The following request for comments is closed. This discussion has been dormant for a long period, and has served its purpose, resulting in some helpful suggestions and feedback. Effeietsanders (talk) 19:37, 27 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Brainstorming of ideas to improve global rename tools

As suggested by my colleagues on our mailing list, I'd like to call for ideas about how the Special:GlobalRenameRequest and Special:GlobalRenameQueue could be improved.

Please submit new ideas by creating a new section so we can discuss each idea in its own section!

Submitted proposals[edit]

Lock requests being addressed[edit]

In order to avoid clashes in criteria, the system should detect if any steward or global renamer is addressing a request for rename and temporary prevent others from addressing it. —Marco Aurelio 10:41, 2 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Support. I once or twice would have found this useful. Litlok (talk) 17:39, 4 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Not sure if I understand. "Addressing" means that the request is opened by some user but it's not yet being processed? Stryn (talk) 16:24, 9 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Stryn: Yes, that's right. —Marco Aurelio 10:08, 11 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support. RadiX ∞ 00:22, 24 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comment FlaggedRevs already has a built-in function to let other reviewers know that you're taking care of that revision. I guess something similar could be thought for this. —MarcoAurelio (talk) 08:18, 24 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Alexmar983 (talk) 13:52, 5 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Boilerplate responses[edit]

Tracked in Phabricator:
Task T171439

Boilerplate responses via dropdown, configurable on-wiki via MediaWiki: namespace, for the most used messages when declining. —Marco Aurelio 10:41, 2 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Support, Jmvkrecords ⚜ (Intra talk) 14:34, 3 June 2017 (UTC).[reply]
Support--Biplab Anand (Talk) 08:26, 4 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support Litlok (talk) 17:33, 4 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Rs chen 7754 18:17, 11 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support. RadiX ∞ 00:15, 24 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Submitted as phab:T171439. —MarcoAurelio (talk) 08:45, 24 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Prevent users from submit rename requests if they have already one rename request pending[edit]

Tracked in Phabricator:
Task T172604

This is being abused. —Marco Aurelio 10:41, 2 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Support Would prevent abuse in cases if a user send repeatedly global rename requests. —Alvaro Molina (✉ - ✔) 11:14, 2 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Biplab Anand (Talk) 08:26, 4 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support, only if the users can cancel their requests -an error is always possible. Litlok (talk) 17:37, 4 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I don't think this should be done. Users accidentally filing an erroneous request can only fix it by resubmission, unless I am mistaken. Thus, I would prefer a different approach, such as the one Litlok pointed to above. --Vogone (talk) 20:58, 5 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Vogone and Litlok: Yes, that was what I had in mind. Sorry for not being clear enough. —Marco Aurelio 10:07, 11 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with Vogone. Stryn (talk) 16:25, 9 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support CreativeC38 (talk) 21:06, 3 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Excellent idea. RadiX ∞ 00:16, 24 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support This is only sensible. Requesters should not be allowed to flood the queue with requests, and they should be able to view and cancel any pending requests they have submitted, if necessary. —k6ka 🍁 (Talk · Contributions) 14:57, 5 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Alexmar983 (talk) 03:45, 8 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Allow users to cancel pending rename requests[edit]

Tracked in Phabricator:
Task T172601

Could be useful. —Marco Aurelio 10:41, 2 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Support Can happen that users to request a global rename then repent and can't cancel the request. Would be quite useful. —Alvaro Molina (✉ - ✔) 11:20, 2 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support, Jmvkrecords ⚜ (Intra talk) 14:40, 3 June 2017 (UTC).[reply]
Support --Rs chen 7754 17:22, 3 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Biplab Anand (Talk) 08:26, 4 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support Litlok (talk) 17:34, 4 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Should be possible, indeed. --Vogone (talk) 20:58, 5 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Sure, just hoping no one is trolling with the system (requesting-cancelling-requesting...) Stryn (talk) 16:27, 9 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Would be very useful. RadiX ∞ 00:17, 24 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Alexmar983 (talk) 13:53, 5 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Allow banning some users (temporary/permanently) to submit more rename requests[edit]

Tracked in Phabricator:
Task T101615

Prevent, via a similar feature as blocks, users to submit indefinitely or temporary any new rename requests. This is being abused. —Marco Aurelio 10:41, 2 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Support If a user does a request several times, it could start in 12 or 24 hours; if becomes reiterative in the time, you could go to rise the time to be indefinitely. —Alvaro Molina (✉ - ✔) 11:25, 2 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Biplab Anand (Talk) 08:26, 4 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I believe it's useful and sometimes needed. Stryn (talk) 16:29, 9 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Useful to track vandals contributions CreativeC38 (talk) 21:07, 3 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Surely in a time of particular need. RadiX ∞ 00:20, 24 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Alexmar983 (talk) 13:54, 5 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Allow searching by "performer" on the closed requests queue[edit]

Tracked in Phabricator:
Task T111837

Being able to search more efficiently using a new "performer" param. —Marco Aurelio 10:41, 2 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Support, Jmvkrecords ⚜ (Intra talk) 17:11, 2 June 2017 (UTC).[reply]
Support--Biplab Anand (Talk) 08:26, 4 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I agree this would be useful. --Vogone (talk) 20:58, 5 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Would be even more useful. RadiX ∞ 00:18, 24 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Better page design[edit]

Do you like it, what improvements would you make? —Marco Aurelio 10:41, 2 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Add confirmation box in Special:GlobalRenameRequest[edit]

I propose add a confirmation box at the end of global rename requests where indicated that the user confirms make the request and may not re-request to new global rename in a while wise. This will allow the user can be aware of the situation and know that there may re-request each time. —Alvaro Molina (✉ - ✔) 13:13, 2 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'd support the checkbox with other content: something about recognizing that you think that your rename request complies with the rename policy, that we may deny it with or without cause and, specially due to privacy policy and terms of use, that all requests will be kept logged and that there's no way to avoid that. —Marco Aurelio 10:06, 11 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Make a form in case of renaming problems with an auto-submitting at Steward requests/Username changes[edit]

That's a detail but it would save time for a lot of people. CreativeC38 (talk) 21:12, 3 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]