rowan.collins wrote:

I don't quite understand what the need for this "attribute" is - from a brief
glance, most of the pages in the lists you link to don't have links in them
anyway, so there are no pages where they would show up on "Whatlinkshere".
Marking minor by default I can see, but this seems like a feature in its own
right ("ability to force a particular page to be minor-by-default") and a
potentially abusable one at that. So this request seems to me rather like a
solution looking for a problem, but maybe I'm misunderstanding something.

gangleri wrote:

in response to comment 1

Hi Rowan!
Please take a look at the pages in capitals at
http://jadesukka.homelinux.org:8180/mediawiki15c/index.php?title=Special:Allpages&from=&namespace=10
and search for ".../to do" or and ".../to do/priority" in the other namespaces.

I would say that for the template namespace Nuka-Wiki has about 80% "overhead".

REDIRECT's could be considered "overhead".

Having the option to filter for "real" information saves time.

Best regards Reinhardt

rowan.collins wrote:

(In reply to comment #2)

Having the option to filter for "real" information saves time.

But you still haven't explained *what* you want to be filtered - I understand
your definition of "overhead", but I'm not sure what you intend to do with that
definition. In your original comment, you mentionned whatlinkshere, but as I
pointed out, "overhead" pages won't generally show up in such places anywhere.
Perhaps you actually meant that they shouldn't show up in Special:Allpages? That
seems reasonable, as does your suggestion on bug 2318 that redirects be styled
differently. But given that with namespaces and sub-pages "overhead" pages
(other than redirects) can generally be grouped so they'll always appear
together alphabetically *anyway*, it's not all that hard to filter them out in
one's head by simply skipping past them. So I'm still unconvinced of the need
for a special way of labelling such pages.

gangleri wrote:

in response to comment 3

Hi Rowan!

Thanks for the answer. Probably you are right with whatlinkshere.
Nevertheless please take a look at
http://jadesukka.homelinux.org:8180/betawiki/Betawiki:Templates/Template:Sort_order/description#documentation
and
http://jadesukka.homelinux.org:8180/betawiki/Betawiki:Templates/Template:Task/description#documentation

Most of the templates there which are *not* redirects are "overhead". Each
change apears in recentchanges, contributions and so on.

The sugestion "OVERHEAD pages should not apear in "Special:foo" by DEFAULT."
does *not* mean that you would *not* be able to track these pages or changes
made to them. The idea is that you need to make an action (change filter) to
*see* them and not to *hide* them.

Regards Reinhardt

There is no logical reason to hide edits to such pages. Such hiding would be detrimental and would make it much harder
to track both legitimate changes and vandalism. There is no possible benefit to such a change, only downsides.

gangleri wrote:

In replay to comment 5

Hi Brion!
I did *not* request to hide the changes completely. Maybe it is to early to
implement it now or to say if is logical or not. Similar with the bot flag issue
the comunity would request it or not if it hurts.

Regards Reinhardt

The bot flag applies to edits by a pre-approved, trusted process expected to make massive
numbers of trusted edits. It exists to increase the community's ability to see and react
to events by keeping the recentchanges list clear of massive numbers of known-good
preapproved edits.

This suggestion however would seem to apply to pages which would be very *rarely* changed.
There is no benefit to automatically hiding those edits, since they going to be are small
in number.

Hiding them would however be a very negative thing, because it would be harmful to the
community's ability to self-patrol. Redirects, templates, etc could be silently changed by
anyone and the community's ability to discover and react to this would be made much much
more difficult.

gangleri wrote:

please read about benefits of *atribute OVERHEAD* at
bug 2409: "new toolbox item included (mainly) in the template namespace"