"Avoid namespace numbers above 10,000. These are reserved for future use."
Can you give any detail what you meant by "future use"? Is there some WMF project in the works that will use numbers in this range, or was it maybe meant as a more nebulous "we don't really need these yet, but we might some day" thing, or something else? 「ディノ奴千？！」☎ Dinoguy1000 13:38, 30 July 2019 (UTC)
- We might need them someday. It's there so that developers won't interpret the advice as "pick a random number between 5000 and 9007199254740991". But rather put a more reasonable limit on it, which might get extended one day after a discussion to another reasonable limit. --Krinkle (talk) 14:43, 30 July 2019 (UTC)
My message on T20493
I was wondering what you thought of my suggestion on the Unify the various deletion systems thread.
And in response to my belief that there ought to be an extension to the traditional deletion system allowing for individual or multiple revisions to be deleted and moved to the archive table, as opposed to being limited to deleting all revisions and then restoring the wanted revisions. If such an ability were to exist, I would imagine it sharing the same pages as the traditional deletion ability, via ?action=delete.
But if the page deletion system and the revision deletion system were to be merged together, how will we be able to find a way to please those sites that prefer not to give Administrators the ability to selectively delete revisions by default? ― C.Syde (talk | contribs) 05:13, 1 August 2019 (UTC)
- Thanks, I've replied at https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T20493. --Krinkle (talk) 13:23, 1 August 2019 (UTC)
Community Insights Survey
RMaung (WMF) 14:34, 9 September 2019 (UTC)