Wikipedia:Edit filter/Requested

Requested edit filters
This page can be used to request edit filters, or changes to existing filters. Edit filters are primarily used to address common patterns of harmful editing. Private filters should not be discussed in detail. If you wish to discuss creating an LTA filter, or changing an existing one, please instead email details to wikipedia-en-editfilterslists.wikimedia.org. Otherwise, please add a new section at the bottom using the following format: == Brief description of filter == *'''Task''': What is the filter supposed to do? To what pages and editors does it apply? *'''Reason''': Why is the filter needed? *'''Diffs''': Diffs of sample edits/cases. If the diffs are revdelled, consider emailing their contents to the mailing list. ~~~~ Please note the following: Edit filters are used primarily to prevent abuse. Contributors are not expected to have read all 200+ policies, guidelines and style pages before editing. Trivial formatting mistakes and edits that at first glance look fine but go against some obscure style guideline or arbitration ruling are not suitable candidates for an edit filter. Filters are applied to all edits. Problematic changes that apply to a single page are likely not suitable for an edit filter. Page protection may be more appropriate in such cases. Non-essential tasks or those that require access to complex criteria, especially information that the filter does not have access to, may be more appropriate for a bot task or external software. To prevent the creation of pages with certain names, the title blacklist is usually a better way to handle the problem - see MediaWiki talk:Titleblacklist for details. To prevent the addition of problematic external links, please make your request at the spam blacklist. To prevent the registration of accounts with certain names, please make your request at the global title blacklist. To prevent the registration of accounts with certain email addresses, please make your request at the email blacklist.
Click here to create a new request

Non-autoconfirmed user rapidly reverting edits

Just a note: it probably would be more useful if this filter, once triggered, would block further instances around the same time the bot reports to AIV for triggering the filter 5+ times instead of simply logging while allowing further disruption. It can take 20 minutes and over before derp revert vandals get blocked while a small army of patrollers must remain active to revert each edit, which appears suboptimal (i.e. see the still-ongoing 114.17.235.146). Thanks, —PaleoNeonate – 02:52, 1 October 2017 (UTC)

So disruption persisted for 34 minutes for this IP address alone. —PaleoNeonate – 02:58, 1 October 2017 (UTC)

29 minutes before 46.150.88.31 was stopped/blocked. —PaleoNeonate – 04:04, 1 October 2017 (UTC)

• I'd support this for a trial period. Checking the last 500 times this filter fired, just a handful of the Ips that triggered it are not blocked as of now. Crow^Caw 19:16, 1 October 2017 (UTC)

• Support setting 249 to disallow! These types of vandals are far too difficult to deal with. I have only on one occasion seen a new editor going on a good reversion spree where they were cleaning up someone's else's vandalism. – Thjarkur (talk) 14:40, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Preventing blank speedy contesting

• Task: Disallow edits that consist of creating a talk page with the default This page should not be speedily deleted because... (your reason here) --~~~~ text generated by the "contest this speedy deletion" button of every {{db-xxx}} template
• Reason: New users frequently believe that just clicking the button is sufficient to contest a speedy deletion, just creating the default text without further information. The filter could prevent this by requiring the default text to be modified before saving (or by requiring that "(your reason here)" is not on the page). Regards SoWhy 08:15, 27 February 2019 (UTC)

  @SoWhy: Perhaps an edit intro might be worth trying first? Something along the lines of Template:Falsepositive/Editintro or Template:BLPN notice, but perhaps larger and more eye-catching. If you want to get really fancy, it could even be customized for each speedy category, unlike the filter warning. Suffusion of Yellow (talk) 02:10, 28 February 2019 (UTC)

  Good idea (which someone already had in 2011 but was never implemented). That said, I see no problem with having both an edit intro and a filter preventing empty contentions. Regards SoWhy 08:55, 28 February 2019 (UTC)

  @SoWhy:  Done as 968 (hist · log) (log-only for now). My initial reaction was that a filter would be BITEy (WP:HNST etc.), but on second reflection deleting the page when they think they've contested it is even BITEier. Even if we don't implement the warning, the filter can be used to gather data on the effectiveness of the editintro, so can you hold off on implementing it until the filter has been confirmed as working, for a few days? The filter needs to account for all the Special:Prefixindex/Template:Hangon variations, and all the, um "creative" places the user might put their request, so may need more work. Suffusion of Yellow (talk) 01:47, 1 March 2019 (UTC)

  @Suffusion of Yellow: Thanks! Seems to work for this edit. I proposed the change to {{db-meta}} at Template talk:db-meta and I'm waiting for feedback anyway before editing a template that affects thousands of pages. Regards SoWhy 08:10, 1 March 2019 (UTC)

  @SoWhy: Looks like it was missing Template:Hangon preload A7. I've also temporarily set 1 (hist · log) to log all edits with a summary containing "Contested deletion", to see what others 968 (hist · log) might be missing. Suffusion of Yellow (talk) 19:26, 1 March 2019 (UTC)

  Still only one hit. 1 now just looking for "your reason here" instead, because there seems to something buggy with the summary check. Suffusion of Yellow (talk) 16:51, 3 March 2019 (UTC)

@SoWhy: I've disabled the filter until we decide what to do. It's probably skipped over a few because of the edit summary bug, but that should be most of them. Looking through the hits, do you see anything that's not completely hopeless on the (deleted) pages? That is, would there be any point to a warning, other than to encourage the user to write a message that will be ignored anyway? I'm curious. Suffusion of Yellow (talk) 01:43, 6 April 2019 (UTC)

Defamation on Today's featured articles

This vandal has for nine consecutive days added the same defamatory material to Today's featured articles. He strikes at the turn of midnight and edit wars to keep the material in. See 222324252627. People are against preemptive protecting of TFA, but getting a protection when he inevitably strikes takes 40 minutes and these are high traffic articles.

Could we possibly get a temporary filter on the words "Connie Glynn", "mintfaery", "mint coven"?

– Thjarkur (talk) 17:53, 27 April 2020 (UTC)

Þjarkur, I think a filter is a pretty good idea but I'm worried the vandal will change the message to get around the filter. How long do you think protection should last after the first addition of the text is observed? I'm usually online around that time, and can get someone else to pick it up via IRC or something if I'm not around. Enterprisey (talk!) 19:35, 27 April 2020 (UTC)

He always starts at right after 00:00 and is occasionally active until 07:00 UTC (using various VPNs). You're right that he'll probably change the message. – Thjarkur (talk) 20:17, 27 April 2020 (UTC)

All right, so he took it as a challange and bypassed the filter. Thanks for the help, the filter can probably be turned off now, preemptive protection is probably going to be the only deterrent. – Thjarkur (talk) 00:17, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

And now he's decided to move on to non-FA...see Special:Contributions/220.240.101.203. Their first edit summary was revdel'd (for containing more of the BLP-violating content), but part of it said something to the effect of "because the FA is protected, I'll post this here instead" creffett (talk) 19:50, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Still going

See, for example, [1] (was on MP) and today's history of Florian Schneider (currently on MP). Editor is IP shifting all over the place, presumably using proxies, and hitting non-semi-protected articles that are on the Main Page. Since they're linking her article, stopping IP addresses simply adding "Connie_Glynn" anywhere in articlespace except her actual article would be useful? Black Kite (talk) 00:48, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

• And again today [2]. Black Kite (talk) 01:15, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

Yes, I think something needs to be done about this. Sadly I don't know exactly what (and if I did I'd not want to spill the beans). I'm suspicious about how the editor uses so many undetected proxies. Could they be subscribing to, or even perpetrating, a botnet? Certes (talk) 09:20, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

There are many open proxies that are not blocked. We block them only once they start editing, don't think this is a Botnet. The one editing Trevor Cherry is running OpenVPN on port 1602 and 1534 (still active). Their latest one (190.203.163.12) seems to have already died by now, but was a SOCKS proxy on port 8080. We could consider having a bot automatically check all IP editors of TFA and block proxies (and maybe even automatically revert them?) (RonaldB may be able to assist us in this), but otherwise there isn't much we can do here. --MrClog (talk) 09:46, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

Courtesy ping to Black Kite and Certes. --MrClog (talk) 09:46, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

Mirror site filter

• Task: You can refer to the Chinese wikipeidia[3]. The filter is used to block all edits include "wikimirror.org" reminds us to replace it manually.
• Reason:I am from China, sometimes I must edit via mirror site. Because of this site's technical reasons, any "wikipedia.org" will be changed to "wikimirror.org" like this[4]. If someone who uses this mirror site forgets to change it, links will be destroyed. RuiyuShen 03:11, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

• In the link you linked, it looks like the wikimirror edit does get saved, just the link is wrong? I'll set up a logging-only filter soon as my test filter is free, to see how often this is a problem. EF runs against every edit on enwiki so it needs to be a problem that warrants the cpu time and inherent delay. Crow^Caw 20:07, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

Thanks, and the site has changed to wikipedia.wikimirror.org. The website'owner set up only people from China mainland can enter.--RuiyuShen 22:01, 19 May 2020 (UTC)

Unsourced IP edits to weather box templates

• Task: Flag unsourced edits by IP users to the content of {{weather box}} templates.

• Reason: I have no idea why these templates of all things are the target of so much drive-by subtle vandalism (maybe it's because of all the colors? idk), but I see it all the time on the many, many pages of cities and towns that I keep an eye on. A tag for it would make these edits much easier to track. Sometimes the edits are correct (for example, if a town records a new record high temperature, then in some cases the source will auto-update, so when the article is edited to reflect that, no change to the source is needed) but very often they are not. CJK09 (talk) 22:18, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Preventing Users from make articles of the same name of their username

• Task: It’s supposed to stop users From making promo/self promotion articles.
• Reason: It will help crack down on Promo articles/self promotion users. Signed,The4lines |||| ^{(You Asked?) (What I have Done.)} 18:43, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

  The4lines, we already have 148 (hist · log), is there a change you'd like to see to that one? creffett (talk) 19:20, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

  Creffett Can it catch draft/ Articles with similar names? Signed,The4lines |||| ^{(You Asked?) (What I have Done.)} 19:26, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

  Yes, it picks up Articlespace and Draftspace. The problem is that it's only set to warn/tag. New users creating promo articles will ignore the warning. Black Kite (talk) 19:29, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

  Black Kite Good point, maybe we should set it to Disallow. Signed,The4lines |||| ^{(You Asked?) (What I have Done.)} 19:30, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

Moving discussion to Noticeboard. Signed,The4lines |||| ^{(You Asked?) (What I have Done.)} 19:32, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

IP highway route damage

• Task: Trigger on any edit by an IP to a {{jct}} template. Further limit the scope to articles which are (transitively) in Category:United States Numbered Highways, assuming that's possible.
• Reason: See WP:Sockpuppet investigations/Oliver Wendell 2009. In short, this blocked sock has taken to editing against consensus on many US highway related articles. The wide range of pages and IPs used make any kind of block or page protection infeasible. User:Ken Gallager may have additional ideas. -- RoySmith (talk) 12:47, 19 May 2020 (UTC)

Disallowing users that are not AFC user (or sysops) from removing the Draft prefix

• Task Makes removing the Draft prefix harder.
• Reason: It’s stop new users/spammers from removing the Draft prefix harder. It will help as new users/spammers can’t remove the draft tag and hope their promo/spam article is unnoticed and it gets in the wiki. If there is already feel free to disregard this request. Signed,The4lines |||| ^{(You Asked?) (What I have Done.)} 23:11, 19 May 2020 (UTC)

• What Draft prefix? Do you mean the Draft:ArticleName? Crow^Caw 13:35, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

Yes Crow Signed,The4lines |||| ^{(You Asked?) (What I have Done.)} 14:29, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

• That's done by moving the page, which already requires autoconfirmed status. Crow^Caw 17:21, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

Crow Yes, I know but spammers could get AutoConfirmed easily and then do What I said in the beginning. Signed,The4lines |||| ^{(You Asked?) (What I have Done.)} 17:35, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

• We can't unilaterally change the move policy here (which a filter here would be doing). Any spammer who slips through the normal AFC process will usually be caught by the Page Curation process, and won't be indexed by search engines until then. Crow^Caw 17:51, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

Crow How about if it was only Tag. Would that work? Signed,The4lines |||| ^{(You Asked?) (What I have Done.)} 17:56, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

Given that any AC account can create articles directly in mainspace, I don't see that such edit filters are needed or desired. Tagged maybe, but AFC isn't a usergroup. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 18:00, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

• Screw the AFC part of the title. Signed,The4lines |||| ^{(You Asked?) (What I have Done.)} 18:03, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

• Remember that every live filter runs against every edit made anywhere on enwiki, so while there's countless things that would be nice to have, we need to make sure that new filters are fixing a problem that can't be fixed any other way. There's already a Page Move Log which could be patrolled by anyone as easily as patrolling the EF tag log. I don't think this warrants a filter unless/until there's a policy to do this. Crow^Caw 18:12, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

• Oh well there goes another idea. Signed,The4lines |||| ^{(You Asked?) (What I have Done.)} 18:17, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

• Not trying to squelch your enthusiasm, but this is one of the more complicated areas on-wiki, and as you've seen, has nuances that aren't immediately apparent. Crow^Caw 18:32, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

Preventing users from adding promotional links to social media accounts

• Task: This filter would stop users from posting links on any page to their own personal social media accounts and using Wikipedia as a place to attract subscribers and followers on sites such as YouTube, Facebook, Twitter, etc.
• Reason: I have personally seen numerous users joining Wikipedia for the sole purpose of using Wikipedia as a site to attract subscribers and followers to their social media accounts and posting links on pages, either in the information on the page or as a reference, to these accounts. Some of these users start spamming these links on random pages to try and get as many people as possible to go follow or subscribe to them. -- ProClasher97 (talk) 06:20, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

• A problem with this is that we do allow social media accounts in certain cases, such as where the subject is notable for their social media presence, or otherwise has no official web site to link to. The filter can't make that determination as to whether such an addition is appropriate or not. Crow^Caw 13:37, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

• Perhaps we could nail down "their own" by checking user name against account, e.g. User:A.Crooner can't link to twitface.com/acrooner69, but that's not going to stop IP editors or PR agents. Certes (talk) 14:04, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

  1043 (hist · log) catches social media spam. ~~ CAPTAIN MEDUSA^talk 20:22, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

BLP date change

• Task: Prevent unsourced changes/additions of dates of birth (i.e. if there is no <ref>some source</ref> in the wikitext in the infobox parameter for this) in infoboxes
• Reason: This is a frequent source of vandalism; eg. this and the edits are already tagged as such so this shouldn't be too difficult to implement. WP:DOYCITE is rather clear on this, too. Thanks, RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 17:46, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

Audio File Add

• Task: Create an alert that when an audio file is added to any page it gets logged and/or placed on a page where project participants can review them to make sure they follow the criteria laid out in the project and unlink the file if needed. Right now it appears that 1530 articles have an audio file associated with it.
• Reason: Recommended by ToBeFree; also will help cut down on bad audio files being uploaded and possibly contain spam, not containing the article, etc. Galendalia Talk to me ^{CVU Graduate} 08:04, 31 May 2020 (UTC)
• I'd support a tagging filter for the addition of audio files to the article namespace. Audio files require a longer time investment for proper reviewing than images, are a relatively rare addition and can be harmful to the reputation of the encyclopedia if they contain hidden vandalism or copyright violations. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 10:53, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

Disallow empty edit requests

Moved to WP:EFN

 – ~ ToBeFree (talk) 04:03, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

Filter name

• Task: What is the filter supposed to do? To what pages and editors does it apply?
• Reason: Why is the filter needed? Indrajeet sisodia (talk) 18:54, 2 June 2020 (UTC)