Hey,For patrolling work, ORES usually has two levels of support:
- For basic support we usually provide a model that is called 'reverted' and has less accuracy. It also risks perpetuating editor biases due to the lack of differentiation between reasons that a change may have been reverted.
- For advanced support, we require manual labeling of a large sample of edits, but then we can provide two more models: 'damaging' and 'goodfaith'.ORES review tool can only be enabled on wikis where advanced support is available and most other tools prefer the 'damaging' over the basic 'reverted' model as well.So, for performance and capacity reasons we think it makes sense to remove 'reverted' models from the ORES service when 'damaging' model is made available. However, we also want to be careful about making sure this change doesn't disrupt the work of tool developers that make use of the ORES service.If you do, please voice your concerns now. If there is no objection within the next two weeks, we'll begin the process of removing the 'reverted' model for wikis that have the 'damaging' model available.Related phabricator card: https://phabricator.wikimedia.
org/T171059Best--Amir Sarabadani TafreshiSoftware Engineer (contractor)
-------Wikimedia Deutschland e.V. | Tempelhofer Ufer 23-24 | 10963 Berlin