koyaanisqatsi@nupedia.com wrote:
Should we document the moving of a page from one location to
another in the article's history? e.g. create a new line in the history showing the time and user with an autogenerated comment like "article moved from [[IMDb]] to [[Internet Movie Database]]"?
YES YES YES, we should do that. Should be pretty straightforward.
That's easy for you to say :-)
Article histories are not stored as change records; they are constructed from stored revisions. Moving an article doesn't create a revision--it actually renames the article record and all its revision records, so as far as the database is concerned the article has /always/ had the new name--it doesn't know any different.
To keep a log of moves would require a new table to record them, and the changing the article history list to use that new table. Not a major obstacle, but not a quickie either.
On Fri, Aug 23, 2002 at 10:51:47AM -0700, lcrocker@nupedia.com wrote:
Article histories are not stored as change records; they are constructed from stored revisions. Moving an article doesn't create a revision--it actually renames the article record and all its revision records, so as far as the database is concerned the article has /always/ had the new name--it doesn't know any different.
To keep a log of moves would require a new table to record them, and the changing the article history list to use that new table. Not a major obstacle, but not a quickie either.
Couldn't you just insert a dummy revision (which would become the latest revison) with the edit text unchanged and the edit summary saying something like "Moving 'X' to 'Y'"?
-- Jan Hidders
On Fri, Aug 23, 2002 at 10:51:47AM -0700, lcrocker@nupedia.com wrote:
koyaanisqatsi@nupedia.com wrote:
Should we document the moving of a page from one location to
another in the article's history? e.g. create a new line in the history showing the time and user with an autogenerated comment like "article moved from [[IMDb]] to [[Internet Movie Database]]"?
YES YES YES, we should do that. Should be pretty straightforward.
That's easy for you to say :-)
Article histories are not stored as change records; they are constructed from stored revisions. Moving an article doesn't create a revision--it actually renames the article record and all its revision records, so as far as the database is concerned the article has /always/ had the new name--it doesn't know any different.
To keep a log of moves would require a new table to record them, and the changing the article history list to use that new table. Not a major obstacle, but not a quickie either.
I think you could create a revision identical to the existing one, just having a new comment.
JeLuF
lcrocker@nupedia.com wrote:
koyaanisqatsi@nupedia.com wrote:
Should we document the moving of a page from one location to
another in the article's history? e.g. create a new line in the history showing the time and user with an autogenerated comment like "article moved from [[IMDb]] to [[Internet Movie Database]]"?
YES YES YES, we should do that. Should be pretty straightforward.
That's easy for you to say :-)
Article histories are not stored as change records; they are constructed from stored revisions. Moving an article doesn't create a revision--
Therein the reason they don't currently show up in the history.
it actually renames the article record and all its revision records, so as far as the database is concerned the article has /always/ had the new name--it doesn't know any different.
To keep a log of moves would require a new table to record them, and the changing the article history list to use that new table. Not a major obstacle, but not a quickie either.
You misunderstand; when moving an article, simply *save* a new revision of it with a summary field of "Renamed from X". Thus, it shows up in the history list because there is a new revision.
-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org