This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the
current main page.
Task: Tags all usernames containing "According to all known laws of aviation, there is no way a bee should be able to fly. Its wings are too small to get its fat little body off the ground. The bee, of course, flies anyway because bees don't care what humans think is impossible. Yellow, black. Yellow, black. Yellow, black. Yellow, black. Ooh, black and yellow! Let's shake it up a little. Barry! Breakfast is ready! Ooming! Hang on a second. Hello? - Barry? - Adam? - Oan you believe this is happening? - I can't. I'll pick you up. Looking sharp. Use the stairs. Your father paid good money for those. Sorry. I'm excited. Here's the graduate. We're very proud of you, son. A perfect report card, all B's. Very proud. Ma! I got a thing going here. - You got lint on your fuzz. - Ow! That's me! - Wave to us! We'll be in row 118,000. - Bye! Barry, I told you, stop flying in the house! - Hey, Adam. - Hey, Barry. - Is that fuzz gel? - A little. Special day, graduation. Never thought I'd make it. Three days grade school, three days high school. Those were awkward. Three days college. I'm glad I took a day and hitchhiked around the hive. You did come back different. - Hi, Barry. - Artie, growing a mustache? Looks good. - Hear about Frankie? - Yeah. - You going to the funeral? - No, I'm not going. Everybody knows, sting someone, you die. Don't waste it on a squirrel. Such a hothead. I guess he could have just gotten out of the way. I love this incorporating an amusement park into our day. That's why we don't need vacations. Boy, quite a bit of pomp... under the circumstances. - Well, Adam, today we are men. - We are! - Bee-men. - Amen! Hallelujah! Students, faculty, distinguished bees, please welcome Dean Buzzwell. Welcome, New Hive Oity graduating class of... ...9:15. That concludes our ceremonies. And begins your career at Honex Industries! Will we pick ourjob today? I heard it's just orientation. Heads up! Here we go. Keep your hands and antennas inside the tram at all times. - Wonder what it'll be like? - A little scary. Welcome to Honex, a division of Honesco and a part of the Hexagon Group. This is it! Wow. Wow. We know that you, as a bee, have worked your whole life to get to the point where you can work for your whole life. Honey begins when our valiant Pollen Jocks bring the nectar to the hive. Our top-secret formula is automatically color-corrected, scent-adjusted and bubble-contoured into this soothing sweet syrup with its distinctive golden glow you know as... Honey! - That girl was hot. - She's my cousin! - She is? - Yes, we're all cousins. - Right. You're right. - At Honex, we constantly strive to improve every aspect of bee existence. These bees are stress-testing a new helmet technology. - What do you think he makes? - Not enough. Here we have our latest advancement, the Krelman. - What does that do? - Oatches that little strand of honey that hangs after you pour it. Saves us millions. Oan anyone work on the Krelman? Of course. Most bee jobs are small ones. But bees know that every small job, if it's done well, means a lot. But choose carefully because you'll stay in the job you pick for the rest of your life. The same job the rest of your life? I didn't know that. What's the difference? You'll be happy to know that bees, as a species, haven't had one day off in 27 million years. So you'll just work us to death? We'll sure try. Wow! That blew my mind! "What's the difference?" How can you say that? One job forever? That's an insane choice to have to make. I'm relieved. Now we only " or "guistOneOneOne".
Task: Tags all new users that have the words "th3", "woomoo", "dead rats" "rats dead" "xisu", "suix", "siux", "xius" and/or other similar strings to "suix" in their usernames, and tags the insertion of "woomoo", "dead rats" and "rats dead" into articles.
Reason: A user, The Suix, has been abusing multiple vandalism/spam-only accounts, all with similar usernames (see sockpuppet category), and, among other things, replacing article content with an advertisement for a certain "Woomoo" company (
[3],
[4],
[5],
[6],
[7],
[8],
[9],
[10]...).
I had a few variations of "suix" in filter 102, but they were too easily circumvented. As an alternative, since almost all accounts created articles containing "WOOMOO INC.", a filter looking for some variation of wo{2,}mo{2,} inc, in articles created by new accounts might be more effective. N.B. I know very little regex, so I won't be attempting this myself. —
DoRD (
talk)
16:06, 19 November 2016 (UTC)
@
DoRD: I was hoping to try to nail down some patterns to add to 102 :/ good idea for the actual disruption though - if we can't tag the accounts getting the actual abuse would be useful. @
Linguist111: thank you for the examples, very helpful :) --
samtartalk or
stalk16:23, 19 November 2016 (UTC)
Actually, they were created under all sorts of titles, so I don't think that the TBL will work, either. Also, other pages were vandalized with the same content as in the diffs above. —
DoRD (
talk)
16:49, 19 November 2016 (UTC)
(
edit conflict) I think a filter for "Woomoo" in usernames and in articles would suffice for the most part. There have been a number of articles created by the user with "Woomoo" in the titles, some of which have been salted.
LinguistMoi?Moi.16:56, 19 November 2016 (UTC)
@
Samtar and
DoRD: Have new strings been added to the filter? I tried to ask here if some new strings the vandal is using had been added but the filter
disallowed it. I'm assuming it's because those strings have already been added?
LinguistMoi?Moi.20:24, 19 November 2016 (UTC)
Has "dead rats" been added to the username filter? User has been rapidly creating socks with this string recently (see sock investigation). Also, can edit summaries containing "dead rats" be disallowed?
LinguistMoi?Moi.15:01, 20 November 2016 (UTC)
Task: Should prevent IPs and vandals from inserting the word inside the template Infobox person, infobox school and in the lead section of the page. Rival school students target other school pages after some school level sports competition.
Reason: I have reverted too much insertion of this word especially in BLPs of female popstars and female sportsperson, politicians, talk show hosts. Sometimes the insertion is mixed up with other words: For example "Mountain" will be changed to "Mountainpoop" or "Mountpoopain". And there is obvious name change.
Maybe this request won't work as sometimes they create variation as
this and
this. I went through my 200 huggle edits, and couldn't find the exact edits. I know I have seen many such edits. The edits are extremely vulgar, due to which other huggle users revert before me. I click revert to get the message, "There are some newer edits". As I clicked revert button in huggle window, I sometimes feel I reverted it, but the revert was already made by somebody else. --MarvellousSpider-Man17:52, 13 September 2016 (UTC)
@
Zzuuzz: I think expanding on that filter may be a good idea, I'm not 100% sure how .*'s could be used in this filter (or if they even should be) - would welcome any suggestions --
samtartalk or
stalk18:15, 13 September 2016 (UTC)
Yes, it looks quite complicated to fit in, and without FPs. Perhaps Filter 189 (and 39) could be used? Just a sideways thought. --
zzuuzz(talk)18:24, 13 September 2016 (UTC)
If you plan on making any changes to the poop filter I highly recommend using a third-party tool such as
debuggex so that you can create test cases, etc. Looking for words containg "poop" might work but I don't think you'll be able to get away with just "poo" (Winnie-the-poo, poodle, harpoon, pool, etc). This would work only under some circumstances such as \bpoo poo\b, or the like, but you still have
Poo Poo Point,
Poo poo platter (common misspelling), etc. Given the age of the poop filter I suspect it has undergone significant tweaking to be well-rounded while still being accurate — MusikAnimaltalk15:39, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
The filter evidently looks for poop by itself or followed by a range of possibilities, which does not include "tastic"
[11]. This seems like an edge case, but there are some more common things like POOPIE where the IE should be detected — MusikAnimaltalk21:15, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
You're right, I was testing locally and it actually got blocked by a different filter. My suggestion would be to add "\bPOOP" to a filter that just tags (rather than blocks) edits.
Kaldari (
talk)
22:39, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
This probably needs some community discussion, but I broadly support this sort of filter. To reduce the cost of such a filter, it should be restricted to editors who are either not autoconfirmed or perhaps not extendedconfirmed. ~
Rob13Talk06:35, 29 November 2016 (UTC)
Yes, that would definitely need a community discussion, since this would amount to a ban on something that is not currently prohibited.
Someguy1221 (
talk)
08:21, 29 November 2016 (UTC)
@
Mlpearc: The ever present question of Wikipedia; where the heck do I ask that?? I'd say
WP:VPP (as I guess it'll be kinda policy based?) or
WP:VPT (I swear there was a similar conversation recently about emoji's in usernames?) --
samtartalk or
stalk18:00, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
This definitely requires community approval, and I oppose it. What is the problem with emoji in edit summaries? Emoji are a legitimate means of textual communication, even if some don't like them.
BethNaught (
talk)
17:59, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
@
BethNaught: Just for the record, I do like emoji's and use them all the time, on
IRC, talk page discussions and texting, I do have issues when used in edit summaries (which are supposed to describe an edit not how you feel, that's what talk pages are for) and I don't like them in usernames either, but I'll bite my tongue on that for now. - Mlpearc (
open channel)18:15, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
There could be legitimate uses of these, so I oppose a blanket restriction on these. Usernames could contain these characters and why would we need to say block Reply to
User:Name(emoji) ? —
xaosfluxTalk19:53, 3 December 2016 (UTC)
@
Brynda1231: Hi there, thanks for making a filter request. I'm having some trouble trying to understand what exactly it is you'd like the filter to do - to help us understand, could you give us a step by step of what the filter would do? For example:
@
Brynda1231: The edit filter is only really capable of catching very basic vandalism. Also, most obvious vandalism, including that on user pages, already gets reverted by Cluebot NG. Omni Flames (
talk)04:28, 28 November 2016 (UTC)
Cluebot NG does not work on user pages. Would be nice if it did. Anyway filter 803 seems to have already greatly reduced vandalism by IP's and new users to userpages.
Sro23 (
talk)
19:33, 10 December 2016 (UTC)
Task: Disallows edits that add a significant portion of the script from the "
Bee Movie". The script is quite long, so it may be better to check for just a few specific lines from the script instead.
Reason: Adding or replacing content with the Bee Movie script (it's become a trend recently) is an irritating, but easy to detect form of vandalism. The edit filter should disallow the edit because it's not only simple vandalism, but requires a RevDel, as it's a copyright violation.
Task: Could we please have a filter for the word "contact" (case insensitive), followed by whitespace and/or a colon, followed by 11 numeric digits.
Reason: An IP-hopping spammer has been adding "Contact" followed by a phone number to many Nigerian university articles, e.g.
[16],
[17].
User:Materialscientist tells me "This is an LTA case, and some socks are
here. All edits come from the 197.210.0.0/16 range, which is busy, but we might consider blocking it. The added phone numbers vary." Looking at the sock contributions, they do indeed vary over time, e.g.
[18]. But they all seem to start with "contact", and all seem to end with an 11-digit Nigerian phone number. Thanks,
Wikishovel (
talk)
16:49, 29 December 2016 (UTC)
Task: An extremely active sock is repeatedly creating articles about himself. The pages range from regular articles to his current style of complex userpage-looking pages with the article text in an infobox. (See
[19],
[20],
[21] for examples). Currently the text used is always the same, so an edit filter on some of the strings, song titles, imdb page, etc, set to disallow (eventually) would slow him down. His links indicate he's young so it shouldn't take much to make him lose interest.
Thanks, any way I can see the code for this one, not having the sorcery and all? I may be able to help tweak the regex if/when he adapts, since this is one on my search list.
CrowCaw18:20, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
@
EvergreenFir: That second one I think is a false positive, but I think I've fixed the regex. So your plan is to monitor this filter, not disallow, correct? I say let's test it for a while, and if we see there are unique ranges (like the ones you've already identified), disallowing might be feasible — MusikAnimaltalk18:21, 27 January 2017 (UTC)
Testing at
Special:AbuseFilter/637. At quick glance it seems this disruption comes in short, infrequent spurts. That may be a problem, but the filter should at least give us an idea of what we're dealing with. I'm not aware of an existing filter that could block/log these types of edits in particular — MusikAnimaltalk03:50, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
For now I'm going to mark this as Denied. It's possible I'm missing something, but after two weeks we still haven't gotten any hits. If there were an existing filter we could add this to then it would be less of a problem, but I don't think there is. The behaviour is very specific, such that I'm less comfortable leaving a dedicated filter running for an extended period of time. If disruption resumes let me know and we'll get it going again! — MusikAnimaltalk20:34, 27 January 2017 (UTC)
NDenied It already exists as
Special:AbuseFilter/12,
Special:AbuseFilter/380, and probably a few more. The problem is that any bad word (even "fuck") can be used constructively, as in an article about bad words or when quoting someone. Therefore we place limits on the specific circumstances of the use to limit false positives. --
King of♥♦♣ ♠
10:28, 29 January 2017 (UTC)
New account orphan tagging
Task: Detect non-confirmed accounts removing {{New unreviewed article}} and replacing with {{orphan}}, with any parameters, in a single edit. (e.g.
[36])
Reason: There is a quite active sockfarm (see
Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/PlikoraT) whose telltale behaviours include having one throwaway account create an article in draft space with a handful of edits, and within a few days a second account copies and pastes same article in mainspace, though sometimes it's an older revision of the draft. Then, a third account tags the article as an orphan; in the past this has made an entry in the patrol log but that is not consistent. See the mangled history of
Adrok Group and
Draft:Adrok for a recent example. Reviewing the contributions of the three accounts often reveals more mangled drafts, which in turn reveal more sock accounts, but this tag would be useful for detecting future abuse. -
Ivanvector (Talk/Edits)
20:35, 4 January 2017 (UTC)
Task: Disallow the posting of "I would like to log my dissatisfaction with the general bias of this article held ransom by a clique of Greek editors who are misleading the general public into believing that it was a great Greek victory when in fact, the Greek army failed, in the end, to defeat the Italians and on April 22, were forced to sign a formal surrender document to General Geloso of the Italian 11th Army. The fact that the Greeks surrendered to the Italians should be clearly spelled out. It is neither an opinion nor an argument, but simply a fact that should be included to maintain the credibility of this dubious and substandard article.", or any of the sentences involved, due to a large number of sockpuppets of AnnalesSchool posting it.
Task: Prevent IP editors from making large changes to car infoboxes
Reason: A Korean editor is making many unconstructive edits to automotive articles, which may not be easily noticed by those with limited automotive knowledge. Their editing has also led to several requests for protection on articles targeted such as
Nissan Armada and
Infiniti QX56.
WNYY98 (
talk)
07:41, 6 February 2017 (UTC)
(unexplained) numerical changes
I see often edits where the only change is a number (whether it is a year, amount of money, boiling point, etc.) without a proper explanation. I would expect it to be worth to check for such changes, as often plain numbers are vandalism prone (and, for years, possibly a BLP concern), and that such edits need extra attention. I only don't know (yet) how to construct such a filter .. is this something that we could come up with? (I am considering to regex out all '\d' and all '!\d' from both sides of a diff, and then have (left\d != right\d) && (left!\d == right!\d) as check ..). --
Dirk BeetstraTC11:59, 6 February 2017 (UTC)
Cat Creek Lion filter
Task: Create a filter that logs whenever the word "lion" is added to
Cat Creek, Montana or related articles.
Task: To tag any edit that causes a page in user space to be
indexed for search engines, either by adding the magic word __INDEX__ or its wrapper template, {{
INDEX}}. This adds the page to
Category:Indexed pages.
Reason: User space is
"noindexed" by default. There are some legitimate reasons for editors to override this (see
this discussion), but approximately 450 formerly indexed pages in user space were found to contain promotional or self-publicising content, frequently couched as draft articles and thus bypassing the
vetting that would occur if transferred to mainspace. See, for example,
this or
this. Others were normal userpages containing an apparently random collection of magic words, such as
this: Noyster (talk),14:37, 19 February 2017 (UTC)
Task: Disallow IPs from changing a player's team in sports infoboxes when templates based off of
Template:Current sports transaction are on an article.
Reason: So many sports-related articles are protected due to IPs changing the team before a trade/signing is made official by the team/league after it is announced by sports journalists
WNYY98 (
talk)
23:39, 20 February 2017 (UTC)
Testing at
841. This will need tweaking, and no promises that it will be sufficiently accurate such that we could set it to disallow. Infoboxes are one thing but changing the team in the lead or body of the article is going to be much more difficult to detect. I think we will need to seek broader input before disallowing anyway, but let's wait and see if this is even feasible. My gut instinct is that this sort of filter might be more on the expensive side, so if this does work out, we might consider only enabling it during the "trading season" or whatever, assuming that's a thing — MusikAnimaltalk18:53, 21 February 2017 (UTC)
NDenied Due to technical limitations I don't think I can get this to be 100% accurate, so I'm afraid disallowing is out of the question. Warnings would only stop the editors some of the time, and even then we might be warning them when they aren't actually even changing the team. Finally, we need to scan the whole article text for {{current sports transaction}} which is not so great for larger articles. All things considered I think page protection is probably the best route, as undesirable as it may be. Sorry! — MusikAnimaltalk01:40, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
Sarah Paulson
Task: Keep IP editors from adding the words "Lily Rabe" to the
Sarah Paulson article.
Reason: IP editors come back every few weeks to the Sarah Paulson article and add a relationship with
Lily Rabe which, from what I can tell, has never existed or, more precisely, has never been reported. These edits are don't occur every day, so that's why I'm not looking for full protection. But the IP is persistent. †dismas†|
(talk)02:10, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
I guess I misunderstood the goal of edit filters. I, and the rest of the editors that watch the article, will just have to deal with the vandalism. Thanks for the explanation. †dismas†|
(talk)17:42, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
@
DatGuy: Not that I'm aware. I only have the Paulson and Rabe articles on my watchlist. I don't know where else this IP's edit could possibly be put in other than those two articles. †dismas†|
(talk)21:39, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
I agree an edit filter does not seem like the best solution in this case. However given the infrequent but persistent disruption this article seems like a prime candidate for pending-changes protection, so I've added it. This won't stop the vandalism but it will make it invisible to most readers — MusikAnimaltalk01:52, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
Task: Slightly adjust
filter 249 to not affect confirmed users.
Reason: I saw a confirmed user using Twinkle, and because many of the edit summaries of their edits contained "Reverted", their edits were tagged as "Non-autoconfirmed user rapidly reverting edits" even though they are confirmed (see
[39]). —
MRD2014📞What I've done12:51, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
Consider adding this to nonsense filter, but exempt confirmed editors from the filter due to the fact it could be used in a valid way.
ⓏⓟⓟⓘⓧTalk13:52, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
@
Zppix: I'm still a bit of an EF novice but if there's a way to do that, I'm on board. Also, fun fact, I found these..
[40][41] — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Drewmutt (
talk •
contribs)
Task: Disallow
VHS vandal edits (changing of dates in infoboxes and cleanup templates, changing images to the VHS logo, and the "how to become a VHS president" copypasta).
Reason: Long-term abuser. When their main IPv6 range was blocked for three months due to use by another vandal, they started creating vandalism-only accounts.
KATMAKROFAN (
talk)
03:04, 21 February 2017 (UTC)
Task: prohibit IPs from editing other user's signatures/comments (or something of this sort), intended for an IP hopper I've been dealing with for some time
Reason: I've been dealing with an IP address for quite some time now. They will usually go to a former IP of there's talk page and
change my signature to something obscene.
Due to the freedom users have in formatting their signatures, it's very tricky to definitively say someone is maliciously modifying it. Here this person is only disrupting their own talk page. While it is obscene, offensive, and targeted towards you, it is very common. I can't count how many times it's happened to me! Fortunately the visibility of such talk pages are comparatively low, and any patroller (likely the only people who would see the talk page) are going to know the IP was meddling with the signature. For this reason I'm not sure the expense of a filter is worth the benefit in this case — MusikAnimaltalk22:16, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
What I'm suprize dabout isn't that the user is technically able to remove what (s)he's removing, but the addition of these bad words should generally be disallowed even in the User talk: namespace.
עוד מישהוOd Mishehu18:38, 9 February 2017 (UTC)
Disallowing offensive language across user talk (maybe all talk?) pages seems more worthwhile and less prone to error, however I wonder why such a filter hasn't been implemented yet already. We have a few that check certain talk pages, e.g. admins and CheckUsers who are frequently harassed. If we wanted we could expand
Special:AbuseFilter/380 or
384 to check user talk, but maybe we should seek broader input first — MusikAnimaltalk18:59, 21 February 2017 (UTC)
Wikipedia isn't censored, but we do disallow use of many bad words in many contexts by anons and new users, simply because they are almost always abused by them.
עוד מישהוOd Mishehu14:17, 2 March 2017 (UTC)
Yeah...
WP:CENSORED is about content, transparency, etc.
Personal attacks, impersonation, and general
disruption on talk pages are not acceptable. Zippx does have a point that while we do prevent bad language in articles, unconfirmed users might make edit requests or otherwise discuss legitimate content that contains offensive language. Maybe that's why the "bad word" filters aren't being applied to the talk namespaces. I would argue however profanity in the user talk namespace is most likely going to be personal attacks of sorts and not related to content. Anyway, I'm going to go ahead and mark this one as NDenied since I don't think the original request (disallow changing of signatures) is possible. If we want to extend some of the various "bad word" filters to user talk I think we should first discuss at
WP:EFN, perhaps consulting the authors of those filters who may have intentionally excluded user talk — MusikAnimaltalk18:01, 2 March 2017 (UTC)
Detecting potential undisclosed paid editing
Task: Log new articles by new users that bear hallmarks of undisclosed paid editing. Examples (all deleted):
[42][43][44][45][46]
Reason: Currently our detection of spammy articles created by throwaway accounts relies on chance and often on CU to find other accounts and articles. e.g.
Orangemoody,
HemantDas34,
Brilbluterin. I'd like to know whether we can detect and log edits similar to those I've linked above, that have certain hallmarks of undisclosed paid editing and are made by new users to new articles. There was previous discussion about general things we might be able to detect
back in 2015 and I have some specific criteria that I would be interested to test and evaluate the rate of false positives. Specifying the criteria here would seemingly defeat the object... Is this a suitable use for the edit filter?
SmartSE (
talk)
00:32, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
@
Smartse: I could only see this causing a lot of false positives however, maybe a few keywords could be added to COI filter (or if theres already a paid filter that would work too).
ⓏⓟⓟⓘⓧTalk13:46, 2 March 2017 (UTC)
@
Zppix: There would undoubtedly be false positives, which is why I'd only be interested in logging edits to get an idea of the proportion that are suspicious. If it's 90% FPs then it would obviously be of no use, but if it's closer to 50% that would still be a good starting point for patrolling. The COI filter is very crude (just checking for the inclusion of usernames in edits) and serves a different function. There is no EF that attempts to find paid editing at present.
SmartSE (
talk)
14:30, 2 March 2017 (UTC)
@
Smartse: I'm going to need more than hallmarks of undisclosed paid editing to even begin testing this.. Looking at the above examples show no real pattern I could work with. Could you email us at wikipedia-en-editfilterslists.wikimedia.org with some more specific patterns? -- Samtartalk ·
contribs15:04, 2 March 2017 (UTC)
Agreed, taking this to the mailing list with some specifics might be best. I did want to share one specific filter with you,
Smartse, that was built to detect paid editing:
Special:AbuseFilter/829. This does not detect paid editing in the way you suggest, however. It also regularly receives false positives, so you might have to dig through the log to find the legitimate hits, but they are there :) — MusikAnimaltalk18:20, 2 March 2017 (UTC)
Task: A filter that checks for vandal words like "gay" penis" "b*tch" "c*nt" and other words typically used in vandalism attacks against BLP. Would be helpful it were public logs so it could be monitored by vandal police.
Reason: In my work as PCR, RCP and STiki, I have come across numerous vandal edits that employed the above trigger words. An edit filter could flag edits to BLPs containing them so reversion could occur faster. Thanks
L3X1(distant write)16:46, 9 March 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for showing me that, I should have guessed that one existed due to how old the project is. Is there a list of all abuse filters somewhere? I couldn't find one on
WP:EFD.
L3X1(distant write)16:52, 9 March 2017 (UTC)
Note the category text says "
This search only displays articles in the category". The resulting page can also be used to choose other namespaces. I used to empty the category of articles every few days but haven't done so for a while. Many DISPLAYTITLE attempts to move an article have inappropriate names and shouldn't be moved. The good ones can be moved by more experienced editors checking articles in the category (I will probably soon get back to it). I don't think there is much point in using resources on an edit filter.
PrimeHunter (
talk)
23:08, 11 March 2017 (UTC)
Rajkumar Mishra
Task: What is the filter supposed to do? To what pages and editors does it apply?
Prevent creation of any article that includes the name "Rajkumar Mishra" and also prevent the addition of the name to articles.
Multiple sock accounts keep recreating various versions of "Rajkumar Mishra" articles. For details see:
Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Socking.2C_COI.2C_repeated_article_creation.2Fdeletion
This has been going on even before this most recent spate of spamming/disruption. They also keep adding the name to numerous Indian film articles, replacing the names of legitimate and even famous actors. As far as I know, there is no notable person with this name, so false positives may be quite unlikely. An administrator at WP:ANI suggested I come here to make this request.
First Light (
talk)
12:11, 13 March 2017 (UTC)
When he's not creating new articles, he spams articles with his name, Rajkumar Mishra. For 15 March, we have multiple users doing that. Some days it's been more than this. He shows no signs of letting up. He understands how to create new and countless user accounts, edits from IPs, and is relentless. Today's tally, not his best day by far, probably average:
Impossible by my understanding. We have things like article_recent_contributors and article_first_contributor, but there's no way to find out anything about those accounts, such as the edit count. The normal checks we can do only apply to the edit being made — MusikAnimaltalk23:59, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
Pretty much anywhere other than the article about the website. It can't be used as a reliable source for anything. Sorry for not seeing the instructions.
DuncanHill (
talk)
00:09, 13 March 2017 (UTC)
Task: Search for the string "attack heli*" on articles and talk pages with "gender" and/or "trans" in the title, and flag the edit as possible vandalism. (Ideally, also apply filter to all articles under
Category:Transgender and transsexual people and its subcategories.)
Reason: There is an
offensive meme directed at people with
non-binary genders (like myself) that suggests "attack helicopter" is a valid gender. Various editors have vandalized gender-related articles with variations on this meme. Some recent examples:
1,
2,
3,
4.
Funcrunch (
talk)
18:43, 24 March 2017 (UTC)
TWo initial capitals
Task: If a newly added link has two initial capitals followed by some lowercase letters, and if that link goes to a nonexistent page or to a redirect marked with {{R from typo}}, warn the user: something like "are you sure you meant to do this?" Warn only, since there can sometimes be good reason for doing this. Bots should be exempted — a bot that's intentionally adding such a link would be stopped from editing until the operator recoded things, a bot that's accidentally adding such a link should be blocked because it's misbehaving, and all other bots won't make typos at all.
Reason: It's always easy to make typos such as "CApital letter" or "WIkipedia", easy enough that many programs will autocorrect them to a single capital. Of course, our software shouldn't be in the business of changing things people write, but we ought to ask them if they're intending to add what's almost always a mistake.
UNless something has changed since the last time I read the documentation, the edit filter can't tell if a link is red or not, or know anything about the content of a page besides the one being edited.
Someguy1221 (
talk)
03:56, 25 March 2017 (UTC)
Oh. In that case, never mind; there's no way the filter should be holding you up from adding a link to an existing page merely because the page's title has two existing capitals.
Nyttend (
talk)
10:46, 25 March 2017 (UTC)
Reverting IP vandalism on birth/death dates & places
Task: Revert all edits by IPs using the article's title as the edit summary.
Reason: As reported at
ANI, an anonymous editor has been adding (mostly) false birth/death dates and places using a number of different IPs, so blocking is not useful. The editor always uses the article title as their edit summary (see
here or
here for a couple of IPs they've edited from).
Number5718:40, 25 March 2017 (UTC)
Gonzo/Trump 2020
Task: Stop IP editors from adding "Gonzo" and "Trump 2020" to articles and edit summaries (especially on BLP pages)
Reason: Per the discussion at ANI found
here. There is an IP hopping vandal in the 2600:387:2:8* range who adds these words to left-leaning activists' (esp. BLM activists) and other Black Americans' articles as well as any page with the word Gonzo in it. Example edits:
[47],
[48],
[49],
[50],
[51],
[52],
[53],
[54],
[55],
[56].
Task: Warn new users who attempt to create pages in the template namespace or project space, or who attempt to move a page into the project space. Subpages would be exempt. (custom warning(s) needed)
Reason: These are almost always the result of test edits, unfamiliarity with wikilinks/templates/the editing interface, or confusion over namespaces when attempting to publish a draft.
@
MusikAnimal: - I think my request was a little unclear. Approaching it with a fresh mind, this is what I came up with in code form...maybe this has too many false positives? But it would be a warn, so users could go ahead anyway.
Pinging @
Steel1943: to see if he wants to add/remove conditions. I'm not limiting the moves to userspace moves, to catch things like
[57][58]. It may be better to have two filters, as the custom warning message for the second case is different than the first case. –
Train2104 (
t •
c)
20:25, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
The test filter 1 as written is picking up a bunch of things that shouldn't be picked up...I suspect it's due to the use of moved_to_text in the second check? IP's editing projectspace pages shouldn't get caught. –
Train2104 (
t •
c)
23:14, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
@
Train2104: Indeed, that should be article_text not moved_to_text. I've modified the filter, but am not sure about !(contains_any(article_text,"deletion","discussion","creation","WikiProject","Sockpuppet")). When would you (a newish user) move a page to a title like this? — MusikAnimaltalk15:39, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
True, though newish users may file deletion discussions, they're unlikely to have to move them. I'd leave the WikiProject exclusion in there though, there are some legitimate moves to WikiProject subpages. –
Train2104 (
t •
c)
18:40, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
I've created a dedicated filter at
Special:AbuseFilter/850. To reduce false positives, I think we might want to only check for moves to the project space. The creations there and in Template are often garbage (to put it bluntly), but they seem intentional, hence I don't want to warn them about test edits or namespace confusion. How does that sound? Would you mind helping come up with the message to show them? — MusikAnimaltalk20:57, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
Sure. It seems like that'll catch most of it, plus new page patrol is way easier than move log patrol. I'll work on a warning (pinging
Steel1943 again). Note - the title on 850 is incorrect - 4 and 5 are WP and WT (which is what I intended). Also, how does this behave when it comes to moving a page along with its talk page? Will it warn the user twice? –
Train2104 (
t •
c)
22:11, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
(Thought I had already responded to this, seems I didn't) I'm not convinced that there's a need to do this with "Template:" namespace creation/moves, but I do strongly agree that there is a need to do page creation/move prompts for pages created/moved to the "Wikipedia:" namespace. Strong evidence on why restrictions for creating/moving pages in the "Wikipedia:" namespace can be found in
my CSD log, starting in July 2016. New editors frequently move drafts they are publishing into the "Wikipedia:" namespace thinking that it is the article space; all deletions in my CSD log related to this are leftover redirects from correcting this mistake.
Steel1943 (
talk)
23:03, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
@
Train2104: If this notice is to be used exclusively for page moves into the "Wikipedia:" namespace and not page creations, then the following will need to be reworded in one way or another:
*create a WikiProject page, deletion discussion, or other administrative page? You are in the right place. Please press "Save page" below to save your edit.
To me, this looks misleading since this notice is not used for page creations, and erroneously titled pages for deletion discussions are very rare anymore. Also, new users (I'm assuming that this is what the filter is meant to trigger: users with less than 100 edits) are probably not creating WikiProject pages. (However, I will say that adding all of these terms to a notice is very beneficial since, for a lack of a better explanation, will essentially scare new users into not introducing human error.)
Steel1943 (
talk)
00:59, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
@
Steel1943: I've gotten rid of the words "deletion discussion" and changed the word "create" to "publish", as well shortening the physical box. –
Train2104 (
t •
c)
02:59, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
@
Train2104: Looks good. I suppose then I have essentially one last question/concern, given that I am not at all familiar with how edit filters work: Is there a way to detect what namespace a page is moving from in regards to this notice? Just wondering since it doesn't make sense to suggest moving a page to the "Draft:" namespace if the page is already in that namespace.
Steel1943 (
talk)
03:03, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
This is question for @
MusikAnimal:. I don't believe edit filter warnings are parameterizable. You could have the edit filter itself not do anything on Draft -> Project moves, but that seems like a bad idea as I've definitely seen that move happen before. I'm more concerned about my question above, since I'm not sure how MediaWiki treats the "move associated talk page" option. The user may get two warnings. –
Train2104 (
t •
c)
03:07, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
@
Train2104: "You could have the edit filter itself not do anything on Draft -> Project moves, but that seems like a bad idea as I've definitely seen that move happen before."" Right, I agree that doing so would be an issue since I've seen that happen before as well.
Steel1943 (
talk)
12:27, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
Done There are moved_from_namespace and moved_to_namespace variables, but I agree we should show a warning regardless of what namespace they are moving from (unless it was also Wikipedia). The user should receive only one notice, as is the case if an action tripped multiple filters that have warnings. The warning you've created looks good to me, so I've deployed it :) Thanks for making this happen! I think this filter will prove to be effective, and save people a lot of headaches — MusikAnimaltalk15:34, 20 April 2017 (UTC)