I noticed in the bulk actions menu (visible on the search page, using bulk select for 1 or more posts).
There are two delete options:
The confirmation for Delete Posts seems clear, but the confirmation for Delete Topics is confusing imo.
Permanently delete the selected topics. This action cannot be undone.
from: js.topic_bulk_actions.delete_topics.description
If I confirm to delete the selected topic(s), they are deleted normally (soft) and can be restored.
This is with site setting can_permanently_delete as false (default).
Also, there doesn’t seem to be a visual distinction between search results that are a topic or a post/reply, besides hovering over them and looking at the end of the url. Which makes using these two bulk delete options a bit unintuitive for moderators imo.
3 Likes
we’re in the process of improving the “actions” offered in bulk mode, but this one fell through the cracks as it’s not (yet
main ← fix-bulk-delete-topics-copy
merged 07:46AM - 25 Aug 26 UTC
Reported in [Bulk actions confusion - Delete Topics](https://meta.discourse.org/… t/410444).
Selecting topics and choosing **Delete** asks you to confirm:
> Permanently delete the selected topics. This action cannot be undone.
…and then soft deletes them, so they can be recovered. Not search-specific — the same modal is used by every topic list.
There is no configuration where the copy is true. `TopicsBulkAction#delete` builds `PostDestroyer` with an empty options hash, so `permanent?` is never satisfied, and `PUT /topics/bulk` doesn't permit `force_destroy` in the first place. `can_permanently_delete` has no bearing on this path. The description was added with the copy pass in 4b6169028f and never matched the behaviour.
### Also fixed
Two long-standing bugs in the same six lines:
- `delete` was the only operation in `TopicsBulkAction` that never appended to `@changed_ids`, so the endpoint always answered `{"topic_ids":[]}`. A bulk delete where the guardian skipped every topic looked exactly like a successful one, toast included.
- `ordered_posts` is scoped by `Trashable`, so for a topic whose first post was already deleted it returned post 2. `is_first_post?` was then false, `@topic.trash!` never ran, and an unrelated reply was deleted while the topic stayed alive — reported as a success. `TopicsController#destroy` already gets this right with `ordered_posts.with_deleted.first`.
### Follow-ups, not in this PR
- `ordered_posts.first` feeding `PostDestroyer` carries the same latent bug at five other call sites: `Jobs::DeleteTopic`, three in `DestroyTask`, and `TopicGuardian#can_recover_topic?`. Worth a `Topic` accessor rather than a sixth hand-rolled copy.
- Search results give no hint whether a hit is a topic or a reply, which is the other half of the report. `post_number` is already serialized and `search.post_format` already exists, but is gated to the in-topic dropdown.
- Translations of this key still assert permanence until the pipeline catches up.
3 Likes
