I suggest to provide non-global rename / stewards limited access to global rename requests.
For Special:GlobalRenameQueue/request/* we generally use this a reason in the summary, therefore limited access for "non renamer" would be helpful
For example:
From
FormerUsername
To:
NewUsername
Status
approved
Requested
06:15, 22 June 2015
Completed
06:25, 22 June 2015
Done by
Renamer| Status | Subtype | Assigned | Task | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Stalled | None | T103290 Provide limited access to Special:GlobalRenameQueue/request/ | |||
| Open | None | T113938 GlobalRenameRequest: Allow to suppress rename requests |
I'm not sure if this would be helpful. I have seen some of those containing in the reason field information that could be private. And if we remove the reason field, then we have the same info the local and global rename logs provide, so I'm not sure. Open to be conviced otherwise. Best regards.
[Rephrasing task summary to make clear this is a feature request and not a bug]
@Steinsplitter: Did you set the priority because you plan to work on this or now somebody planning to work on this?
I am hesitant to support the proposal in its current form. There is currently a level of restriction to who can view, and having them open to view unrestricted may be problematic if the data has a level of confidentiality. As these (non-special)logs cannot be oversighted or restricted, there has not been a demonstrated value to opening then access.
Of course the reason should be hidden. And maybe a function should be crated to allow oversighting in the special form. :-)
Just some toughs... :-)
For no, or little, benefit, or making more work.
So the proposal would have to be
at which wiki undetermined
benefit not expressed.
That is without discussing what, when and why we may oversight.
To my way of thinking there should be a strong case presented on why this
should go forward. There a lot of things that I see are more important,
needed and have benefit.
I think a "mark as private" checkbox should be enough for now, in the future we will probably need an oversight-level stuff.
We should probably just keep open requests private always and should make them public (if not suppressed - see T113938) after the request has been closed.
Opposing this. People submits and have submitted the (detailed in some cases) reasons for rename requests through this form because they knew it was private/confidential and only visible to basically stewards and global renamers. We even tell in some places that indeed its contents are only visible to global renamers and stewards. Making the contents of the requests visible would expose those reasons submitted in confidence to us, and that'd be unnaceptable. Now we advice users to use OTRS if they want to lodge a private rename request, but this has not been always the case. Billinghurst makes good points at T103290#1386742 and T103290#1389619.
I suggest closing this as declined. It's been 5 years since this task was opened and there's no consensus for this to happen. Not to mention that T113938: GlobalRenameRequest: Allow to suppress rename requests is still unresolved after 5 years as well, which makes unadviceable to make this information public if there's no easy way later to hide it, making it a privacy issue.
Would it not be possible to make this an option for non-WMF wiki farms who feel this should be public?
I am willing to review patches that implement this in a way that is sustainable for us to maintain in the future, but I am not going to spend my time developing features that would not be used on the Wikimedia cluster. I suspect the same applies for other CA maintainers.