Last modified: 2012-04-13 15:18:46 UTC
Sorry, pressed enter accidentally. AbuseFilter: "Lines added in edit" (added_lines) shows old lines, not added on the specific edit. Sometimes the whole page content is shown, sometimes on or two lines before and after the added line(s). It's the same oddity for "Unified diff of changes made by edit" (edit_diff) and for "Lines removed in edit" (removed_lines).
Examples: * http://als.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:AbuseFilter&details=616&uselang=en L ... shows full text content for added_lines, removed_lines and edit_diff although the actual diff is showing a one-line change. * http://als.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:AbuseFilter&details=610&uselang=en L ... showed one additional line in added_lines and removes it in removed_lines. See edit_diff: where does this additional "---" line come from? Compare actual diff. * http://als.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:AbuseFilter&details=583&uselang=en L ... showed the same like the first (latest/current) example. This happens since the last big code update.
Correct URLs [AbuseFilter => AbuseLog], sorry: http://als.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:AbuseLog&details=616&uselang=en http://als.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:AbuseLog&details=610&uselang=en http://als.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:AbuseLog&details=583&uselang=en
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 19716 ***
This problem has been seen by me a couple of days ago. As I'm not sure if this bug is really a duplicate from bug 19716, I guess I should report it again: Please, compare the value of added_lines and removed_lines variables with the actual diff on this case: * Actual diff: https://pt.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Alexis_Texas&diff=27267727&oldid=27110744 * Abuse log: https://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Especial:AbuseLog/864451 What I've found particulary odd was that this problem occured only with some edits, and mostly with bots edits, although at time the code wasn't filtering by user group (I've even added a user group condition, thinking at first this could be the problem, though it not seems the case now). If it is actually a duplicate of bug 19716, I'm anticipating my apologies.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 20310 ***