The AbuseFilter has been re-purposed to not only look at abusive edits, but also be used as a means to stop things like test edits. The names of the components of the software (abuse log, etc.) have caused a lot of confusion and hostility, esp. as they often are simply inaccurate for the filters being used.
The extension should be renamed to something less inflammatory. Suggestions include "ActionFilter" (which keeps the AF initials) or "EditFilter."
This is related to task T21618.
matthew.britton wrote:
(In reply to comment #0)
The names of the
components of the software (abuse log, etc.) have caused a lot of confusion and
hostility, esp. as they often are simply inaccurate for the filters being used.
I assure you most of the confusion and hostility directed towards the extension is a result of the hostility towards new and inexperienced users, both by the extension's UI and those behind its filters, and the fact that its very existence is completely contrary to the principle of a wiki.
Actions that are not *obviously serious abuse* warrant at least the decency of the split-second human review that any recent changes patroller can give them, and with little impact on the content of the wiki. We managed for eight years. Instead, you try to use this extension to enforce style guidelines, and somehow get away with concealing these automated decisions in what is just about the only piece of closed-source code in the whole Wikimedia setup -- right down to the routers and the phone system -- further entrenching the "us vs. them" mentality that has come to define the project's outward attitude towards, frankly, all but a few thousand people.
The fact that you're using the extension for things it wasn't designed for, and, in my opinion, shouldn't be used for at all, doesn't merit a name change.
(In reply to comment #1)
Actions that are not *obviously serious abuse* warrant at least the decency of
the split-second human review that any recent changes patroller can give them,
and with little impact on the content of the wiki. We managed for eight years.
Instead, you try to use this extension to enforce style guidelines, and somehow
get away with concealing these automated decisions in what is just about the
only piece of closed-source code in the whole Wikimedia setup -- right down to
the routers and the phone system -- further entrenching the "us vs. them"
mentality that has come to define the project's outward attitude towards,
frankly, all but a few thousand people.The fact that you're using the extension for things it wasn't designed for,
and, in my opinion, shouldn't be used for at all, doesn't merit a name change.
I somehow missed this reply.
You mean the general "you," I suppose. I don't do much with the AbuseFilter extension and I never have.
Early on in its development, I postulated the various ways in which the extension could be mis-used and abused, much as nearly any feature of MediaWIki has been abused or mis-used. With this extension, there are all kinds of nefarious filters that can be deployed by incompetent or abusive administrators.
I also commented about these issues before it was announced (by guillom, as I recall) that the extension would be installed Wikimedia-wide. I worried about smaller projects where abuse or mis-use might go unnoticed (much as we've seen with the Titleblacklist extension, for example).
So when you talk about "you," you're not really talking about me.
In any case, the exact purpose of the extension isn't as clear as you suggest it is in your reply. It was originally written with a specific goal being to stop obvious and harmful vandalism by persistent bad users. But there were other underlying goals and possible use-cases being addressed as well. On such use-case was about using the filters as a calmer and more casual way of stopping edits such as obvious test edits (inserting "~~~~" into an article, for example). While, yes, it's easy to spot and revert these edits, a few considerations have to be made:
Compare this with the arguably more gentle approach of disallowing the edit and explaining to the user that there are more appropriate venues to make test edits (such as a sandbox or test.wikipedia.org).
This is one particular example of a hole in your logic, but there are many others. The larger point is that the suggestion that the AbuseFilter was only ever intended for abusive edits simply doesn't match with history and reality.
What we know for sure is that giving every user an "abuse log" is a poor idea. The terminology causes problems and has led to a number of wikis manually changing system messages in order to mitigate the harsh language of the extension. This is bad.
Another suggestion for name: EditChecker / Special:CheckEdits
Forwarding the reason given: "'Filter' sounds like censorship and it yet more express the function of the extension."
Anyway, any progress in this?
(In reply to comment #4)
Another suggestion for name: EditChecker / Special:CheckEdits
The AbuseFilter can monitor any action, so calling it just "edits" isn't accurate.
(In reply to comment #5)
Isn't this "easy" to implement? (once/if there is consensus for it)
I'm not sure if it's easy, you need to rename all the files, variables, databases, translated interface messages, etc.
The extension was meant to stop abusing behaviour, but it's also used to stop e.g. edits, that would have been destructive by accident. And of course, sometimes there are false positive hits, that cause a harmless edit by a harmless user to be logged forever. There are many users who dislike any public entry of theirselves in an "abuse log".
In enwiki the tool is already renamed to "edit filter". In dewiki it's renamed to "Bearbeitungsfilter" which is a translation of "edit filter", see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Edit_filter and https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Bearbeitungsfilter respectively. Yes, the term "edit" is meant in a very general way (a page move is also an edit). However, this is a much more descriptive name than "abuse filter" and the renaming was consensual.
Because the extension has got some own variables, it's not possible to change some names like "Special:AbuseFilter", "Special:AbuseLog", ...
These should be changed into Special:EditFilter, Special:EditFilterLog a.s.o.
In my opinion, it could be a good way, to implement two MediaWiki sysmessages, where you can change the name of the default special page, for example to Special:Edit Filter. The old names (Special:AbuseFilter etc.) would redirect the user to the new name, that's the best solution in my opinion.