This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 68.50.128.91 (talk) at 23:08, 20 December 2012 (→Edit filters: Added subheading). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 23:08, 20 December 2012 by 68.50.128.91 (talk) (→Edit filters: Added subheading)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff) ShortcutsMisplaced Pages Help Project‑class | |||||||
|
Archives | ||||||||
Index
| ||||||||
|
||||||||
This page has archives. Sections older than 20 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III. |
Requests for permissions
EFM for Legoktm
ResolvedHi.
Lately, I've been working on some tools that would use the edit filter and have been constantly irritated at how many filters are set to private. Take User:Mr.Z-bot/filters.js for example. All of the filters considered immediate are set to private except for 139, which was specifically un-privated after I talked to an admin about it on IRC. For anyone trying to find/track serious vandals this gets annoying real fast. I understand that many of these filters are private because they're for LTAs and would be gamed if made public, but it still is annoying.
I've also been reporting a few bugs regarding the edit filter: bugzilla:42734 (Non-admins can see contents of deleted pages when viewing abusefilter details), bugzilla:42758 (AbuseFilter log events should show in the IRC feed), bugzilla:42802 (Query multiple filter logs at the same time in the API), and bugzilla:42814 (Abusefilter API does not check for abusefilter-view-private userright). Incidentally I wouldn't have noticed the last one if I did have the EFM right.
One of the things I'm currently working on is an IRC bot that tracks active vandals using the edit filter (working), and is able to accurately recommend blocks (not yet working). I believe this would be a major improvement over the current system in #wikipedia-en-abuse-log. It's currently about halfway done, you can PM me if you want access. If/when bug 42814 is closed, I won't be able to monitor private filters without the EFM right. Nor can I currently start tracking private filters, which are mainly for LTA's, if I can't see them.
As far as editing filters goes, I believe I am competent in regular expressions (having successfully run a number of bots) and have enough clue to know whats a good idea and not. But for the most part I don't plan on editing filters.
tl;dr: I would like the EFM permission to view private filters and build useful tools with the edit filter, not so much of editing actual filters. Legoktm (talk) 06:32, 7 December 2012 (UTC)
- I definitely support this request because he's been trying to help fix up problems we have, as you can see above and below. I recently signed back up as an EFM after a 1-year hiatus to try to help with a simple problem but my skills don't seem to be much help here as I've already come across code I can't remember how to parse. My only advice to Legoktm, if approved, would be to use the testing tools before pushing anything live, even if you're absolutely sure the code is right, as people have thought that before only to be proven wrong. ☮Soap☮ 23:09, 7 December 2012 (UTC)
- I would trust him with this task, he seems well skilled for it. MBisanz 23:25, 7 December 2012 (UTC)
- Support - Seems reasonably skilled. Reaper Eternal (talk) 21:22, 8 December 2012 (UTC)
- Support - Reasonable request. NativeForeigner 18:04, 12 December 2012 (UTC)
Done following 5 days of discussion with no objections. 28bytes (talk) 19:02, 12 December 2012 (UTC)
- Thanks, I'll try not to blow anything up! Is there anywhere that EFMs can discuss private filters, like an IRC channel? I took a look at a few and have questions now :P Legoktm (talk) 19:30, 12 December 2012 (UTC)
- There may be (I'm not on IRC, so I don't know), but if you have any questions about a specific filter you can always email the person who created or last edited it. 28bytes (talk) 19:34, 12 December 2012 (UTC)
- There isn't any such channel that I know of. However, many active EFMs use IRC for other purposes and can be PMed. Reaper Eternal (talk) 20:43, 12 December 2012 (UTC)
- There may be (I'm not on IRC, so I don't know), but if you have any questions about a specific filter you can always email the person who created or last edited it. 28bytes (talk) 19:34, 12 December 2012 (UTC)
Edit filters
Filter False Positive
Any progress on this?: ] 68.50.128.91 (talk) 08:26, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
Filter 189 false positives
In filter 189 (BLP vandalism/libel) please change \bwank
to \bwank(a|er|ed|ing|s)?\b
to avoid false positives like jfd34 (talk) 05:30, 24 November 2012 (UTC)
Edit filter based on ip/username
There is a question at WP:AN about a long term abuse case whether IP can be an edit filter criteria. Specifically there are some things that might be caught by abuse filter but only within a specific set of IP ranges. Is this functionality possible? Shadowjams (talk) 04:39, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
- Yes, that is technically possible. Reaper Eternal (talk) 04:47, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
Filters to show up in IRC feeds
Tracked in PhabricatorTask T44758
Hi all,
I have submitted a bug and changeset for edit filter log events to show up in the irc.wikimedia.org feed for enwp. Since these feeds are public, only public filters will be included. This will allow for bots/scripts to find out about filter trips as soon as they occur, rather than continually polling the API.
Thanks, Legoktm (talk) 11:48, 13 December 2012 (UTC)
- After a few unexpected hiccups, it works! Log entries follow this general format (with colors and stuff too):
<rc-pmtpa> ] hit * Username * Username triggered ], performing the action "edit" on ]. Actions taken: Warn (])
- Edits to filters will also show up, however that's slightly broken right now (see Template:Bug).
- I'll try and work on setting up a bot to bridge filter trips over to irc.freenode.net. Thanks, Legoktm (talk) 01:09, 14 December 2012 (UTC)
Proposal to have private filters show up in the RC feed
Hi all,
I wrote above that edit filter trips will start showing up in the irc.wikimedia.org recent changes feed. However this is only for public filters, not private ones. The only "non-public" information that would be shown (as compared to what Special:AbuseLog shows) would be the filter ## of what was tripped, and the log id. I believe that such information will not enable clever vandals to try and game the filters, however it would make it easier for tools/bots to track private filters. A slight code modification would be required to implement this, however I'm willing to write that. Thanks, Legoktm (talk) 04:35, 14 December 2012 (UTC)
- Seems reasonable to me. Private filters were only implemented as a means to hide filter rules from clever vandals, as I understand it. Outputting filter hits to an IRC feed should be fine, I think. --MZMcBride (talk) 04:54, 14 December 2012 (UTC)
- Filter numbers are a very small disclosure, this seems a useful step forward. Rich Farmbrough, 03:33, 16 December 2012 (UTC).
Edit filter 31 tripping on pre-existing text on a page
Here, a good edit is rejected because of the paragraph above, which was already there and presumably added before the edit filter existed. Is this a bug, and does it need fixing? Black Kite (talk) 12:40, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
Categories: