Community Wishlist Survey 2022/Miscellaneous/Enhanced Move Logs

Random proposal ►◄ Miscellaneous The survey has concluded. Here are the results!

Enhanced Move Logs

Problem: When a page is moved, the log entry is associated with the old page, and not the new page. In order to find what the history behind how a page ended up where it is, you may have to dig through the move logs of other pages first. This makes it difficult to determine prior titles for a given page.
Proposed solution: Include both the source and destination in move logs, integrate these in to log displays.
Who would benefit: Editors
More comments: This proposal page is a good example. The move log is empty, however the page was moved from a different title.
Phabricator tickets: phab:T66184, phab:T152829
Proposer: — xaosflux ^Talk 18:18, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

Awesome, thank you very much for proposing this. ToBeFree (talk) 18:21, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Ironically, this proposal itself had to be moved. But from where? The log is empty. And how would you revert the move? (I know it's possible, but this is not intuitive. No revert button in the history, no entry in the target log). ToBeFree (talk) 18:25, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
For someone who really wants to see the log for more education, it is here: Special:Redirect/logid/45090401 (A very non-intuitive way to find it had to be used). — xaosflux ^Talk 18:30, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed This would be useful to find previous versions 'lost' from a Move action.Kaybeesquared (talk) 19:47, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I think the movement of logs should be done, because of protection logs: When a page moved after protected, we only find the move log entry in the protection log; and logs from the old should be moved to the new pages. Thingofme (talk) 03:17, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This has unintended consequences for users who undergo a rename... –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 20:08, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@MJL: I'm not seeing anything serious in that - first renames are not private, second this would only have affect if said user had a userpage, which if such userpage was moved by the globalrename job it already logs the userpage move in the history (example). Can you be more specific? If you think this is a security issue you can share by wikimail. — xaosflux ^Talk 21:04, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Xaosflux: All of what you said is true, but some people don't want it to be that public. You know when names are changed for privacy reasons? I'll email you when I get home about it. –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 17:39, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Someone with "privacy reasons" is best of changing their account to "Renamed user xxxx" and starting a new account. — xaosflux ^Talk 17:46, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This is like an username violates the username policy. In this case, the log of global renaming should be revision-deleted or oversighted, and the new, fresh username would be allowed to function as normal names. Thingofme (talk) 03:18, 16 January 2022 (UTC)\[reply]

@Thingofme: I'm not going to get in to argument about deletion policies here, however if there is an extraordinary case where pages and logs are being suppressed, the move log would already be getting take care of and this proposal wouldn't change that. — xaosflux ^Talk 10:15, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

But the edit summary or reasons for the log would not be changed,... so the old page (with old names) are seen, which also may cause confusion. Thingofme (talk) 13:24, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Changing the current behavior of the move function is as close to a bug fix as a requested new feature can be. If there is a general privacy problem, unrelated to this proposal, with traces created by user renames on Wikimedia projects, then it can be addressed separately for Wikimedia projects. As pointed out above, the revision history already contains an entry labeled "moved from A to B"; it is just pointlessly missing from the move log. ToBeFree (talk) 19:54, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Xaosflux: I tweaked the wording of the proposal a little bit that hopefully makes it more understandable. Please review and if you're okay with it, I'll ready it for translation. Thanks for the fine suggestion! MusikAnimal (WMF) (talk) 05:37, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@MusikAnimal (WMF): think something got lost in the massaging: I want to make it clear that I'm suggesting the log entry is associated with both pages, not to change it from being associated with the old page to the new page. — xaosflux ^Talk 10:58, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Actually that's ok, the "problem" doesn't need to say that, the solution already does - so go ahead! — xaosflux ^Talk 10:59, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I think the wordings of the proposal is like unclear, and we need to start by somethings. First of all, we need to move the logs (protection log, revdel log, patrol log, review log, creation log) to the new name, and won't be considered with the old name. Other logs WON'T be moved, and should be stayed in the old place. Thingofme (talk) 03:22, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
So, right now the move log contains: timestamp, actor, frompage (target), topage, summary; however the Special:Log page only allows searching by the frompage - as if there is no index on the topage -- that's what I'm asking be added, then that can be integrated with Special:Log, and other places. — xaosflux ^Talk 17:42, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This is an important question. As it turned out, moving is a risky operation and can be used for very strange purposes. Intervention may require administrator rights (double move example: wikt:eo:abio, wikt:eo:abio-PIRATAĴO - only this page is original and contains full revision history, wikt:eo:abio-DENOVA-PIRATAĴO), and in some cases even the administrator will not be able to do anything.

Move operations should have more control and analysis in the logs. For cases of cascading move or circular move with delete operation.

For the move result page, you need to be able to get a list of all sources.

For a move source page, you need to be able to get a list of all move result pages.

In both cases, references to the logged event are needed.

Anticipe pardonu aŭtomatan tradukilon, se ĝia angla lingvo estas ne tre kvalita (

)

Va (🖋️) 11:30, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This wish will not make the eo:wikt:PIRATAĴO mess easier to unravel. And, as I explained there, it is not the case that nothing can be done, even with the codebase as it is today. * Pppery * _{it has begun} 21:21, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

To unravel and restore this particular example - yes, it will not help. But it will help to identify damage for in similar cases for manual recovery by re-entering data. And it can help identify similar cases, whether intentional or accidental. Va (🖋️) 09:23, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A sleeker solution is to allow Special:Log/move to accept a page ID rather than a page name. Nardog (talk) 12:57, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Voting

Support - the new title is stored in a DB column that holds random stuff. MER-C 18:12, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Matěj Suchánek (talk) 18:15, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Good idea MrMeAndMrMe_{Let's talk} 18:19, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Tol (talk | contribs) @ 18:29, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support As proposer! — xaosflux ^Talk 18:59, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Useful proposal. -- ◄ David L • talk ► 19:08, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Femke (talk) 19:29, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support BrandonXLF (talk) 19:36, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Fuger (Talk) 20:27, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Draceane ^talk_contrib. 21:34, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Sgd. —Hasley 23:10, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Izno (talk) 23:31, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 23:41, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Sakretsu (炸裂) 00:02, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very useful, especially after page moves are reverted or improved. Certes (talk) 01:18, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Betseg (talk) 02:08, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Jake The Great 908 (talk) 06:21, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- ಮಲ್ನಾಡಾಚ್ ಕೊಂಕ್ಣೊ (talk) 07:05, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Graham11 (talk) 08:23, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Arado Ar 196 (talk) 11:14, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Hemantha (talk) 12:15, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 12:19, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Aca (talk) 13:16, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support — SHEIKH (Talk) 13:52, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nardog (talk) 14:31, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Nachtbold (talk) 14:49, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support BSMIsEditing (talk) 15:16, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Mbrickn (talk) 15:51, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Jules* ^Talk 18:29, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support De un millón (talk) 18:40, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support ToBeFree (talk) 22:51, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Tgr (talk) 00:06, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support josecurioso ❯❯❯ Tell me! 00:30, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support TheInternetGnome (talk) 08:06, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Johannnes89 (talk) 08:31, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support DePlusJean (talk) 09:38, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Stryn (talk) 17:16, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Titore (talk) 18:10, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support আফতাবুজ্জামান (talk) 20:10, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support This would be very useful. KevinL (aka L235 · t) 20:55, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Libcub (talk) 22:22, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support This is maybe the single weirdest pain-in-the-ass thing that MediaWiki does. There's no way it can be called a feature -- it's just pointless. JPxG (talk) 00:47, 31 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support HugoHelp (talk) 04:13, 31 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support daSupremo 04:23, 31 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Dreamy Jazz ^{talk to me | enwiki} 14:47, 31 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Thingofme (talk) 15:54, 31 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Havang(nl) (talk) 16:16, 31 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support JAn Dudík (talk) 20:50, 31 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support IOIOI (talk) 20:53, 31 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Strong support IAmChaos (talk) 21:28, 31 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Dave Braunschweig (talk) 22:34, 31 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support stwalkerster (talk) 23:31, 31 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Labdajiwa (talk) 03:00, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support No such user (talk) 12:43, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support This, that and the other (talk) 14:00, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Thibaut (talk) 15:42, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 22:49, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support — JJMC89 (T·C) 02:14, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Hampcky (talk) 15:39, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 16:30, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support ~ Amory (u • t • c) 20:47, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Uanfala (talk) 00:11, 3 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support EN-Jungwon 03:35, 3 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support WikiAviator (talk) 15:43, 3 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Ammarpad (talk) 08:16, 4 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Rzuwig^► 12:15, 4 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support 07 (talk) 22:04, 4 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --ToprakM ^✉ 01:06, 5 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support —— Eric Liu_（Talk） 05:36, 5 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Ealdgyth (talk) 17:39, 5 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support —Thanks for the fish! ^{talk•contrib} (he/him) 21:39, 5 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Vulp❯❯❯here! 04:34, 6 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Michael Barera (talk) 06:10, 6 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Ayumu Ozaki (talk) 07:14, 6 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Emaus (talk) 08:21, 6 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Voice of Clam (talk) 10:54, 6 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose --Ciao • Bestoernesto • ✉ 17:35, 6 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support — DaxServer (t · c) 21:25, 6 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Brewster239 (T·C·CA) 09:42, 7 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I think this makes sense (I've also been confused how to track the history of page moves on and off WM projects), and my understanding is that this would be a change to the MediaWiki software, and therefore potentially benefit implementations more widely than just Wikimedia. paul2520 (talk) 15:33, 7 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support this keeps coming up, it is clearly confusing for many people, so we should find a solution. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 18:18, 7 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support ~Cybularny ^Speak? 20:49, 7 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Achim55 (talk) 09:00, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support ⇌ Jake Wartenberg 20:50, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Rots61 (talk) 22:43, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Similarly confusing with account renames. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 22:43, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Mario1257 (talk) 11:21, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Mahir256 (talk) 20:20, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Asukite (talk) 00:00, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Extraordinary Writ (talk) 00:03, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Andrei Romanenko (talk) 02:29, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Would love to see this. Giraffer (talk) 21:01, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Gaurav (talk) 06:28, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Yair rand (talk) 07:16, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nehaoua (talk) 16:02, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --evrifaessa (talk) 16:17, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Hunting down the trampolines is really annoying. -BRAINULATOR9 (TALK) 17:21, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]