Page MenuHomePhabricator

Filter deletion log by page deletions, undeletions and revision deletions
Closed, ResolvedPublic

Description

In bug 17806, to address the problem of revision deletions being 'lost' in the deletion log, filtering the deletion log was preferred to adding a new log. So here is a request for a filter, maybe working similarly to the filters in recentchanges: show/hide revision deletions, show/hide page deletions.

The link is to the latest discussion on adding the revdelete right to admins on enwiki.


Version: unspecified
Severity: enhancement
URL: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Revision_deletion

Details

Reference
bz20839

Event Timeline

bzimport raised the priority of this task from to Medium.Nov 21 2014, 10:51 PM
bzimport set Reference to bz20839.

FT2.wiki wrote:

Can this be done using tags?

Even if this could be done, I'm not sure it would be optimal from a usability point of view. And I think we could also add a filter for undeletions (had been proposed in the past), so we could filter by the three log_actions: delete, restore and revision.

happy.melon.wiki wrote:

This is just a subset of bug17293. It could probably be done for the RC feed much more easily than for the logs in general.

IAlex added a comment.Sep 29 2009, 4:23 PM

Isn't this a duplicate of bug 18954?

aaron added a comment.Oct 14 2009, 1:17 AM

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 18954 ***

matthew.britton wrote:

Reopening. While resolving bug 18954 would resolve this bug, there are other ways in which the requested feature might be implemented. For example, by giving revision deletion a separate log type to page deletion (and running a script to update the log type on existing revision deletions).

Having, for example, protections, unprotections and changes to protection settings all in the same log is not a problem as, semantically, they are the same thing.

Deleting a page and hiding the edit summary of a revision, however, are completely different things. Even resolving bug 18954 would leave the two things lumped together under "deletions", which is not entirely satisfactory. They should be separated.

matthew.britton wrote:

duping this to 24932 instead, which makes the same argument I just made

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 24932 ***

Restricted Application added a subscriber: JEumerus. · View Herald TranscriptApr 4 2016, 11:24 PM