Minecraft Wiki talk:Patroller requests

How best to sort/organize these requests
On Discord there've been many discussions about what people prefer about the sorting order of the requests. Some people want new requests to be posted at the top and older ones move up as they get replies or get modified. Others want the finished requests to be sorted separately at the bottom to split them from the ones that still need attention. And yet others want new requests to be posted at the bottom just like new sections are handled on talk pages. Suffice to say there are many ways we can organize the requests that patrollers may want to post, for both their and other users' convenience. Is there one way we can do this to make it the most convenient for everyone? I've tried to find a compensation with this script, but there's still more concensus to be made.


 * 1) Sorting unfinished requests at the top separate from the finished ones, would make it easier to find those that still need someone's attention, as opposed to needing to look through all requests to find them.
 * 2) Sorting finished requests at the bottom in a separate section would be convenient for archiving and overview purposes, but moving requests around in the source of the page is very messy and makes the history pages confusing, as more requests keep being added and moved around as they finish.
 * 3) Sorting new requests at the top like news listings is convenient in some way, but is less intuitive if you consider the page is used like talk pages, which work the opposite way.
 * 4) Grouping all requests by a heading for each page, provides a quick overview of common subjects.

These are four arguments I've been hearing and with the script above I tried to cover some of them. If you activate the user script, you can now hide finished requests along with their conversation, and automatically detect empty page groups and hide them as well. This makes you only see the requests that still need attention so you can focus on only those, without changing their sorting order in the page's source. However this does not group the finished requests separately under a different header, it just hides them.

What do you think of this solution, does it need to address more problems? Or how do you want or need the page to work and why? Optionally it'd be very easy to also add an option to only show finished requests, if an overview of just those is desired. Tell me what you think. – Jack McKalling 13:51, 1 August 2018 (UTC)


 * I'm glad you made this script, because it makes the thing way more usable, particularly as the page continues to grow. I am fine organizing things the existing way. As far as I've used it, which I guess is to investigate like 5 or 6 things, it's pretty great. I suppose there are many ways you can sort and organize things, but I don't see any problems with how it is right now.
 * Actually wait. Can you use window.localStorage so that the finished entries are still hidden/shown when the page reloads? – Sealbudsman talk | contribs 17:19, 9 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Of course! Good idea, why had I not thought of that yet I do not know. I thought about user preferences, even cookies, but already scrapped those ideas. I'll work on the local storage option soon. Thanks! – Jack McKalling [ Grid Book and Quill.png Grid Diamond Pickaxe.png ] 17:23, 9 August 2018 (UTC)


 * My proposal: keep the origination by page as it is, but put finished topics in an archive section as soon as they've been patrolled, and then archive that section into a separate page every month or so.-- Madminecrafter12 Orange Glazed Terracotta.png to meLight Blue Glazed Terracotta.png 19:32, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
 * So you don't mind the argument against that in point 2? Please tell me why. – Jack McKalling [ Grid Book and Quill.png Grid Diamond Pickaxe.png ] 19:34, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
 * I'm not seeing how it's much harder to just move a request to the bottom of the page than to mark it as done. How exactly would that make the history of the page confusing?-- Madminecrafter12 Orange Glazed Terracotta.png to meLight Blue Glazed Terracotta.png 19:37, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Well you have to realize edits on the page will likely and have already, come in quick succession. It'd sometimes not be very easy to keep track of a request if one person is replying to it and another moved it to somewhere else. It's also hard to keep the replies to the requests "sourced" if the text is moved around, and you're looking at deleted and added text in the history. As the diff special page cannot clearly show moved text, it just shows deleted and then added text, which is hard to compare. – Jack McKalling [ Grid Book and Quill.png Grid Diamond Pickaxe.png ] 19:42, 13 August 2018 (UTC)


 * This page is not exactly a talk page, it's closer to a bug tracker. It would require some crazy scripting to try to implement something decent on MediaWiki. I'd say new requests on top, move finished one to a separate section preserving order (a confusing history is better than a confusing page), and archive finished requests monthly. --AttemptToCallNil (report bug, view backtrace) 19:53, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Have you tried the script that I provided yet? It allows you to hide all finished requests with one click so you can focus on the remaining ones, but I can easily add an individual toggle for each state for the requests so you can also specifically hide requests that have not been worked on yet for instance. This script doesn't move finished requests into a separate section like you suggest, but it does what such a section would be for, remove cluttering requests from view. And if/when this page would be moved to a proper namespace, the script should somehow be activated for everyone automatically. So what you're referring to as crazy scripting, what exactly do you mean by that? – Jack McKalling [ Grid Book and Quill.png Grid Diamond Pickaxe.png ] 20:11, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Oh, you have a script for hiding resolved requests? Never mind then. I meant something more advanced though. --AttemptToCallNil (report bug, view backtrace) 21:02, 13 August 2018 (UTC)

Updated script with persistence and more toggle options
Ok I've just finished a major update to the script. You can now choose to show or hide requests of any of the used statusses, not just the finished ones, and any combination of them. So if you wanted to show only progressed requests or both new and progressed ones, you now can! Also, your choices are now finally permanently saved in window.localStorage as you make them, so each time you visit the page it will automatically hide the same requests that you hid before. Nothing is hidden by default (if you haven't visited the page/script before). Grouped page headings are also automatically hidden with the rest if all their content is hidden. This version of the script should function much better for the purpose of keeping everything organized in view. It still lacks edit links for each request, but that won't be possible for now. To make this script automatically available for new visitors of the page, I'd like to turn the script and toggle links into a widget for the page soon. – Jack McKalling 14:14, 30 August 2018 (UTC)

Move to Minecraft Wiki namespace
Now that the page and the patroller usergroup are fleshing out and we're getting decent activity, should we move this page to the Minecraft Wiki namespace? Like for instance MCW:Patroller requests or MCW:Patroller portal? And MCW:Projects/Patroller requests is also an option, but I believe the page is more than just a project, because it's an ever continuing process for the whole usergroup.

And if moved, also move with it the related subpages: /request, /request/doc and /toggle-requests.js (the script also needs to be activated, see below for options).

If we don't move the patroller requests page and its subpages, (new) patrollers won't know it exists or how to use it and will miss out on the usergroup coordination that it can provide. So after the move we should also promote it on the MCW:Community portal and the MCW:Patrollers pages.

How to activate the script?
 * 1) Add the script remotely by URL with a   in mediawiki:common.js or mediawiki:hydra.js, which enables editing/adjusting the script separately from the chosen global script (see User:Jack McKalling/hydra.js for an example)
 * 2) Add the script by inline copy/paste to either of the above global scripts, which protects the script the same way as the global script is protected
 * 3) Add the script to the page by widget (don't know how that would work)
 * 4) Leave the script somewhere in my userspace and let every user of the patroller requests page activate it personally in their own common or hydra script (very inconvenient)

Please let me know what you guys think about the move and how to activate the script for everyone. – Jack McKalling 08:36, 2 August 2018 (UTC)


 * Support moving to MCW:Patroller requests. For the script, I personally don't think we should even have it - I like the idea of moving all finished requests to a separate section better. However, if we did use the script, I would probably support 1, or if not then 2.-- Madminecrafter12 Orange Glazed Terracotta.png to meLight Blue Glazed Terracotta.png 18:54, 2 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Oh yes indeed, the script's purpose is defined by the outcome of the discussion above as well. If the consensus will be that finished requests need to be sorted separately by hand, which is what I originally designed (but changed doing), the script of course won't be needed anymore. But please look into the discussion above too, to share your (you guys) opinion on that as well. – Jack McKalling [ Grid Book and Quill.png Grid Diamond Pickaxe.png ] 12:52, 4 August 2018 (UTC)


 * Support moving to main space also. In my opinion the script is quite helpful to have activated if you're going to the page for its primary purpose, which as I see it, is finding something to investigate and verify or fix. – Sealbudsman talk | contribs 17:31, 9 August 2018 (UTC)

Whitelines within conversations not working for the script
As I was aware of this issue a while ago, I'm going to make the script smarter at some point. Whitelines between parts of a conversation should not break it up, but for now, they do and will stubbornly remain visible on the page. as you mentioned in this edit, you're absolutely right, sadly. I'll get to this later, but for now please remember to not use whitelines as you reply. – Jack McKalling 16:13, 30 August 2018 (UTC)