MediaWiki talk:Abusefilter-warning-empty-edit-request

Protected edit request on 20 May 2019

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

I'm so tempted to leave this request blank... Following the discussion at WP:EFN#Set filter 987 to disallow, please create this page with:

Wait! This edit request looks empty!

The purpose of edit requests is to ask that a specific change be made, not to request access to edit yourself. If you would like to request access to edit the page, please review the protection policy.
If you wanted to request access for a specific change, please specify what edit you would like to be made.
If this edit request was not empty, please click 'Publish changes' again, and report this error.

Report error

(Courtesy ping to DannyS712, who wrote most of the message). Suffusion of Yellow (talk) 05:31, 20 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Suffusion of Yellow: Lol, I would have been tempted too. Also, is this going to be warn, disallow, warn and tag, or what? How will the filter be activated (I want to try it out)? --DannyS712 (talk) 05:33, 20 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@DannyS712: Warn-only for now. If too many people ignore the warning, then disallow. You will need a non-autoconfirmed sock to test it, of course. Suffusion of Yellow (talk) 05:37, 20 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Suffusion of Yellow: Maybe tag requests too? --DannyS712 (talk) 05:39, 20 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Warn and disallow (with tag) in some time definitely, we want them to fix it before submitting. But most disallow filters are first set to warning to check what we're catching. Also, maybe change the informational icon to

(File:Stop hand nuvola blue.svg) given the intent. --qedk (t 桜 c) 05:43, 20 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@QEDK: Changed the icon. Actually, none of the disallowing filters are set to warn first anymore. One upon a time, that was the only way to show the user a custom message, since the disallow message had to be the BITEy MediaWiki:Abusefilter-disallowed, but now we can use custom disallow messages, so there's little need for warn+disallow anymore. Suffusion of Yellow (talk) 05:54, 20 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@DannyS712: (and QEDK) What would be the purpose of a tag, here? Not against it, just wondering who would use it. Suffusion of Yellow (talk) 05:56, 20 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Suffusion of Yellow: (edit conflict) I meant in the sense of testing, disallow filters are tested with a warn, due diligence and all that. I think a warn+disallow is a better solution in this particular case maybe, like the DS edit filter, giving the editor the opportunity to fix it, but it is kind of equivalents and I'm ambivalent about it either way. As for the tag, a lot of editors submit empty edit requests for the "lulz" and we have warning for test edits, so that's one test case that comes to mind. --qedk (t 桜 c) 06:01, 20 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@QEDK: Thanks, now I understand what you meant about the warning. I suppose a tag might also be useful as an "ignore this" flag in watchlists and contributions, at least. But it'll take two more MediaWiki-namespace requests to properly create the tag (text + description), so one thing at a time! Suffusion of Yellow (talk) 06:34, 20 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Done Galobtter (pingó mió) 09:52, 20 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Protected edit request on 17 September 2023

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

please add |fplink=no to the template, which removes the big blue button on the edit filter warning (template documentation) with the consensus reached in this discussion, thanks. 0xDeadbeef→∞ (talk to me) 12:56, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Done * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 16:57, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]