Last modified: 2012-11-03 09:50:00 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 T10516, the corresponding Phabricator task for complete and up-to-date bug report information.
Bug 8516 - Ignore non-articles on Lonelypages
Ignore non-articles on Lonelypages
Status: NEW
Product: MediaWiki
Classification: Unclassified
Special pages (Other open bugs)
All All
: Low enhancement with 5 votes (vote)
: ---
Assigned To: Nobody - You can work on this!
Depends on:
Blocks: 4204 39661
  Show dependency treegraph
Reported: 2007-01-07 04:53 UTC by Mashiah Davidson
Modified: 2012-11-03 09:50 UTC (History)
4 users (show)

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


Description Mashiah Davidson 2007-01-07 04:53:49 UTC
I found the behaviour of the script constructing Lonelypages list does not work for the goal of 
collecting Orphaned articles because it interprets links from some superflows namespaces as parenting 
links. This becomes a big problem for the lonelypages list. Just as an example, let suppose a Portal 
about Persons contains a News page and every relevant article is announced on this page. This means 
lonelypages list does not contain any info on personalies and there is no information on which articles 
are orphaned for this category. It is just an example of one of the problems with lonelypages collecting 
script I know.

I formed two conditions in simpliest (on my taste) form for improved list creation, the script is

not to take into account any links from any namespaces except for Articles (main namespace, 0 valued) 
to take into account links from disambiguation and redirection pages linked from main namespace Articles 
(note that disambiguations are defined by a category)
Comment 1 Aryeh Gregor (not reading bugmail, please e-mail directly) 2007-01-08 01:40:59 UTC
Repurposing to the namespace issue only.  Bug 3483 and bug 7546 are best viewed
as separate.

This would be a fairly trivial addition to the query's WHERE clause, I assume,
but do we want it?  I would like other opinions.  Certainly the meta namespaces
aren't unimportant, and knowing about lonely pages in those has value.  Your
example of a portal, well, the same could be said of the main page, couldn't it?
 And any such link would presumably disappear sooner or later.  I'd be inclined
Comment 2 Mashiah Davidson 2007-01-08 02:02:28 UTC
You shown a good example with the main page. Both, the news list and the main page are temporary pages!

Ok, you do not know about the usecase scenario for namespaces for particular wiki. And you suppose one can 
use them as subspaces for main namespace.

I suggest a parameter value or list enumerating namespaces to be present in the WHERE clause. One can tune 
it for it's own wikipedia. Is this a big deal or trivual addition again?
Comment 3 Mashiah Davidson 2007-01-14 22:28:35 UTC
It looks like if I did not described the problem correctly. Now I have to add a short list of pages 
influencing the lonelypages list content. Pages in the list are temporal in a certain sence but indeed they 
stay for a long time:
* user pages (users insert bookmarks and their good articles on their pages)
* any pages discussed anyware! (articles being discussed for deletion, articles discussed on user 
discussion pages, elected to be a good or a featured article)
* main page of the project or portal (first is really temporal, portal may have being edited rarely or 
never edited)
* news for portal pages ("archived" influencing lonelypages)

So, the problem is that lonelypages list does not show the state of orphaned pages problem at all.
Comment 4 Mashiah Davidson 2007-02-22 21:28:32 UTC
Is it possible to mark an article or its section to ingnore links to be threated as links from Main 
namespace? This will be very helpfull to have it to mark news archives and requested articles lists this 
Comment 5 Max Semenik 2007-03-10 09:09:27 UTC
(In reply to comment #1)

> This would be a fairly trivial addition to the query's WHERE clause, I assume,
> but do we want it?  I would like other opinions.

I wholeheartedly support this!
Comment 6 Nemo 2012-11-03 09:50:00 UTC
Sort of duplicate of bug 4204.

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