Talk:Edit Review Improvements/New filters for edit review

About this board

This page is about New Filters for Edit Review filtering tools and interface. These are now standard on Recent Changes and the Watchlist.

New filters for edit review are in maintenance mode. Major bugs will be fixed but no improvements are scheduled for now.

Leave feedback in any language.

How to provide feedback

  • Do you have that bug when you are not logged-in?
  • Explain how to reproduce the bug (step by step)
  • Tell us what is your configuration (browser version, scripts you use, etc.)
  • Say on what page it is happening (Recent Changes, Watchlist, etc.)

Also see the FAQ.

Want to opt-out?

Check on your preferences on the wikis you are active on:

Useful but a little confusing

Axlrosen (talkcontribs)

Thanks for asking for feedback! I’m sure that this can be very useful, but I found it confusing to use.

  • I have played around with it for a while, and I still don’t have a good mental model. Does this filter things in or out? Are the checkboxes ANDed or ORed together? If Bot is not checked and Human is not checked, then I see all edits; but if I check Bot, then I stop seeing Human edits. This is not a consistent mental model.
  • Prefixing items with “Show” or “Hide” or “Show only” or something would help a lot.
  • The subtitles are inconsistent. Most of them (like “Edits made by human editors”) tell me what checking the box will show me. That makes sense. But some are different, like “Highly accurate at finding almost all problem-free edits”. This seems to be telling me about the algorithm used to implement this checkbox. That’s not what I would expect, and it’s hard for me to interpret. How about “Show only edits identified as very likely problem-free by a highly accurate algorithm” or something?
  • It appears that these predictions filters are not “spanning” or whatever. For me, I got 4 edits under “very likely good” and zero under the rest, but if I checked none of them, I have 13 edits. The names “very likely good, may have problems, likely have problems, very likely have problems” led me down the garden path; I assumed that every edit has a single “sketchiness” rating, and each checkbox shows me one section of that number space. If that’s not the case, I suggest that this naming scheme is more misleading than helpful.
  • While I’ve been trying to understand how this system works, I’ve been thwarted by the fact that the filter checkboxes cover up the edits that they control. It’s great that clicking on them changes my results live, but that’s actually not very useful because I can barely see.

In the end, I just checked Human and left it at that.

Reply to "Useful but a little confusing"
BabbaQ (talkcontribs)

I do like the tool. It is ok. But I feel like it would be better if there was setting that was standard and that those settings were highlighted as Standard. To make it easier for all editors so they do not have to Set and guess what settings to use to make the edit list standard.

Wargo (talkcontribs)

What do you mean by word "standard"?

BabbaQ (talkcontribs)

The four original settings that are the "Standard" should be highlighted in my opinion. I mean Latest revision, Page edits, Page creations, and Logged actions.

Matěj Suchánek (talkcontribs)

For everybody, "standard" is different (for me, it isn't Latest revision and it is Human (not bot)). When you have chosen those "standard" filters, click the bookmark, call it "Standard" and "Set as default".

Trizek (WMF) (talkcontribs)
Trackinfo (talkcontribs)

I am reluctant to trust a filter to detect. We have bots but we have to have humans watch for vandalism in subjects they know and care about to keep noticing the things that fly under that radar. However, I like the categories you choose. I would like a way I can note I have looked at something in the watchlist, quickly, 1 keystroke. That would also be helpful to see that others have looked at the same new edits and have not objected. Of course on some hot articles, I'd like to consider the source (the POV) of the editor approving of the edits.

Trizek (WMF) (talkcontribs)

Most filters are not looking for objective contents. They are taking things as they are in the data base, like:

  • is this edit made by a user who registered less than 4 days ago?
  • is this edit made on mobile?
  • is it an edit made on the Talk: namespace
  • etc.

The only exception are the predictions filters, that are based on ORES, our artificial intelligence. Like any artificial intelligence, it is based on human expertise but can have some limited false positives.

There is a way to know if an edit has already been checked, using the Review status filters. They are available only to users with appropriate rights on wikis that have implemented RC Patrol.

Reply to "I like it, but"
Tuvalkin (talkcontribs)

I come accross this thing first time just now at pt.wp, where I’m less active than in Commons (where it is not yet deployed). So I applied a few filters, and then tried to find an "OK" or "submit" button. Turns out there’s none — filter implementations happen on the fly.

This was a feature of the old Special:Watchlist which was changed a few years ago, with the addition of the "show" button, in the box labelled "Watchlist options". Back then a user sort of complained, saying he liked to tick the checkboxes on and off and get immediate results and now, oy vey!, an extra click is needed. This user was severely mocked and shown xkcd 1172 and yet here we are again, back to the old UI paradigm, with changes applied on the fly. (Of course the new UI’s elements are now very huge because reasons.)

MJL (talkcontribs)

@Tuvalkin Do you want to say that again in Portuguese or can you link to these conversations? I'm a bit confused. My apologies.

Tuvalkin (talkcontribs)

@MJL: What would you do with a Portuguese text? Your user page states you are only fluent in English…

As for a link to a discussion in Commons I vaguely remember from 3 years ago or so, sorry, it’s unlikely I can remember enough of it to allow a successful search.

I only meant to emphasize the way UI principles keep changing, in this case a whole 360°, and yet every time someone complains those principles are refered to by devs as abolutely enlightened and set in stone.

MJL (talkcontribs)

@Tuvalkin I meant that users who actually do speak it could be assistance.

Ah, gotcha, my apologies for misunderstanding.

Tuvalkin (talkcontribs)

Se o meu inglês não te serve, MJL, vai aviar-te a outra loja, que esta agora já fechou.

MJL (talkcontribs)
Trizek (WMF) (talkcontribs)

I'm reacting to the "where it is not yet deployed": the filters are default on all wikis since almost one year. Maybe you've opted the filters out on Commons.

Check on your preferences on the wikis you are active on:

You will get the buttons back.

Tuvalkin (talkcontribs)

Thanks, I’ll do the same in pt.wp too.

Reply to "Messed up"

Filter for page deletions?

Shisma (talkcontribs)

Is there a way to see only pages that have been deleted?

Trizek (WMF) (talkcontribs)
Reply to "Filter for page deletions?"
Shyamal (talkcontribs)

Sorry but I am not able to find an intuitive way to suppress edits by bots. Perhaps there is a help page that the filters UI can link to.

Matěj Suchánek (talkcontribs)

In "Automated contributions", choose "Human (not bot)".

Is there a way to block out user creation logs?

CupcakePerson13 (talkcontribs)

If there is, how do you use it, and if there is not one yet, I think it would be useful and should be around.

Trizek (WMF) (talkcontribs)
Reply to "Is there a way to block out user creation logs?"

add/remove categories is a great filter!

Valereee (talkcontribs)

I've been wondering how to discover whether a page was added to categories, that's really a help!

Trizek (WMF) (talkcontribs)

Thank you! (talkcontribs)

Thank you

Reply to "add/remove categories is a great filter!"

What are the default filters? Or is default to show all contributions? If so, many editors will give up on using their watchlist

Timeshifter (talkcontribs)

What are the default filters? Or is default to show all contributions (no active filters)? I see no "default" button for a pre-selected list of active filters chosen by the wiki admins. If default is to show all contributions, then I believe many editors will stop using their watchlist very much, if at all.

Anyone with a lot of categories on their watchlist may give up as I almost did before someone selected some filters for me. See my other thread. The filters are baffling, even to longtime editors. The "all contributions" watchlist shows all the many files added and removed from those watchlisted categories. That makes the watchlist very long and almost useless. One can't find the important stuff buried among the files being added and removed.

A pre-selected fallback list of active filters might keep many editors from abandoning their watchlist over time. There needs to be a filter to show all revisions, except for revisions for talk pages. The filter should set talk pages to latest revision. Otherwise the same active talk pages will show up on every day of the watchlist. I like seeing all revisions (for most things), but had to turn it off due to talk pages filling up my watchlist.

Trizek (WMF) (talkcontribs)

Default filters are the ones people got when they opened the watchlist the first time on the old configuration. You see all contributions.

You can redefined default filters by clearing all of them (trash bin icon), which will give you access to the "restaure default filters". It is possible to define a different set of filters for your wiki, after a community consensus.

You can personally set your favorite set of filters, by saving a preset and defining by default.

You can exclude some namespaces, for instance talk pages (click on "namespace", then select one or multiple namespaces, then click on "excluding namespaces"). That selection can be saved for you as well, so that you can switch to it anytime.

Timeshifter (talkcontribs)

I have been talking about the Commons watchlist. I suggest that "Restore default filters" be supplemented and improved with 2 options that are always visible:

  • "Restore my saved default filters".
  • "Restore the Commons default filters".

What do you mean by "old configuration"? Are you talking about checking the box for the setting, "Hide the improved version of the watchlist":

I don't want to totally exclude the talk pages on the Commons from my watchlist. I only want to see the last revision of talk pages.

Trizek (WMF) (talkcontribs)

Default Commons filters are the ones you get when you access your watchlist the first time, if you haven't changed them. If you wish to define another set of filters as default, you can save them as "Commons default filters". Then you can switch between "Restore my saved default filters" and "Commons default filters".

By old configuration, I mean the one you get by selecting "Hide the improved version of the watchlist" on

To get the last revision of talk pages exclusively, you combine two filters: the one for talk pages and the one for "latest revision". You can go further and filter multiple kind of talk pages, differentiating them using highlights (here yellow for Talk: and green for File talk:).

Timeshifter (talkcontribs)

Thanks. I saved the first-time watchlist filters.

Both of the talk page filter combinations ended up with empty watchlists. I looked back 14 days too. So they are not allowing talk pages at all on the watchlist.

Trizek (WMF) (talkcontribs)

Empty results mean that there is no changes on talk pages you watch for those combinations. I don't have changes on my volunteer's account watchlist either.

You can test those combinations on RecentChanges to be sure they're working. Just change "Watchlist" by "RecentChanges" in the URL:

Timeshifter (talkcontribs)

OK. Some talk pages on my watchlist are Commons talk, template talk, category talk.

Are there any generic talk filters?

Kaartic (talkcontribs)

> Are there any generic talk filters?

I suppose there isn't a direct Generic talk filter. But, I think you could use the "Exclude selected" option and do some magic with it. For example the linked set of filters would show you all the RecentChanges to the talk pages in en.wikipedia. That's done by excluding all the corresponding article namespaces.

Trizek (WMF) (talkcontribs)

@Timeshifter, you're looking for a global filter for all talk pages?

Timeshifter (talkcontribs)

Yes, I am looking for a way to see all talk pages changes in my watchlist. But I only want to see the latest revisions for talk pages.

Timeshifter (talkcontribs)
Trizek (WMF) (talkcontribs)

That would be visible through time.

Kipala (talkcontribs)

How do I get rid of this? And why is it on my page? Did I agree???

There is a setting which is lousy, does not show my contributions any more. When I take off the shown choices (whatsoever these mean) I can see my own edits but also see all the database edits which I do not want to see.I recognize no way of saving a choice - and it is not clear if the filter filters in or out. So take that thing away! ~~~~

Reply to "What are the default filters? Or is default to show all contributions? If so, many editors will give up on using their watchlist"

Why are Wikidata edits showing up in Updates?

Contributor321 (talkcontribs)

My default filter is set to show only "Human (not bot)" and "Latest revision", but the updates are clogged with Wikidata edits (which I have no interest in seeing). And it's not just the latest Wikidata edit for a specific page: I'm getting all of them.

For example, D Rutgers University (Q499451); 13:10 . . GDW531441 (talk | contribs) (‎Changed claim: Property:P463: Q5583848), D Rutgers University (Q499451); 13:08 . . GDW531441 (talk | contribs) (‎Changed claim: Property:P138: Q12094720), D Rutgers University (Q499451); 13:07 . . GDW531441 (talk | contribs) (‎Changed claim: Property:P31: Q21032617), and D Rutgers University (Q499451); 13:00 . . GDW531441 (talk | contribs) (‎Changed claim: Property:P31: Q615150) are all showing up as updates.

This is a real pain in the neck. How do I filter all of the Wikidata edits out?

Jdforrester (WMF) (talkcontribs)

You're seeing relevant Wikidata edits (i.e., edits to Wikidata items about that page on your wiki, or or referred to in the wikitext of that page). This is by request of many of our editing communities, who wish to bolster the anti-vandalism patrolling of relevant content for readers.

If you don't want to see certain types of change, you should scroll down to the Types of change options in the Recent Changes menu, and unselect Wikidata edits.

Contributor321 (talkcontribs)

Thanks for your fast reply. Do you mean the Recent Changes menu under Preferences? In that tab under Advanced Options, "Show Wikidata edits by default in recent changes" was already unchecked. On the Watchlist page there's a Recent Changes link in the far left column under Community Portal, but clicking on that doesn't show Types of Change options. What am I missing?

Catrope (talkcontribs)

In the filters menu on the Recent Changes page itself (the dropdown with all the check boxes where you can turn filters on and off), you have to go to "Types of change" and select everything except "Wikidata edits". This is because selecting nothing for a category is treated the same as selecting everything.

Contributor321 (talkcontribs)

Thanks, that did the trick. I've got to say, "selecting nothing for a category is treated the same as selecting everything" is hardly intuitive!

Reply to "Why are Wikidata edits showing up in Updates?"

Unseen changes highlight is buggy

Summary by Trizek (WMF)
Ita140188 (talkcontribs)

I have had problems with the highlight of unseen changes (blue dot and bold font in watchlist) since the new watchlist was introduced, and it is getting worse recently. There are two kinds of problems:

- Articles would still show as unseen even though I already opened it, or even edited it.

- If there are new edits to a page I have seen earlier, all the previous edits (of the previous days, for example) become "unseen".

Trizek (WMF) (talkcontribs)

There is a bug on that feature. It has been detailed on the last issue of Tech News:

  • Special:Watchlist can show the wrong information. It does not always show which edits are read and which are unread. The developers are working on solving the problem. [1]
Ita140188 (talkcontribs)

I am still experiencing this problem. The tool was working mostly fine for the last couple of months until today.

Trizek (WMF) (talkcontribs)

Do you still exactly have the issues you've described before?

Ita140188 (talkcontribs)

Hi, sorry for late reply. Yes, I still have the exact same issues. They appear less often, but they are still there.

Trizek (WMF) (talkcontribs)

Can you please check the following? (copied from

Be sure you have an up-to-date configuration

  1. First, ensure your browser is up to date. MediaWiki features and some scripts are not supported by old browsers for safety reasons.
  2. Then, purge the cache for the page to force the page to be redisplayed from its source or scripts to restart.

Those two points solve most issues.

If you have a tool like "NoScript" or ad blockers installed on your web browser, then make certain that scripts are enabled for,,, and

Test if you have problems related to user scripts or gadgets

To test if your problem is linked to user scripts or gadgets, you can try to temporarily deactivate all on-wiki scripts at once.

To do so, add ?safemode=1 to the web address (URL) of the page on which you see the problem. Example:

If the URL already includes a ?, append &safemode=1 instead. Example:

If you still have problems on the page you are testing with the safe mode, and your browser is up to date, please report here.

If you don't have the problem anymore using the safe mode, it means you have an issue with a user script or gadget. You have then to identify the problem.

Ita140188 (talkcontribs)

Hi, fortunately the problem is quite rare, so I cannot easily reproduce it. In any case, I use an up to date version of Google Chrome and I already purged the cache. I did not see this problem again since last week.

Reply to "Unseen changes highlight is buggy"
Return to "Edit Review Improvements/New filters for edit review" page.