"A filter automatically compares every edit made to Wikipedia against a defined set of conditions. If an edit matches the conditions of a filter, that filter will respond by logging the edit. It may also tag the edit summary, warn the editor, revoke his/her autoconfirmed status, and/or disallow the edit entirely.[2]"
Footnote 2: "The extension also allows for temporary blocking, but these features are disabled on the English Wikipedia." <-- TODO: Is there wikipedia on which it isn't disallowed?
// do the users notice the logging? or only "bigger" actions such as warnings/being blocked, etc.?
* Has the definition changed over time (Abuse filters --> edit filters)
"Non-admins in good standing who wish to review a proposed but hidden filter may message the mailing list for details."
// what is "good standing"?
// what are the arguments for hiding a filter?
// what are the arguments for hiding a filter? --> particularly obnoctious vandals can see how their edits are being filtered and circumvent them; security through obscurity
"Filters should only be hidden where necessary, such as in long-term abuse cases where the targeted user(s) could review a public filter and use that knowledge to circumvent it. Filters should not generally be named after abusive editors, but rather with a simple description of the type of abuse, provided not too much information is given away."
// are users still informed if their edit triggers a hidden filter?
"For all filters, including those hidden from public view, a brief description of what the rule targets is displayed in the log, the list of active filters, and in any error messages generated by the filter. "
"Filters should only be hidden where necessary, such as in long-term abuse cases where the targeted user(s) could review a public filter and use that knowledge to circumvent it. Filters should not generally be named after abusive editors, but rather with a simple description of the type of abuse, provided not too much information is given away."
"Be careful not to test sensitive parts of private filters in a public test filter (such as Filter 1): use a private test filter (for example Filter 2) if testing is required."
harassment! mailinglist
...
...
@@ -155,7 +155,6 @@ shouldn't all filter editors be able to test??
same goes for the debugging tools: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:AbuseFilter/tools
* What happens when a filter gets triggered?
* 4 filter actions (are users whose edits tripped the filters notified for all of them?)
2.1 Logging: All filter matches are logged in the abuse log. This cannot be turned off. (so, every filter trigger is always being logged?)
2.2 Warning: The user is warned that their edit may not be appreciated, and is given the opportunity to submit it again. You may specify a specific system message containing the warning to display.
* ping aaron/amir for access to a backend db to look at filters; explanation how this is helping the community is important
* questions from EN-state-of-the-art
// do the users notice the logging? or only "bigger" actions such as warnings/being blocked, etc.?
"Non-admins in good standing who wish to review a proposed but hidden filter may message the mailing list for details."
// what is "good standing"?
// what are the arguments for hiding a filter? --> particularly obnoctious vandals can see how their edits are being filtered and circumvent them; (no written quote yet)
// are users still informed if their edit triggers a hidden filter?
Exemptions for "urgent situation" -- what/how are these defined?
Discussions may happen postfactum here and filter may be applied before having been thoroughly tested; in this case the corresponding editor is responsible for checking the logs regularly and making sure the filter acts as desired
"Because even the smallest mistake in editing a filter can disrupt the encyclopedia, only editors who have the required good judgment and technical proficiency are permitted to configure filters."
--> Who are these editors? Who decides they are qualified enough?
