Wikimedia Bugzilla is closed!

Wikimedia has migrated from Bugzilla to Phabricator. Bug reports should be created and updated in Wikimedia Phabricator instead. Please create an account in Phabricator and add your Bugzilla email address to it.
Wikimedia Bugzilla is read-only. If you try to edit or create any bug report in Bugzilla you will be shown an intentional error message.
In order to access the Phabricator task corresponding to a Bugzilla report, just remove "static-" from its URL.
You could still run searches in Bugzilla or access your list of votes but bug reports will obviously not be up-to-date in Bugzilla.

Bug 5865 - Warning on editing other user's userpage


Summary:	Warning on editing other user's userpage

Status:	REOPENED

Product:	MediaWiki
Classification:	Unclassified
Component:	Page editing (Other open bugs)
Version:	unspecified
Hardware:	All All

Importance:	Low enhancement with 6 votes (vote)
Target Milestone:	---
Assigned To:	Nobody - You can work on this!

URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords:	patch, patch-reviewed

Duplicates:	16997 (view as bug list)
Depends on:
Blocks:
	Show dependency tree / graph

Reported:	2006-05-07 20:25 UTC by Mormegil
Modified:	2011-09-01 21:35 UTC (History)
CC List:	8 users (show)

See Also:
Web browser:	---
Mobile Platform:	---
Assignee Huggle Beta Tester:	---

Attachments
A patch implementing this feature request (1.62 KB, patch) 2006-05-07 20:26 UTC, Mormegil	Details
Rob's patch with a namespace check (1.77 KB, patch) 2008-08-09 03:38 UTC, Emufarmers	Details
Add an attachment (proposed patch, testcase, etc.)

Description Mormegil 2006-05-07 20:25:46 UTC

Often, a user trying to write a message to another user uses a user: page instead of the talk page.

So, when editing another user's page, an edit warning should be given.

(See also bug 2352 – "New feature to automatically protect user: page".)

Comment 1 Mormegil 2006-05-07 20:26:27 UTC

Created attachment 1694 [details]
A patch implementing this feature request

Comment 2 Rob Church 2006-05-07 20:27:25 UTC

Don't see any massive benefit to this, to be honest. Users tend to go for the
"new section" link in a lot of cases, and would notice its absence from the user
page.

Comment 3 Mormegil 2006-05-07 20:33:38 UTC

(In reply to comment #2)

This affects mainly the case when the user's page is nonexistent -- a user intending to write a message clicks on 
a red link without noticing it leads to the user page instead of the talk page (i.e. in the case when you don't 
use either [edit] or [+]). I see that quite often on cs:. Of course, when you are writing to a long-term user, you 
are likely to notice the difference between a userpage and a talkpage. :-)

Comment 4 lɛʁi לערי ריינהארט 2006-05-07 20:40:38 UTC

(In reply to comment #2)
> Don't see any massive benefit to this, to be honest. Users tend to go for the
> "new section" link in a lot of cases, and would notice its absence from the user
> page.

When trying to contact users in wikies using other scripts or languages it still
happens that user pages get edited by accident.

Comment 5 Mormegil 2006-06-08 09:39:33 UTC

Is there any _negative_ aspect of this? There is a positive one for sure,
because this does happen. See e.g.
http://cs.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedista_diskuse:Robo.cz&action=history
or take a look at [[en:Special:Log/move]] and notice it there, too.

Comment 6 Rob Church 2006-06-15 06:56:34 UTC

Added in SVN trunk, r14768, although I didn't use the provided patch.

Comment 7 Mormegil 2006-06-22 16:58:12 UTC

Reopening, obviously reverted in SVN immediately, r14769

Comment 8 Andrew Garrett 2008-08-08 10:05:43 UTC

Interest seems to be lost (apparently, it's not still causing problems). Marking as WONTFIX for now.

Comment 9 Mormegil 2008-08-08 15:25:47 UTC

I have no idea how you came to “interest seems to be lost”. (And “it’s not still causing problems?” Has anything changed? OBTW on test.wp, there is a modified version [[MediaWiki:Editing]], so that the information shows up at least in the page caption.) I have filed a feature request (not a bug report!), and provided a working patch. That patch has been rejected, and the alternative solution reverted immediately as broken. After that, this request has been ignored.

I am not sure what should I have done to make the “interest not seem to be lost”? Update the patch every week to keep it up to date with the current trunk, and let it be ignored anyway? Bug some developer every day on IRC? Is that really necessary?

Marking a feature request WONTFIX because it is a bad idea, or because it cannot be easily implemented into MediaWiki, etc., that’s fine with me. But marking a feature request (and such a simple one!) as WONTFIX just because everyone ignores it?

Never mind, I’ll keep my JavaScript.

Comment 10 Petr Adamek 2008-08-08 15:32:23 UTC

I definitelly agree with Mormegil. This request make sense for me and if suggested sollution is wrong, the reason should be explained.

Comment 11 Emufarmers 2008-08-09 03:38:11 UTC

Created attachment 5154 [details]
Rob's patch with a namespace check

Comment 12 P.Copp 2009-01-12 20:33:50 UTC

*** Bug 16997 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 13 John Du Hart 2011-09-01 03:57:14 UTC

Fixed in r95930

Comment 14 John Du Hart 2011-09-01 21:35:25 UTC

Reverted in r96046

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.

Search

Personal tools

Navigation

Links

Contents Listing Alphabetical by Author:

A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z Unknown Other

Contents Listing Alphabetical by Title:

# A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W Y Z Other

Medical Encyclopedia

Browse by first letter of topic:

A-Ag	Ah-Ap	Aq-Az	B-Bk	Bl-Bz	C-Cg	Ch-Co
Cp-Cz	D-Di	Dj-Dz	E-Ep	Eq-Ez	F	G
H-Hf	Hg-Hz	I-In	Io-Iz	J	K	L-Ln
Lo-Lz	M-Mf	Mg-Mz	N	O	P-Pl	Pm-Pz
Q	R	S-Sh	Si-Sp	Sq-Sz	T-Tn	To-Tz
U	V	W	X	Y	Z	0-9