Page MenuHomePhabricator

"What links here" image links are nonexistent until the pages linking to the image are edited
Closed, InvalidPublic

Description

Author: timwi

Description:
BUG MIGRATED FROM SOURCEFORGE
http://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=966936&group_id=34373&atid=411192
Originally submitted by Nobody/Anonymous - nobody 2004-06-05 06:30

See <a href="http://meta.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=MediaWiki_1.3_comments_and_bug_reports&action=edit&section=34">here</a>. Copying:

<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Perseus-slays-medusa.jpg">This image</a>, for instance, appears in <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perseus_%28mythology%29">this page</a>, but does not appear under "image links".

Editing a page that links to the image seems to re-associate the link.

  • Additional comments ------------------------

Date: 2004-06-09 12:54
Sender: nobody
Logged In: NO

  1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Rh%2C45.jpg didn't

show a backlink to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhodium.

  1. I added the image to

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Paddu/sandbox.

  1. Now it only showed one backlink to my sandbox.
  2. I added more copies of the image to my sandbox.
  3. It still showed only one backlink to my sandbox.

I thought that the list of backlinks always omitted one
entry due to some off-by-one error.

  1. I commented out the image in

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhodium (this was just for a
short duration, I was too lazy to upload an image just to
check this & then ask sysops to delete it after the experiment).

  1. It still showed one backlink to my sandbox.
  2. I uncommented the image from

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhodium.

  1. It still showed one backlink to my sandbox.
  2. I commented out the image in my sandbox.
  3. Now it properly shows a link to

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhodium.

(!!!)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Paddu

Date: 2004-06-09 13:00
Sender: nobody
Logged In: NO

Related bugs: #968603, #584445

Date: 2004-06-09 13:08
Sender: nobody
Logged In: NO

Related bugs: #968603, #584445

Date: 2004-06-09 13:09
Sender: nobody
Logged In: NO

Related bugs: #968603, #584445

Date: 2004-08-07 04:52
Sender: SF user vibber

This was caused by an incomplete backup/restore during a database
crash. The image links simply need to be regenerated, and are
when the
page is edited.

This is not a software bug, but a wikipedia-specific issue.


Version: unspecified
Severity: major

Details

Reference
bz85

Event Timeline

bzimport raised the priority of this task from to High.Nov 21 2014, 6:43 PM
bzimport set Reference to bz85.
bzimport added a subscriber: Unknown Object (MLST).

wikibug.5.starfury wrote:

*** Bug 127 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

timwi wrote:

*** Bug 106 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

timwi wrote:

*** Bug 97 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

guanaco wrote:

I believe that it occurs every time a wiki is upgraded from 1.2 to 1.3.

teunspaans wrote:

Even when both the image description and the page linking to it are updated,
sometimes the image is listed as unused.
see:

http://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Afbeelding:Iochroma_fuchsioides.jpg

http://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iochroma

both were created by me today.

So it sems this is not 'just' a matter of conversion.

teunspaans wrote:

The image i just reported finally shows the page from which it was linked.

I uploaded a new image :
http://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Afbeelding:Streptosolen_closeup.jpg

used from
http://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streptosolen

This link isnt shown either, but perhaps there is some delay so that it takes a few
hours before the link is recognised?

jeluf wrote:

*** Bug 427 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Old issue with links tables, which have since been regenerated.

So now there will never be any delay?

There was never any "delay". The links are either there or they're not.

Okay, I apologize for being unclear. Is it now the case that "What Links Here" will now always
be correct for images, or are there caveats?

It should always be correct unless there's some other problem.

Please don't change the severity of an old bug to "enhancement". Enhancement bug mean a
request to add a new feature, which this never was.

Thank you for your answer. If I changed the status it was by mistake, and I apologize.

Gilles raised the priority of this task from High to Unbreak Now!.Dec 4 2014, 10:19 AM
Gilles added a project: Multimedia.
Gilles moved this task from Untriaged to Done on the Multimedia board.
Gilles lowered the priority of this task from Unbreak Now! to High.Dec 4 2014, 11:21 AM