This page uses content from Wikipedia and is licensed under CC BY-SA.

Wikipedia:Edit filter noticeboard

Welcome to the edit filter noticeboard
Filter 858 (deleted) — Actions: none; Flags: disabled
Last changed at 18:25, 11 December 2018 (UTC)

Filter 420 — Pattern modified

Last changed at 03:39, 11 December 2018 (UTC)

Filter 901 — Pattern modified

Last changed at 21:13, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

Filter 946 (new) — Actions: disallow,throttle; Flags: enabled,private; Pattern modified

Last changed at 08:46, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

Filter 766 — Pattern modified

Last changed at 19:17, 9 December 2018 (UTC)

Filter 888 — Flags: disabled

Last changed at 13:13, 8 December 2018 (UTC)

Filter 948 (new) — Actions: none; Flags: enabled,public; Pattern modified

Last changed at 16:05, 7 December 2018 (UTC)

Filter 890 — Pattern modified

Last changed at 11:30, 7 December 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 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.



Custom disallow messages

Right now, 17 filters are set to "warn, disallow". This is kind of pointless; if the edit is never going to save, we should just be disallowing it up front. Of course, in most cases this was just because the software didn't have an option for custom "disallow" messages, so if we wanted to show the user a custom message, it had to be a warning. But thanks to a recent software update, it looks like it is now possible to have custom disallow messages. I'd suggest the following changes:

Also see the private filters 68, 139, 648, and 651. They might need some changes, but I don't want to try to figure out which filter uses which warning. Suffusion of Yellow (talk) 21:27, 22 October 2018 (UTC)

@Suffusion of Yellow: Thank you for creating this list! I have removed the warnings and adjusted the disallow messages for all the said filters. I did not modify any of the messages, though. MediaWiki:abusefilter-top100 in particular I think is fine... it may be a little bite-y, but it's not as bad it used to be!
Under principle I agree all disallow/warn messages should link to WP:EF/FP, but at least for a few of the filters there's a slim to no chance of false positives, such as 694. Anyway, I'll try to update them all soon, but anyone else should feel free to do it and not wait on me. Thanks again! MusikAnimal talk 22:48, 23 October 2018 (UTC)

Why are open requests archived?

I'm particularly thinking of my request at Wikipedia:Edit filter/Requested/Archive 12#Switching text from Israel to Palestine or Indian to Pakistan. There are others of course. Thanks. Doug Weller talk 15:02, 23 November 2018 (UTC)

@Doug Weller: I don't know the answer to your general question, but I've un-archived your post, at least. Perhaps the archive time should be tweaked. Suffusion of Yellow (talk) 23:04, 23 November 2018 (UTC)
I've changed the delay to two weeks. Maybe it should be even higher. Suffusion of Yellow (talk) 23:09, 23 November 2018 (UTC)
@Suffusion of Yellow: thanks. I'm not at all sure that's long enough. I'm surprised it was shorter. Doug Weller talk 18:41, 24 November 2018 (UTC)

RFC enforcement - TFA image protection

Hi all, want to discuss strategy for enforcing: Special:PermaLink/870355366#RfC:_should_we_automatically_pending-changes_protect_Today's_Featured_Articles?. The RfC closed with consensus to disallow non-autoconfirmed users from adding images on TFAs, as a default measure. This appears to require an edit filter, but we will also need something to match on. The pages are already being updated by @Legoktm: 's TFA Protector Bot - so perhaps that could be worked in to the process (e.g. adding and removing a comment code to say "this is currently the TFA"). Any ideas before people start building this? Some pings to some people from the RfC: @MusikAnimal: , @L293D:. — xaosflux Talk 15:28, 24 November 2018 (UTC)

@Xaosflux: I asked Legoktm if they were interested in implementing the bot task, and got no reply. I'm happy to take it on. This will be quite easy to implement, and I'm eager to get it done as soon as possible. Shall I file a BRFA? MusikAnimal talk 17:04, 24 November 2018 (UTC)
Related, I've created Special:AbuseFilter/943. I know that's a quite unwanted solution, but think of it as a temporary, emergency safeguard. If you disagree with it, feel free to disable. MusikAnimal talk 17:24, 24 November 2018 (UTC)
@MusikAnimal: 943 seems OK, I'd hope it never actually hits now. — xaosflux Talk 18:03, 24 November 2018 (UTC)
@MusikAnimal: the full 'extra protection' seem fine for now. — xaosflux Talk 21:51, 24 November 2018 (UTC)

Edit filter helper right for Winged Blades of Godric

 Done For those commenting on the "private" aspects please keep in mind that these filters are private in that the details of what they filter on are not made public, however they do not deal with personal 'privacy' information - all of the actions that they trigger on are things disclosed publicly by editors. Filters have 0 visibility to readers, to checkuser data, or to suppressed edits. — xaosflux Talk 12:58, 1 December 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.

Uncontested closure has started. (refresh)

Well, I've occasionally helped out at WP:EF/FP/R for the past few months and for now, have taken an interest in helping out at WP:EF/R a bit , for which I am currently exploiting my sysop-rights at test-wiki.

Very yesterday, I was designing an EF to tag addition of DS-Notices on article-t/p by non-admins, today another one to restrict the vandalism on Donald Trump (which included some weird experimentation, to check the various variables:( ) and a few days back, another to guard-wall against a promo-sock-ring.

But, it's often very necessary to look at details of private-filters, to take ideas and further develop the language.

I do not claim any extreme competency in regex/abuse-filter framework but have a fair idea of both.

I understand the importance of account security, (esp. in light of the recent saga) and have 2FA enabled. I further understand the necessity of not discussing certain filters anywhere except private correspondence between equi-trusted folks. WBGconverse 13:06, 25 November 2018 (UTC)

Incidentally, I see that it was me who closed the RFC for the creation of this group! WBGconverse 13:06, 25 November 2018 (UTC)
  • ?! WBGconverse 13:03, 28 November 2018 (UTC)
    @Winged Blades of Godric: I expect the recent US Holidays have delayed some responses here - would like to give this a couple of days to see if there are any comments still. If there are no responses by 20181201 ping me and I'll do a "silence is consent" completion. Thank you for your patience! — xaosflux Talk 13:58, 28 November 2018 (UTC)
    Xaosflux, no qualms:-) Reset countdown.WBGconverse 14:09, 28 November 2018 (UTC)
    Xaosflux, Where are we, as to this :-) ? WBGconverse 09:43, 1 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Support. Good use case, helpful user - TNT 💖 14:25, 28 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Support, has the technical chops and clue to use it, and frankly you just need to crack this and you could try for this. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 14:28, 28 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose Edit filters can end up snagging a lot of personal information whether or not it is posted, and he does not have a track record of showing good judgment in the area of private information. Natureium (talk) 19:01, 28 November 2018 (UTC)
    Natureium, could you link to any incidents etc that show that he wouldn't handle private information well? That would be helpful in evaluating WBG for the EFH right. Galobtter (pingó mió) 05:12, 29 November 2018 (UTC)
    I'm not sure how you're expecting me to link to privacy violations... Natureium (talk) 15:01, 29 November 2018 (UTC)
    @Natureium:, is it on what Nihlus states and what Katie has commented upon? In case of anything other than that stuff, I don't have the slightest of clues and will urge you to send the specifics to the appropriate folks.WBGconverse 15:06, 29 November 2018 (UTC)
    I meant if there was any on-wiki discussion of the apparent incident(s), a link to that, or you could describe what happened without any specifics that could reveal private information. Galobtter (pingó mió) 15:22, 29 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Support. WBG is trusted with access to OTRS where there is more personal information than in edit filters and I am not even sure how private filters hold "personal information" of people. Private filters are just hidden to prevent the abuser from knowing how they were set which will in turn gives clue on how to bypass them. (Correct me if I am wrong). With that said, I am waiting for Natureium's example of the alleged poor judgement in handling personal info and may change my mind if found convincing. –Ammarpad (talk) 09:16, 29 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose per this ordeal, which is what I believe Natureium is referring to, as well as a lack of demonstrated need. Nihlus 09:31, 29 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Meh. I've mailed Katie already, as to this request and expect that she might have something to say, based on the long email-exchanges that followed her posting.WBGconverse 10:21, 29 November 2018 (UTC)
  • I don't have anything to add about EFH, but WBG and I have an understanding about that incident and I have no doubt he's able to handle confidential information in an appropriate manner. That's all I'm able to say about it. Katietalk 11:51, 29 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Support per Ritchie333. Even the RfA part. SemiHypercube 12:21, 29 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment Whether reason or not to oppose for this access request I have no idea, but permissions obviously involve trust and transparency. The requester has shown a disregard for behavioral guideline WP:REDACT in recent days by editing own comment with an obscure edit summary despite his original comment having been replied to. [1] Leaky Caldron 10:21, 1 December 2018 (UTC)
  • LC, this's going into definite harassment territory. Following me around, after I criticized your behavior at Rschen's t/p. FWIW, I know Atsme quite well-enough and the self-redaction was minutes later; something with which she did not have any problem.
  • At any case, taking cues from Bishonen's post and the wise words of Ehrmann, I will let you have the pleasure of having the last word. Ta. WBGconverse 11:22, 1 December 2018 (UTC)
  • For the record, I asked a question in the RFA at 12:18 GMT, automatically placing the RFA on my watchlist. Your first edit and subsequent inappropriate redaction took place sometime LATER. So not following you at all. Correct reading of WP:REDACT does NOT make it ok if someone involved "has no problem with it" - it is for benefit of wider community that edits are not removed, not to cover up your error of judgement. Leaky Caldron 11:32, 1 December 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.

Strange filter log flooding

Can someone provide some insight as to what is happening here? To me it looks like someone is trying to create an account but is getting blocked by an “abusive account names” filter, even though the username does not appear abusive, and they are repeatedly resubmitting the account creation and therefore creating quite a flood. I’m also concerned that the filter in question appears to be private (hence I don’t even know the ID number) as monitoring for abusive account creations is something that anyone can do and should not require advanced permissions. — Matthew Wong (at PMA), 15:32, 28 November 2018 (UTC)

This is a filter which, among other things, prevents user names containing three consecutive hyphens (don't blame me). For the sake of this one user who already has a global account, I've extended it to four. -- zzuuzz (talk) 15:39, 28 November 2018 (UTC)
Thanks, but why is that filter private anyway? There are many filters that are blocking far worse things than 3 consecutive hyphens that are publicly visible. — Matthew Wong (at PMA), 15:44, 28 November 2018 (UTC)
I did say among other things. Among other things it blocks some bad LTA stuff. According to my interpretation of the addition (admin only), this pattern actually formed part of some LTA abuse. -- zzuuzz (talk) 15:46, 28 November 2018 (UTC)

How do I request a filter be added to a page

Reading WP:LISTPEOPLE, it seems like the article List of LGBT YouTubers should have filter {{Editnotice for lists of people}}. Where do I go to request it be added? Mathglot (talk) 07:36, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

Mathglot, that isn't a edit filter but a WP:EDITNOTICE; I've created it for you. As a page mover you should see a red linked "Page notice" in the top-right corner when editing a page; creating that page with the template will add the edit notice. Galobtter (pingó mió) 07:49, 3 December 2018 (UTC)
Galobtter, thanks on both counts! Mathglot (talk) 07:57, 3 December 2018 (UTC)