New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

CSD and blanking needs to be reworked #8

Closed
Nathan2055 opened this Issue Jun 21, 2013 · 21 comments

Comments

@Nathan2055
Member

Nathan2055 commented Jun 21, 2013

It's annoying that you could, either accidentally or not knowing any better, blank or CSD any article. To fix this, only BLPs should be allowed to be blanked and only copyvios should be allowed to CSD. Please see this thread for more info.

@wikipedia-mabdul

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@wikipedia-mabdul

wikipedia-mabdul Jul 13, 2013

Member

just to get a step by step to do list:
*CSD is only allowed for Copyvios
*Copyvios should be tagged as g12
*only BLPs and copyvios should be blanked. right?

Member

wikipedia-mabdul commented Jul 13, 2013

just to get a step by step to do list:
*CSD is only allowed for Copyvios
*Copyvios should be tagged as g12
*only BLPs and copyvios should be blanked. right?

@theopolisme

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@theopolisme

theopolisme Jul 13, 2013

Contributor

@wikipedia-mabdul yep to the first two.

For the third, "only BLPs and copyvios should be blanked", that's not entirely correct. Copyvios should be tagged as G12, but not blanked, so the patrolling admin can see the page text and verify that, yes, it is a copyvio. Generally, only attack pages should be blanked.

Contributor

theopolisme commented Jul 13, 2013

@wikipedia-mabdul yep to the first two.

For the third, "only BLPs and copyvios should be blanked", that's not entirely correct. Copyvios should be tagged as G12, but not blanked, so the patrolling admin can see the page text and verify that, yes, it is a copyvio. Generally, only attack pages should be blanked.

@Nathan2055

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@Nathan2055

Nathan2055 Jul 14, 2013

Member

@wikipedia-mabdul @theopolisme - Everything should be able to be blanked. Only copyvios can be CSDd, and they should be replaced with {{db-g12|url}}.

Member

Nathan2055 commented Jul 14, 2013

@wikipedia-mabdul @theopolisme - Everything should be able to be blanked. Only copyvios can be CSDd, and they should be replaced with {{db-g12|url}}.

@wikipedia-mabdul

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@wikipedia-mabdul

wikipedia-mabdul Jul 14, 2013

Member
  • Only copyvios can be CSDd <-- done
  • Everything should be able to be blanked <-- nothing to do
  • CV should be G12 <-- not done
Member

wikipedia-mabdul commented Jul 14, 2013

  • Only copyvios can be CSDd <-- done
  • Everything should be able to be blanked <-- nothing to do
  • CV should be G12 <-- not done
@martijnhoekstra

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@martijnhoekstra

martijnhoekstra Jul 16, 2013

While it is not possible to CSD nom, the checkbox for CSD is still present. The checkbox should ideally be unchecked and disabled for anything other than copyvio.

martijnhoekstra commented Jul 16, 2013

While it is not possible to CSD nom, the checkbox for CSD is still present. The checkbox should ideally be unchecked and disabled for anything other than copyvio.

@Nathan2055

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@Nathan2055

Nathan2055 Jul 16, 2013

Member

@wikipedia-mabdul - Looks like you have more work to do.

Member

Nathan2055 commented Jul 16, 2013

@wikipedia-mabdul - Looks like you have more work to do.

@theopolisme

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@theopolisme

theopolisme Jul 31, 2013

Contributor

@wikipedia-mabdul i don't think your current functionality really makes sense, try it out:

Now, the csd checkbox is checked -- and it says, Trigger the 'csd' parameter and nominate the submission for CSD? (replace the content with {{afc cleared|csd}}). The problem with this? Well, it's not clear if the script is replacing the content or if the user is supposed to replace the content.

Looking at the source code (L923 in current develop), if I select "cv" (copy vio), then the first, "blank the submission", checkbox is checked. So why isn't it auto-checked with blp when it tells the users to "(replace the content with {{afc cleared|csd}})"?

I just think it's inconsistent right now, and needs some general clarification -- perhaps writing some pseudocode would be useful.

Thanks for your work on this,

Contributor

theopolisme commented Jul 31, 2013

@wikipedia-mabdul i don't think your current functionality really makes sense, try it out:

Now, the csd checkbox is checked -- and it says, Trigger the 'csd' parameter and nominate the submission for CSD? (replace the content with {{afc cleared|csd}}). The problem with this? Well, it's not clear if the script is replacing the content or if the user is supposed to replace the content.

Looking at the source code (L923 in current develop), if I select "cv" (copy vio), then the first, "blank the submission", checkbox is checked. So why isn't it auto-checked with blp when it tells the users to "(replace the content with {{afc cleared|csd}})"?

I just think it's inconsistent right now, and needs some general clarification -- perhaps writing some pseudocode would be useful.

Thanks for your work on this,

@Nathan2055

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@Nathan2055

Nathan2055 Jul 31, 2013

Member

/me comes back again to say that the checkbox was disabled because about 10 users came and said that failure of BLP is NOT a reason to auto CSD.

Member

Nathan2055 commented Jul 31, 2013

/me comes back again to say that the checkbox was disabled because about 10 users came and said that failure of BLP is NOT a reason to auto CSD.

@theopolisme

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@theopolisme

theopolisme Jul 31, 2013

Contributor

@Nathan2055 so why does blp in the menu say "Blatant violation of BLP policies (please blank the page)"? It seems like users said things that weren't reflected in the code (or even in issues).

Contributor

theopolisme commented Jul 31, 2013

@Nathan2055 so why does blp in the menu say "Blatant violation of BLP policies (please blank the page)"? It seems like users said things that weren't reflected in the code (or even in issues).

@Nathan2055

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@Nathan2055

Nathan2055 Jul 31, 2013

Member

I believe the correct answer to the above question is "forgetfulness". Due to how strangely the blanking and CSD code is implemented in the script (at least while I was making that feature) it took me about twenty minutes to get the button working, and so I must have just forgotten to change the reason hash.

Member

Nathan2055 commented Jul 31, 2013

I believe the correct answer to the above question is "forgetfulness". Due to how strangely the blanking and CSD code is implemented in the script (at least while I was making that feature) it took me about twenty minutes to get the button working, and so I must have just forgotten to change the reason hash.

@theopolisme

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@theopolisme

theopolisme Jul 31, 2013

Contributor

I agree that the CSD/blanking code isn't especially intuitive at the moment -- I think just making a clear outline of the different functionalities we (and more importantly users) expect would be a step in the right direction.

Contributor

theopolisme commented Jul 31, 2013

I agree that the CSD/blanking code isn't especially intuitive at the moment -- I think just making a clear outline of the different functionalities we (and more importantly users) expect would be a step in the right direction.

@Nathan2055

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@Nathan2055

Nathan2055 Jul 31, 2013

Member

I agree. There are many of these discussions that fly under the radar of the other devs (see #81), we need to make a place to list these out when they close.

I just can't leave, can I?

Member

Nathan2055 commented Jul 31, 2013

I agree. There are many of these discussions that fly under the radar of the other devs (see #81), we need to make a place to list these out when they close.

I just can't leave, can I?

@theopolisme

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@theopolisme

theopolisme Jul 31, 2013

Contributor

So perhaps a CHANGELOG?

Contributor

theopolisme commented Jul 31, 2013

So perhaps a CHANGELOG?

@Nathan2055

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@Nathan2055

Nathan2055 Jul 31, 2013

Member

facepalm
That was the ENTIRE reasoning behind #91 and #78.

Member

Nathan2055 commented Jul 31, 2013

facepalm
That was the ENTIRE reasoning behind #91 and #78.

@theopolisme

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@theopolisme

theopolisme Jul 31, 2013

Contributor

No, I don't think #91 or #78 would solve this. Right now, you can still see a complete commit history by looking at develop. There are no "hidden branches." How would your proposed solutions solve the problem of "many of these discussions that fly under the radar"? If your problem is features being added without knowing about them, look at the commit history of develop. Everything that is changed goes in there first (except for hotfixes to master, which get merged back into develop a few minutes later).

Just putting everything in one branch wouldn't solve your "discussions that fly under the radar" problem. However, a CHANGELOG -- with links to relevant commits/diffs as well as the associated issues -- could be very useful, especially when writing summaries of changes and such.

Contributor

theopolisme commented Jul 31, 2013

No, I don't think #91 or #78 would solve this. Right now, you can still see a complete commit history by looking at develop. There are no "hidden branches." How would your proposed solutions solve the problem of "many of these discussions that fly under the radar"? If your problem is features being added without knowing about them, look at the commit history of develop. Everything that is changed goes in there first (except for hotfixes to master, which get merged back into develop a few minutes later).

Just putting everything in one branch wouldn't solve your "discussions that fly under the radar" problem. However, a CHANGELOG -- with links to relevant commits/diffs as well as the associated issues -- could be very useful, especially when writing summaries of changes and such.

@Nathan2055

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@Nathan2055

Nathan2055 Jul 31, 2013

Member

If we gave up on using develop and implement #91, we can use GitHub's built-in changelog system. Or we could implement #78 and use pull requests. Or we could even open an issue and close it again when we implement a feature by consensus. There's more than one way to peel an orange.

Member

Nathan2055 commented Jul 31, 2013

If we gave up on using develop and implement #91, we can use GitHub's built-in changelog system. Or we could implement #78 and use pull requests. Or we could even open an issue and close it again when we implement a feature by consensus. There's more than one way to peel an orange.

@theopolisme

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@theopolisme

theopolisme Jul 31, 2013

Contributor

What would using pull requests change? :p

Contributor

theopolisme commented Jul 31, 2013

What would using pull requests change? :p

@wikipedia-mabdul

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@wikipedia-mabdul

wikipedia-mabdul Jul 31, 2013

Member

just to the original problem: I'm still working on that issue. I hadn't any time today except the cosmetic changes at work.

One of my issues is that I'm rethinking on how to organize that different kind of properties changing in a more useful and efficient way (checkbox checking and hiding divs) by using a function (or whatever)

At least at this moment it is very... hackisch added. ("historical grown code")

Member

wikipedia-mabdul commented Jul 31, 2013

just to the original problem: I'm still working on that issue. I hadn't any time today except the cosmetic changes at work.

One of my issues is that I'm rethinking on how to organize that different kind of properties changing in a more useful and efficient way (checkbox checking and hiding divs) by using a function (or whatever)

At least at this moment it is very... hackisch added. ("historical grown code")

wikipedia-mabdul pushed a commit that referenced this issue Aug 3, 2013

theopolisme added a commit that referenced this issue Aug 28, 2013

Work on #8 (csd and blanking) some more
Only display `csd` if the rationale is vandalism or copyvio, per
[[Template:AfC submission/comments]]; just enable blanking for `blp`;
and otherwise hide the CSD option

theopolisme added a commit that referenced this issue Aug 30, 2013

theopolisme added a commit that referenced this issue Aug 30, 2013

@theopolisme

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@theopolisme

theopolisme Aug 31, 2013

Contributor

This seems to be all worked out (what with the above commits)...if problems resurface or if something still hasn't been addressed, please reopen (@wikipedia-mabdul)

Contributor

theopolisme commented Aug 31, 2013

This seems to be all worked out (what with the above commits)...if problems resurface or if something still hasn't been addressed, please reopen (@wikipedia-mabdul)

@theopolisme

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@theopolisme

theopolisme Sep 1, 2013

Contributor

This is not pushed to live yet

Contributor

theopolisme commented Sep 1, 2013

This is not pushed to live yet

@theopolisme theopolisme reopened this Sep 1, 2013

@Technical-13

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@Technical-13

Technical-13 Sep 6, 2013

Contributor

There seems to be an issue with cv declines not posting the reviewer's comments on the draft outside of the "blanked" area. See issue #152

Contributor

Technical-13 commented Sep 6, 2013

There seems to be an issue with cv declines not posting the reviewer's comments on the draft outside of the "blanked" area. See issue #152

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment