The Wikipedia Review: A forum for discussion and criticism of Wikipedia
Wikipedia Review Op-Ed Pages

Welcome, Guest! ( Log In | Register )

 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Oversight has no visible logs, How then can we guard the guards?
LamontStormstar
post Sun 7th January 2007, 7:37am
Post #1


Postmaster
*******

Group: Regulars
Posts: 2,359
Joined: Fri 18th Aug 2006, 7:25am
Member No.: 342

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



So I saw http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...&oldid=99049386 in my watchlist. Shows removed edit

Go into history and http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...&action=history it's removed

View logs http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...page=Talk:4chan

Likely personal information. I was curious why no logs. None on wikipedia. None on www.mediawiki.org or meta.mediawiki.org


http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...er:66.248.97.31 says blocked for personal information

But http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Oversight says Oversight has logs.

Apparently it no longer does.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Gracenotes
post Fri 2nd March 2007, 5:12am
Post #2


Neophyte


Group: Contributors
Posts: 5
Joined: Fri 2nd Mar 2007, 1:58am
Member No.: 1,049

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(LamontStormstar @ Sun 7th January 2007, 2:37am) *

But http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Oversight says Oversight has logs.

Apparently it no longer does.

Just wanted to drop by to tell you that oversight does have logs, but those logs are only available to other oversighters. Initially, MediaWiki software did not support oversight logs for anyone, but now, at least others with similar privileges can review the summary and location of deleted edits.

Of course, there is still the issue of accountability; it may be best to have trusted editors that can review logs but not perform any actions, but this doesn't seem socially feasible.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
LamontStormstar
post Fri 2nd March 2007, 6:05am
Post #3


Postmaster
*******

Group: Regulars
Posts: 2,359
Joined: Fri 18th Aug 2006, 7:25am
Member No.: 342

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



I don't see what would be so bad about making such logs public?
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Somey
post Fri 2nd March 2007, 6:19am
Post #4


Can't actually moderate (or even post)
*********

Group: Moderators
Posts: 11,815
Joined: Sat 17th Jun 2006, 7:47pm
From: Dreamland
Member No.: 275



QUOTE(LamontStormstar @ Fri 2nd March 2007, 12:05am) *
I don't see what would be so bad about making such logs public?

People might ask questions!

Actually, if used responsibly, I'd actually support keeping oversight logs under wraps. This is assuming I had any say in the matter... Oversight logs would probably be a roadmap to where the personal-attack and privacy-violation action is that day. I suspect that people who make oversighted edits often try again, and if you're monitoring the right pages, you can see what they put in when subsequent attempts are made...

So it really sort of makes sense to hide the logs, but then again, well... User:Jayjg! dry.gif
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
guy
post Fri 2nd March 2007, 10:01am
Post #5


Postmaster General
*********

Group: Inactive
Posts: 4,294
Joined: Mon 27th Feb 2006, 8:52pm
From: London
Member No.: 23



QUOTE(Gracenotes @ Fri 2nd March 2007, 5:12am) *

it may be best to have trusted editors that can review logs but not perform any actions, but this doesn't seem socially feasible.

What about ArbCom members? No doubt some editors here have varying opinions about some of them, but surely nobody could object to them being able to see the logs.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
michael
post Thu 22nd March 2007, 5:01am
Post #6


Senior Member
****

Group: Contributors
Posts: 254
Joined: Fri 9th Mar 2007, 12:47am
Member No.: 1,097



QUOTE(LamontStormstar @ Thu 1st March 2007, 11:05pm) *

I don't see what would be so bad about making such logs public?


I remember reading that anti-Wikipedia sites were downloading old database dumps and retrieving the information that was later oversighted. So they stopped showing them publicy to avoid that from happening.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
jch
post Mon 20th August 2007, 3:39am
Post #7


Quickly running out of Cache
***

Group: Contributors
Posts: 136
Joined: Sun 5th Aug 2007, 3:56am
Member No.: 2,249

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



Developers can look at the logs for everything, of course, and a steward can make themselves oversight and look at the logs too.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 

-   Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 23rd 10 14, 3:47am