Knowing that BURs have obviously more advantages over single alias and implication requests, such as the creator being able to edit and reject it, my request is:

• Keep the "Request alias" and "Request implication" forms, but make them create BURs in practice (so simple requests can be kept in a user-friendly form).
• Add a bolded red text in both forms with "Do you have multiple requests related to each other? Consider creating a single Bulk Update Request !"
• Consider adding in both forms a text explaining what the "From" and "To" fields means, to avoid confusion.
• Add a link next to "Help" in the "Request BUR" Form with: Documentation

This could help avoid mistakes from the users and make the life of the staff easy:

• If the creator of an alias/implication changes their mind, they can reject it right away and save time for the staff;
• If the creator of an alias/implication reverses the order of the request, either by mistake or by reconsideration, they can simply edit the BUR created, instead of creating yet another request and lefting the older one to rot;
• The warnings can direct users to BURs organically, instead of them creating 10 different alias requests because they do not know what the button "Request BUR" means.

This feature has been requested before (kind of): topic #30588

I'll repeat what I said 4 months ago: keeping Alias/Implication Requests around is not worth the trouble. BURs are superior in every aspect.

... I like handling normal requests more than BURs.
Mainly because some people tend to pack in like a dozen different things into one BUR. And the fact that the BUR listing page is really laggy.

Giving users the ability to edit or reject their own requests is quite possible on a technical level. It just needs to be implemented.

bitwolfy said:
... I like handling normal requests more than BURs.
Mainly because some people tend to pack in like a dozen different things into one BUR. And the fact that the BUR listing page is really laggy.

Giving users the ability to edit or reject their own requests is quite possible on a technical level. It just needs to be implemented.

I guess this could be done, then.
The last two points could still apply, though. It would increase clarity on these forms.

omegaumbra said: The last two points could still apply, though. It would increase clarity on these forms.

Yeah, I agree. Having a bit more explanation on the request page would definitely be helpful.