I agree with this:
Not sure where to have this discussed or proposed, so I though that doing it here would be a good start. Please advice if an RFC at mediawikiwiki here is also required. Thanks.
Description
Description
| Status | Subtype | Assigned | Task | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| · · · | ||||
| Open | None | T139810 RFC: Overhaul the CheckUser extension | ||
| Open | None | T132892 CheckUser UI revamp | ||
| Open | None | T69811 CheckUsers "Get users" design needs improvements | ||
| Open | Feature | Dreamy_Jazz | T24120 Enhance Blocking and tagging from checkuser interface: add dropdowns | |
| Open | Feature | None | T18306 Allow user to specify block settings from CU form | |
| Resolved | Glaisher | T49505 CheckUser results (userlinks) cannot be customized | ||
| Resolved | Niharika | T24119 Enhance Blocking and tagging from checkuser interface: add new page | ||
| Resolved | Feature | Dreamy_Jazz | T16699 More versatile searching in CheckUser log | |
| Duplicate | None | T140345 Userlinks in CheckUser should be customizable | ||
| Open | None | T21964 Provide a link to the user on account creation | ||
| Duplicate | None | T144099 Make CheckUser unit-testable | ||
| Resolved | Dreamy_Jazz | T309815 Use OOUI in Special:CheckUser | ||
| Resolved | Dreamy_Jazz | T266586 Use OOUI in SpecialCheckUserLog | ||
| · · · |
Event Timeline
Comment Actions
I don't think a formal RFC is needed here. Comments by the users of the extension here is fine.
Comment Actions
It's unlikely that the features will be implemented any time soon because the Special:CheckUser code is so old that it's hard to get something major done with the guarantee that nothing else is broken. That being said, I did some minor cleanup (mostly removing duplicated code and fixing some minor bugs which was discovered) recently with help from Krenair and lego. If time permits (probably not soon) and if we can get reviews within a reasonable time, I'll be willing to work on it.
Comment Actions
If the code is so old that working with it is a pain, what about writting a new CU extension from the start, with fresh, working and updated new code?
Comment Actions
https://prtksxna.github.io/wmf-cu-prototype/ (presented in T237039 - source) looks very good.
I'd add a minor feature - a "Proxy/VPN check" link - after "Tor check": <a href="https://www.ipqualityscore.com/free-ip-lookup-proxy-vpn-test/lookup/<?=$IP ?>">Proxy/VPN check</a>
For geolocation (no link in prototype) I prefer to use "https://www.iplocation.net/?query=<?=$IP ?>"
which presents data from 3 sources (that often differ). These include https://whatismyipaddress.com/ip/1.1.1.1 and https://db-ip.com/1.1.1.1 currently used on IP contributions pages
Note: one more useful alternative (50/day free requests only): https://www.ip2location.com/demo/1.1.1.1
A more substantive task would be to aggregate subnetwork (isp) data from whois and geolocation from these services or an on-site database and present it in 2 more columns. This would greatly increase the efficiency of evaluating dynamic ips, vpn users, etc.
See: T174553: Create a mechanism that allows fetching geolocation and subnet data for IP addresses
Another feature would be for >10 IPs to group IPs by subnet.
@Niharika These features could be detailed further, please advise: should I make a separate task here, or is there a meta/mediawiki page where these UI improvements are discussed now.
EDIT: refactored comment to T237593#5643260
Comment Actions
@AronManning Thank you for the feedback. I am discussing this with the community on this page. Adding your comments there and also providing your thoughts on what others have stated would be helpful to me. I can respond to your comments there so others can see it too.
I'll note that the mocks in https://prtksxna.github.io/wmf-cu-prototype/ are very much subject to change. The idea is to share them and iterate based on feedback. :)