Last modified: 2011-06-27 00:21:31 UTC
When you move a thread to another page, a placeholder always remains at the old page where it has been. However, unlike other threads on the page, it's not deletable. While it may be good to keep them around usually, it should at least be possible to delete them since they clutter the page and the table of contents and some users might not like them. Furthermore, on some wikis, it's common practice to delete unnecessary move leftovers. For example, on the German language Wikipedia, there's an own bot that puts speedy deletion templates on all talk page redirects and move artifacts with a parentheses title. Some time ago, a bot used to delete about 300 user talk subpage redirects leftovers from userspace drafts. Thus, a delete option would be useful, even though you might not want to encourage deleting them.
I would like very strong support this request. On Polish Wikipedia we consider the introduction of LQT on pages where we discuss whether an article should be deleted. On one page we would like to have all open threads and after closing the thread, we are going to move thread to another archive-page (yes, we know that threads can be archived automatically, but more clear situation is distinction on page with open threads and page with archive threads). So placeholder stamp will be useless on page with open threads. It would be great to * create magic word like {{lqtnotcreateplaceholder}} or/and * on [[Special:MoveThread]] add option "Leave a redirect behind" the same as on [[Special:MovePage]].
*** Bug 24178 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
I'm going to turn this into a real bug and not an enhancement. Here, let me wave my magic wand! >ding!<
Hello, Is there any progress in fixing this bug (and other related to LQT)? Next weekend Polish Wikipedia community is going to meet on annual strategy planning meeting ([[meta:GDJ 2010]]) and we are planning to talk about enabling LQT. But it would be easier to discuss if the bugs have been fixed :-) PS. I heard that you are working under new version of LQT - is there possibility to test it?
This is particularly annoying because it makes impossible to archive LiquidThreads, see also bug 24815 and bug 25329.
(In reply to comment #5) > This is particularly annoying because it makes impossible to archive > LiquidThreads, see also bug 24815 and bug 25329. This is a main idea of this bug. As I said in comment 1: "On one page we would like to have all open threads and after closing the thread, we are going to move thread to another archive-page (yes, we know that threads can be archived automatically, but more clear situation is distinction on page with open threads and page with archive threads). So placeholder stamp will be useless on page with open threads."
(In reply to comment #6) > (In reply to comment #5) > > This is particularly annoying because it makes impossible to archive > > LiquidThreads, see also bug 24815 and bug 25329. > > This is a main idea of this bug. Well, because you agree I add it as blocker of bug 24815.
