Last modified: 2011-03-13 18:06:44 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 8128 - Show boteditletter in history
Show boteditletter in history
Product: MediaWiki
Classification: Unclassified
History/Diffs (Other open bugs)
All All
: Lowest normal (vote)
: ---
Assigned To: Nobody - You can work on this!
Depends on:
  Show dependency treegraph
Reported: 2006-12-03 02:15 UTC by Danny B.
Modified: 2011-03-13 18:06 UTC (History)
0 users

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


Description Danny B. 2006-12-03 02:15:44 UTC
It would be useful to have bot edits marked in history as well as minor edits
are now.
Comment 1 Danny B. 2006-12-03 04:17:12 UTC
See also bug 8129 with similar request for watchlist.
Comment 2 Rotem Liss 2006-12-03 15:17:17 UTC
Unlike the watchlist, it's very hard to have it in the history: the history uses
the table "revision" (which does not mark bot edits), while the recent changes
and watchlist use the table "recentchanges" (which does mark them).
Comment 3 Danny B. 2006-12-03 16:33:23 UTC
I see. Is there any chance to add marking of bot edits into revision table then
to simplify this task or is it too expensive change?

I think that history marking bot edits would be useful because of two major
reasons: not every bot has a name containing the "(B|b)ot" string or vice versa
contains "(B|b)ot" while not a bot. And second: not every edit of bots contains
eg. "Robot:..." or "Robot assisted..." etc. in summary.

I think that it wouldn't be such a big harm to start this feature without having
to synchronize the entire history (which I guess would be the most expensive
part of setting of this feature). So everybody will know that bot edits before
Day D haven't been marked and since then they are. If I remember correctly, this
approach has been already used in some other features.
Comment 4 Rob Church 2006-12-03 22:04:46 UTC
Just remember that altering the structure of the revision table will hit big
wikis hard. For instance, there are about* 95 million rows in this table for the
English Wikipedia alone, so it's certainly not something to be done lightly.

[*Estimate based on Special:Statistics, not definitive, blah blah]
Comment 5 Rob Church 2006-12-19 12:59:12 UTC
Realistically, the bot flag is only advisory, and serves to avoid flooding
recent changes. It doesn't ever affect what goes into page histories, and I
don't think it should be preserved past recent changes.

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