Last modified: 2011-03-13 18:05:37 UTC

Wikimedia Bugzilla is closed!

Wikimedia has migrated from Bugzilla to Phabricator. Bug reports should be created and updated in Wikimedia Phabricator instead. Please create an account in Phabricator and add your Bugzilla email address to it.
Wikimedia Bugzilla is read-only. If you try to edit or create any bug report in Bugzilla you will be shown an intentional error message.
In order to access the Phabricator task corresponding to a Bugzilla report, just remove "static-" from its URL.
You could still run searches in Bugzilla or access your list of votes but bug reports will obviously not be up-to-date in Bugzilla.
Bug 26636 - Warn the user if an edit marked as minor doesn't seem to be minor
Warn the user if an edit marked as minor doesn't seem to be minor
Status: RESOLVED WONTFIX
Product: MediaWiki extensions
Classification: Unclassified
AbuseFilter (Other open bugs)
unspecified
All All
: Lowest enhancement (vote)
: ---
Assigned To: Andrew Garrett
:
Depends on:
Blocks:
  Show dependency treegraph
 
Reported: 2011-01-08 18:38 UTC by Amir E. Aharoni
Modified: 2011-03-13 18:05 UTC (History)
4 users (show)

See Also:
Web browser: ---
Mobile Platform: ---
Assignee Huggle Beta Tester: ---


Attachments

Description Amir E. Aharoni 2011-01-08 18:38:15 UTC
Sometimes users mark as "minor" edits that shouldn't be marked this way. This happens especially often with users who have "Mark all edits minor by default" turned on in their preferences.

This cannot be detected automatically, but a certain automatic sanity check is possible. For example, a large number of changed characters, or a change of more than X bytes in the page size. (X can be 100 bytes, but the statisticians in the crowd should decide about the default number, and this should be configurable, too.) In such a case the software should warn the user - "Are you sure you want to mark this edit as minor?".

This warning can be similar to "Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary".

Related: Bug 24313.
Comment 1 Roan Kattouw 2011-01-08 22:54:22 UTC
Can't this be done with AbuseFilter?
Comment 2 Chad H. 2011-01-09 14:40:55 UTC
Dunno, I think so?

Certainly doesn't belong in core.
Comment 3 Andrew Garrett 2011-01-28 21:08:34 UTC
Not going to be implemented in core. You can implement it with an edit filter, if you like.
Comment 4 Mark A. Hershberger 2011-01-28 22:57:00 UTC
I changed to AbuseFilter, reopening.
Comment 5 Andrew Garrett 2011-01-28 23:00:56 UTC
(In reply to comment #4)
> I changed to AbuseFilter, reopening.

I don't understand. This is not a bug or enhancement request relating to AbuseFilter. It's an enhancement that will not be implemented in core, but the behaviour could possibly be replicated by creating an edit filter using the AbuseFilter extension.
Comment 6 Mark A. Hershberger 2011-01-28 23:25:23 UTC
(In reply to comment #5)
> I don't understand. This is not a bug or enhancement request relating to
> AbuseFilter. It's an enhancement that will not be implemented in core, but the
> behaviour could possibly be replicated by creating an edit filter using the
> AbuseFilter extension.

I'm not familiar with AbuseFilter, so perhaps you are right.  If AbuseFilter is meant to be set up by each user and doesn't come with a default list of filters, then, yes, this is obviously not relevant to AbuseFilter.

However, my thought was that since this is marked "enhancement" and AbuseFilter (I am assuming) comes with some filters, then this an acceptable assignment.

(Now, I need to go read up on AbuseFilter.)
Comment 7 Andrew Garrett 2011-01-28 23:29:55 UTC
Edit filters are written entirely by the communities running the extension.

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.


Navigation
Links