The Pending Changes report doesn't make clear an important feature of the current RfC: it proposes to lower the auto-accept level for PC2 from the pending changes reviewer usergroup to the recently introduced extended-confirmed usergroup: so about 29,000 editors (extended-confirmed) would be able to edit PC2-protected articles without review compared to about 6,000 (PC-reviewers) under the previous PC2 framework: Noyster (talk),21:11, 4 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I commented after an editor made a statement on one of the help pages, and I got the response that the Internet Archive actually does a better job of archiving web sites than I thought. I still believe the story should say "links to the relevant pages, if any".— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 20:07, 10 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
More important to make sure that the features that already exist are in working order?
@Danny Horn: It”s good to ask the community about what new features are needed, but it is much more important to make sure that the features that already exist are in working order. Take for example page view statistics (there are more examples) which breaks fairly regularly (example). I realize this is probably someone else’s department, but since no one has provided me with an org chart, I am relying on you to pass this concern on to the right person. Also pinging @Kudpung: who IIRC made a similar comment years ago. Ottawahitech (talk) 21:08, 15 November 2016 (UTC)please ping me[reply]
Hi 69.159.64.100, according to the Signpost article: Wish #7: Pageview stats tool. The new Pageviews Analysis tool is live for all wikis now. BTW I did not get your notification -- I believe this feature is only available to registered users, but there is a proposal about it in Misc. section of the 2016 survey. Ottawahitech (talk) 23:44, 23 November 2016 (UTC)please ping me[reply]
← Back to Discussion report