Last modified: 2014-06-09 22:46:51 UTC

Wikimedia Bugzilla is closed!

Wikimedia migrated from Bugzilla to Phabricator. Bug reports are handled in Wikimedia Phabricator.
This static website is read-only and for historical purposes. It is not possible to log in and except for displaying bug reports and their history, links might be broken. See T17942, the corresponding Phabricator task for complete and up-to-date bug report information.
Bug 15942 - Create a log and revert function for Special:Nuke
Create a log and revert function for Special:Nuke
Status: RESOLVED WONTFIX
Product: MediaWiki extensions
Classification: Unclassified
Nuke (Other open bugs)
unspecified
All All
: Low enhancement with 1 vote (vote)
: ---
Assigned To: Nobody - You can work on this!
:
Depends on:
Blocks:
  Show dependency treegraph
 
Reported: 2008-10-11 18:40 UTC by Techman224
Modified: 2014-06-09 22:46 UTC (History)
4 users (show)

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


Attachments

Description Techman224 2008-10-11 18:40:54 UTC
There's some concern that a rouge admin can delete thousands of pages at once with Special:Nuke and it would take a long time to revert the damage, so I'm creating this bug. There should be some "revert" function built into the nuke interface. Also, there should be a separate log containing who used nuke (and be able to revert it from there).
Comment 1 Mike.lifeguard 2008-10-11 18:54:46 UTC
They're just normal deletions - I don't think another log is needed; seems like feature bloat (coming from me, that's saying something)

Deletions are easily reverted manually, or using a bot or script if there are many of them. I don't think mass-restore is needed either - has there been a case of "a rouge admin delet[ing] thousands of pages at once with Special:Nuke" that couldn't be easily restored using the methods I mentioned?
Comment 2 Techman224 2008-10-11 18:58:01 UTC
(In reply to comment #1)
> They're just normal deletions - I don't think another log is needed; seems like
> feature bloat (coming from me, that's saying something)
> 
> Deletions are easily reverted manually, or using a bot or script if there are
> many of them. I don't think mass-restore is needed either - has there been a
> case of "a rouge admin delet[ing] thousands of pages at once with Special:Nuke"
> that couldn't be easily restored using the methods I mentioned?
> 
But where do you get the scripts?
Comment 3 Mike.lifeguard 2008-10-11 19:20:14 UTC
(In reply to comment #2)
> (In reply to comment #1)
> > They're just normal deletions - I don't think another log is needed; seems like
> > feature bloat (coming from me, that's saying something)
> > 
> > Deletions are easily reverted manually, or using a bot or script if there are
> > many of them. I don't think mass-restore is needed either - has there been a
> > case of "a rouge admin delet[ing] thousands of pages at once with Special:Nuke"
> > that couldn't be easily restored using the methods I mentioned?
> > 
> But where do you get the scripts?
> 

Write it yourself, or use pywikipediabot - there's probably a bunch floating around. Even if there weren't ready-made scripts I don't think we need this.
Comment 4 X! 2008-10-11 19:28:15 UTC
Ilmari Karonen on enwiki has a BRFA open for an undelete bot, could probably me easily modified to when such a case comes about.
Comment 5 Techman224 2008-10-11 19:36:37 UTC
But can the script be integrated in Mediawiki or made into another feature? Because that's what I'm asking.
Comment 6 Alex Z. 2008-10-11 23:16:38 UTC
The problem is that since they are just regular deletions, the software has no easy way of knowing what to un-nuke. To get the list of pages to nuke, it gets all the pages from recentchanges that a user has created. But once they're deleted, they're just an entry in the deletion log. How would it know what to undelete? The only real way to do this would be to create a log of "nuke" deletions, but creating another log type just to be able to more easily undo a highly unlikely situation seems excessive. 
Comment 7 TeleComNasSprVen 2014-06-09 22:46:43 UTC
I also don't feel creating another log is worth the time and resources.

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


Navigation
Links