MZ brings up a good point. Do we have any idea what the reject rate is for Abusefilter on desktop?
Also is there any way to view the edits that triggered AbuseFilter to get an idea bout what % of them were actually vandalism? On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 6:25 PM, MZMcBride <z...@mzmcbride.com> wrote: > Jon Robson wrote: >>Between 31st July 2013 (00:00:00) and August 19th (@ 18:53:18)... >> >>15089 of all mobile edits resulted in an error compared to 23455 >>successful edits (38544 edits in total)- that's a 39% error rate which >>is simply unacceptable. The breakdown of these errors is as follows. >>The most alarming is AbuseFilter - it is accounting for 72% of all >>editing errors, costing all of our projects a lot of edits. >> >>[stats] > > These numbers don't mean a whole lot (to me, at least) without a > comparison to stats for non-mobile edits. We knew when the AbuseFilter was > introduced that it wasn't always going to be used to filter only abuse. > People naturally use it for all kinds of crazy purposes these days. > Without a bit more context, it's difficult to know what's actually a > problem (in relative terms). > > MZMcBride > > > > _______________________________________________ > Wikitech-l mailing list > Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l -- Jon Robson http://jonrobson.me.uk @rakugojon _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
