Right now, many events in the Timeline are categorized under the "history" event, including closings, deletions, postings, community-wiki-making, Tweeting, etc:

Now, this would typically work, but "history" is an awfully broad term, and could probably stand some division.

Ideally, moderation actions (like deleting, closing, CWing, merging, et al) could be under their own "mod action" category, sort of like this mockup:

In a similar vein, items like post creation can probably also stand their own "created" entry, similar to how every answer has a Timeline entry. Bounties and the like could probably also fall under their own category, as they're relatively major events in the post history. Things like tweets could probably be under their own "Tweeted" category or similar, but this may be too fine-grained. Given the list provided by Shog in the comments, I've compiled an example list, available over here, which are just my personal ideas for a replacement of the History section.

Would it be possible to implement these changes to make the timeline more verbose?

  • 1
    Note that "history" reflects the source of the event: votes, review, flags, and history are all sources that are merged together in the timeline. Sure, you could call them all "history", but then you'd need another name for history... I don't think "mod" is particularly accurate. – Shog9 Sep 26 '16 at 23:49
  • @Shog9: Well, the "history" event isn't really an apt name for things like closures either. Nor really is it good for original postings and similar. Ideally, it'd be broken into all of the sub-events that make up the "history" moniker. I'm sure "mod" isn't a good name for this type of event, but I can't think of anything better at the moment. I'll edit the post to be more broad (breaking up history) soon. – Kaz Wolfe Sep 26 '16 at 23:56
  • So, created, edited, rolled back, closed, reopened, deleted, undeleted, locked, unlocked, cw'd, un-cw'd, migrated, merged, protected, unprotected, disassociated, unmerged, tweeted... I'm only half-way through the list. Maybe just scan the 3rd column where those are listed? – Shog9 Sep 26 '16 at 23:59
  • ...incidentally, I have a userscript around somewhere that enables filtering this list, if that'd be of any use here. – Shog9 Sep 27 '16 at 0:02
  • @Shog9 Of course we shouldn't have 40 items, but "created" shouldn't be in the same general category as "deleted", "closed", "protected", and the like. – Kaz Wolfe Sep 27 '16 at 0:02
  • Well... They're listed together in the revision history, which is where this data comes from. So someone would need to sit down and categorize them. – Shog9 Sep 27 '16 at 0:06
  • @Shog9 Ah. I did not know they came from the revision history. Although, there's already a categorization in the third row which could probably be read and placed into their own categories. Of course, the community would need to decide what goes into what category, but that seems relatively easy. – Kaz Wolfe Sep 27 '16 at 0:11
  • As I hinted above, there are something like 50 separate events that can appear in revision history... Some of them are pretty rare, but in theory they can all appear. Some are already categorized: edits are lumped together for instance, and others appear only to mods or employees. But this is something that'd have to be explicitly created and maintained. FWIW, you can find a (somewhat incomplete) list of history types in SEDE: data.stackexchange.com/stackoverflow/query/545018 – Shog9 Sep 27 '16 at 0:17
  • @Shog9 Thank you for the SEDE link. That was useful. Post edited with my personal ideas for what to list each of those as. Of course, this is very much an opinion and is just how I'd categorize these things. – Kaz Wolfe Sep 27 '16 at 1:00

You must log in to answer this question.

Browse other questions tagged .