Last modified: 2013-03-06 17:04:36 UTC
Edit conflict handling is quite simply broken on Wikimedia wikis. I've hit a number of edit conflicts in the past week or so, and the "Stored text" and the text in the top textarea is simply wrong. So if you try to submit with it, you overwrite someone else's edit silently. This should be easy to reproduce.
On a number of wikis, or en.wikipedia.org? Any specific example / screenshot / testcase? This reminded me of bug 41280... Tentatively moving to ContentHandler component.
I've only experienced the issue on the English Wikipedia.
There are various reports of users hitting outdated page histories on the English Wikipedia's technical village pump. I wonder if something similar is going on here. I tried to reproduce this bug on test.wikipedia.org and en.wikipedia.org and wasn't able to. :-/
On en.wp:VP I see many mentions that link to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Village_pump_%28technical%29#Users_reporting_site_time_issues_and_delay_in_visible_update_of_edits which I so far didn't understand as an editing issue but an issue with serving outdated content on the mainpage.
hmm.... the phpunit tests pass for me (on the deployment branch and master). I am not sure what's going on, but can try to reproduce.
the EditPage phpunit tests pass, which test edit conflicts
Throwing this back to Wikimedia, as I don't think it's ContentHandler-related. Also lowering the priority, since it doesn't seem like it's getting reported a lot right now. It's an annoying bug, but it doesn't seem pervasive. I'll try to take a screenshot the next time I encounter the problem.
Leslie has commented in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Village_pump_%28technical%29#Users_reporting_site_time_issues_and_delay_in_visible_update_of_edits In short: Likely multicast forwarding router bug, and she is investigating. Related: bug 44391 - "old revisions of pages are shown when not logged in and also revision history is outdated".
This bug is a mess. Last comments should have been on bug 44360. As for the edit conflicts, WORKSFORME. Please reopen if there are specific examples or steps to reproduce.
(In reply to comment #9) > This bug is a mess. Last comments should have been on bug 44360. This appears to be a typo, as this is bug 44360. > As for the edit conflicts, WORKSFORME. Please reopen if there are specific > examples or steps to reproduce. Specific examples: * https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/Article_feedback&diff=prev&oldid=534372779 * https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/Article_feedback&diff=prev&oldid=534738771 In both of these cases, I hit an edit conflict, I copied and pasted just my text from the second (lower) textarea, and then when I submitted my edit, I somehow silently overwrote other users' edits.
(In reply to comment #10) > (In reply to comment #9) > > This bug is a mess. Last comments should have been on bug 44360. > > This appears to be a typo, as this is bug 44360. Sure, I meant bug 44391. > Specific examples: > > * > https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/ > Article_feedback&diff=prev&oldid=534372779 > > * > https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/ > Article_feedback&diff=prev&oldid=534738771 > > In both of these cases, I hit an edit conflict, I copied and pasted just my > text from the second (lower) textarea, and then when I submitted my edit, I > somehow silently overwrote other users' edits. Thanks. The two examples are a bit different. In the first it's about two different sections: were you section-editing just the first of the two? Probably originally you were, but then had an edit conflict with the 19:59 comment, and ended up saving the full text of the page after the 20:03 comment? If you re-did a section edit and removed something on another section, this would be a bug (it sometimes happened in the past). In the second, it's just a normal double edit conflict. I'm not sure how smart the edit conflict detection is supposed to be here, maybe it could get smarter (and this would be a feature request); surely it's better to check the diff before saving after a conflict, as usual.
It seems to have happened again in this edit: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:In_the_news/Candidates&diff=537690318&oldid=537690261
(In reply to comment #12) > It seems to have happened again in this edit: > > https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:In_the_news/ > Candidates&diff=537690318&oldid=537690261 How do you know? Did the user say what they did? It's hard to guess from the diff only. Thanks.
(In reply to comment #13) > How do you know? Did the user say what they did? It's hard to guess from the > diff only. I hit the same issue as described in comment 0 during this period of intense editing. It's some kind of nasty race condition, I think. That diff shows that the user accidentally overwriting another user's edit. I think it's safe to assume this overwrite was unintentional.
(In reply to comment #14) > I hit the same issue as described in comment 0 during this period of intense > editing. It's some kind of nasty race condition, I think. Without asking the user it's impossible to tell. Maybe the "your text" below was just blindly copied to the edit area. There are too many ways to produce a diff like that. > > That diff shows that the user accidentally overwriting another user's edit. I > think it's safe to assume this overwrite was unintentional. Sure, we can mourn and pray together, but without specific information nothing can be understood or done.
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:MZMcBride&diff=542292244&oldid=542292175 Presumably another instance of whatever this issue is.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 21494 ***
