Requests for comment/Bad image list

From MediaWiki.org
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Request for comment (RFC)
Bad image list
Component General
Creation date 2015-07-04
Author(s) MZMcBride
Document status in draft
General2015-07-04MZMcBride

This is a dump of thoughts related to MediaWiki's bad image list.

Background[edit]

MediaWiki core has included a MediaWiki:Bad image list feature since April 2005 (cdb3f96a).

Problem[edit]

A bad image list feature is a bit esoteric and probably not widely used.[citation needed] The name annoys people (cf. phabricator:T16281).

On the English Wikipedia, as of July 2015, w:en:MediaWiki:Bad image list has over 290 page watchers and over 1,120 edits (cf. page info). A volunteer-run bot (ListManBot) is used to keep the list alphabetized and to remove deleted images.

Proposal[edit]

One idea is to remove the bad image list from MediaWiki core and instead recommend that users use other anti-abuse features such as AbuseFilter instead.

Current implementation[edit]

Pros
  • Very simple input mechanism
  • MediaWiki:Bad image list can be added to watchlists and appears at Special:RecentChanges
  • Supports per-page exceptions
  • Removes shock value of images by replacing embedded image with link
Cons
  • A bit esoteric
  • Not very granular, applies to all users
  • Requires manually listing exceptions (and maintaining such a list)
  • No gallery of images (cf. phabricator:FIXME)
  • Requires manually keeping list up-to-date

AbuseFilter implementation[edit]

Pros
  • Much more flexible and granular
    • Can limit filter to users with fewer than 100 edits, for example
  • Can prevent edits rather than allowing and simply not expanding the images
Cons
  • Awkward input mechanism
  • More difficult for admins to monitor as AbuseFilter doesn't integrate with Special:RecentChanges or Special:Watchlist
  • Requires third-party users to install an additional, large extension
  • Might impact condition limit on edits by users to be checked. These tend to include the users who get checked for lots of things, so we might want the max condition limit increased.