Hmm, this still mixes an actual implementation (parameter action) with some outcomes of specific values (info, purge) passed to that implementation; plus how to differentiate / distance from action=edit (MediaWiki-Page-editing), action=history (MediaWiki-Page-history), etc?

action=info is basically the result of the special page Special:PageInfo?

To me purging has been somewhere unclear between MediaWiki-File-management, MediaWiki-Page-editing and MediaWiki-General. Maybe it should even have its own tag. But preferably not under a #MediaWiki-Actions umbrella? (I know MediaWiki-Special-pages exists, we shouldn't repeat that mistake.)

In T268386#6638452, @Aklapper wrote:

Hmm, this still mixes an actual implementation (parameter action) with some outcomes of specific values (info, purge) passed to that implementation; plus how to differentiate / distance from action=edit (MediaWiki-Page-editing), action=history (MediaWiki-Page-history), etc?

Perhaps create #mediawiki-action-purge / #mediawiki-action-info / #mediawiki-action-credits for the actions that don't have dedicated components related to their underlying code?

action=info is basically the result of the special page Special:PageInfo?

Special:PageInfo just redirects to action=info

Any input from CPT?

I think this project as proposed might be too generic. Apart from a very basic set of interfaces and wiring, the Action system isn't much, and also doesn't have an owner currently. Might be small and simple enough to keep under generic with teams tagge as-needed. At least that way it's clear that something isn't tracked by anyone.

I do support the idea of connecting MW's built-in actions to existing features, and creating them if missing.

• "Edit" - MediaWiki-Page-editing
• "History" - MediaWiki-Page-history
• "Patrol" – MediaWiki-Patrolling
• "Delete" – MediaWiki-Page-deletion
• "Purge" - This is a tiny wrapper around code that largly falls under MediaWiki-Page-derived-data and HTTP Cache (MediaWiki-Core-HTTP-Cache). There is a similar tiny wrapper for it in the action API. Perhaps it could be documented as part of Mediawiki-Page-derived-data?
• "Info" - This indeed doesn't have a project gag or owner currently. All sorts of data from different features is exposed through here, but perhaps the UI itself is worthy of its own project tag (perhaps MediaWiki-Page-info)

This isn't useful to Platform Engineering, but we are not opposed to this if it's useful to someone.

Proposing to decline per Krinkle's comment...

Note that MediaWiki-User-Interface has a milestone for actions.

In T268386#6638452, @Aklapper wrote:

But preferably not under a #MediaWiki-Actions umbrella? (I know MediaWiki-Special-pages exists, we shouldn't repeat that mistake.)

I realise that I'm replying to a 5-year-old comment, but @Aklapper for my own understanding, please could you expand on why you consider it to be a mistake? AFAICS, it has the benefits of the Phabricator component tag being more closely reflective of how the MediaWiki code itself is organised (IIUC it covers includes/specialpage & includes/specials), of providing a clear project for bugs about special-pages that don't have their own Phab project, and of documenting all the special pages that do have their own Phab project (at https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/project/profile/133/). However, if you consider it to be a mistake, then I feel like there must be something I'm missing. /gen

As it happens, as alluded to by @Pppery, it seems like a project with a similar scope to the one originally requested here was created independently of this task: MediaWiki-User-Interface (actions). To me, the UI of an action is (IIUC) defined within the file for that action itself, so IMO it isn't that intuitive to separate that out into a separate Phab project from the actual actions themselves. In addition, from spot-checking a few tasks within that project, it feels like it's also sometimes de facto being used as a tag for bugs within the logic of action pages, rather than just their UIs (which might be an indication of the potential usefulness of the project originally requested here?).
In fact, I was about to create a task proposing to split that milestone-project out into a top-level #MediaWiki-Actions project, when I came across this declined task here… :/

I realise that I'm replying to a 5-year-old comment, but @Aklapper for my own understanding, please could you expand on why you consider it to be a mistake?

Too broad/generic and/or not disjunct enough, I guess. :)

In general, developers/teams work (or don't work) on features things like "blocks" or "user preferences", which involve changes across the related special pages, tests, APIs, database schema, etc, instead of scoping their work on boundaries like "any arbitrary special pages" or "any arbitrary actions". So organizing tasks on those concrete features is useful (which is why we have MediaWiki-Blocks and MediaWiki-Core-Preferences) but tags like "all actions" or "all special pages" aren't that helpful. (See also: T364652: Make component boundaries in MediaWiki core easier to discover.)