https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=42660
--- Comment #13 from Matthew Flaschen <[email protected]> --- (In reply to comment #12) > Firstly I dispute the 'high/major' importance of this bug since the history > is > still there. The last edit was a redirect and it seems logical at least to me > how you find the full history. What would you expect to see in this > situation? I'd expect a link to the history of the article I'm viewing. I'm not viewing the redirect, I'm viewing what I was redirected to. If I'm not mistaken, I have to do three clicks to see the right history: 1. "Last modified 3 months ago", taking me to the wrong history page. 2. Click link in "Redirected page to Mitigating factor". *Only* works if they used the default redirect message, or included their own link 3. Click "Last modified 3 months ago" again. > Maybe an editor wants to see who set up the redirect and when? If we link to > the full edit history of the content of the article this useful information > gets lost. That's the point of the "Redirected from" link, which seems to be hidden/absent on Mobile. If you're interested in the redirect itself, you follow that link. > The person who setup the redirect is a contributor and surely under cc by sa > should be credited as well?? And they are, if you follow the "Redirected from" link. > Off topic but relating to redirects: > It still seems extremely strange to me that you'd have near identical content > on 2 different urls. I understand the importance of redirects as I've been > confused by this in the past (even the 'redirected from X' link is sometimes > hard to spot and has led to much confusing). You said yourself, "Maybe an editor wants to see who set up the redirect". The redirect link provides a way to get that kind of information, as well as a way to edit the redirect (add a template, change the target, etc.) > I'd personally prefer it to just > link to the article (See [[Mitigating factor]]) You're saying if I go to https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitigating_factors I should see a link to https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitigating_factor ? I think that's very inefficient. Most of the time people are going to want to see and/or edit the actual article (i.e target of the redirect). There shouldn't be an extra click for that case. >- it seems really strange > that you'd generate exactly the same page with a one line difference. In this > particular case a 302 would make sense as the difference between titles is so > minimal. If it's a 302, how do you propose allowing people to change the redirect? I don't think there should be a special case for minimal differences like "factor/factors". That would probably add confusion. -- 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
