User Details
- User Since
- Oct 16 2014, 4:00 PM (513 w, 1 d)
- Availability
- Available
- LDAP User
- Unknown
- MediaWiki User
- Scott [ Global Accounts ]
Fri, Aug 2
Jul 14 2024
There's been no movement on this since I subscribed to one of the merged bugs nine years ago. Any chance of some priority being given to it? Especially since the namespace selector on search has had this capability for a very long time.
An approach has been missed in the discussion so far, which is to not make decisions over which namespaces have more abstract utility but to allow users to choose how they want the list to be sorted instead. Having the list as an antique plain dropdown makes that much harder, when it could be a panel containing items that can be sorted by drag and drop. Naturally in 2024 any such reordering should be instantly saved as a user preference to be applied anywhere there's a namespace selector. A "reset order" button would need to be provided as well. This would offer a gentle and straightforward way for motivated users to optimize a small part of their interface while not interfering with the status quo.
As a suggestion for how this could be implemented:
Jul 13 2024
Thanks @Bugreporter! 👍🏻
Jul 12 2024
Jun 26 2024
May 23 2024
May 10 2024
Dec 13 2022
Dec 12 2022
I'm a couple of months late but just want to say happy tenth birthday to this task.
🎉
Oct 2 2022
Thanks a million for this @Lens0021.
Feb 22 2022
Another way to solve this would be a dynamic load of further history elements by the api and adding them the history page.
Feb 19 2022
Feb 1 2022
(Apologies all for bugspam)
Dec 19 2021
It stopped being developed in 2015, but as you wish.
Marking as resolved as Flow is defunct.
Nov 4 2020
@Addshore OK, great. Thanks for the info 👍
Nov 2 2020
Just like that, without even a comment?
Sep 24 2020
Jul 24 2020
[New comment after refreshing my memory]
Apr 14 2020
I think this is related in some fashion to T13181.
Apr 2 2020
Done.
I've unmarked this story as being a duplicate of T72239 because that is different, specifically requesting "Add null revisions for page delete and restore events". This task as I envisioned it would be resolved by using database queries and sorting to produce a merged view of existing logs.
Mar 30 2020
Mar 28 2020
@Ammarpad - you've merged my task T62736 (created 6 months before this one in 2014) here as a duplicate. But I share the many concerns expressed by commenters above about the hacky nature of using null revisions. My task imagined using database queries to provide an integrated view of history and deletion events, and as such I don't think it's a duplicate of this at all.
Feb 15 2020
Hi, great to see this suggestion finally being implemented 7 years after I filed it. However looking through the diff in an email I just had from Jenkins, the message "Displayed $1 {{PLURAL:$1|item|items}}." is using past tense. It should be in present tense, consistent with other comparable messages (eg. on Special:FewestRevisions, "Showing below up to 50 results in range #1 to #50.").
Sep 27 2019
Aug 19 2019
Aug 14 2019
Jun 25 2019
May 10 2019
Mar 21 2019
See also T13739, "Inverse selection for [[Special:Log]]".
Feb 26 2019
Feb 2 2019
Jul 1 2018
Yeah - on enwp we can use RevDel to remove the visible traces of vandalism, but that's obviously not an option here.
Once the reversions are done, will it be possible to get the traces of this attack wiped? TBH it seems to me like this matter would best be handled at DBA level.
Apr 27 2018
Apr 23 2018
Hi @Niharika, I edit the English Wikipedia, and my language setting is English. I got a security notification from the Spanish Wikipedia, in Spanish.
Apr 21 2018
To clarify here: their preferences where? On their home wiki? Or the one they've never used, where a security alert has been generated?
Apr 20 2018
So you think that a security notification should potentially be sent to users in a language that they don't understand - possibly even in an alphabet that they can't read. That makes no sense whatsoever. If one user throws the message in the trash without reading it because they can't, then it has failed to do its job.
Mar 12 2018
Jan 20 2018
+1000 for this cogently-put argument.
Dec 28 2017
@He7d3r - you're right, sorry; looks like I glossed over that part. Done.
Per Helder at T4994#3860813, rephrased task to only be about external authors as T4994 already covers on-wiki contributors.