matthew.britton wrote:

quite serious if true

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Abuse_filter/False_positives&diff=prev&oldid=284509845 could be another one.

Given test case matches for me, it's because of a buggy filter.

Remember to test against the version of the filter which was in effect at the time, in this case, http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:AbuseFilter/history/17/item/90

("X" rlike summary) will *always* match for empty summaries regardless of what "X" is.

For the expected result, reverse "X" and summary.

mike.lifeguard+bugs wrote:

An chance we can get some indication when the log entry applies to an old version of the filter rather than the current one? This is *very* confusing otherwise. Either the revision number or just top/not top would be excellent.