Page MenuHomePhabricator

LQT: "Mark as read" should not lose list position
Open, NormalPublic


Each time when I select "mark as read" on a thread on the page "new messaegs (some number)" of my personal user-specific links, the page is redisplayed and both paging and scrolling are started from the newest thread. Since I do not mark newer threads as read before having read then, and I read them in roughly chronologial order, I have to page back to where I was before, then scroll down to where I was before, and continue reading. With several 100 threads and messages, this is extremely time consuming. I spend a magnitude more time waiting for pages to be sent to me just to immediately go to the next page, and scrolling down than actually reading. Unfortunately I do not have a choice to avoid using this extension, else I would.

Thus I suggest to include the parameters of the respective next or previous thread in the "Mark as read" link.

Version: unspecified
Severity: enhancement



Event Timeline

bzimport raised the priority of this task from to Normal.Nov 21 2014, 11:21 PM
bzimport set Reference to bz26891.
bzimport added a subscriber: Unknown Object (MLST).
  • Bug 30871 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Jorm removed a subscriber: Jorm.Dec 26 2015, 7:28 PM
Restricted Application added a subscriber: Aklapper. · View Herald TranscriptDec 26 2015, 7:28 PM
Jdforrester-WMF lowered the priority of this task from Normal to Lowest.Aug 4 2016, 11:35 PM
Jdforrester-WMF added a subscriber: Jdforrester-WMF.

LiquidThreads has been replaced by StructuredDiscussions on all Wikimedia production wikis (except one, which will be done soon). It is no longer under active development or maintenance, so I'm re-classifying all open LQT tasks as "Lowest" priority.

Nemo_bis raised the priority of this task from Lowest to Normal.Feb 24 2019, 8:36 AM

Restore information removed with now-invalid rationale.

Liuxinyu970226 lowered the priority of this task from Normal to Lowest.Mar 22 2019, 1:59 AM
Liuxinyu970226 added a subscriber: Liuxinyu970226.

@Nemo_bis This is not the reason you touch that field, please file a Gerrit patch first before change that.

Nemo_bis raised the priority of this task from Lowest to Normal.Mar 22 2019, 1:10 PM

Restore information removed with invalid rationale.