Wikipedia:Edit filter noticeboard

"WP:EFN" redirects here. For information on the {{efn}} template, see WP:EXPLNOTE.

Welcome to the edit filter noticeboard

Shortcuts

• WP:EFN
• WP:EF/N

WATCH

Recent filter changes (purge):

Filter 1347 — Pattern modified

Last changed at 06:30, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

Filter 1325 — Pattern modified

Last changed at 06:11, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

Filter 614 — Pattern modified

Last changed at 23:47, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

Filter 50 — Pattern modified

Last changed at 05:05, 9 May 2025 (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 or changes to existing filters, 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.

---

There are currently 354 enabled filters and 48 stale filters with no hits in the past 30 days. Filter condition use is ~1030, out of a maximum of 2000. (Purge). See also the profiling data and edit filter graphs.

Click here to start a new discussion

FilterDiff user script

I've been annoyed for a while by the endless scrolling through unmodified lines when reviewing changes to filters, especially for filters with long notes or many conditions. To improve the readability of edit filter diffs, I wrote User:Daniel Quinlan/Scripts/FilterDiff. The script hides unmodified lines that are far from changes, adds line numbers, and provides a toggle to view the full diff when needed.

Note that the script is currently in beta, so any feedback is appreciated. Daniel Quinlan (talk) 00:00, 19 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for this script. – PharyngealImplosive7 (talk) 22:30, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

¡Muchas gracias! I think both of your filter scripts can work globally, and for FilterBlame, I can provide a Spanish translation for that. Codename Noreste (talk · contribs) 22:46, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Con gusto. FilterDiff should work on non-English Wikipedia editions now. I did the absolute bare minimum of testing on a few editions, including Spanish and two that use non-Latin scripts (one of which is also right-to-left). Daniel Quinlan (talk) 08:39, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

FilterBlame user script

Trying to figure out when a certain condition was added to a filter so you can read the diff, improve your log analysis, or know who to talk to about an issue? User:Daniel Quinlan/Scripts/FilterBlame solves this problem. You can search using a substring or a regular expression, use binary or linear search, and search for insertions or removals.

Note that despite the name, "blame" is just the traditional term for this kind of functionality. It's about searching the history, not pointing fingers. As with the previous script, it's in beta. Daniel Quinlan (talk) 00:49, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for both of these. EggRoll97 ^(talk) 17:56, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. Please let me know if you run into any issues with either script. Daniel Quinlan (talk) 07:57, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Filter 1355 to disallow

1355 (hist · log)

I propose setting filter 1355 to disallow, which currently logs AfD closures by anonymous users, which are inappropriate NACs, and thus are revertible when done, and are generally disruptive. This was originally discussed at Wikipedia:Edit_filter/Requested#AfD_closures_by_anonymous_users, and I'm bringing it here for the extra visibility on the main noticeboard prior to setting to disallow. EggRoll97 ^(talk) 19:27, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I support this, as long as we use a custom disallow message to be less bitey to good-faith IPs trying to close an AfD. – PharyngealImplosive7 (talk) 21:48, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

(1) Shouldn't that use added_lines_pst instead of added_lines? This filter will only catch users who cut-and-paste Template:Afd top instead of substing it. (2) Are there non-LTAs doing this regularly? If this is mostly an LTA thing, the filter should probably be private+log-only per WP:NOSALT. Suffusion of Yellow (talk) 01:31, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Changed to added_lines_pst, thanks for that. As to 2, I can't really tell. Possibly, I guess, though it's definitely a broader scope than just LTAs (IPs shouldn't be closing discussions regardless, as BD2412 mentioned on EFR). No objections to setting as private, but I didn't see it as necessary at the time since it seemed to be more of a general prohibition than targeting a specific LTA. EggRoll97 ^(talk) 02:09, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

While looking at the current hits, I've noticed that most of the hits show IPs adding a 'no consensus' result to an AfD. I'm not sure if that is an LTA or just an odd coincidence, so I'm fine with making it private or keeping it public. – PharyngealImplosive7 (talk) 03:09, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

For any EFHs/EFMs looking at this conversation, also see [1] on the mailing list regarding this filter. – PharyngealImplosive7 (talk) 03:52, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I've sent a reply on the mailing list, and while I won't copy the entire comment here, it generally reiterates what I've said above. EggRoll97 ^(talk) 06:06, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No objection to marking it as private, see my thread on the mailing list. Codename Noreste (talk · contribs) 00:15, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The filter has been set to private. – PharyngealImplosive7 (talk) 23:12, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Exempt bots and/or archives from filter 1,347?

While patrolling the edit filter log, I noticed that ClueBot III was unable to create an archive because it tripped filter 1,347, attempting to archive content that contained protection template markup; see Special:AbuseLog/40769169. This wasn't the first time it has failed; ClueBot III's filter log shows several previous failed attempts. — MRD2014 (talk) 00:00, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think we could just add !(bot in user_groups) to the top of the filter. – PharyngealImplosive7 (talk) 01:33, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

<nowiki>{{pp should not be hit by the filter, bot or not. Adding !(added_lines irlike "<nowiki>{{pp") or something to the same effect is a good idea. Nobody (talk) 05:16, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Done. I used a negative look-behind assertion. If there's additional text between the nowiki tag and the protection template sometimes then we'll need to use an additional condition instead, but I don't see any instances of that in the logs. I also exempted ClueBot III and Lowercase sigmabot III. Daniel Quinlan (talk) 06:40, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Added_links issue

Filter 231 uses !(added_links to remove urls from the filter, but this has the effect that this edit doesn't get picked up by it, due to {{coord}} (produces a geohack.toolforge url) from {{Infobox French commune}} grabbing type as a optional parameter, which includes the population number. This has the effect that changes to | population can never be picked up by filter 231. I don't think this is the desired behaviour. Nobody (talk) 08:14, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

From what I see this effects at least all 573k uses of {{Infobox settlement}}. Nobody (talk) 08:23, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

1325 should exclude references

I've noticed that filter 1325 ("Possible AI-generated text") has picked up edits where various idioms the filter is looking for happen to be used in the titles of references (for example here and here). Please exclude these cases. Duckmather (talk) 02:27, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Done. I think this will increase the false negative rate somewhat because "must-see" and "must-visit" citations show up in some AI-generated articles, but there are just too many false positives due to citations right now. Daniel Quinlan (talk) 06:15, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]