https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=28633
--- Comment #23 from Trijnstel <[email protected]> --- (In reply to comment #22) > (In reply to comment #21) > > (In reply to comment #19) > > > Perhaps we could automatically add a note on action=revisiondelete saying > > > that there are AbuseFilter entries for a page of this title not > > > associated with any particular revision, and asking the user to check to > > > make sure they don't need to suppress these too? Somewhat succinctly > > > (albeit > > > not hugely accurately), "there are possible matching AbuseFilter entries > > > for this page title"? > > > > I agree, that's a possibility. But, abusefilter logs can only be hidden by > > oversighters and as nlwiki doesn't have local OS no one can hide the entries > > apart from the stewards (and most of the local users do not even know you > > *can* hide those). That's why it would be nice if they would be > > automatically > > be hidden (even a revdel system for the logs perhaps?) > > The problem is that the RevDel system is about deleting revisions and log > entries; AF log entries that block a save don't get associated with a > revision, > so AF can't automatically hide these. The automatic-hiding-of-AF-hits can > only > work because the AF hit is recorded against a revision that is being > suppressed. My suggestion would at least highlight that further work could be > needed. > > Presumably if NLwiki has no oversighters it also can't suppress the edits > using > RevDelete, so they are just leaving them available to any passing sysop? > That's > rather troubling. Theoretically NLwiki could extend the "hide this AF hit" to > local sysops (assuming that's OK with legal and the community itself?), but > if > they are dealing with a lot of these issues they should probably consider > getting some local OSers like other big wikis with this issue. If neither of > these options appeal, at the least if the notice is present it could be > locally > adjust to advise asking for a steward to help. Sure, stewards help where they can. And personally I don't see the need for local oversighters, nor does the community. But isn't it possible then to give admins the rights to revdel abuse filter log entries? (instead of only be able to suppress these) In that case admins could revdel them and with real privacy issues stewards could suppress them as well. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes. _______________________________________________ Wikibugs-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikibugs-l
