Wiki.Melancholie wrote:

Bug 14033 ("Allow templates to get flagged; flagging should approve 0-review-needed articles") is more preferable, by the way!

*** Bug 14043 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

*** Bug 14060 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

pbirken wrote:

My suggestion: Do a quick fix so that if the current version is sighted and a template is changed, the behavior is as follows: i) The UI still shows that the version is sighted, but the exapanded box has a different message saying that in comparison to the sighted version, templates or pictures may have changed.

In a future step, we add the template namespace to the flaggable namespaces and show the last sighted template in a current sighted version.

(In reply to comment #4)

My suggestion: Do a quick fix so that if the current version is sighted and a
template is changed, the behavior is as follows: i) The UI still shows that the
version is sighted, but the exapanded box has a different message saying that
in comparison to the sighted version, templates or pictures may have changed.

In a future step, we add the template namespace to the flaggable namespaces and
show the last sighted template in a current sighted version.

So maybe just change "The draft has 0 changes awaiting review." to "Template/image changes are awaiting review" or something?

Wiki.Melancholie wrote:

Yes, would be enough.

But it would be nice to know *what* content has changed [where, name it]. How do you know whether an image has been just optimized, or a templated was modified by one single character only?

Done in r34606.

Wiki.Melancholie wrote:

Note: At [[:de:Blatt_(Graphentheorie)]] there is still shown "0 changes need
review"...

Wiki.Melancholie wrote:

#c8: This seems to have been caused by action=pure, as mentioned at [[:de:Hilfe_Diskussion:Gesichtete_und_geprüfte_Versionen#action.3Dpurge_setzt_gesichtet_Flag_zur.C3.BCck]]

Instance removed in r34946