Community Wishlist Survey 2022/Miscellaneous/Enhanced Move Logs

Enhanced Move Logs

  • Problem: When a page is moved, the log entry is associated with the old page, and not the new page. In order to find what the history behind how a page ended up where it is, you may have to dig through the move logs of other pages first. This makes it difficult to determine prior titles for a given page.
  • Proposed solution: Include both the source and destination in move logs, integrate these in to log displays.
  • Who would benefit: Editors
  • More comments: This proposal page is a good example. The move log is empty, however the page was moved from a different title.
  • Phabricator tickets: phab:T66184, phab:T152829
  • Proposer: — xaosflux Talk 18:18, 10 January 2022 (UTC)


  • Awesome, thank you very much for proposing this. ToBeFree (talk) 18:21, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
    Ironically, this proposal itself had to be moved. But from where? The log is empty. And how would you revert the move? (I know it's possible, but this is not intuitive. No revert button in the history, no entry in the target log). ToBeFree (talk) 18:25, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
    For someone who really wants to see the log for more education, it is here: Special:Redirect/logid/45090401 (A very non-intuitive way to find it had to be used). — xaosflux Talk 18:30, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
Agreed This would be useful to find previous versions 'lost' from a Move action.Kaybeesquared (talk) 19:47, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
I think the movement of logs should be done, because of protection logs: When a page moved after protected, we only find the move log entry in the protection log; and logs from the old should be moved to the new pages. Thingofme (talk) 03:17, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
This has unintended consequences for users who undergo a rename... –MJLTalk 20:08, 13 January 2022 (UTC)
@MJL: I'm not seeing anything serious in that - first renames are not private, second this would only have affect if said user had a userpage, which if such userpage was moved by the globalrename job it already logs the userpage move in the history (example). Can you be more specific? If you think this is a security issue you can share by wikimail. — xaosflux Talk 21:04, 13 January 2022 (UTC)
@Xaosflux: All of what you said is true, but some people don't want it to be that public. You know when names are changed for privacy reasons? I'll email you when I get home about it. –MJLTalk 17:39, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
Someone with "privacy reasons" is best of changing their account to "Renamed user xxxx" and starting a new account. — xaosflux Talk 17:46, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
This is like an username violates the username policy. In this case, the log of global renaming should be revision-deleted or oversighted, and the new, fresh username would be allowed to function as normal names. Thingofme (talk) 03:18, 16 January 2022 (UTC)\
@Thingofme: I'm not going to get in to argument about deletion policies here, however if there is an extraordinary case where pages and logs are being suppressed, the move log would already be getting take care of and this proposal wouldn't change that. — xaosflux Talk 10:15, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
But the edit summary or reasons for the log would not be changed,... so the old page (with old names) are seen, which also may cause confusion. Thingofme (talk) 13:24, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
Changing the current behavior of the move function is as close to a bug fix as a requested new feature can be. If there is a general privacy problem, unrelated to this proposal, with traces created by user renames on Wikimedia projects, then it can be addressed separately for Wikimedia projects. As pointed out above, the revision history already contains an entry labeled "moved from A to B"; it is just pointlessly missing from the move log. ToBeFree (talk) 19:54, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
  • @Xaosflux: I tweaked the wording of the proposal a little bit that hopefully makes it more understandable. Please review and if you're okay with it, I'll ready it for translation. Thanks for the fine suggestion! MusikAnimal (WMF) (talk) 05:37, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
    @MusikAnimal (WMF): think something got lost in the massaging: I want to make it clear that I'm suggesting the log entry is associated with both pages, not to change it from being associated with the old page to the new page. — xaosflux Talk 10:58, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
    Actually that's ok, the "problem" doesn't need to say that, the solution already does - so go ahead! — xaosflux Talk 10:59, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
    I think the wordings of the proposal is like unclear, and we need to start by somethings. First of all, we need to move the logs (protection log, revdel log, patrol log, review log, creation log) to the new name, and won't be considered with the old name. Other logs WON'T be moved, and should be stayed in the old place. Thingofme (talk) 03:22, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
    So, right now the move log contains: timestamp, actor, frompage (target), topage, summary; however the Special:Log page only allows searching by the frompage - as if there is no index on the topage -- that's what I'm asking be added, then that can be integrated with Special:Log, and other places. — xaosflux Talk 17:42, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
This is an important question. As it turned out, moving is a risky operation and can be used for very strange purposes. Intervention may require administrator rights (double move example: wikt:eo:abio, wikt:eo:abio-PIRATAĴO - only this page is original and contains full revision history, wikt:eo:abio-DENOVA-PIRATAĴO), and in some cases even the administrator will not be able to do anything.
Move operations should have more control and analysis in the logs. For cases of cascading move or circular move with delete operation.
For the move result page, you need to be able to get a list of all sources.
For a move source page, you need to be able to get a list of all move result pages.
In both cases, references to the logged event are needed.
Anticipe pardonu aŭtomatan tradukilon, se ĝia angla lingvo estas ne tre kvalita ( )
Va (🖋️) 11:30, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
This wish will not make the eo:wikt:PIRATAĴO mess easier to unravel. And, as I explained there, it is not the case that nothing can be done, even with the codebase as it is today. * Pppery * it has begun 21:21, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
To unravel and restore this particular example - yes, it will not help. But it will help to identify damage for in similar cases for manual recovery by re-entering data. And it can help identify similar cases, whether intentional or accidental. Va (🖋️) 09:23, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
  • A sleeker solution is to allow Special:Log/move to accept a page ID rather than a page name. Nardog (talk) 12:57, 22 January 2022 (UTC)