Wikimedia Forum/Nuke extension on Wikimedia

Discussion moved from metapub([1]):

Enable mw:Extension:Nuke on WMF wikis by default

edit
The following discussion is closed: Extension:Nuke is to be enabled on Wikimedia — vvv 08:00, 21 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This would help stewards mass-delete pages when necessary on small wikis, and gives local sysops that ability as well. This extension doesn't allow administrators or sysops to do anything they can't already, but simply makes it faster. I suspect enwiki and other large wikis will want to opt-out; would users from those wikis please note that we are not trying to force this upon you. Any wiki which wishes to have this disabled, can do so.

List of wikis not included in this proposal
chrwiki (already has it)
commonswiki (already has it)
dewiki (should decide for themselves)
enwiki (should decide for themselves)
frwiki (should decide for themselves)
mediawiki.org (already has it)
metawiki (already has it)
pdcwiki (already has it)
...?
Arguments in favor
  • This would ease the work of SWMT members/stewards/sysops cleaning up newpage vandalism/copyvios very much.
  • More server friendly than doing these deletions manually or per script.
Arguments against
  • Sysops going nuts can delete hundreds of pages very soon and these had to be restored manually or with a script.

Support

Oppose

  Oppose I STRONGLY disagree here, much damage can be caused with this script. A rogue sysop could easily delete thousands of pages in a very short time and at this time they would have to be manually restored as to my knowlege no script exists to mass restore pages. We have already seen that many vandals are patient enough build up a good reputation and get sysop rights. Just to reek havoch. I would only trust this power to 'crats and stewards. Prom3th3an 07:20, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That is an argument against wikis, not an argument against this proposal. Further, you may misunderstand what this feature does - it allows deletion of page creations by a single user which are still in recentchanges. That is, you cannot delete old pages, nor a list of arbitrary pages - this doesn't allow anything sysops cannot already do, it only saves them time and effort.  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 18:05, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
There does exist a script to mass restore pages. I've used it myself. Majorly 16:33, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
If I understand the extension correctly, it will only delete pages edited by a single user... I don't think we're going to see "thousands" of those lying around unless they were just recently created by a spam bot. If a script to mass-undo admin actions doesn't exist, it wouldn't be very hard to make one. If somebody wants to put in several months or work to do two minutes of damage, I think we're still coming out ahead. May be worth rate limiting the extension, though. Luna Santin 20:08, 19 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Oppose I think if a community want this function on, they can discuss in their village pump and then request this function. The meta folk cannot impose a vote here on behalf of the local communities, who maybe even doesn't know that there is a proposal here, or who cannot read english and cannot talk here. The whole situation remembers me of that at the beginning of Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy.--Wing 13:59, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Did you read the proposal? "enwiki and other large wikis will want to opt-out; would users from those wikis please note that we are not trying to force this upon you. Any wiki which wishes to have this disabled, can do so." guillom 14:27, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes I read the proposal. But I cannot speak for the zh-wp for example, and cannot speak for its community. So the community must at first discuss the issue by itself. And when that discussion, which can really last long, came to a conclusion, the vote here is already run. And probably the few voters here had then already imposed a tool on the zh-wp. And exactly because of this I oppose this suggestion.--Wing 14:32, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    And I cannot list zh-wp on that list above because I cannot represent the zh-wp community to list itself there. No one can do that without the community had discussed before. --Wing 14:33, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Developers add new features to the MediaWiki software all the time, without asking for anyone's permission. guillom 06:14, 18 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Stop haranguing him. It's ridiculous to assert that Devs insert extensions and updates as big as this without community consultation. —Anonymous DissidentTalk 06:20, 18 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral/Comments

  •   Neutral I like the idea having Nuke on small wikis without active local sysops. But on the other projects it should be up to the community to decide that. I don't know why enwiki may decide it for themselves but the others not. --Thogo (talk) 19:20, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Mostly because I cannot list them all. The "...?" meant "Please help me out by listing other large wikis which should decide for themselves"  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 18:02, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    I should also point out that it is a really low-impact change - it only affects the ease with which sysops may delete bad page creations by a single user.  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 18:05, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    I would rather like it as an opt-in. With auto-opt-in for wikis without own sysops. --Thogo (talk) 19:20, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Agreed. --MZMcBride 19:36, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Btw., I asked on dewiki (without linking this discussion), what they think about having it there. Let's see what kind of arguments they give. One is that a going-mad sysop could delete thousands of pages and one had to restore them manually... --Thogo (talk) 20:07, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • In a sense, it currently is an opt-in in that you just make a bugzilla request after showing a bit of consensus onwiki (that's what we did on Commons). I think it would be a good idea to get this on some small wikis, but I don't think enabling it almost globally is the best idea. Maybe enable it for wikis covered by SWMT or something like that? —Giggy 13:25, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • In general, can someone please explain mass deletion. How is it done and how can you check which pages to delete. I don't get it from the extension page. Pjetter 19:40, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    You enter a username, which gives you a list of their recent page creations (including media uploads) with checkboxes. Specify a deletion reason, specify the pages to delete, press the button and they're gone. This can already be done with scripts, but using the extension is easier (especially for stewards, who would otherwise have to import the script to any wiki where they need to do many deletions after a spambot, vandal etc.)  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 18:10, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: this is a big proposal, involving hundreds of wikis. I do not think metapub provides a wide enough and an accessible enough forum for consensus-deriving discussion of this Wikimedia-wide topic. —Anonymous DissidentTalk 09:44, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Moved down for more exposure. Will post to foundation-l  — Mike.lifeguard | talk 13:33, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Implementing

edit

Now, before implementing that proposal, we need a list of small wikis where it should be enabled. Any ideas where should we get that list? — vvv 08:00, 21 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why only this extension should be enabled in "small" wiki? I think it is more useful in LARGE wikis.--Kwj2772 10:40, 21 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Not "small wikis", all but the largest wikis. This should be easy to implement in the same way that JeLuF did for enotif on bug 15031. Cbrown1023 talk 18:10, 21 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Good question: en.wikt would like to opt-out, what is the process? Robert Ullmann 11:11, 25 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Op-out

edit
  • chrwiki (already has it)
  • commonswiki (already has it)
  • dewiki (should decide for themselves)
  • enwiki (should decide for themselves)
  • frwiki (should decide for themselves)
  • mediawiki.org (already has it)
  • metawiki (already has it)
  • pdcwiki (already has it)
  • en.wikt (en:wikt:Wiktionary:Grease pit#Extension:Nuke)
  • zhwiki (proposed by user:wing; need further discussion)