Last modified: 2014-09-27 01:59:51 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 24815 - Archived LiquidThreads talk pages management
Archived LiquidThreads talk pages management
Status: NEW
Product: MediaWiki extensions
Classification: Unclassified
LiquidThreads (Other open bugs)
unspecified
All All
: Low enhancement (vote)
: ---
Assigned To: Nobody - You can work on this!
:
Depends on: 24621 24814 25054 25329 25441
Blocks: 29711
  Show dependency treegraph
 
Reported: 2010-08-16 17:09 UTC by Nemo
Modified: 2014-09-27 01:59 UTC (History)
6 users (show)

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


Attachments

Description Nemo 2010-08-16 17:09:42 UTC
The main strength of LQT is also its weakness: potentially you can reply to a five-years old huge thread and bump it to the top of the talk page and to lots of users' Special:NewMessages.
Currently, users won't reply to old discussions because if you read only the page and not the history you don't find easily new messages on old sections, which are less visible; and you are actively discouraged from replying to archived discussions because nobody looks at the archives and to revive a thread you should de-archive it (and you can't).
With LQT, you may even not notice that a thread is archived: try e.g. [[strategy:Thread:Talk:Task force/Wikipedia Quality/Quick update]], where the only hint you have is that "From Task force/Wikipedia Quality/Archive 1" under the title (warning! the talk page is huge – I always get an unresposive script error); and obviously if old threads are just put in some "next page" you are not supposed to move them in a subpage.
Summarizing could help, but not every thread will be summarized.

I think that users should be discouraged from replying threads which: are more old than x; or are e.g. in the third page (assuming 10 threads per page); or have been summarized with a consensual ssummary; or have been closed with some new "thread status" feature.

Please note that due to bug 24814 it's currently impossible to completely archive and protect a talk page. In fact I wrote this as an example of that bug, but it's a separate issue. There's already a discussion on this at http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Thread:Talk:LiquidThreads/Redesign/Discussion_status , I think thaat we can continue there and leave this bug here as placeholder (if you wish).
Comment 1 Andrew Garrett 2010-08-17 17:32:39 UTC
I don't really see why one should be able to prevent people from replying to older threads.
Comment 2 Nemo 2010-08-17 17:43:14 UTC
(In reply to comment #1)
> I don't really see why one should be able to prevent people from replying to
> older threads.

Well, this is a standard behaviour: when discussions get old you archive them and users are not allowed to reply.
Maybe you're saying that it's not necessary to enforce this automatically on LQT?
Comment 3 Max Semenik 2010-08-18 17:33:16 UTC
Probably, it's worth warning a user if the thread they're about to bump is older than, say, one month.
Comment 4 Brandon Harris 2010-08-18 17:34:24 UTC
This can be done by adding a template to the summary.  I'm not sure that providing a software solution is warranted.
Comment 5 Nemo 2010-08-18 17:51:33 UTC
(In reply to comment #4)
> This can be done by adding a template to the summary.  I'm not sure that
> providing a software solution is warranted.

If I have to add a template to every archived discussion LQT will require more manual work than the current system, where I can move aan arbitrary number of discussions to an archive with a single edit.
Comment 6 Andrew Garrett 2010-08-28 13:38:32 UTC
(In reply to comment #5)
> If I have to add a template to every archived discussion LQT will require more
> manual work than the current system, where I can move aan arbitrary number of
> discussions to an archive with a single edit.

Well, you don't have to do any manual work at all to archive a LiquidThreads thread, it archives itself. It's only if you want to put a little note at the top of every thread that it's a lot of work.
Comment 7 Nemo 2010-08-31 20:08:04 UTC
(In reply to comment #6)
> (In reply to comment #5)
> > If I have to add a template to every archived discussion LQT will require more
> > manual work than the current system, where I can move aan arbitrary number of
> > discussions to an archive with a single edit.
> 
> Well, you don't have to do any manual work at all to archive a LiquidThreads
> thread, it archives itself.

This is not true, because you may want to discourage people from replying to oldest threads (well, we will *obviously* want, and there's currently no solution apart from moving the talk) or to prevent them to reply by protecting the archived talk page.

Moreover, there are currently big performance problems with talk pages which have lots of threads, but I've not investigated in this (I'm not sure) and it would be another bug.

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


Navigation
Links