Agon S. Buchholz | 1 Jan 12:30 2004

Re: Re: Single-sign-on

Sascha Noyes wrote:

> The only problem with the merge is the collision of accounts (eg.
> there exists a [[de:Jan]] and [[en:Jan]], but they are not the same
> person). Your proposal does not solve this, but would need to solve
> it in the same way as the simple merge would: In the rare cases that
> this happens, people need to discuss and come to an amicable
> sollution. (I would suggest that whoever registered that account name
> first should have priority.)

Since the en:Wikipedia is longer with us, fist-come-first-serve would 
favor Accounts from en, possibly causing some unhappyness, but it's the 
most straightforward solution. Ambiguous accounts could be simply 
numbered (jan1, jan2). Very nice would be a feature to rename the (own) 
account resp. the ability for admins to do this.

In any case the editing history and the signatures on talk pages etc. 
have to be synchronized with these changes; this could be either done by 
a bot, but it would be non trivial (when is the account on which 
Wikimedia site being changed, when does the bot start renaming, when 
does it finish, when can the account be used again) and cause much load, 
if many accounts have to be merged, or (probably preferred) by direct 
database manipulations when the database is read-only until all changes 
are completed and the integrity is verified somehow. Or is there a 
simpler way?

Nicolas Weeger | 1 Jan 12:45 2004

Re: Re: Single-sign-on

What about keeping accounts as they are, but letting users define links between 

For instance, EnUser on en: declares his user matches DeUser on de:, does the 
reverse. And automatically when s/he logins on either of the sites, login occurs 
on the other sites. Because the system knows that EnUser on en: <=> DeUser on 
de: (obviously you need both declarations for the match to occur).

Ok that would still let users with different accounts on different wikipedias. 
But you could retrive interwiki modifications from the user, using linked 
And it would let users keep their current accounts, so no friction.

OTOH, it means 'User' on en: is not necessarily the same as 'User' on de:.

Just my 2 cents of €