I thought of studying my watchlist for a moment to understand why it was the way it was, and I noticed the following:

  1. My watchlist begins half the page down, because of the watchlist   options box, which btw I have never used or peered into.

  2. The first link in each item is that of the current article. I have   never clicked this because I might as well go through the changes by using   (diff)

  3. I have never clicked (hist) on the watchlist, I would first see the   (diff) and only then browse the history

  4. 0 is colored grey making it disappear from the list. But that does   not mean the article never changed, it could be +400 -400 words but the net   is 0. The edit calculation can be highly misleading. I would rather want to   know how many characters were added and how many deletions. Articles which   have only additions are low on my priority list to patrol.

  5.  Before contacting any user or checking his (contribs), I would   always see what his edit was. I open the (diff) and (contribs) in new tabs.   This could have become integrated because its part of the same task. Same   goes for talk and the user page links littered all over my watchlist

  8. I can jump to the specific section directly by clicking the tiny →   but not the section name itself. I have never used this link either as i   would rather see the (diff)

 With that in mind I made this, which would solve most of my issues: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Mw-ux-visual_watchlist.png Let me know if it would work for you as well? I hope to put some more thought on it and improving the idea.

I thought of studying my watchlist for a moment to understand why it was the way it was, and I noticed the following: 1. My watchlist begins half the page down, because of the watchlist options box, which btw I have never used or peered into. 2. The first link in each item is that of the current article. I have never clicked this because I might as well go through the changes by using (diff) 3. I have never clicked (hist) on the watchlist, I would first see the (diff) and only then browse the history 4. 0 is colored grey making it disappear from the list. But that does not mean the article never changed, it could be +400 -400 words but the net is 0. The edit calculation can be highly misleading. I would rather want to know how many characters were added and how many deletions. Articles which have only additions are low on my priority list to patrol. 5. Before contacting any user or checking his (contribs), I would always see what his edit was. I open the (diff) and (contribs) in new tabs. This could have become integrated because its part of the same task. Same goes for talk and the user page links littered all over my watchlist 6. Knowing whether a user/ip has a talk page or not is important for me to identify a newbie or vandal 7. Reading each edit summary is really slow. Identifying where it begins on a line is tough of all the information that precedes it. 8. I can jump to the specific section directly by clicking the tiny → but not the section name itself. I have never used this link either as i would rather see the (diff) 9. The (diff) gives me the diff with the entire article and image loaded below. In most cases, all the info I need while patrolling is just in the diff. I only need the article if i want to check if tables/images are broken. With that in mind I made this, which would solve most of my issues: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Mw-ux-visual_watchlist.png Let me know if it would work for you as well? I hope to put some more thought on it and improving the idea.

1. My watchlist begins half the page down, because of the watchlist options box, which btw I have never used or peered into.

2. The first link in each item is that of the current article. I have never clicked this because I might as well go through the changes by using (diff)

3. I have never clicked (hist) on the watchlist, I would first see the (diff) and only then browse the history

4. 0 is colored grey making it disappear from the list. But that does not mean the article never changed, it could be +400 -400 words but the net is 0. The edit calculation can be highly misleading. I would rather want to know how many characters were added and how many deletions. Articles which have only additions are low on my priority list to patrol.

7. Reading each edit summary is really slow. Identifying where it begins on a line is tough of all the information that precedes it.

8. I can jump to the specific section directly by clicking the tiny → but not the section name itself. I have never used this link either as i would rather see the (diff)

9. The (diff) gives me the diff with the entire article and image loaded below. In most cases, all the info I need while patrolling is just in the diff. I only need the article if i want to check if tables/images are broken.

With that in mind I made this, which would solve most of my issues: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Mw-ux-visual_watchlist.png Let me know if it would work for you as well? I hope to put some more thought on it and improving the idea.