Page MenuHomePhabricator

Simplify and remove jargon from protection level
Closed, ResolvedPublic

Description

When a page is protected or its protection level changed, it puts for the protection level in the log and history 'Edit=Block new and unregistered users', 'Move=Block all non-admin users', and the like. This wording is unclear - 'block' is an unnecessary jargon term, and the length of the protection description makes it harder to quickly scan and figure out what it's actually saying.

If it is going to be in the format of 'Type=Level', the level should be the exact level with any necessary explanation following, along the lines of 'Move=Admins only' or 'Edit:Confirmed only'. Though the latter is unclear as to what 'confirmed' means, the similar 'Move=New and unregistered users disallowed' takes longer to get to the point while still remaining similarly unclear as to what exactly constitutes a 'new' user.

And given that log entries are currently restricted to a single line, the protection level descriptions must remain in a distinctly structured and short form as otherwise it makes the line difficult to scan.


Version: 1.21.x
Severity: enhancement
See Also:
https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=43272

Details

Reference
bz44497

Related Objects

View Standalone Graph
This task is connected to more than 200 other tasks. Only direct parents and subtasks are shown here. Use View Standalone Graph to show more of the graph.

Event Timeline

bzimport raised the priority of this task from to Medium.Nov 22 2014, 1:22 AM
bzimport set Reference to bz44497.
bzimport added a subscriber: Unknown Object (MLST).

This bug is extremely confusing, I've no idea what it is about.

  1. The names for the protection levels? That's bug 43272 (whose fix may have superseded your comment, as the wording changed).
  2. The term autoconfirmed? That's bug 43302.
  3. The way the length is displayed?
  4. Some other factor?
  5. A combination of the above?

And all this:
A) As shown on history or logs?
B) As shown to the sysop in action=protect?
C) As shown anywhere, e.g. in action=info (bug 43283)?
D) combination of the three?

I suggest closing INVALID and filing specific bugs for specific issues, or a comprehensible tracking bug.

Looks like this was fixed at some point.

Nemo, the bug was exactly what I described, and if you find that confusing I'm afraid there's not a whole lot I or anyone could do about that.

Though any link that might have been included with the bug originally wouldn't work now, it appears the log entries from the time still have some aspects of the change: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=protect&user=&page=&year=&month=1&tagfilter=

(In reply to comment #2)

Looks like this was fixed at some point.

Nice! It's bug 43272 then.

  • This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 43272 ***

...no, it really isn't bug 43272. It's more like the opposite.