Last modified: 2009-01-27 05:02:32 UTC
The following would be really useful for keeping the Willy on Wheels in check: a list of all users sorted by account registration time (most recent first, essentially like RC/watchlists) and with links to talk, contributions, and blockip. Here's a crude ASCII mock-up: 24 August 2005 08:02 Wheelie on Wills! (talk . contribs . block) 08:01 Willee on Wheals! (talk . contribs) The absence of a "block" link would indicate that the account is currently blocked (i.e., this would query the IP block list as well). Several users have been engaged in new user patrol (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#Newuser_patrol), and the functionality described above can be simulated to a certain extent off-line. However, there are some technical problems related to the (ab)use of UTF8 usernames, and the selective presence of block links would be especially useful. Related, but slightly different enhancement: http://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1628
Creation time is not recorded, but creation _order_ is (in the ID numbers). So a sorted list can be made, but it won't include timestamps (at least for now).
Let me quickly reiterate that this enhancement would go beyond the functionality requested in #1628 (http://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1628) because of the cross-referencing with the IP block list.
Re Brion's comment #1: Creation order would be an excellent start! Perhaps in the future the DB scheme could be augmented to also record creation time for each account?
I am actually weakly opposed to this. I think it allows for the impression that old/early created accounts are special. Not to mention the temptation of a new varient of the appeal to authority: "I'm user #24325, shut up you #314531". Identifying newbies has a number of useful purposes, but what good is served by identifying oldies? For this reason, I would prefer that such a listing have a cutoff such that people do age out and merely become part of the society of equals that is Wikipedia.
I agree completely regarding one point: We certainly don't want to encourage Slashdot-style petty elitism based on user ID numbers. One way of doing that would be to simply not show the ID numbers in the list. Also, the community is usually pretty good about judging users by their contributions, pointing out the dangers of editcountitis, etc. User ID snobbery would be even worse than edit count snobbery, and I don't think it would find any acceptance. I do, however, think we do need the ability go back in time and see if there are any temporal patterns in account creation. The Willy on Wheels has been with us for over a year, and has acted methodically, creating sleeper accounts which lie dormant for a while before being used for vandalism. I don't think we should automatically trust the oldest 99% (or some other percentage) of users: they may have registered a long while ago, but if they haven't made any edits at all, the only reason to trust them is [[WP:FAITH]].
Well how about removing people from the list after they have established a certain number of edits then? That would still leave open the possibility to observe even very old sleepers but remove users who have established themselves within the community. 200 is a perfectly abitrary number but would probably be enough to eliminate all but the most enduring of trolls.
This is now feasible with the introduction of the user.user_registration column.
Done in r46177
Release notes?
There also seems to be no UI for selecting it, and the URL parameter 'creationSort' doesn't follow our typical naming patterns. Consider 'sort=name' vs 'sort=id' or such, and provide a UI for selecting it.
Done
(In reply to comment #11) > Done > Release note that is.
