Last modified: 2011-03-13 18:05:40 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 9594 - Deprecate minor edits
Deprecate minor edits
Product: MediaWiki
Classification: Unclassified
History/Diffs (Other open bugs)
All All
: Lowest minor (vote)
: ---
Assigned To: Nobody - You can work on this!
Depends on:
  Show dependency treegraph
Reported: 2007-04-16 18:37 UTC by Jon Harald Søby
Modified: 2011-03-13 18:05 UTC (History)
0 users

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


Description Jon Harald Søby 2007-04-16 18:37:40 UTC
Since Recent changes and Watchlist now show the number of bytes added to/removed
from an article, I believe the minor edit function is no longer necessary. And
since it is based on the user him/herself considering whether or not his/her
edit is minor, it can be wildly inaccurate. For example, [1] is not a minor
edit, while [2] is. The only function I can see minor edits having, is the
ability to hide minor edits in one's watchlist; however, this could also easily
be solved by using the byte diff instead.

Comment 1 Aaron Schulz 2007-04-16 18:40:59 UTC
Sometimes changing a few words can drastically atlter the article "X is true/X
is false", and for trusted user, it would be good form to not mark these edits
as minor, while marking other such edits as minor.
Comment 2 Jon Harald Søby 2007-04-16 18:52:24 UTC
In theory, yes. But it is used so randomly that you would still have to check
Comment 3 Aaron Schulz 2007-04-16 18:54:35 UTC
But if it is a descently trusted user, you don't have to so, so it still has its
uses. Also, some wikis may have a more strict/trusted userbase, and it may be
more useful on those MW sites. I just don't see the need to remove it.
Comment 4 Gurch 2007-04-16 20:04:38 UTC
A minor edit and a small edit are not the same thing.

If I erased an entire paragraph and wrote another of the same size, I would mark
that as a major edit, but the change size would be relatively small.

If I made a change that was small in size but large in meaning to a disputed
area of a controversial article, I wouldn't mark it as minor at all - on the
contrary, it would probably be accompanied by a lengthy edit summary and a
discussion on the talk page (add edit wars, protection, dispute resolution etc.
to taste).

What counts is the significance of the edit, not the number of characters changed.

Furthermore, people don't review the editing history of an article using recent
changes or a watchlist. They use the page history - that's what it's there for.
If and when it becomes possible to see change size in page histories (and
Special:Contributions), this point will no longer be relevant, but the above
always will.
Comment 5 Platonides 2007-04-16 20:11:25 UTC
I'm curious... reverting a page blanking on your point of view is big or minor?

PS: [2] is biased, as you did a large edit marking it as minor ;-)
Comment 6 Aaron Schulz 2007-04-16 20:12:33 UTC
Closing, per the reasons above.

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