Last modified: 2014-11-17 10:36:14 UTC
This will, I believe, have the effect of renaming [[Special:AbuseFilter]] to [[Special:EditFilter]], while retaining the former link as a redirect. This is the final stage of the recent migration that has seen every other user-facing component be renamed; on enwiki the extension is now being used for much more than just preventing abuse. I'm not sure where exactly this should be set in config, though.
Something like this definitely should *NOT* be done as a per-site customization. If we want to rename the extension that should be done the right way.
What *is* the right way to change the name? While there's a clear argument that it's a more accurate descriptor, I'm not sure enwiki should be forcing all English wikis to follow its lead in changing the name.
Just FYI: Russian Wikipedia switched to "Edit Filter" name a long time ago, so naturally we would appreciate the appropriate special page name.
IMO the correct course of action here is to keep the extension name as-is and tell en.wikipedia to stop using something intended for abuse prevention in other ways, such as enforcing their pet guidelines.
Whatever this extension was "intended" to do, users of several WMF wikis have found it useful for filtering edits in general, not just for abuse. To wax philosophic about the 'original intention' is not constructive: if the current use of the extension furthers the Foundation's goals, then the developers should be supporting that use however we can. The situation is more complicated when, as with something like ParserFunctions, the extent to which they really further the Foundation's goals is not unequivocal. But here, there are significant and obvious benefits both in utility, and in friendliness towards editors, from changing the name of the extension. Therefore, barring technical obstacles, we should try to support that development. The whole point of MediaWiki is that it grows and develops organically, just like a wiki. There is never a reason to arrtificially stifle that development and say that things should only be used for their 'original' purposes.
Also just FYI: Portuguese Wikipedia has changed the name too.
I think renaming AbuseFilter to ActionFilter is more accurate (it applies to more than edits and abuse) and it would preserve the references to "AF." I'd like to see this bug's summary updated to something about simply renaming the extension or this bug be closed and a subsequent bug filed.
Changing an extension's name is, generally speaking, more trouble than it's worth.
> I think renaming AbuseFilter to ActionFilter is more accurate (it applies to > more than edits and abuse) and it would preserve the references to "AF." I'd > like to see this bug's summary updated to something about simply renaming the > extension or this bug be closed and a subsequent bug filed. > You want to pirate this bug into one about renaming the entire extension, then refile the site-specific request as a *different* bug, asking for a *different* name that does not have community consensus? Or that this request for a change that has community consensus be closed, and a new bug filed for a change that does *not* have community consensus? WTF?(In reply to comment #7)
> You want to pirate this bug into one about renaming the entire extension, then > refile the site-specific request as a *different* bug, asking for a *different* > name that does not have community consensus? Or that this request for a change > that has community consensus be closed, and a new bug filed for a change that > does *not* have community consensus? WTF?(In reply to comment #7) This may come as a surprise, but the "community consensus" of the English Wikipedia doesn't actually set things like extension names. This extension is used on more than just the English Wikipedia and more than just Wikimedia wikis, and the problems being found with the dramatic name (specifically editor confusion and discontent) are not isolated. I've filed bug 21895 as a generic bug for renaming the extension. I'll leave this one to rot.
(In reply to comment #10) > This may come as a surprise, but the "community consensus" of the English > Wikipedia doesn't actually set things like extension names. (In reply to comment #2) > I'm not sure enwiki should be forcing all > English wikis to follow its lead in changing the name. > I never had any intention of asking for such. This is simply a request for a language-file customisation for enwiki. I don't really understand where the venom in this discussion has come from.
May as well mark it as wontfix since the +shell has been removed.
