Page MenuHomePhabricator

Implement some kind of vandalism detection for redirect.py
Open, LowPublic

Description

Refer https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discussion_utilisateur:Xqt#Bot_piégé_par_un_vandale_?_Bulletin_des_patrouilleurs_->_zigouilleurs

There is a “potential vandalised” detection for IP users already but bot’s behaviour can be improved a bit. One idea is a delay before fixing redirects that human users can react in meantime. Another idea is to look for the last editor and check whether his edit looks trusty enough. Also checking the block log would help as you can see in this reported case.

Event Timeline

Xqt created this task.Mar 6 2019, 5:03 PM
Restricted Application added subscribers: pywikibot-bugs-list, Aklapper. · View Herald TranscriptMar 6 2019, 5:03 PM
Xqt claimed this task.Mar 6 2019, 5:08 PM
Xqt triaged this task as Low priority.
Xqt updated the task description. (Show Details)
Dvorapa added a subscriber: Dvorapa.Mar 6 2019, 7:42 PM

Does API have options for revision scoring in Wikipedia?

Xqt removed a subscriber: Dvorapa.Mar 7 2019, 1:41 AM

Does API have options for revision scoring in Wikipedia?

I guess it does not otherwise I would assume that such a scoring is available for abuse filters but it isn’t. A scoring of trusty edits could be derived from user rights and edit counts and account age. This is a way most abuse filters take into account.

JJMC89 added a subscriber: JJMC89.Mar 7 2019, 2:28 AM

I'm not sure if it will help, but you might want to look at ORES edit quality.

Xqt added a comment.Mar 7 2019, 4:45 AM

I'm not sure if it will help, but you might want to look at ORES edit quality.

Great! Thanks for this hint.

I'm not sure if it will help, but you might want to look at ORES edit quality.

Yes, I meant if ORES is not available through API? (I always forget the shortcut)