If that could be done, then it would be useful if that could be run as a cronjob on a regular basis. Means that we ensure a cleanup, we know from when to when has been done, and trying to outwit the quick acting bots that do welcome pages do not need to combated.

Why has this now been set as low priority?

Actually it should get a rather high priority because that useless automatic welcoming may reveal personal data or libelous information that should be removed and that if possible not just 10 years later.

That bugs/software features reveal suppressible info and the requested fix for that gets into low priority category is something I can't understand.

Feel very free to correct the priority (or setting an assignee) if you are aware of anybody who has this task on their list to work on. Thanks!

Auto-suppressing things makes me uneasy. If a vandal managed to figure out the name of a suppressed user (say, by creating an abusive username and having it be suppressed) they could move pages into their userspace and the script would suppress them.

per @Legoktm 's concerns

As a general question would any such process be internal to the wikis so not requiring special rights? or is something like this more likely to be sitting outside as a bot that requires rights of oversight.

[Seems that this is primarily due to auto-welcoming software, which runs on some wikis.]

So we either manage the auto-welcoming bots on wikis so that they delay their welcome message by some period that allows for suppression prior to implementation (guessing that this possibility is low)

or

A means to identify user pages that have content when an account is to be suppressed, and that can allow suppression of said user pages (with review?) and cleaning of logs.

or

A means to have a reviewable report that shows what was suppressed per run AND there is a process to demonstrate the report was reviewed and actions to be taken were reviewed. [The system is aware of which account names are being suppressed, so what is involved in identifying userpages for those accounts?]

or

Is this a two step process where the data is gathered in step one, and approved in step two. Then all the rights and assignations that are required to get that done (as per previous),

Either way, if we are purposely suppressing as something is defamatory/illegal/... that we purposefully suppressed the username though did not take steps to remove all evidence of such components not only looks bad, may open up legitimate complaints of inaction and the consequences that could flow from it.

In T100383#1318222, @Legoktm wrote:

Auto-suppressing things makes me uneasy. If a vandal managed to figure out the name of a suppressed user (say, by creating an abusive username and having it be suppressed) they could move pages into their userspace and the script would suppress them.

Hi. I am not talking about automatic suppression without any kind of criteria. The script should be suppressing user and user talk pages of accounts already globally hidden or oversighted as of the date of the script is run; after that, we can try to run it on a regular basis or better, fix T98171 so we can do it ourselves when globally oversighting or locally blocking with 'hideuser' an account. Thanks.