Community Wishlist Survey 2022/Admins and patrollers

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Admins and patrollers
11 proposals, 326 contributors, 593 support votes
The survey has closed. Thanks for your participation :)



Allow rev parent id to be fixed

Discussion

Voting

Allow using templated reasons in global blocks.

  • Problem: Global block reasons can't use any templates (since the block reason is rendered on the wiki the blocked user is visiting, and all wikis have their own separate template namespace). This means that the user (who might not be the intended target of the block) has to click to some Meta page to see detailed information about the global block that is preventing them from editing. For example, it would be useful to display templates like en:Template:Blocked p2p proxy directly on the blocked error message.
  • Proposed solution: Implement a way to display pre-defined block reason templates to users by rendering block reasons on meta. Alternatively instead of allowing use of arbitrary meta templates, implement a way to for stewards to configure longer block reasons on a Meta JSON page and selecting one of those on the interface (proposed by Legoktm on the Phabricator ticket).
  • Who would benefit: Users affected by global blocks (since the instructions they see will be clearer), stewards
  • More comments: The GlobalBlocking extension contains incomplete code to render block reasons on a central wiki (such as Meta), see phab:T243863 for details.
  • Phabricator tickets: phab:T243863
  • Proposer: Majavah (talk!) 13:44, 16 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Discussion

  • Kind of edges on global templates as a request, which skimming the Phab kind of looks like some similar concerns there, or at least which would exist if global templates were somewhere in implementation.

    That aside, templated block reasons aren't well supported in some ways even today; en:MediaWiki:Ipbreason-dropdown until recently had lint errors (and then someone moved it to plain text content model, which has its obvious downside of not tracking a link to the template in the page). --Izno (talk) 00:21, 17 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

    I think the global block reasons can be logged in Meta, and a Meta page contains all the reasons, as stewards block user in a Meta-based interface. Thingofme (talk) 00:57, 18 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Voting

Allow global blocks to optionally not block account creation

  • Problem: Currently all global blocks always block account creation. Stewards can only choose whether the block will affect unregistered or registered contributors (the so-called softblock or hardblock).
  • Proposed solution: In line with what happens with Special:Block, please add a checkbox to Special:GlobalBlock and give stewards the option to check or uncheck that box depending on the circumstances.
  • Who would benefit: Stewards as users of the extension; but all users too as we can allow account creations in case where the abuse exclusively comes from unregistered contributors.
  • More comments:
  • Phabricator tickets: task T17273.
  • Proposer: —MarcoAurelio (talk) 19:37, 15 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Discussion

Voting

Allow global whitelisting of IPs subject to global rangeblocks

  • Problem: Several requests for unblock cannot be handled in due time because of providers/tech depths of different organization mixing up networks which could legitimately edit the wikis with farms with open proxies, spam sources, etc. A quite common case are, also, private proxies on VPS or reverse proxies from different organizations hosted in third-party farms.
  • Proposed solution: create a Special:GlobalBlockWhitelist page where a global block can be revoked for a certain IP or subnet falling in a blocked range
  • Who would benefit: dozens of users caught by global blocks
  • More comments:
  • Phabricator tickets: phab:T42439
  • Proposer: Vituzzu (talk) 10:44, 20 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Discussion

Voting

Show recent block history for IPs and ranges

  • Problem: When reviewing an IP's contribs, admins have to look in block history to see if there have been any recent blocks. When dealing with ranges (especially /64), this problem is worse. To see rangeblocks, admins must add /[16,32,48,64] and then go block (not block log because that only works on the base IP, not one within the range) to see recent rangeblocks. Even to see past warnings to editors in a range, admins must go to the range, scroll through and find individual IPs whose talk pages aren't redlinked, open a bunch of them, and see if there's been escalation of warnings over a recent time frame, and then go back to the first IP and warn accordingly.
  • Proposed solution: Add recent block information on contribs pages for admins to see, similar to recent change to Twinkle's block popup window, including rangeblocks. A similar feature on the contribs or talk pages for warnings should be great.
  • Who would benefit: Admins
  • More comments: This would be particularly helpful for dealing with LTA cases and vandals who jump IP addresses to avoid racking up warnings on a single IP.
  • Phabricator tickets:
  • Proposer: EvergreenFir (talk) 05:34, 18 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Discussion

Voting

Mass-delete to offer drop-down of standard reasons, or templated reasons.

  • Problem: Admins have the ability to mass-delete contributions of a user seen as problematic. This usually affects a large number of pages; currently it reads 'mass-deleting contribs of user Foo'. Having a templated reason that gets replaced, or a drop-down of common reasons would help.
  • Proposed solution: Either add a drop-down (with most common reasons, similar to QD), or provide a way that templated reasons get replaced.
  • Who would benefit: Admins: mass-deleting pages, users: knowing more precisely why the page was deleted
  • More comments:
  • Phabricator tickets: phab:T25020
  • Proposer: Eptalon (talk) 23:37, 18 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Discussion

  • @Eptalon:
    Screenshot of the current last step of Nuke.
    can you be a bit more specific, what are the step-by-step directions you are currently using for this process? The "mass-delete" you mention above sounds like you are referring to Special:Nuke, provided by the Nuke extension. This extension already has the option to enter free-form text, solving the problem of admins poorly communicating. (See image below) Is there where you would also like to put a drop down box? — xaosflux Talk 00:11, 19 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
When I delete a page, I get a drop-down with preselected ("quick-deletion") criteria. I was alluding to a simliar dropdown (in addition to freetext box you show)-Eptalon (talk) 23:29, 20 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Voting