|Welcome to the edit filter noticeboard
Filter 984 (new)
— Actions: <span style='color:red; Flags: disabled; Pattern modified
- Last changed at 06:10, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
Filter 1 — Flags: enabled; Pattern modified
- Last changed at 20:51, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
Filter 796 — Flags: disabled
- Last changed at 21:45, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
Filter 986 (new) — Actions: none; Flags: enabled,private; Pattern modified
- Last changed at 20:56, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
Filter 966 (deleted) — Flags: disabled
- Last changed at 11:01, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
Filter 225 — Pattern modified
- Last changed at 07:41, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
Filter 50 — Pattern modified
- Last changed at 22:33, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
Filter 985 (new) — Actions: <span style='color:red; Flags: disabled; Pattern modified
- Last changed at 00:50, 19 April 2019 (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 Wikipedia:Edit filter/Requested. If you would like to report a false positive, please post at Wikipedia: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.
Click here to start a new discussion thread
Cutler LTA, round++
The filter for this LTA was updated a few weeks ago plus a range block, but he's posting a new version of his wacko delusions.  and  for examples from today. While not as crazy and BLP violating as his previous rants, would it be possible to update the filter to block his latest drek? Thanks! Ravensfire (talk) 16:16, 14 March 2019 (UTC)
- Tweaked CrowCaw 16:03, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
Hi everyone! Lately, I've been working on implementing a new feature in AbuseFilter: on-wiki detailed profiling, with a log like Special:AbuseLog which would collect data about slow executions and runtime errors (and possibly more). The feature is on gerrit and there's still a lot to do, so don't expect to see it shortly. However, I'm here to ask comments about the visibility of this feature. I think there are 3 options: 1 - Use an existing restriction for the page itself (e.g. use the "abusefilter-log" right), and require "abusefilter-view-private" for entries related to private filters. 2 - Same as 1, but introduce a new right. 3 - Restrict the whole page to people who can see private filters. The reasoning behind 3 is that the log could disclose performance issues about existing filters, although I don't think they'd be exploitable in any way. I also prefer 1 instead of 2 to avoid adding new rights. What do you think the best choice would be? Keep in mind that it can be changed later, this is just to finish building the first working example. Please feel free to ping me if you have any question! Thanks, --Daimona Eaytoy (Talk) 17:35, 26 March 2019 (UTC)
- We already have two user groups for AbuseFilter, we don't need another one :) So I concur, option 1 seems best. Thank you for working on this exciting and long desired feature! — MusikAnimal talk 00:36, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
- @MusikAnimal: I don't think this question was about "groups" it is about permissions (of which we have many). That being said, I suggest a slight variation on (1) using
(abusefilter-view-private). Some projects don't allow the "any" group to view detail like we do, and this seems to be closer related to that level. — xaosflux Talk 00:54, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
- Great! Thank you both for the comment. I think abusefilter-log is actually the right one for the whole page and abusefilter-log-detail for details of single entries. --Daimona Eaytoy (Talk) 09:35, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
- That seems fine, then just use -view-private if it is a private filter for screening. — xaosflux Talk 11:39, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
- @Daimona Eaytoy: Will this new log include the name of the user or the page being edited? If so, is there any possible way that
api.php?action=stashedit could cause an entry to appear in the log? It seems to cause the standard "On average, its run time is 0.1 ms, and it consumes 1 condition of the condition limit" stats to update, at least on my local wiki. I wouldn't consider it public information that User:Foo was editing page Bar at time T, but chose not to click "Publish changes". Suffusion of Yellow (talk) 00:30, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
- @Suffusion of Yellow: Yes, user and page will be included; you can find here the messages for the log entries. The recording of slow filters is (=will be) done together with the other profiling data for consistency. However, IIRC, profiling stats recorded on stashed edits shouldn't show up anywhere in the interface. What we do is just save runtime etc. in cache during stashedit, and reuse it upon saving if the user effectively saves the edit. Could you please check (on master) that stashed edit data appears in the UI even if the user chooses not to save the edit? I ensured it didn't happen in phab:T191032 and phab:T191430. Thanks! --Daimona Eaytoy (Talk) 08:34, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
- @Daimona Eaytoy: I tried it on master this time, and now it seems that stashedit doesn't cause updates to the (old-style) stats. I also went ahead and tried the new feature (should have done that in the first place...) and there's no way I've found to cause anything to appear to at Special:AbuseFilter/problems without attempting save the edit. So, all good! Suffusion of Yellow (talk) 22:53, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
- Ha, that's great! Glad to hear that everything is working as expected :-) Thank you for your thoughts. --Daimona Eaytoy (Talk) 09:23, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
More exceptions for emoji filter (680)?
Resolved: Pageid's added. — xaosflux Talk 04:27, 30 March 2019 (UTC)
The filter and an example blocked good edit. On List of Falcon 9 first-stage boosters and List of Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy launches we use an emoji in the filtered range (♺) to indicate reused rocket boosters. Adding these symbols is part of routine article updates. Currently Emoji and Principia Mathematica are exempt from this rule. Is it possible to add the two rocketry articles (page ids: 37574004, 54585305) to the exceptions? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mfb (talk • contribs)
- @Mfb: See Talk:List_of_Falcon_9_and_Falcon_Heavy_launches#What's_with_the_emoji? first. We certainly COULD exempt more pages, but I think a better question is why should we at all? — xaosflux Talk 00:41, 30 March 2019 (UTC)
- Also it doesn't look like either of those articles is using that text anywhere. I could possibly see the use for it somewhere in Emoji. — xaosflux Talk 00:43, 30 March 2019 (UTC)
- Which text? The booster list uses the symbol 25 times, the launch list uses it 29 times. These numbers will increase in the future as most future launches are expected to reuse a booster. Well, let's discuss on the talk page there first. --mfb (talk) 03:20, 30 March 2019 (UTC)
- The "current exemption" pages you referenced (Emoji and Principia Mathematica). — xaosflux Talk 04:22, 30 March 2019 (UTC)
- @Mfb: all that being said, this isn't a debate to be had about the edit filter. I've exempted the pageid's and will follow up at the article talk. — xaosflux Talk 04:26, 30 March 2019 (UTC)
Filter 225 Reference and Link Exception?
Over at the false positives page, there's the occasional false positive where the filter is only tripped due to a reference being added where the title is in all caps, and has a word banned by the filter. Additionally, link names sometimes contain a disallowed word and trip the filter to disallow the entire edit. Would it be possible to exempt links and refs from filter 225? EggRoll97 (talk) 18:12, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
- Is it possible to give the particular diffs? This particular public filter gets a lot of hits and for a very small number of FPs, there's not much of a point making another exception. --qedk (t 桜 c) 12:58, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
- Something like this got disallowed by the filter because the Youtube link URL had "FUCK" inside it. Special:AbuseLog/23686623. The ID of the video was gmCKcFUCKBE.
- One other: Special:AbuseLog/23742552. This was tripped because the news article was in all caps and had the word "NAZI" in it, which is, today, somewhat frequently used by the news, so it would make sense that it would be part of the title of a reference in an article. EggRoll97 (talk) 13:27, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
- Done Yeah, that sort of FP has been popping up too much. Galobtter (pingó mió) 07:43, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
Filter 50: Add __INDEX__ exception?
Special:AbuseLog/23781241 flagged as shouting, presumably because of the addition of __INDEX__. There's a good chance that adding __INDEX__ should be getting logged if done by new users or IPs (I'd guess that it would be pretty likely promotional editing), but it's not a case of shouting.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Creffett (talk • contribs) 20:34, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
- @Creffett: Done. I just made an exception for
__[A-Z]+__, so the filter won't need to be updated every time a new magic word is added. I suppose some people might emphasize words like __THIS__, but in the last 500 hits, no one had done so. I'm ambivalent on logging additions of __INDEX__ in mainspace. Yes, there's a good chance of spam/COI issues, but it doesn't actually do anything; only new page patrollers can actually index a mainspace page. See also Wikipedia:Edit filter noticeboard/Archive 4#VisualEditor. Suffusion of Yellow (talk) 22:46, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
Prevent publishing of empty edit request