Last modified: 2011-03-13 18:04:34 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 5189 - Page moves to nonexistent targets should generate an item in the "new page log"
Page moves to nonexistent targets should generate an item in the "new page log"
Status: RESOLVED WONTFIX
Product: MediaWiki
Classification: Unclassified
Special pages (Other open bugs)
unspecified
All All
: Lowest normal with 6 votes (vote)
: ---
Assigned To: Nobody - You can work on this!
:
Depends on:
Blocks:
  Show dependency treegraph
 
Reported: 2006-03-07 08:23 UTC by Jeffrey O. Gustafson
Modified: 2011-03-13 18:04 UTC (History)
4 users (show)

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


Attachments

Description Jeffrey O. Gustafson 2006-03-07 08:23:52 UTC
(First bug report, sorry)

This is for Wikipedia, but likely also for any other wiki running on the
'Pedia's current MediaWiki configuration.

On Wikipedia, New Pages in the Main namespace are logged at
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Newpages.  There are also New page logs for
other namespaces.  

In my experience, New Page patrol is one of the more underutilized "patrols"
Wikipedians make.  If an article from a hit and run contributor has no
wikilinks, and isn't linked to, it is entirely possible that the article can go
un-noticed until stumbled upon randomly.  Best case scenario is that this
article will silly vanity or bad vandalism.  Worst case is that it will be an ad
or pure libel, so New Page patrol is vital for catching these.  That said,
something occured to me and I tried out a little expirement.  

I created a subpage of my user page, and then simply moved it to the article
namespace.  I then checked the New Page log, and it was not there.  One can see
how a user can hide a new article from the New Page log.  And logically, if
[[User:JoeSchmo/Halawazam]] is moved to [[Halawazam]], Halawazam *is* a new
article and should be logged.  

That is not to say that the action is not logged somewhere - naturally it is in
the Move log, and the creation of the user sub-page is in the User space New
Page log.  But, with more eyes needed on New Page patrol, how many are watching
the User Space New Page Log?  And how many are watching the Move Log?

Needlessly long story short, whenever a page is moved into a different name
space, it should be logged on that Name Space's associated New Page log.  

Thanks for the time,

Jeffrey O. Gustafson
Inconsequential Admin
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Jeffrey_O._Gustafson
Comment 1 Jeffrey O. Gustafson 2006-03-07 08:42:58 UTC
From [[Wikipedia:Bug_reports]]:  "Ettiquete: Contribute useful comments; useless
comments (i.e. advocacy) increase the signal to noise ratio."

Sorry about the fluff at the beginning.  

Jeffrey O. Gustafson
Inconsequential Admin
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Jeffrey_O._Gustafson
Comment 2 Ral315 2006-03-07 23:20:50 UTC
Not sure if this would necessarily be a problem on most wikis, but I do agree
that this should be fixed in new page patrol (would it hurt to have newpage
patrol cover all namespaces?  This would also allow articles accidentally
created in namespaces, i.e. something like [[Help: The Beatles album]] or
[[Wikipedia: An essay by Bob]])
Comment 3 Kyle Barbour 2006-04-06 18:05:30 UTC
Although this is an enhancement in some sense, I'd consider this to be more of a
general bug (hence the change, in case anyone was wondering).
Comment 4 Ral315 2006-04-27 21:29:50 UTC
Fixed by Rob Church, apparently.
Comment 5 Rob Church 2006-04-27 22:03:44 UTC
(In reply to comment #4)
> Fixed by Rob Church, apparently.

It was?
Comment 6 Ral315 2006-04-28 13:49:26 UTC
No, I'm an idiot.  All you added was namespace 
filtering of the new page log.  It fixes part of the 
problem, but what Jeffrey wanted was the logging of 
page moves in the log.  Reopened, I guess.
Comment 7 Kyle Barbour 2006-11-25 02:14:26 UTC
This has started to be an actual vandalism concern now, rather than a
hypothetical: see [[Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Vanity page
creators bypassing new page patrol]] and the examples listed there (namely
[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=move&user=Doberman316&page=]
and
[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&target=Cupton]).
Comment 8 Antandrus 2006-11-25 02:40:12 UTC
We need this.  I've recently killed a bunch of vanity/crud pages, by patrolling
the move log, which were created in the user space and then moved after a delay
into the mainspace.  While at first I feared posting on the noticeboard because
it might attract the wrong kind of attention, I thought it much better to have
more eyes on the move log.  Putting these pages into the regular new pages bin
would be a much better solution.

Thanks to anyone who takes this on.  
Comment 9 Aryeh Gregor (not reading bugmail, please e-mail directly) 2007-12-16 20:10:17 UTC
I'm not sure I agree with this.  Logically, moved articles are not new: they've been there the whole time.  This is how we currently treat them at all levels.  Needless to say, move logs need to be patrolled too to protect against this, just as all changes do: not everything is in one log, for good reason.  You might want to request that the move log be filterable on the target namespace (not that that's likely to happen soon).

I suggest WONTFIX.
Comment 10 Kyle Barbour 2007-12-16 23:12:53 UTC
(In reply to comment #9)
> I'm not sure I agree with this.  Logically, moved articles are not new: they've
> been there the whole time.  This is how we currently treat them at all levels. 
> Needless to say, move logs need to be patrolled too to protect against this,
> just as all changes do: not everything is in one log, for good reason.  You
> might want to request that the move log be filterable on the target namespace
> (not that that's likely to happen soon).
> 
> I suggest WONTFIX.

But it's not the article that's new - it's the article title. It seems to me that the creation of a new title (as previously there was only one - the article - and now there's the article plus a redirect) should generate an instance in the new pages log.
Comment 11 Aryeh Gregor (not reading bugmail, please e-mail directly) 2007-12-16 23:44:30 UTC
You could argue either way.  I would say that the purpose of the new page log is to track new content, not new titles.  New pages need to be tracked because they're more likely to deviate from site policy, as changes aren't woven into existing material; and because they aren't on anyone's watchlists.  Neither of these is a concern for moved pages per se, although in certain rare cases it can be.  If anything, I would say that effectively merging the move log and the new pages log would greatly reduce the utility of the latter, just by clogging it up.
Comment 12 Daniel Cannon (AmiDaniel) 2007-12-16 23:48:06 UTC
Marked WONTFIX. I agree with Simetrical -- this seems to be a misinterpretation of what Special:Newpages is.

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


Navigation
Links