Talk:Oversight policy/Archives/2006

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Warning! Please do not post any new comments on this page. This is a discussion archive first created in 2006, although the comments contained were likely posted before and after this date. See current discussion or the archives index.

Older discussion

So this differs from a regular deletion in that the versions won't even be seen by admins. Is this correct? Thanks. --Lord Voldemort 16:31, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

Yes. In fact no one not even someone with oversight can see the deleted edit. Only a developer can restore it or even see it. Prodego Talk 23:21, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
That last bit has of course been changed, the page is correct now. - Taxman 04:04, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

How possible would it be to be able remove deleted revisions without first restoring them? It's both inefficient and disconcerting to restore personal information before hiding it, and the handful of us with oversight permission are not likely to get there before another admin at least deletes the edit. There could be a "hide revisions" box right next to "reset" in Special:Undelete. Dmcdevit 08:29, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Well this is only supposed to be temporary. Prodego Talk 14:33, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

Deleted versions?

So, now that this is here, what about the ability to view deleted revisions? As I recall, it was removed because the fears that people would see personal info in the edit summary, which this seems to deal with... 04:33, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Users with oversight rights

I strongly urge that this power be limited only to the users who already have it, and that the final version of the code include an undelete function. This would be a very, very mischevious tool if it fell into the wrong hands, for instance if an admin's laptop were stolen or password were hacked. 23:57, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

The data is not removed completely, it's just rammed well out of sight, somewhere core MediaWiki doesn't have an awareness of, and so will never access. If the tool was abused, a database administrator could restore the revisions without too much additional work. In such a case, the user account would lose permissions as an obvious precaution, and might end up being blocked on various wikis if it were compromised.
The permission is strongly limited. At present, only a local wiki's Arbitration Committee can order that it be given to a non-developer/system admin/database admin, and the latter groups don't want the additional work anyway. ;) 15:16, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Extended to clear vandalism and testing

This or similar mechanism would be useful if applied to clear vandalism (and subsequent revert) and/or testing by novices, immediatelly changed back by themselves. It is now practically impossible to use history of many "popular" articles.

A mechanism labeling those edits as "absolutely worthless" could be safeguarded against misuse. Say, several people would need to agree unanimously, the votes would be assigned randomly, those who would try to misuse it would not be allowed to use it futher and all their past votes would be nullifyed, etc.

The option to see all edits, including those hidden would be available. Pavel Vozenilek 15:59, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

other wikipedias?

Is that option limited only for en: Wikipedia? Is that an intention? In cs: we'v got an accident when some (previously blocked) user strongly claimed removal of his nonpublic personal information even from history of the page... Another user not very soberly included them previously . We had no option to solve it. With regards --Reo On|+|+ 11:42, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

A local admin can delete specific revisions by deleting the page and then restoring every other revision but the problem ones. There are various javascripts available that can help with that. That makes the revision only available to admins and should be good enough in most cases. - Taxman 17:57, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
see also Talk:Requests for permissions#Oversight in other Wikis? -- MichaelFrey 17:08, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

How to install oversite rights on wiki's

How do I install the oversite rights on my wiki? Can they be installed under mediawiki version 1.6.8? I notice that the download information for hidden.sql states: "Requires DiffViewHeader hook in 1.7 (r14358)" does this mean it will not work under 1.6.8? (I cannot install 1.7 because of the wrong php version).

When I edited the Main Page of my newly set up wiki I found that at the bottom of the page it says: "This page was last modified 14:58, 17 August 2006 by [username]. Based on work by Anonymous user(s) of [wikiname]" - not very elegant! Under history, the "Anonymous user" is transformed into "MediaWiki default". Is there a simple way of deleting this reference to the "Anonymous user(s)" (other than hiding the names of editors, which I have deliberately set to show)?

It would be better if default pages had a creation user for default pages as "MediaWiki default" rather than "Anonymous user(s)". Or alternatively, "MediaWiki default" should not be classified as anonymous.

You can't install the HideRevision extension under MediaWiki 1.6.x. 19:11, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

Re: replacing hidden revision with marker

I removed the following commentary from the policy page for discussion here. - Taxman 17:55, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

It is possible that the system will be changed to replace the removed revisions with an explicitly visible marker.
Should be, including display of the comment. As well as the issue above, accountability requires it. Something obvious in the revision list and perhaps a similar call-out to that for deleted revisions as well. Jamesday 02:42, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
I think one solution is to implement this patch [1] developed by User:Tietew. With that, we can hide the main text of a page without hiding the comment, user name, and timestamp of the revision in the edit history/ revision history page. People can understand, then, that there are some revisions that is not viewable. Wrong attribution could be prevented with this to a certain degree. Tomos 03:20, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
The timestamp? I don't remember it being able to do that, though I suppose it is quite possible. Still, that could leave a messy history. Perhaps a "show deleted revisions" toggle could appear on such history pages.Voice-of-All 22:45, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

Solution to misleading revisions

How hard would it be to specify the offending text, and then have it removed from all revisions? This would avoid misattributions and misleading revisions. Further if the offending text removal process renders any given revision to be of null effect(the article shows no changes when diffed to the previous revision) then that revision can be removed entirely as well.--DataSurfer 18:27, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

Assuming that it remained in all versions exactly the same, that would work, but editing old revisions is a bit strong. Doing it by hand would be the only sure-fire way, but that seems to push things too far.Voice-of-All 22:46, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

Oversight votes

Is oversight only granted where an Arbitration Commitee has approved it, or is it available to anyone who gets the votes? Is there a minimum no. of votes required? Archer7 15:16, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

My sense is that access to oversight will be granted in the way CheckUser is (CheckUser_policy#Access). Not all projects have Arbitration Committees, but the ones that do will aprove oversight users that way, and the ones that don't will use a community vote. Dmcdevit 18:00, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
Why not combine Oversight and Checkuser rights? see talk:checkuser for more discussion. -- sj | help translate |+