User talk:MusikAnimal

User
Talk
Dashboard
Artikel
Scripts
Tools
Templates
Userboxes
Awards

Talk

Where this user is, it is 7:37 am, 6 September 2024 UTC [refresh].

Urgent Help Needed

Please stop RovingPersonalityConstruct !! He keep removing Sourced content on several Wikipedia pages such as: Type 093 submarine, JL-2, Chengdu J-20. Please stop him by blocking him or protecting the pages.

Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:306:B8BF:C0:A40B:3EC8:EBC1:5351 (talk) 01:08, 25 January 2015 (UTC)

Edit filter questions

Hi just wondering if I could pester you with a couple of Edit Filter related questions. I'm looking at some existing edit filters to get to know how they work (the ridiculous requests backlog needs addressing) and am a little unsure about a couple of things I've seen.

• In Special:AbuseFilter/3 there is a line stipulating that users must not be in the autoconfirmed user group, but in Special:AbuseFilter/9 they must not be in the confirmed user group. Are these two treated the same or is there a distinction?

  Internally one is assigned (confirmed) while the other is automatically assigned (autoconfirmed), but as far as I can tell, with edit filters they are one and the same.

• Am I correct in thinking that Special:AbuseFilter/9 works by defining a regex statement, naming it "line1" (is this a special name or could it be called anything?), and then referencing it in the actual requirement for logging to save writing it out twice?

  Yep! You can name the variables whatever you want.

• Why do filters watching for a specific text change (like removing a certain category as with Special:AbuseFilter/117) have to look for removed text and not added text, not just removed text?
  

  There's a edit_diff variable that apparently doesn't work. So instead if we want to ensure whatever is being added wasn't there beforehand (or vice versa), we use the added_lines and old_wikitext variables. There's also new_wikitext which is the text after wiki code has been evaluated, e.g. you'd need to use added_lines to check for ~~~~

Feel free to send me in the direction of the Edit Filter talk page or somewhere if you aren't sure or don't have time to answer! Sam Walton (talk) 23:35, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

Hi Sam! Answers above. mw:Extension:AbuseFilter/Rules format is the where all the documentation is. There's some nifty functions, but I'm not aware of a way to test their output except through an edit filter. So when writing filters I usually batch test against changes I make to my sandbox, adding any namespace or user group restrictions later when I'm ready to put the filter into log mode. In other words, no need to expose your IP while testing when we know !"autoconfirmed" in user_groups will work. For performance, put whatever would eliminate most edits first, such as user group, namespace, then all the regex stuff after that. Finally, I'd prefer any other effective preventive measures over an edit filter, such as page protection. Since the filters tax the entire system, if it doesn't get a lot of hits it may be better just to deal with the abuse the old fashioned way. Also, try to see if there's an existing filter you can modify. Namely Special:AbuseFilter/260, which is used to disallow vandal phrases. Note the use of ccnorm here, pretty cool! Cheers — MusikAnimal ^talk 16:43, 17 January 2015 (UTC)

Thanks! I'm looking at fulfilling the edit filter request made by Lukeno94, currently sat at the top of the requests page. !"autoconfirmed" in user_groups & (lcase(added_lines) rlike "jetanian?") seems to do the trick, but I'd like to hear your thoughts. Should it have narrower scope so that it isn't running for too many edits? Thanks, Sam Walton (talk) 22:11, 17 January 2015 (UTC)

Regex looks on point, namespace restriction definitely helps but only if you know the edits will 100% be in that namespace. Sounds like this one won't have many hits, is long-term, and restricted to that exact phrase. We should look into a general-purpose long-term sock filter that we can just add phrases to. I thought Special:AbuseFilter/16 was it but I don't think it is, or at least doesn't meet our needs here since it only disallows after throttling. Pinging Callanecc who I think would be more knowledgeable about that filter. Anyway for now I think creating a new filter is fine. You may also want to add it to Mr.Z-bot's filter list so that when the filter is tripped, the user is automatically reported to AIV. — MusikAnimal ^talk 22:35, 17 January 2015 (UTC)

I've created it at Special:AbuseFilter/654 log only for a few days to make sure it doesn't flag things it shouldn't, then I'll add it to the AIV list if everything seems ok. Special:AbuseFilter/653 got tripped this morning, but only once, and I'm struggling to diagnose why it only picked up one of the IPs edits. Any ideas? Sam Walton (talk) 11:12, 18 January 2015 (UTC)

I tested the filter against that IP and it matched all the edits. So, perhaps this is what Zzuuzz was talking about at WT:FILTER, where some filters start to fail once so many hit the condition limit. I think this is set by the wiki-configured $wgAbuseFilterEmergencyDisableThreshold as described at mw:Extension:AbuseFilter. If this is true, we might could request the value to be raised. I say this because I can only imagine that the infrastructure we have today is more powerful (CPU, memory, etc) than it when the abusefilter was first introduced. — MusikAnimal ^talk 17:07, 18 January 2015 (UTC)

I've change them to "confirmed" in user_groups so that the filter will also ignore users with the confirmed user right. Because it just tests with that word is in the user groups. You can probably add "jetanian" to either 16 or 260 (there's also Special:AbuseFilter/58) depending on whether you want a rate limit or not. Reason both added_lines and removed_lines are there is in case the regex being tested for is moved (from memory the filter sees that as removed and added - how you'd see it if you saw in the diff view). Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 10:55, 19 January 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, adding to filter 16. Sam Walton (talk) 18:32, 19 January 2015 (UTC)

Last question for now; what does "consumes X conditions of the condition limit." mean? Sam Walton (talk) 18:40, 19 January 2015 (UTC)

Menu gadget

I have reverted your updates to MediaWiki:Gadgets-definition and MediaWiki:Gadget-dropdown-menus.js for now for technical reasons. It is OK to test using the current setup of loading the files raw, but in production it is highly inefficient. So I would like to set it up using a core gadget that can be loaded as a module rather then a raw file. This will save two requests per page view. -- [[User:Edokter]] {{talk}} 20:11, 18 January 2015 (UTC)

Tech News: 2015-04

Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.

Recent changes

• You can download the new version of the Wikipedia app for Android. The new version shows lead images, better galleries and content from Wikidata. It also has many other new features.[1] [2]
• Programs and bots still can't read information about images on many wikis. You can see the list of wikis with the most files to fix. Wikipedia in Italian, Indonesian and Japanese language have the most files to fix. On the biggest wikis you should use bots. Bots can add information templates to groups of files. You can ask other tech users to help you.

Problems

• All JavaScript on Commons was broken for a few minutes on Tuesday. It was because of old code in the HotCat tool. The same problem happened on some Wikipedias on Wednesday. It is now fixed. [3]

Software changes this week

• There are no software changes this week and next week due to annual meetings. [4]

Tech news prepared by tech ambassadors and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

18:13, 19 January 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:List of YouTube personalities

Hello! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:List of YouTube personalities. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated.

For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:04, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Crystal Taliefero

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Crystal Taliefero you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Ritchie333 -- Ritchie333 (talk) 11:41, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Crystal Taliefero

The article Crystal Taliefero you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Crystal Taliefero for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Ritchie333 -- Ritchie333 (talk) 17:21, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

Typo in Page menu

Hello, MusikAnimal. I think I have found a typo in the Page menu gadget. Please see: MediaWiki:Gadget-dropdown-menus-vector.js / function addPageMenu / 'Anaylsis'. Thanks. – Wdchk (talk) 03:35, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

 Erledigt Thanks! — MusikAnimal ^talk 04:51, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

Hello from 86.163.237.255

Hello,

Thank you for your message regarding the edit I made on the Florence and the Machine page. I understand that you felt it wasn't constructive but it's a shame you deleted it the content because it's relevant to her new singles. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.163.237.255 (talk) 16:20, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

Bump (2)

Any updates from User talk:MusikAnimal/Archive 12#Bump? — Revi 16:22, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

@-revi: Yes, sorry it has taken forever! I've still got numerous off-wiki projects I'm in the midst of. We can still do this, though. I'll be out of town this weekend, so let's go with next week and I'll help do the review in tandem with my other work. This time it's a promise! — MusikAnimal ^talk 16:25, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, I thought you have forgot this at all :p

ps. Please keep a look at Special:Contribs/Say2718 - he is xwiki spammer and have removed lv4 warning from his talkpage. If he adds external links again, block should be given. (I already have indef'ed him on kowiki.)

— Revi 16:41, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

Longobardia

Why you protected page? censorship seems ... you have not noticed the ongoing discussion on the User talk:Cplakidas. Wikipedia is based on sources--95.233.199.151 (talk) 00:51, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

Hallo, (and thanks to MusikAnimal for his ospitality here :-))) it's me who asked a temporary semiprotection of the article, to avoid an (already ongoing) edit warring. Please consider the following:

• The place for a discussion about an article's content belongs to the article talk page, not to an user talk page;
• According to the BRD cycle, if another user revert your changes, a discussion should start on the article's talk page and the original version of the article should stay on the article until consensus has been reached;
• What User:Cplakidas asked on his talk page makes perfectly sense. Please bring the info which he asked on Talk:Longobardia and wait for his answer;
• Keeping reverting can easily lead to your block for disruptive editing;
• If you have problem to understand what User:Cplakidas wrote, I can translate it for you in Italian;
• Bye, Alex2006 (talk) 09:42, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 21 January 2015

• From the editor: Introducing your new editors-in-chief

• Anniversary: A decade of the Signpost

• Interview: WWII veteran honors shipmates through Wikipedia editing

• News and notes: Annual report released; Wikimania; steward elections

• Op-ed: Let's make WikiProjects better

• In the media: Johann Hari; bandishes and delicate flowers

• Featured content: Yachts, marmots, boat races, and a rocket engineer who attempted to birth a goddess

• Arbitration report: As one door closes, a (Gamer)Gate opens

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Abbestellen
• MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:14, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

Re: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kuttiattoor Thittayil Sree Daivathar Temple (2nd nomination)

The page creator, User:Daivathar, has now moved the article to Topic:Kuttiattoor Thittayil Sree Daivathar Temple. I don't know if this is a case of WP:NOTHERE, an attempt to circumvent the AfD process, gross incompetence or a bit of each. Given his history of recreating deleted articles, removing speedy templates and now an inexplicable move, I think a block is in order. What do you think? --Drm310 (talk) 19:07, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

By the way, if you're confused as to what the hell is going on, see Topic:Sadzz6ecrahbu1rh and also Wikipedia talk:Flow/Archive 14#Move not listed in the logs? So, the redirect wasn't exactly to a non-existent page, the page is in there somewhere, but we just can't get to it. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 23:22, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

The Topic page apparently has been deleted, or the equivalent of, so I've deleted the original location at Kuttiattoor Thittayil Sree Daivathar Temple as it was a redirect. I'll find out what's going on with the original copy to see if the AfD should be closed. Anyway considering nearly all of the user's contributions are to that page, and that page does not exist right now, I'm not sure a block is any bit preventive. We can salt the original mainspace location if need be. — MusikAnimal ^talk 23:30, 22 January 2015 (UTC)