Last modified: 2013-08-06 08:47:50 UTC
The Danish Wikipedia is currently undergoing a discussion about either a) introducing a policy with certain requirements to the signature, or b) technically limiting to only standard signatures (as defined per MediaWiki:Signature). However b) doesn't seem to be an option right now, as we would like it to be done retroactively (reverting all current signatures to standard). As far as I can see, the solutions in https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=33944 and https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15160 wouldn't give the intended output, as it would prevent users with existing non-standard signatures to revert. The later was closed with WONTFIX (new core ability), however this was in 2008 and things might have changed since. While we appreciate the arguments given in https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1491 (that the signature can't do anything that people can't type themselves), the option of supporting the policy with a technical limitation seems like a good idea.
btw Users can always sign manually with any signature they want (instead of using ~~~~)
Per comment 1, that could be bypassed so easily it's not even funny.
For the record I would like to add, that I find it very de-motivating to submit suggestions, when they apparently can be closed with an arrogant teenager-like comment, that clearly show that the closer haven't even read the entire description; especially when there isn't an option for re-opening or contesting the closing. Even after almost three months later I still find it sad, that this was the best this community could come up with...
I'm not sure why you would expect a non-'teenager-like' comment from a teenager. I certainly wouldn't see wrong in an adult making such a comment, and I seriously advise against making ageist comments on Bugzilla in the future. I have read the entire description (don't bother making assumptions on what I have not read) multiple times, the idea remains pointless. You want the ability to disable for other users what is simply a convenience feature, which doesn't add the ability to do anything which the user can't otherwise do (albeit in a very slightly less convenient way), and therefore I would not consider this request being fulfilled as a technical limitation. You even pointed to a bug where your argument was debunked, and yet offer no real counter other than 'seems like a good idea'. There most certainly is an option for re-opening, it just probably isn't open for you. Wanting to use it on bugs like this is likely not the best way to go about getting that ability. As for contesting, you are of course welcome to ask another developer, but I do not expect any to agree with you.
My comment was on behavior not actual age (like ’childish’ or ’old fart’) which I consider to be relevant. By removing the ability to do any action in a simple way, to a slightly less convenient way, I would expect less people to do that particular action. That makes controlling and sanctioning an easier task. This apply to any given action; in this case the use of standard signatures. For me that was obvious, but forgive me for not having described it detailed enough. For the “another developer” I had already – prior to creating the bug – talked to Ovi, who found it to be an interesting idea, which was why it was assigned to Ovi in the first place. Again I guess I should have been more specific in my description, but Bugzilla is not really where I play most of my time, so I’m not that well versed in the practices of it.
(In reply to comment #5) > I consider to be irrelevant. 'irrelevant' - not 'relevant'. Sorry
