https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=21165

--- Comment #5 from FT2 <ft2.w...@gmail.com> 2010-03-10 01:13:28 UTC ---
The tool needs to be "fit for purpose" before doing so. Its purpose includes
tracking and easy review of deleted revisions and scrutiny of the actions
admins may undertake... which at present it can't provide. Complaining there is
consensus to enable a fully usable RevDelete that allows admins to scrutinize
and review each others actions, when log entry link mechanisms break, is going
to lead to some interesting effects. Try figuring the history of a dispute when
the log tells you 2 revisions were redacted but cannot tell you which of the
many possible candidates were the two being deleted or restored and who did
what in which order. It was tough enough for 20 active oversighters on the
occasions when they had to track unfollowable links in the logs. There are
_2000_ admins who will be trying to use this tool and it will be enwiki's main
(and almost exclusive) deletion tool for anything except full page deletes,
once enabled. Virtually every single revision delete, undelete, redact,
unredact, and delete review/scrutiny action on the entirety of enwiki? 2000
admins? Widespread log link breakage? Let's request the developers fix it
first.

On your second point, apologies, you're mistaken. Admins have had view-only
access to RevisionDelete for many months now (when not in Suppression mode for
Oversight purposes). Admins can and do have access to scrutinize all
non-oversight use of RevisionDelete as they wish. They have had this for a very
long time.

-- 
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
Wikibugs-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikibugs-l

Reply via email to