https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14323


Happy-melon <[email protected]> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|[email protected]   |




--- Comment #9 from Happy-melon <[email protected]>  2009-05-13 14:20:35 UTC 
---
(In reply to comment #8)
> Err... Then what is line 996 in Article.php (r50332) doing? Looks like it
> parses the whole redirect page in order to update category links, template
> transclusions, and so on; just the output text is not actually used.

My thoughts exactly; my patch above only changes this one line.  There is
clearly no fundamental reason why it *can't* be done't; for some reason a
conscious decision has been made not to.  

> The only objection I can see to rendering the redirect page content would be
> the opportunity it presents for someone to vandalize a page that few would 
> ever
> look at (and then, presumably, post a link on some other website with
> redirect=no to say "Ha ha! Stupid Wikipedia didn't fix my vandalism!").

I expect that if my patch was applied straight, we'd get "#REDIRECT[[Foo]]"
output at the top of the page; that would need to be stripped from the wikitext
before rendering.  Maybe I'll load up that patch on my new test wiki and see
what happens, and how easy it is to fix.  It shouldn't be difficult.  Other
than that, I can't see any reason not to; the 'lulz' factor is even lower here
because vandalism is not normally visible to readers!!  No, Stupid Wikipedia
didn't fix the vandalism, but only because Stupid Vandal put it somewhere no
one would ever see it!! :D


-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug.
You are on the CC list for the bug.

_______________________________________________
Wikibugs-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikibugs-l

Reply via email to