Make pages history available to all Numista users

Hi everyone,

I'd like to propose making the page history on Numista accessible to all users, not just referees.

Until recently, I was an Admin, and I’m only now realizing how essential this feature is, even as a regular user. Being able to see the edit history helps in many ways:

• Understanding the original source behind a page’s creation
• Checking the reasons for additions or removals
• Easily accessing all sources used across edits
• Knowing who to contact (the requester or validator) if questions arise
• And more

Since Numista is a collaborative platform, I believe the catalog should be as transparent as possible, just like Wikipedia, Wikidata, and similar projects.

What do you think?

I'd say +5 but can only vote once so +1.  Here is a very recent prime example where this would have been useful.

https://en.numista.com/forum/topic159659.html

Using https://web.archive.org/ has its limitations and usually you have to make a guess based on limited knowledge.

Year line edits are not tracked in the change history or are at least not visible so it would not be of help in that case.

I totally agree with the suggestion. I made the same suggestion three months ago. 😁 https://en.numista.com/forum/topic155551.html

Idolenz

Year line edits are not tracked in the change history or are at least not visible so it would not be of help in that case.

I am not a referee and I do not know how you see the change history, or how this information is saved in the database. But I think it is saved in the same field (the change history of the page). 

As contributor, I write all comments and sources (related to the page or to the year line) in the “sources” field of the edit page. And I see all the of this field in the request page:

For example, I made these request in the same edition:

Yes exactly

Here an exemple of how history changes look like

I suggest anonymizing the history for non-admins to keep focus on the changes and not the personalities. Possibly just say contributor, referee, master referee, admin.

bjherbison

I suggest anonymizing the history for non-admins to keep focus on the changes and not the personalities. Possibly just say contributor, referee, master referee, admin.

+1

bjherbison

I suggest anonymizing the history for non-admins to keep focus on the changes and not the personalities. Possibly just say contributor, referee, master referee, admin.

Agreed

bjherbison

I suggest anonymizing the history for non-admins to keep focus on the changes and not the personalities. Possibly just say contributor, referee, master referee, admin.

We are almost all using pseudo already, I really don't see the issue about making users actions visible; it's about responsibility of change request, accountability of referees' work too. What would we have to hide? Cf Wikipedia which is a good example and where users are known

Compendium

bjherbison

I suggest anonymizing the history for non-admins to keep focus on the changes and not the personalities. Possibly just say contributor, referee, master referee, admin.

We are almost all using pseudo already, I really don't see the issue about making users actions visible; it's about responsibility of change request, accountability of referees' work too. What would we have to hide? Cf Wikipedia which is a good example and where users are known

There are some strong personalities on this forum and just easier to make it anonymised to prevent unnecessary confrontation. 

I agree with Peter - Mike

Maybe decide on the what first and leave the how until later?

rsirian1

Maybe decide on the what first and leave the how until later?

Yes please! :-)

Need is to see the history first ^^

I think it's more useful for all users to see the previous value in their "My modification requests" list than to see the “Modification history” of a piece. Currently the two only for referees and administrators.

The history doesn't show the changes to the year lines. It's also harder to find the previous value you changed. On the other hand, both pieces of information are clearly visible in the modification request.

I saw screenshots of a modification request with edits in fields of the page and year line, in the contributor and referee side. We both see similar things. Item N#4651

• The referee sees the previous value (I want see that, too! 😋).
• The sources of the page are displayed in all cases. 

But as says

Idolenz

Year line edits are not tracked in the change history or are at least not visible so it would not be of help in that case.

Right! and this is a problem. The example is show in the history link this

• The sources are saved, and are displayed with the new value of the page field.
• But there is not history in year lines.

Year lines have a complex structure,

date, mintmark, other marks, signature, number printed, mintage, references, comment (EN), and comment (FR)

but the history of a page records the changes in the mints, which also have structure (well, less complex) with lines containing mark, mint and image.

Maybe the history of a page could also records the changes in the year lines.

Edit: Suggested here https://en.numista.com/forum/topic161378.html

As a referee from Spain, I can now see the modification history of pages of objects from Spain.

And yes, this is what I wanted to see. But I can only see it in pages of my scope as a referee.

I would like to see the same thing in all pages, maybe hiding the user who made the changes as said https://en.numista.com/forum/topic159803.html#p1242345

Compendium

bjherbison

I suggest anonymizing the history for non-admins to keep focus on the changes and not the personalities. Possibly just say contributor, referee, master referee, admin.

We are almost all using pseudo already, I really don't see the issue about making users actions visible; it's about responsibility of change request, accountability of referees' work too. What would we have to hide? Cf Wikipedia which is a good example and where users are known

With Wikipedia you know your handle will be available in the history when you edit (if you are a logged-in user). That wasn't the case with previous Numista edits.

One alternative: Move to a Wikipedia model. Show handles on new edits, but not on old edits. (And warn editors of the change.)

The edits you do are visible to referees and admins already. I simply ask that any logged in user can see it. It is very useful to see sources and understand changes history for complicated cases

One other thing different to the Wikipedia example is that nobody gives a f*ck about your knowledge about some garden variety shrubbery but some people might be interested in knowing who might own some rare and or valuable items that they added/edited toIn the catalog on a site where you potentially can get access to members addresses through swapping.

So leaving out member names for the public access seems like a good compromise.

Same here: https://en.numista.com/forum/topic124652.html

Idolenz

One other thing different to the Wikipedia example is that nobody gives a f*ck about your knowledge about some garden variety shrubbery but some people might be interested in knowing who might own some rare and or valuable items that they added/edited toIn the catalog on a site where you potentially can get access to members addresses through swapping.

So leaving out member names for the public access seems like a good compromise.

An important consideration.

It also raises the notion that members who made adjustments made them on the understanding that it was anonymous, and that changing this now could lead to issues where members might not have wished their input to be non-anonymised. There might also be an issue where images submitted as references might be prohibited due to being from an un-approved source.

Hibernia

An important consideration.

 

It also raises the notion that members who made adjustments made them on the understanding that it was anonymous, and that changing this now could lead to issues where members might not have wished their input to be non-anonymised.

The contributors may want their changes be anonymous, but as they have a counter of contributions, and they seeing the history of their modification requests, with their comments, I assume they know this information is shared to some extent.

I think the problem is solved by hiding the usernames of the contributor and referees (anonymising the messages).

Hibernia

There might also be an issue where images submitted as references might be prohibited due to being from an un-approved source.

This could be a more important issue. The solution could be hide images to normal users.

Nothing is anonymous. All admins see changes history. Referees do too. Nothing prevent Numista to extend these “rights”

But I really dont care. Hide usernames if you want, but please let us see changes history