Wikipedia:Edit filter noticeboard

Could someone add eadaily.com to filter 869, per WP:RSP#EADaily? Thanks. Aaron Liu (talk) 19:40, 12 January 2025 (UTC)Reply

  Done. –Novem Linguae (talk) 21:36, 12 January 2025 (UTC)Reply

• 614

I've seen quite a bit of recent vandalism involving the term 'low taper fade', 'imagine if Ninja got a low taper fade' and other similar variants. Seems to be coming from an Internet meme, so could this be added to filter 614? Entranced98 (talk) 18:37, 14 January 2025 (UTC)Reply

  Done –Novem Linguae (talk) 05:55, 15 January 2025 (UTC)Reply

  You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Large language models § LLM-generated content. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 11:25, 31 January 2025 (UTC)Reply

Should have probably cross-posted this at WP:EFR instead, my bad. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 23:19, 1 February 2025 (UTC)Reply

Could someone add *.geni.com, *genealogy.eu, and *.genealogy.euweb.cz to Special:AbuseFilter/869 per Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 465#RfC: Geni.com, MedLands, genealogy.eu? Thanks in advance. Aaron Liu (talk) 14:09, 5 February 2025 (UTC)Reply

Possible regex could be geni\.com|genealogy\.eu(?:web\.cz)?. – PharyngealImplosive7 (talk) 14:45, 5 February 2025 (UTC)Reply

PharyngealImplosive7, your regex suggestion looks great, but the only modifications I made was that I escaped the . (periods) with backslashes. Without the backslash, the period would match any character or letter. Codename Noreste (talk) 18:18, 5 February 2025 (UTC)Reply

Oh yes, I forgot to add the delimiters. Thanks for that. – PharyngealImplosive7 (talk) 18:55, 5 February 2025 (UTC)Reply

 Y Done EggRoll97 ^(talk) 05:40, 9 February 2025 (UTC)Reply

• 707 (hist · log)

Pinging 1AmNobody24 and PharyngealImplosive7 per WP:EFR, Special:Diff/1274183006 is why we should implement my suggestion to filter 707 that can disallow additions to EFFPR with more than 2500 bytes or more. I have decided to cross-post it to here due to minimal responses other than myself and those users who participated in the EFR thread. Codename Noreste (talk) 23:21, 5 February 2025 (UTC)Reply

I think your suggestion looks good. You just forgot the !(summary irlike "^(?:revert|rv|undid)") at the end of the filter but otherwise it looks fine. We might need to make a custom message so people understand why their edit was disallowed also. – PharyngealImplosive7 (talk) 23:59, 5 February 2025 (UTC)Reply

Filter 707 already has a custom message, MediaWiki:Abusefilter-disallowed-EFFPR, but you meant that we should modify that message as your suggestion. What should we add to the message, should we enact your suggestion (and to add | friendly = yes)? Codename Noreste (talk) 00:18, 6 February 2025 (UTC)Reply

And to top it off, I added your suggestion (revert exclusions) to my filter suggestion. Codename Noreste (talk) 00:22, 6 February 2025 (UTC)Reply

So right now the message is fairly vague, and I think we should add the | friendly = yes parameter also. Here is my suggestion:

{{edit filter warning
| filter   = 707
| action   = disallow
| friendly = yes
| text     = <center>An automated filter has identified this edit as potentially unconstructive. Please be aware that meddling with this page's headers and/or false positive reports will result in [[Wikipedia:Blocking policy|revocation of your editing privileges]]. Also, please note that you do not need to paste the content of your attempted edit here, as it is visible to others in the [[Special:AbuseLog|edit filter log]]. If this edit was disallowed in error, please make a new section on the same page you were editing.</center>
| fplink   = no
}}

What do you think? – PharyngealImplosive7 (talk) 01:39, 6 February 2025 (UTC)Reply

Here is how this template would actually look, so here is a sample edit with the proposed code above: Special:Diff/1274211623. – PharyngealImplosive7 (talk) 01:47, 6 February 2025 (UTC)Reply

I modified the suggested message above, and I believe meddling might be less bitey than disrupting. I also changed other users' with false positive, added attempted before the word edit here, and removed on this page as it applies to the EFFPR page itself, not just other users' reports. Codename Noreste (talk) 02:12, 6 February 2025 (UTC)Reply