This is especially adverse for stewards who use loginwiki to run checks, since no one has any edits there. Seems like it's probably an easy bug to fix (just remove the edit count check)?

@Niharika Any chance this could get some attention? Special:Investigate and all its benefits are largely unusable by stewards :( I can still use the Timeline view but I don't get the user agent highlighting feature, for instance.

@MusikAnimal Sorry - AHT has been working on MediaWiki-extensions-SecurePoll this quarter. This task is very much on our radar. I hope to have an update soon.

I think this might the code that does it: https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/plugins/gitiles/mediawiki/extensions/CheckUser/+/refs/heads/master/src/CompareService.php#167

Change 785888 had a related patch set uploaded (by Reedy; author: Reedy):

[mediawiki/extensions/CheckUser@master] CompareService: Add RC_LOG to cuc_type in getQueryInfoForSingleTarget

https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/785888

With the patch applied, when a new user is created, we see the log lines from the Timeline tab appear in the IPs & User agents tab:

...where they're described as 'edits'. If that user then makes any edits, they're not distinguished from the log lines:

I'm wondering what we should do here?

• Come up with a design that separates out edits and other activities in the IPs & User agents tab
• Re-label [2 edits] to something like [2 edits/actions]
• Keep discussing but merge the patch in the meantime, since we really need this!
• Something else?

Thanks for the patch, @Reedy!

@Tchanders I think we would need a new design to separate out the edits and other actions but in the meantime how about we -

• Re-label [2 edits] to something like [2 edits/actions]

and

merge the patch in the meantime, since we really need this!

We can take time to come up with a new design afterwards.
CC @Prtksxna

Change 789647 had a related patch set uploaded (by Tchanders; author: Tchanders):

[mediawiki/extensions/CheckUser@master] Update message in Special:Investigate table to include actions

https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/789647

Change 785888 merged by jenkins-bot:

[mediawiki/extensions/CheckUser@master] CompareService: Add RC_LOG to cuc_type in getQueryInfoForSingleTarget

https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/785888

Change 789647 merged by jenkins-bot:

[mediawiki/extensions/CheckUser@master] Update message in Special:Investigate table to include actions

https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/789647

@MusikAnimal from your experience, do you think it’d be useful to have the number of edits and actions separately, as in (2 edits/3 actions)? Or is it ok to bundle them together, as in (5 edits/actions)?

In T268163#7907229, @Niharika wrote:

…I think we would need a new design to separate out the edits and other actions…

Do we know more about this use case? Some questions:

• Do we need to highlight certain kinds of logged actions?
• Should we add a link to the logs from the three-dot menu?

In T268163#7928743, @Prtksxna wrote:

@MusikAnimal from your experience, do you think it’d be useful to have the number of edits and actions separately, as in (2 edits/3 actions)? Or is it ok to bundle them together, as in (5 edits/actions)?

The old Special:CheckUser bundled them together, so I think it's acceptable to do the same here as it's not breaking any workflows. However, I can see it being useful to separate them. Many vandals create accounts and make only logged actions (such as thanking users), so it's important they are counted and exposed in Special:Investigate.

Thanks for fixing this!