Last modified: 2006-04-13 23:34:36 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 5563 - User:pages namespace linked on Live Category:lists pages
User:pages namespace linked on Live Category:lists pages
Product: Wikimedia
Classification: Unclassified
Interwiki links (Other open bugs)
All All
: Normal normal (vote)
: ---
Assigned To: Nobody - You can work on this!
Depends on:
  Show dependency treegraph
Reported: 2006-04-13 16:40 UTC by Dennis Lowell
Modified: 2006-04-13 23:34 UTC (History)
0 users

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


Description Dennis Lowell 2006-04-13 16:40:11 UTC
Example from URL (April 13, 2006):
  Brooklyn Bridge
  Castle Clinton

User User:Shlomke/sandbox copied the content from the Brooklyn Bridge 
article (including the Category links at the bottom) into his Sandbox for 
edit on March 05. Since then a link to User:Shlomke/sandbox has appeared 
on each of the 9 live Category pages included in his editing draft of the 
Brooklyn Bridge article.

Not sure if this is a design flaw or an anomaly in the "business rules" 
but I'm sure that you don't want pages in the User namespace to be 
indexed by the Category List engines.
Comment 1 Dennis Lowell 2006-04-13 16:45:49 UTC
Didn't mean to triage's not my place to determine the 
importance of a bug on your site. My faux pas. Sorry.
Comment 2 Andrew Culver 2006-04-13 16:48:24 UTC
This is intended. You can put <noinclude></noinclude> around the
[[Category:whatever]] in Brooklyn Bridge to prevent them from being included.
Comment 3 Dennis Lowell 2006-04-13 17:09:44 UTC
Sorry, just tested your suggestion and it doesn't work.

I copied the content from the [[Grace Church]] article (including the Category
Links) to my User:Drlowell page and added <noinclude></noinclude> tags (you may
look at the source in the versions if you like). After each save my User page
appeared on
  Grace Church
  Grant's Tomb
  Hamilton Grange National Memorial

I'm certain this is not intended. Please work through the example step by step
to see for yourself. I will revert my user page so it's not being picked up by
the Category page generator.

BTW - Thanks for the qick response.
Comment 4 Rob Church 2006-04-13 19:38:20 UTC
If an unescaped* [[Category:Foo]] tag exists on a page, it is categorised; this
is intended behaviour.

* as in, not wrapped in a tag that will cause it to be ignored or stripped out
of the markup at parse time
Comment 5 Brion Vibber 2006-04-13 19:38:44 UTC
<noinclude> affects includes, not copying.

It's normal and desireable to be able to categorize user pages, this is 
regularly done.
Comment 6 Dennis Lowell 2006-04-13 20:36:02 UTC
Am I being unclear?

The is following the websites editing
advice which suggests making our edits on a Sandbox page so it doesn't interfere
with the live articles in the Main:namespace. See I'm certain that he/she
didn't intend to have their Sandbox page indexed on 9 Category pages when they
started editing the Brooklyn Bridge atricle on March 05, 2006. However, because
they copied the full content of the article (including the Category links) their
Sandbox page is now being indexed in several places in the Main:namespace. See and
look directly below the Brooklyn Brige link.

I'm suret the engine or process that picks up the tag for the categories works
as intended. <U>The process is flawed</U>. I think <U>it is a design
oversight</U>. Should the Editing guidelines be update to warn Users not to copy
the category links to their Sandbox pages? Or should someone try to get the
policy changed to avoid indexing pages from the User:namespace in the
Main:namespace? Or should I just start smoking crack again?
Comment 7 Brion Vibber 2006-04-13 21:43:12 UTC
It is deliberate, useful, and used that you can categorize user pages.
This is normal. This is not a bug. This is not a flaw. This is not a
design oversight.
Comment 8 Dennis Lowell 2006-04-13 23:34:36 UTC
I disagree. But it's clear that I'm alone in my opinion. Thanks for 
spending time looking at this.

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