Wikipedia:Edit filter noticeboard

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Welcome to the edit filter noticeboard
Filter 927 — Actions: disallow; Pattern modified
Last changed at 18:24, 18 August 2018 (UTC)

Filter 635 — Pattern modified

Last changed at 21:07, 17 August 2018 (UTC)

Filter 642 — Pattern modified

Last changed at 11:06, 17 August 2018 (UTC)

Filter 877 — Flags: disabled

Last changed at 22:32, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

This is the edit filter noticeboard, for coordination and discussion of edit filter use and management.

If you wish to request an edit filter, please post at WP:Edit filter/Requested. If you would like to report a false positive, please post at WP:Edit filter/False positives.

Private filters should not be discussed in detail here; please email an edit filter manager if you have specific concerns or questions about the content of hidden filters.


There are currently 190 enabled filters and 23 stale filters with no hits in the past 30 days (Purge). See also the edit filter graphs


Edit filter helper for EggRoll97[edit]

Not granted, no support was raised and opposition speaks to lack of general experience. — xaosflux Talk 13:57, 27 July 2018 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Earliest closure has started. (refresh)

EggRoll97 (t · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · xtools · supercount · pages created (xtools • sigma· non-automated edits · BLP edits · logs (block • rights • moves) · rfar · spi) (assign permissions)(acc · ap · fm · mms · npr · pm · pcr · rb · te)

I might as well request this, as I'm getting into false positives troubleshooting. I had a long read on the EFH right, and I believe I meet all the requirements. I could use this right to help me know whether a user was tripping a private filter. I would then be able to report false positives of such a filter to an edit filter manager privately. In general, this would let me access the private filters when troubleshooting false positives.

If I'm not going to get this, I'd be fine with withdrawing for a bit. I understand there might be concerns about my experience, and I don't deny such concerns.

Thanks for listening, EggRoll97 (Let's talk!) 05:48, 24 July 2018 (UTC)

  • Oppose You need to have experience in dealing with filters. You're just getting into filters as of yesterday, so I don't see a need for EFH. Plus, you just started editing Wikipedia since the near end of May of this year. I think you should put more time editing Wikipedia in general before focusing on filters. — JudeccaXIII (talk) 19:10, 24 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Not done no support was raised. @EggRoll97: you are certainly welcome to assist with public filters on the false positives noticeboard, it is a good way to get started in this field. — xaosflux Talk 13:57, 27 July 2018 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Help with filter[edit]

Hey all, not to be a pest, but can anyone spare a few minutes to look at Wikipedia:Edit_filter/Requested#Komail_Shayan? I opened a request about a month ago. If this is the typical wait time, then I apologize--I know that all you technical types are always very busy. This guy keeps vandalizing[1][2][3] and it seems like it would be fairly easy to dissuade him. Thanks! Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:35, 24 July 2018 (UTC)

  •  Done CrowCaw 20:41, 24 July 2018 (UTC)
Thanks Crow! Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:31, 26 July 2018 (UTC)

Special:AbuseFilter/921 to warn/disallow?[edit]

This was created following a request, in response to a major PR incident where some nazi-related vandalism went unreverted for some time. The filter has been running for a while with great success. I quick glance through the logs shows the hits are almost always vandalism, BLP violations or otherwise very questionable edits. Much of it is very subtle. Every time I go through I find edits that haven't been reverted. Indeed political articles and human subjects are a primary target.

I think this filter at least should be throwing a warning. Do you think disallow would be acceptable? The standard warn/disallow messages seem satisfactory to me. MusikAnimal talk 21:47, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

@MusikAnimal: I'm not really a fan of special filter for one word at all - can this be combined with another warning filter? Special:AbuseLog/21589919 looks like a FP as well. — xaosflux Talk 22:44, 25 July 2018 (UTC)
For sure, if we put in warn/disallow it makes sense to merge it elsewhere. This filter does things a little differently than most word-prevention filters, though: it checks old_wikitext to make sure there was no prior mention of "nazi(sm)" in the whole article, something you usually avoid for performance reasons. Here it was used to further prevent false positives. We're also checking against the edit_delta. I'll have to reevaluate the false positive rate if we change these things. And yes, there are definitely false positives as it is now, but seemingly rare. Overall my belief here is that this form of vandalism is more severe than "poop" or the like, as it often goes unnoticed. MusikAnimal talk 22:59, 25 July 2018 (UTC)
Warn/Tag should fix the "unnoticed" problem though as the tags can be patrolled - perhaps some more "and didn't contain" words that could cut down FP's would be useful as well. — xaosflux Talk 00:16, 26 July 2018 (UTC)

Filter 279 again[edit]

Can someone take a look at this? Seems the IP twice triggered 279 and nothing else. Pinging MusikAnimal who was last to edit filter. Home Lander (talk) 02:28, 27 July 2018 (UTC)

Probably a bug server side. Dat GuyTalkContribs 09:15, 27 July 2018 (UTC)
I've a similar theory to as before -- the editor was repeatedly attempting to save their edit, but it wasn't another filter that stopped it. Could be any number of things, who knows... It wasn't "vandalism". That filter name is misleading, better would be something like "repeated attempts to save edit". I chalk it up as a glitch or limitation in AbuseFilter. Honestly, I'm not sure how valuable this filter is to begin with. Is anyone monitoring that log? It tags as "possible vandalism", which if other filters were tripped, it might already be tagged. To me, "Repeated attempts to vandalize" in many cases is redundant, because I can already see the other filters repeatedly disallowed their edit. MusikAnimal talk 15:52, 27 July 2018 (UTC)
@MusikAnimal: I regularly monitor the log, that was actually how I spotted this instance. I suppose you could say I use it as an alternate to "recent changes". I've noticed that most times when 279 properly flags an edit, other filters are doing so also. At minimum perhaps the name should be changed, but in my opinion it could probably be disabled as redundant. Home Lander (talk) 18:37, 27 July 2018 (UTC)

Move throttle[edit]

Sometime recently, we were discussing further restricting the page-move throttle. Can't remember exactly where. Check out this account. Think whichever filter controls the page-move throttle is going to have to be modified. Home Lander (talk) 02:35, 28 July 2018 (UTC)

@Home Lander: I think you are referring to Special:AbuseFilter/68. See the private conditions. — xaosflux Talk 03:06, 28 July 2018 (UTC)
Thanks Xaosflux. Did the above account have any deleted contribs? Home Lander (talk) 03:12, 28 July 2018 (UTC)
@Home Lander: That was a recent neglected and failed proposal at the Village pump. See Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)/Archive 151#Rate limits for autoconfirmed users. Ultimately it didn't really make a whole lot of sense, at least not as presented. I'm open to suggestions that would result in less colateral damage. Compassionate727 (T·C) 02:16, 31 July 2018 (UTC)

"Possible self promotion in userspace"[edit]

There seems to be a problem with the tag name since it doesn't only tag edits in userspace. Filter#354 says it only checks namespaces 2 and 3 (user and usertalk) but it seems to also be tagging edits in Draftspace (example [4]). Checking draftspace is probably intended behaviour, but then the tag label itself needs to be updated to reflect that to remove inaccuracies. :) Ben · Salvidrim!  21:48, 11 August 2018 (UTC)

@Salvidrim: the edit you referred to hit filter 627 (see log) not 354. I'm not seeing any Draft space hits in 354's log. Can you elaborate? — xaosflux Talk 23:27, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
I'm just going off of Special:Tags which says this tag is applied by 354. If 627 applies it to Draftspace it should use a different tag for draftspace or the tag whould be updated to reflect both filters which use it. ..... right :/ Ben · Salvidrim!  23:29, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
@Salvidrim: OK, I see 627 was using the same TAG as 354. I've updated the tag on 627. Hope that helps! — xaosflux Talk 23:31, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
Sure thing. I just saw a patently inaccurate tag and thought I'd point it out. :) Ben · Salvidrim!  01:51, 12 August 2018 (UTC)