy way to do that on a page with so many links? --Phroziac . o º O (mmm chicken) 18:15, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
Not move it in the first place? run through what links here with page set to 500 and indetify them all.Geni 18:25, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
Heh. I'll work through it. I just prefer the wiki to be clean and sleek. --Phroziac . o º O (mmm chicken) 19:06, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

Expand a stub

A long time ago, we used to replace Requests with Stubs on alternating weeks. I thought it might be a good idea to try that again for a while. Quality, instead of just quantity. Danny 04:03, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

Who is Gary Austin?

The first article on the Requests line is Gary Austin, and has been there for several days. As far as I can tell it's only listed as a "requested article" because it's on Wikipedia:List of encyclopedia topics (27). Since there's no context there to tell us who Gary Austin is or why he's notable enough for an encyclopedia entry, it's hard to start writing one. Apparently there have been 5 joke entries already.

Should the "Requests" list be maybe taken from some more specific list, like Wikipedia:Most wanted articles? Tim Pierce 17:45, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

Replace new articles with CotWs

How about replacing the requested articles with the current CotWs? Since anons can't create new articles anymore, it makes sense to do something that they can more easily participate in -- there'd be a lot of general copyediting and tweaking. Wikipedia has an article on everything notable that is not obscure, I think, and the vast majority of people have no inclination and/or resources to do the required research. CotWs tend to be general subjects that a lot of people can help out in (and that interest a lot of people). We could have the general Wikipedia:Collaboration of the week and one or two of the more specialized ones (and active ones, as a bonus, this would be an incentive for more active CotWs) on a rotating basis. Tuf-Kat 07:41, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

Perhaps this would make more sense on {{opentask}} (which is on the community portal). I have a feeling that most RC patrollers have usernames, wouldn't you think? Dmcdevit·t 08:01, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

Not updating

As of now the "Recent changes" page is not updating. Know this has been the case for at least the last half-hour, but I don't know why.Bjones 03:40, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

Channels and categorisation

This page used to be useful, but now edits occur so rapidly that it's very hard to keep track of the changes. Would there be any mileage in somehow splitting the stream of changes into sections organised in categories - e.g Arts, Science, Politics etc. so that users could track changes within areas of their interest? If this could be done easily then it could make a worthwile improvement.

David Martland 07:59, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

How would the server side coding be done to handle this? Off the top of my head, I'd think that each article would need a corresponding category (Science, Technology, Social Sciences, etc) if it were to be sorted by subject. Also, many do not fall under specific categories, so we may still have lots of articles in the "uncategorized" section. Kareeser|Talk! 14:23, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

SHould this be in a box?

It seems to me that it might be good, from an information taxonomy viewpoint, to put RCT into a box as it appears on the Recent Changes page. That would, among other things, make About This Page, which seems a bit misleading to me, into About This Box, which would be much clearer.

Is that insert automatic? Can I put stuff on RCT in *my* MW1.5 and get it there?
--Baylink 19:36, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

Those identity numbers

I am freaked out. It seems that you capture a unique identity from my computer when I do not have a user name. If this is so, then can this be done by anyone with the technical proficiency, and is there no such thing as anonimity on the internet. If this is off the subject, my apologies. Perhaps the answer can be found in a Wikipedia article.

Also, as a long time internet user, who just got broadband, I amazed at the Wikipedia phenomonon. I have been on perhaps a couple dozen articles, and each one is clear, coherent, and balanced. You are single handedly restoring may faith in humanity. There are defects, but somehow it seems to work. Congratulations.

Thanks! We do try. :) Well, the identity numbers we record, your IP address, is basically the way our servers reach your computer (or your proxy server, in some cases. Getting an account does give you some protection, as we cannot see your IP address anymore without making requests heavily regulated by our privacy policy. But yes, it is quite easy to find several things about your computer, so you're right in saying that there isn't anything as pure anonimity in the Internet. Titoxd(?!? - help us) 23:50, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

I would have to say that your personal information is never safe while displayed on the internet. For example someone got a hold of my email and used is for there internet porn shop. Yah disgusting. I was nearly charged for it (it involved children). So always be careful while on the internet. 216.186.99.139 20:27, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Question

When are you guys going to bring back the IRC recent changes? It's been so long since you got rid of it. --Revolución (talk) 06:17, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

Watching vandals

Is there a way to add a person's contributions to your watchlist, so that they appear in bold when you are doing RC Patrol? -- King of Hearts | (talk) 01:58, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

I think it is possible with User:CryptoDerk/CDVF. Not possible with regular RC patrol.Geni 03:33, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

The Barbie part of Wikipedia

Um ya i was messing around and i accidently deleted part of the first paragraph and then a paniced and accidentily pressed enter =( can someone fix it?

Adding straw poll

I'd like to request that the straw poll Wikipedia:User RFC reform be added to the Other: section. I would like to see as much input as possible on this important discussion of the User RFC process. Crotalus horridus (TALK • CONTRIBS) 04:48, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

"Invert selection"

Could we pleas wikify 'Invert selection' and provide a brief explanation of what this feature does? I don't think it is obvious to newbies and non-techies. Thanks! Djbaniel 09:19, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

Enhancement Request:

For new users is rather difficult to get to know how they have to interact with Wiki at first. But maybe this is the reason they are like this. So you get more inside the Real essence of Wikipedia.

Anyway, I can't see a way to do a "special" (advanced) search. Based on the language of the article, for example.

This is the English language Wikipedia; for pages in other languages, you would have to search those Wikipedias. As far as I know, each Wikipedia search is distinct; as of yet, there exists no capability to do a global search. Thanks! Flcelloguy (A note?) 00:09, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
You can always go to Google and type site:wikipedia.org before the terms you want to search for. That will search all websites that end in wikipedia.org. --Bowlhover 03:03, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
Wiki's are pretty complex, i recommend a way of simplifieng it Web Master 07:34, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

Minor Bug

FYI, the "Hide logged in users" and "Hide my edits" filters may be mutually exclusive (if you are logged in). Thus selecting one should deselect the other. However, it appears that selcting both essentially turns off the "Hide logged in users" filter, without informing the user (e.g., by changing page from "Show..." to "Hide...").MFago 16:37, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Going back through the list

Show last 50 | 100 | 250 | 500 changes in last 1 | 3 | 7 | 14 | 30 days

Maybe I'm missing something, but since there seem to be thousands of changes every hour, the "1/3/7/14/30 days" bit seems a bit redundant. This is really a "very recent changes indeed" page, where the first screen shows what's happened in the last few seconds. It would be good to be able to go back through the list in chunks of a hundred or a thousand or whatever without having to keep the most recent changes on the screen all the time, so you could have a hope of finding changes over the last 24 hours at least. Flapdragon 10:45, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

I suppose what I mean is "View (previous 50) (next 50) (20 | 50 | 100 | 250 | 500)" along the bottom of the page. Flapdragon 12:36, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

New accounts

Is there a page where new signups are listed? Flapdragon 10:50, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

Try [8]. --Celestianpower háblame 12:14, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

Thanks! Flapdragon 12:32, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

Please think of some new ghost links to replace the current live links. Georgia guy 22:19, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

Done. Flcelloguy (A note?) 01:06, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

How about dividing up the RCs?

I can't do RC patrol effectively because by the time I revert a vandal (which takes me about 10 seconds), someone with a rollback button has already done it. How about collecting recent changes in a list, and farming them to people who want to do it, like a renderfarm server? - Richardcavell 01:33, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

Discussion threads

Talk pages are effectively flat files, but some of them generate several threads. Currently the main supports for different topics are Wikipedia's heading and subheading formats. However most talk pages are not using these formats.

Craig Bolon 05:56, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

Take this out of the MediaWiki namespace

I propose that we use a template trick to move this page to some Template namespace page, like Template:Recentchangestext? It would clean out the MediaWiki namespace RC list from all the regular changes to this page that now clutter it up. Also, it would give us the freedom to decide how much protection this page needs - even if we decide that total unprotection is not a good thing, semi-protection might be a good compromise. Thoughts, comments, suggestions? JesseW, the juggling janitor 06:00, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

It used to be at Wikipedia:Recentchanges. I'm neutral to the move. I think we'd probably keep it protected anyways. This page doesn't need that much tending that admins can't do it alone. We don't want strange hacks/goatse to start appearing here. BrokenSegue 18:34, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

Book-packaging

Please remove the live link. Georgia guy 17:01, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

Proposed add'l function for RC page

I think that in addition to the name of the page edited and the last editor of the page, it would be useful to have a bytecount on the page, in terms of relative bytes (i.e. if an editor removed ten bytes of data from the page, the bytecount on the RC list would show (-10) to indicate that the last editor removed ten bytes. This would make it easier to catch potential vandals; any obscenely large negative value would indicate partial or complete blanking.--HubHikari 11:30, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Don't the bots already pick up large changes in bytage? It's a good idea nonetheless, I'm just a tad concerned about overcluttering the recent changes page. -- Francs2000 11:47, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
The RC page does not currently display byte-change logs. If they are there in the background, I propose they be brought into visibility. The notation doesn't have to be huge; much like the notation on the new page list, it just displays a byte size and thereby gives people some idea as to whether a change is potentially legit. It makes sense, if you think about it. --HubHikari 12:12, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Bot filter bug

The SmackBot is not removed by the "Hide Bots" filter --OrangeDog 16:42, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

Hello! This really isn't the right place for more information about the account or its bot status. Please see the account's user page, contact the owner, or see the appropriate page for more information. Thanks! Flcelloguy (A note?) 00:19, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
Formal request for flag is in. Rich Farmbrough 14:55 20 June 2006 (GMT).

Evolutionary software

What is the live link doing at the requests line?? Please remove it. Georgia guy 18:22, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Remove Requested Page

Jim Weathers should be removed from the requested pages on this page. It was already deleted 4 times, and that way, nobody else re-makes it by mistake. andrew... 05:31, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Undo|Thank

Hello, I think the recent changes page should have a Undo | Thank feature similiar to other pages revision histories! Jakesyl (talk) 18:33, 26 September 2015 (UTC)

Strange that a story of Baath doesnt mention the forty years of Saddam Hussein or the Baath in Syria until now.. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 37.136.84.110 (talk) 21:11, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=MediaWiki_talk:Recentchangestext/Archive_1&oldid=840615232"