Last modified: 2014-11-17 09:21:06 UTC
The same as in Extension:Oversight, please create in RevisionDelete permission to view hidden revisions from administrators (and other users). In Extension:Oversight this permission is called 'oversight'. Reason: In Wikiemdia projects stewards had permission 'suppressrevision' without permission 'deleterevision' - in this configuration stewards could view hidden revisions by oversighters. After enabling for stewards permission 'deleterevision', they can't have permission 'suppressrevision' due to transparency issues (stewards can't be permanent global oversighters).
After software update is even worse... stewards cannot view contribution of user, which was suppressed. This is problematic, because when steward suppress account, cannot revert edits. Please fix bug as soon as possible and scap it.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 19199 ***
Hello again, after code update in Wikimedia there is still the same problem... ;/ Could you granularize permissions in suppresion tool? More details above.
Not only stewards needs this right, but also founder group, look at header of http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_comment/Remove_Founder_flag.
Hello, any progress? This bug waiting since September 2009 ;/
Just to clarify: currently stewards are permanent global oversighters. Stewards have to have enabled permissions "deleterevision" and "suppressrevision", because stewards need access to view a contribution of users which was suppressed by using permission "hideuser" and for example check whether edit need be reverted. So "suppressrevision" have to be divided on two permission: 1. suppressrevision-hide - hide revisions from administrators and other users (the same permission as "hiderevision" in Extension:Oversight), 2. suppressrevision-view - view a previously hidden revision by using new permisssion "suppressrevision-hide" and view an items hidden by using permission "hideuser". Permission "1" will be assigned *only* for local oversight group (stewards can have oversight access on all wikis by granting themselves temporary local oversight access - look at Oversight policy http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Oversight). Permission "2" will be assigned for local oversight group and for global steward group.
Bug 19199 split deleterevision right into deleterevision (perform changes), deletedhistory (view history, like hidden user/comment) and deletedtext (view hidden text). This bugs wants tp at least one split suppressrevision in two.
> Permission "2" will be assigned for local oversight group and for global > steward group. And for founder group.
The right should be split into suppressrevision, suppressedtext and suppressedhistory - it only makes sense.
Clickable link: r105432.
(In reply to comment #11) > Clickable link: r105432. Are you sure you wrote correct revision?
(changing the title to something more precise)
lowering priority to reflect reality
Change 139277 had a related patch set uploaded by Vogone: Split suppressrevision into two user rights https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/139277
(Requested by Legoktm here) I feel like the patch is not what the bug is asking for. The bug asks for the actions themselves to be separated, not for one to imply the other. I feel like one right implying another simply loses flexibility over having two mutually discrete rights - this is the case with CheckUser, for example.
(In reply to Jasper Deng from comment #15) > (Requested by Legoktm here) > > I feel like the patch is not what the bug is asking for. The bug asks for > the actions themselves to be separated, not for one to imply the other. > > I feel like one right implying another simply loses flexibility over having > two mutually discrete rights - this is the case with CheckUser, for example. I don't think that two mutual exclusive rights make any sense over here. In the past we've introduced various rights that imply others and I don't see a problem with doing the same here. You should probably see the new right as a subset of the old one.
I agree that there's no reason for `supressrevision` not to be a superset of `viewsuppressed`. Users who ended up with only the ability to suppress things, without the ability to see what they were doing, would have a very difficult time of things. `suppressrevision` also incorporates the ability to *un*suppress content; how would a user exercise that if they couldn't see what had previously been suppressed?
Change 139277 merged by SPQRobin: Split "suppressrevision" into two user rights https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/139277
One thing was forgotten, I think. The stewards are still able to oversight abuse log entries, which is also part of the oversight package. For example, I still can see the "adjust visibility" button on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:AbuseLog - and I can click on it after which I can probably hide those entries if I would (won't test that now, but nothing has changed in the interface), while I'm definitely not an oversighter on enWP.
This is most likely due to stewards having "abusefilter-hide-log" assigned globally, but please correct me if I am wrong.
(In reply to Vogone from comment #20) > This is most likely due to stewards having "abusefilter-hide-log" assigned > globally, but please correct me if I am wrong. Thanks for pointing us on it. I've removed this right as well.
