Hi @Tiger3018! I've added this to our backlog. Now that we have the basic list you have provided, we need to do the work to get it integrated into a language file like the ones you see here: https://github.com/wikimedia/revscoring/tree/master/revscoring/languages We're working on other things so we haven't gotten to it yet.

The PR didn't quite do what it needed to do so I pushed a followup commit and cleaned up some of the tests.

Oh! I misread. I agree with your point about not needing to drop it. I think the idea of dropping it comes from @Joe's proposal that we make ORES look like other services.

Aaron misunderstands @Ladsgroup and then deletes his comment when he realizes his mistake

submitting jobs from changeprop to an uWSGI endpoint directly

I generally agree that exposing something like this is a good idea. We'll likely want to have different rules on per-wiki basis. E.g. in English Wikipedia, you only need to wait 48 hours (max) to see if an edit will be reverted with high confidence. In smaller wikis with less robust patrolling, you'll likely want to wait longer to confirm an edit as good. There are also likely some improvements we can make the algorithm to help 3rd party reuse remain fresher for such wikis. E.g. by looking at the edit history and user groups of an editor.

There we go! Looks like we can resolve this.

I made https://github.com/wikimedia/draftquality/commit/264071ce5312e67561b597d31ada86a1b3487747 to see if it would propagate.

@Ladsgroup tried turning mirroring off and on again. We also tried scheduling an update. Nothing seems to have changed and we don't see any errors.

https://github.com/wikimedia/ores-wmflabs-deploy/pull/104

Is this something that will be part of the common infrastructure for services in kubernetes?

@TheDJ, let us know if this addresses your question. Please feel free to open if I have missed something.

Stat machines are not used to deploy to prod for ORES.

@Ladsgroup, I'd love to have your notes on this one.

I believe that if you remove "|default" from the relevant line in MediaWiki:Gadgets-definition, it will disable the gadget by default.

I think the best strategy here is to explicitly document the meaning of the param in revscoring extract. There are differences depending on how the sample is gathered, but so long as someone has a basic grasp of math, they should be able to work out what to do by the intention.

I'm not sure what is being asked for here. Are you imagine a page documenting steps taken or a specific type of automation? Also what kind of model?

I'm not sure I understand what's being asked for here. Could you provide examples of where this is documented well for other systems that we might crib from?

@awight, were you able to make progress on this?

I think the best next step is to provide a starting list of regexes for badwords, informals, or words to watch. Then we can run some experiments with zhconv to see if we're doing OK.