https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=38642

--- Comment #5 from Nathan Larson <[email protected]> ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> Personally I think this is the sort of thing that is better suited to an
> extension. However I tend to lean that way on most things and often people
> disagree with me...

Perhaps you would like to weigh in at
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Schools_of_thought_concerning_integration_of_extensions_into_the_core
with your own school of thought. I'm not sure, but I think it might have
required changes to the core to implement cleanly and without a much of code
duplication anyway. I have submitted a patch that implements it entirely as a
core feature.

What do you think the demand would be for the feature? My thought is that it is
somewhere between the status quo and the semi-deletion (aka pure wiki deletion)
that is sometimes proposed. Users, especially newbies and people who create a
lot of new articles, often get annoyed at their pages getting speedily deleted;
it's inconvenient to have to request that a sysop provide a copy.

I'm going to ask around at #wikipedia to see whether people would prefer to
have a wl_del_notificationtimestamp or wl_del_notificationrevid. The former is
what I coded; it causes the user to be emailed a maximum of one revision text
unless he returns to the page to clear the field. The latter would allow users
to be emailed an unlimited number of times, if the page were to be deleted,
then a new one created (with a different revision ID), then deleted and
recreated again, etc. It would, however, prevent the user from being emailed
the same revision text (with the same revision ID) more than once.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
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