Last modified: 2006-01-16 04:41:35 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 2437 - Automatic edit summaries when none entered
Automatic edit summaries when none entered
Status: RESOLVED DUPLICATE of bug 1307
Product: MediaWiki
Classification: Unclassified
Page editing (Other open bugs)
All All
: Normal enhancement with 10 votes (vote)
: ---
Assigned To: Nobody - You can work on this!
Depends on:
  Show dependency treegraph
Reported: 2005-06-17 16:02 UTC by Omegatron
Modified: 2006-01-16 04:41 UTC (History)
1 user (show)

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


Description Omegatron 2005-06-17 16:02:33 UTC
The software should add some info about the edit when someone doesn't fill out
the edit summary field, making patrolling easier on everyone. For instance, if I
make a minor change to an article, changing "5KV" to "5 kV", I just press alt+s
out of habit, without filling out the summary. What would be ideal is if the
software just autogenerated a summary of:

16:15 Electricity (diff; hist) . . Omegatron (Talk) (→Voltage - "5KV" → "5 kV")

In cases of vandalism, this clearly labels it for those patrolling recent
changes or watchlists:

16:15 Politics (diff; hist) . . (Talk) (→Political concerns - "is a
member of the" → "IS GAY!!!")

Since the autogenerated summary is colored, it can be trusted and can prevent
the need to waste bandwidth, time, and server load from checking a lot of diffs
by anon editors that are simple spelling fixes and such.

"But we already have a policy of encouraging edit summaries!  They should be
filled in!"  So what?  A lot of people, especially vandals, simply don't fill
them out.  It would be tremendously helpful if the software generated a crude
summary itself in these cases.

This saves precious server resources by processing a diff only once, preventing
the need for many people to load that diff again in the future.

More details and examples at the included URL.
Comment 1 T. Gries 2005-06-22 20:37:23 UTC
(In reply to comment #0)
> The software should add some info about the edit when someone doesn't fill out
> the edit summary field....

This is a similar to bugzilla

"Auto-Edit Summary: if few changes ("smaller" than a threshold) have been made,
automatically create an Edit Summary from diff results"
Comment 2 Xiong Changnian 2005-08-07 15:33:56 UTC
This is the germ of a good idea. I might not like to see the mini-diff right on
top of or sharing the edit summary field; I'd rather have another column in the
history display. 

Implementation might be very tricky. The diff mechanism already tends to choke
and get confused, failing to equate large blocks of identical text. I do agree
that a mini-diff of some sort would prove extremely useful. 
Comment 3 Omegatron 2005-12-01 02:27:50 UTC
I bet a user script could be written based on this diff algorithm:

I started to look at it but I am not that good with js yet.
Comment 4 Rob Church 2005-12-01 10:13:05 UTC
I'd go for something with the name of the section that was edited, if a section
*was* edited, then the change in size, in bytes, e.g.:

→ Voltage (+1)
Comment 5 Zigger 2006-01-16 04:41:35 UTC

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 1307 ***

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