3

This question was migrated from a different site, then closed as a duplicate. Later on, it was locked for historical significance. The revision history shows it correctly, and the vote arrows and flag option is gone (as expected). However, the lock notice for historical significance doesn't show up. Instead, the "rejected migration" notice shows up, which makes no sense, since closing as duplicate does not reject the migration, and even if it did, the date should be the same as the date of the closure. Instead, the date on the "rejected migration" notice is the same as the (later) date the lock was applied.

migration rejected from stackoverflow.com Oct 18 '13; marked as duplicate Apr 26 '13

It may be that the lock is what triggers the "rejected" notice, and also causes the system to ignore any other lock notice that may have been applied.

Update: The tag was applied, but there are a number of questions on Server Fault still exhibiting this bug. The same query can be done on other sites to find such questions, excluding unanswered ones (which would also include merge stubs). If, per the answer, the resolution is to not fix this notice, the question should be tagged instead.

  • There was a question on Veganism & Vegetarianism migrated from Pets . The Q was closed as too broad and the same banner showed up as migration rejected and is locked. – Nog Shine Jan 20 '18 at 3:52
  • That migration actually was rejected, @Nog. – Shog9 Jan 20 '18 at 4:08
  • @Shog9 I should probably come clean here - I would genuinely prefer if my question was categorized correctly, and I think status-completed is the wrong category given my update above. Is there a good reason why this is the correct category? – Sonic the Bracketed Hedgehog Jan 21 '18 at 3:28
1

Yeah, this is not a supported scenario.

Migration rejection is implemented by way of logic that automatically locks the question when it is closed (for reasons other than "duplicate") or deleted.

The status banner is triggered by the presence of a previous inbound migration and a closed state and a locked state. Of course, any moderator can arrange this same circumstance on any migrated question... But moderators can also clear migration history (and should do exactly that if they plan to do a lot of messing around with the post).

I've cleaned up the post: I don't think it needs either a historical lock or a migration history pointing to a long-deleted question on SO from '09.

  • Shouldn't this be status-declined, then? – Sonic the Bracketed Hedgehog Jan 20 '18 at 4:09
  • 1
    The fix for this is always to either clear migration history, unlock, or both. Anyone equipped to cause this scenario can also fix it. – Shog9 Jan 20 '18 at 4:10
  • Yes, but this isn't completed in the sense that the notices now show up properly, but declined in that you say the above should be done so this edge case doesn't happen (so it won't be fixed). – Sonic the Bracketed Hedgehog Jan 20 '18 at 4:11
  • It's fixed insofar as the question isn't showing the wrong banner. Altering the system to make this bulletproof would involve rewriting data on untold numbers of migrations going back quite a few years - which is why we opted for this mostly-accurate heuristic 4 years ago. This is actually the first complaint I've encountered regarding it, though I expect it's happened once or twice elsewhere. – Shog9 Jan 20 '18 at 4:13
  • My question was about the general scenario, not this specific case (just an example). Also, why not just not show the rejected notice if it's been closed as a duplicate? – Sonic the Bracketed Hedgehog Jan 20 '18 at 4:14
  • Because a sufficiently-determined moderator could still cause the notice to appear incorrectly even with that check in place. Also, the relevant logic is quite complicated enough already. Generally, we trust moderators to fix what they break; this is no exception. – Shog9 Jan 20 '18 at 4:16
  • Okay, that answers my question there. It also favors the resolution of this question as status-declined. – Sonic the Bracketed Hedgehog Jan 20 '18 at 4:17
  • There are a number of such questions on Server Fault; can you look into those? serverfault.com/… – Sonic the Bracketed Hedgehog Jan 21 '18 at 0:44
  • 2
    A former moderator went out of his way to break a massive number of questions on Server Fault. That search is just the tip of the iceberg. One of these days, if I'm feeling particularly masochistic, I'll fix those too. – Shog9 Jan 21 '18 at 2:42
  • Not all of them were done by the same moderator. Also, this increases my feeling that status-completed tag is incorrect, perhaps status-bydesign or status-declined should be added instead. – Sonic the Bracketed Hedgehog Jan 21 '18 at 2:43
  • 1
    If you want to do something useful here, run that search on various sites and report broken posts on their respective metas. Changing the notice doesn't fix the actual problem here: those posts should all be merged or unlocked. – Shog9 Jan 21 '18 at 2:50
  • If mods there see status-completed on this question when I link it for context, they'll just think it's a resolved bug and that it's not a problem. Please change the tag; it will help my case there. – Sonic the Bracketed Hedgehog Jan 21 '18 at 2:51
  • No, it won't. These questions are essentially broken: they can't be edited, answered, reopened, deleted... By the rules of migration, they should be rejected - but they can't be, because they were dup-closed before being locked. That's a crappy situation, and neither futzing with banners nor rearranging tags is going to fix it – Shog9 Jan 21 '18 at 3:16

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .