Community Wishlist Survey 2022/Larger suggestions/AbuseFilter: Indicate that an edit was a revert

This proposal is a larger suggestion that is out of scope for the Community Tech team. Participants are welcome to vote on it, but please note that regardless of popularity, there is no guarantee this proposal will be implemented. Supporting the idea helps communicate its urgency to the broader movement.

Random proposal ►◄ Larger suggestions The survey has concluded. Here are the results!

AbuseFilter: Indicate that an edit was a revert

Problem: There is no clean way, with AbuseFilter, to detect an edit is a revert. Which is important, several long term abusers having for habit to revert editors edits as a way to harass them.
Proposed solution: Create a variable revert (if possible with the username of the author of the reverted editor) in AbuseFilter.
Who would benefit: Abusefilter editors, harassed editors, everyone.
More comments: This change has a dedicated phabricator ticket (see below). From what I understand (thanks to Daimona Eaytoy explanations), this task is currently stalled because a change is needed in the mediawiki core code, regarding when abusefilters are processed, and when an edit is marked by mediawiki as a revert.
Phabricator tickets: phab:T159725
Proposer: — Jules* ^Talk 09:54, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

After reading through the task and subtasks we've decided this likely too big for our team, so I'm moving it to the Larger suggestions category. Thanks for participating in the survey, MusikAnimal (WMF) (talk) 20:52, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for letting know, @MusikAnimal (WMF):. If hope other WMF teams will help to improve AbuseFilters: this is a very useful feature for communities (in order to fight vandalism and also harassment), but the WMF seems not to allocate enough ressources on it. I know that Daimona Eaytoy is working on it, and I have no doubt he's doing good work (it seems there was a lot to do to improve the core code of the extension), but from my non-technical point of view, it seems that there should be more devs on it. And I have no clue how to make this feedback to the WMF.

Best, — Jules* ^Talk 11:02, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Voting

Support * Pppery * _{it has begun} 19:01, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support 𝑇𝑚𝑣 (𝑡𝑎𝑙𝑘) 07:41, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Bilorv (talk) 16:38, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Zeleni (talk) 18:51, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --NGC 54 (talk｜contribs) 23:15, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support A09090091 (talk) 08:24, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support TheInternetGnome (talk) 08:51, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Darwin ^Ahoy! 19:24, 4 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Thingofme (talk) 14:14, 5 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support —Thanks for the fish! ^{talk•contrib} (he/him) 17:10, 6 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ciao • Bestoernesto • ✉ 19:28, 6 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support InterstateFive (talk) 20:27, 6 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support —— Eric Liu_（Talk） 07:32, 7 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 03:32, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Valerio Bozzolan (talk) 15:52, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]