Last modified: 2009-08-02 14:29:52 UTC

Wikimedia Bugzilla is closed!

Wikimedia has migrated from Bugzilla to Phabricator. Bug reports should be created and updated in Wikimedia Phabricator instead. Please create an account in Phabricator and add your Bugzilla email address to it.
Wikimedia Bugzilla is read-only. If you try to edit or create any bug report in Bugzilla you will be shown an intentional error message.
In order to access the Phabricator task corresponding to a Bugzilla report, just remove "static-" from its URL.
You could still run searches in Bugzilla or access your list of votes but bug reports will obviously not be up-to-date in Bugzilla.
Bug 12781 - Special:RecentChanges with only show edits by bots selected does not work
Special:RecentChanges with only show edits by bots selected does not work
Status: RESOLVED DUPLICATE of bug 13441
Product: MediaWiki
Classification: Unclassified
Recent changes (Other open bugs)
unspecified
All All
: Normal normal (vote)
: ---
Assigned To: Nobody - You can work on this!
:
Depends on:
Blocks:
  Show dependency treegraph
 
Reported: 2008-01-24 20:10 UTC by Adam Brookes
Modified: 2009-08-02 14:29 UTC (History)
3 users (show)

See Also:
Web browser: ---
Mobile Platform: ---
Assignee Huggle Beta Tester: ---


Attachments

Description Adam Brookes 2008-01-24 20:10:08 UTC
Special:RecentChanges won't allow for edits by only bots to be displayed. Tested on Meta and enwiki, selecting show bots, hide edits by logged in users and hide edits by logged in users doesn't work. Rather than display only edits by bots as one would expect, it only displays edits by anonymous users.
Comment 1 Roan Kattouw 2008-01-24 20:20:49 UTC
That's not what you should expect when setting "Show bots" and "Hide logged-in users". Since bots are logged-in users, their edits will be hidden. There is currently switch in the RC interface to show bot edits only, I agree that there should be.
Comment 2 Adam Brookes 2008-01-24 20:25:49 UTC
I'd suggest that the "Show bots" selection should overrule any "Hide logged-in users" and display edits by bots only. I think that is the operation that most users will expect and is the most useful. Regardless of how the interaction of rules is implemented, the selection of show bots, hide logged in users, hide anonymous users as I've discussed above, should either display nothing, or display only edits by bots. 
Comment 3 Roan Kattouw 2008-01-24 20:29:57 UTC
(In reply to comment #2)
> I'd suggest that the "Show bots" selection should overrule any "Hide logged-in
> users" and display edits by bots only. I think that is the operation that most
> users will expect and is the most useful. Regardless of how the interaction of
> rules is implemented, the selection of show bots, hide logged in users, hide
> anonymous users as I've discussed above, should either display nothing, or
> display only edits by bots. 
> 

Show bots shows edits by both bots and normal users. Hide logged-in users hides *all* edits by logged-in users *including bots* (as they are logged-in users). The combination of "Hide anonymous users" and "Hide logged-in users" hides all edits by definition, because every edit is either anonymous or logged-in.

I'd suggest changing this proposal to "Add a Show/Hide non-bot edits" to Recentchanges.
Comment 4 Adam Brookes 2008-01-24 20:32:16 UTC
It shouldn't should anything as Roan notes but it currently displays edits by IPs. This should either be changed to show nothing or to show only edits by bots which I'd suggest is the most useful.
Comment 5 Roan Kattouw 2008-01-24 20:38:20 UTC
(In reply to comment #4)
> It shouldn't should anything as Roan notes but it currently displays edits by
> IPs. This should either be changed to show nothing or to show only edits by
> bots which I'd suggest is the most useful.
> 

You don't seem to understand what these switches do exactly:

Hide minor edits: Only show non-minor edits
Show minor edits: Show both minor and non-minor edits
Hide bots: Only show normal (non-bot) edits
Show bots: Show both bot and non-bot edits
Hide anonymous users: Only show logged-in edits
Show anonymous users: Show both anonymous and logged-in edits
Hide logged-in users: Only show anonymous edits
Show logged-in users: Show both anonymous and logged-in edits
etc.

Somehow, everyone seems to think the first two (concerning minor edits) make perfect chance, but have trouble understanding the rest of them.

I'll say it again: the options you chose show IP edits only. That's *not* a bug, that's *intended behavior*. Changing it do show something else would be illogical and require ludicrously ugly code. The best option IMO is to just add a "Show/Hide non-bot edits" switch.
Comment 6 Adam Brookes 2008-01-24 20:42:34 UTC
I'm sorry, I now realise my mistake. I think I understand this fine but did make an error in my first post when I said "hide edits by logged in users and hide edits by logged in users", this should read "hide edits by logged in users and hide edits by anonymous users". Hopefully this will clarify this.
Comment 7 Roan Kattouw 2008-01-24 20:55:40 UTC
(In reply to comment #6)
> I'm sorry, I now realise my mistake. I think I understand this fine but did
> make an error in my first post when I said "hide edits by logged in users and
> hide edits by logged in users", this should read "hide edits by logged in users
> and hide edits by anonymous users". Hopefully this will clarify this.
> 

I understood that. Like I said before, choosing both "Hide anon. edits" and "Hide logged-in edits" will hide all edits by definition, as every edit is either anonymous or logged-in.
Comment 8 Adam Brookes 2008-01-24 20:59:05 UTC
(In reply to comment #7)
> (In reply to comment #6)
> > I'm sorry, I now realise my mistake. I think I understand this fine but did
> > make an error in my first post when I said "hide edits by logged in users and
> > hide edits by logged in users", this should read "hide edits by logged in users
> > and hide edits by anonymous users". Hopefully this will clarify this.
> > 
> 
> I understood that. Like I said before, choosing both "Hide anon. edits" and
> "Hide logged-in edits" will hide all edits by definition, as every edit is
> either anonymous or logged-in.
> 

But it doesn't work.
Comment 9 Roan Kattouw 2008-01-24 21:02:03 UTC
(In reply to comment #8)
> But it doesn't work.
Hmm, apparently the software is too smart to let you choose both, realizing that would be pointless (as no edits would be shown).

Comment 10 Adam Brookes 2008-01-24 21:05:44 UTC
(In reply to comment #9)
> (In reply to comment #8)
> > But it doesn't work.
> Hmm, apparently the software is too smart to let you choose both, realizing
> that would be pointless (as no edits would be shown).
> 

What would be smart would be if it would allow you to hide anons, hide logged in users, but overrule this rule by saying show bots. That is more likely to reflect what people will expect and would be most useful. In any case, I don't think it is particularly helpful just to silently ignore a request that would show no edits, instead a warning should be displayed. 
Comment 11 Roan Kattouw 2008-01-24 21:07:29 UTC
(In reply to comment #10)
> What would be smart would be if it would allow you to hide anons, hide logged
> in users, but overrule this rule by saying show bots. That is more likely to
> reflect what people will expect and would be most useful. In any case, I don't
> think it is particularly helpful just to silently ignore a request that would
> show no edits, instead a warning should be displayed. 

Currently the anon/logged-in thingies act like toggle, which I think is smart enough. I don't really understand why you're clinging to the idea that hide anons + hide logged-in + show bots should show bots only, rather than just adding a "Hide non-bot edits" toggle and be done with it.
Comment 12 Adam Brookes 2008-01-24 21:13:20 UTC
(In reply to comment #11)
> (In reply to comment #10)
> > What would be smart would be if it would allow you to hide anons, hide logged
> > in users, but overrule this rule by saying show bots. That is more likely to
> > reflect what people will expect and would be most useful. In any case, I don't
> > think it is particularly helpful just to silently ignore a request that would
> > show no edits, instead a warning should be displayed. 
> 
> Currently the anon/logged-in thingies act like toggle, which I think is smart
> enough. I don't really understand why you're clinging to the idea that hide
> anons + hide logged-in + show bots should show bots only, rather than just
> adding a "Hide non-bot edits" toggle and be done with it.
> 

Because it is the most straightforward and logical approach. We already have options to hide logged in edits and anonymous edits and to show/hide bot edits. It would be sensible just to simply exempt bots from being otherwise hidden by the logged in user when show bots is selected.
Comment 13 Roan Kattouw 2008-01-24 21:15:00 UTC
(In reply to comment #12)
> Because it is the most straightforward and logical approach. We already have
> options to hide logged in edits and anonymous edits and to show/hide bot edits.
> It would be sensible just to simply exempt bots from being otherwise hidden by
> the logged in user when show bots is selected.

It might make sense to some people, but it doesn't make any sense from a programming perspective and will therefore be ugly to implement. A new switch will be cleaner.

Comment 14 Adam Brookes 2008-01-24 21:17:33 UTC
(In reply to comment #13)
> (In reply to comment #12)
> > Because it is the most straightforward and logical approach. We already have
> > options to hide logged in edits and anonymous edits and to show/hide bot edits.
> > It would be sensible just to simply exempt bots from being otherwise hidden by
> > the logged in user when show bots is selected.
> 
> It might make sense to some people, but it doesn't make any sense from a
> programming perspective and will therefore be ugly to implement. A new switch
> will be cleaner.
> 

Software should most definitely not be designed from the perspective of what is easiest or cleanest to implement rather it should consider what is in the best interests of its users.
Comment 15 Roan Kattouw 2008-01-24 21:24:09 UTC
(In reply to comment #14)
> Software should most definitely not be designed from the perspective of what is
> easiest or cleanest to implement rather it should consider what is in the best
> interests of its users.

True. However, there isn't much of a difference between your idea and my idea from a user perspective (I daresay mine is clearer for someone new to wikis).

Comment 16 Siebrand Mazeland 2009-02-02 12:39:30 UTC
Changed component to "RecentChanges"
Comment 17 Niklas Laxström 2009-05-23 08:27:13 UTC
Can't provide everything while keeping the ui simple. Line has to be drawn at some point or an alternative solution must be created.
Comment 18 Alexandre Emsenhuber [IAlex] 2009-08-02 14:29:52 UTC

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 13441 ***

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.


Navigation
Links