User talk:Hersfold

ATTENTION: One or more IPBE flags are up for review at this time. Please confirm that all flags listed on this page are still necessary. Thank you! ATTENTION: One or more IPBE flags are up for review at this time. Please confirm that all flags listed on this page are still necessary. Thank you!

	Welcome to my Talk Page!
	Thank you for coming by, however please note that I have largely retired from Wikipedia. Messages left here will not receive a prompt response, if ever. Please also note that I no longer hold any access rights; if you are contacting me in relation to a block, deletion, or any other administrative action I have taken, I am unable to assist you. Please contact another administrator for help. If you do have an urgent need to contact me specifically, such as for one of my bots, please send me an email via Special:Emailuser/Hersfold.
		User:Hersfold/Talk Header - v • e

Don't Do that!

Hi Hersfold.

I saw that ban template and thought you really were banned. I nearly freaked out. Don't ever do that again with me please. But that was a good one anyway! Be sure to sign my guestbook soon! Carabera (talk) 01:48, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

It's just an april fools joke. :-) Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 01:49, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

I know. Be sure to sign my new guestbook soon! Carabera (talk) 12:46, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Current events

Per the current events guidelines, "Please avoid Yahoo! news links, as those URLs are temporary and die quickly! (You can use a search engine to get the original source.)" This is why the headline was removed. Tomdobb (talk) 02:41, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Hi, me again

Hello, dude, thanks for replaying on my e-mail sent! You can talk to me at: [1]. Thank you, for second time, you'r great assister!

(sorry, because I have missed to write my signature on English Wikipedia) --Aleksa Lukic (talk) 18:54, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

---

Serbian Wikipedia User: Aleksa Lukic

Abuse filter syntax

Hi, Hersfold! I'm asking you because I think you've edited some of the abuse filters, so you might know the answer to this. I just happened to be looking at the code for abuse filter 3 and I thought that just possibly there might be an error in it. Of course, it's also possible that it's correct; I'm not very familiar with the syntax and variable names. But it says "& user_name != article_recent_contributors" and I just think maybe instead of "!=" it ought to say "!in" or something. Thanks. ☺Coppertwig (talk) 23:54, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

You would be correct there. The only thing is that I don't think !in works, so it's !(user_name in article_recent_contributors) instead. Thanks for catching that! Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 01:29, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! Well, I thought it might be something like that; that's why I said "or something"! ☺Coppertwig (talk) 12:12, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

OK, let's try a few more:

• how about this part of filter 5? "& (user_name == moved_from_text)" Again, perhaps the operator should be "in"? Also, I'm not sure exactly what the logic is with the choice of namespaces in this filter.
• filter 30: "& (user_name != article_recent_contributors)" again, should perhaps be "& !(user_name in article_recent_contributors)"
• filter 34: "(article_namespace = 2 | article_namespace = 3)": Maybe the operator should be "==", not "=".
• filter 46: "(article_namespace = 0 | article_namespace = 10) &": Again, maybe the operator should be "==", not "=".
• filter 50: "(article_namespace = 0" Again, maybe the operator should be "==", not "=".

  Also filter 50: "("#REDIRECT" in added_lines)" could perhaps be changed to "(added_lines rlike "^#\s*REDIRECT\s*\[\[") "

• Filter 53: In two places, it has an asterisk followed by a question mark. Maybe the question marks shouldn't be there. (I'm accustomed to Perl regex format. The asterisk already means the pattern might appear 0 times, so the question mark seems redundant.)
• Filter 59: "(user_name != article_recent_contributors)" should be " !(user_name in article_recent_contributors)"

  Also filter 59: "(removed_lines rlike "\{\{.*\}\}")" Does that really work? Shouldn't it be " (removed_lines rlike "\{\{[^}]*\}\}")" ?

  Also filter 59: "(user_name != article_recent_contributors)" should be " !(user_name in article_recent_contributors)"

• Filter 61: " !("#redirect" in lcase(added_lines))" might be better as "(lcase(new_wikitext) rlike "^#\s*redirect\s*\[\[")" or "(lcase(added_lines) rlike "^#\s*redirect\s*\[\[")"

  Also filter 61: Has an "=" operator which should perhaps be "==".

  Also filter 61: A more exact count might be obtained by defining a ref-opening as either "<ref>" or "<ref name" and a ref-closing as either "</ref>" or "ref name ... />". (With the named reference, the same tag will sometimes count as both an opening and a closing.) The code might look something like this (assuming rcount expects regular expressions):

  /* count of removed ref-openings exceeds count of added ref-openings, or count of removed ref-closings exceeds count of added ref-closings; named refs with slashes count as both openings and closings. */ & (rcount("(<ref>|<ref\sname)",removed_lines) > rcount("(<ref>|<ref\sname)",added_lines) | rcount("(</ref>|<ref\sname[^>/]*/>)",removed_lines) > rcount("(</ref>|<ref\sname[^>/]*/>)",added_lines)

☺Coppertwig (talk) 00:02, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

*eyes glaze over* Hoo boy. I don't think I have time to take a look at too many of these just now, but I'll try to remember to keep poking at them when I get the chance. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 01:33, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

• Filter 5: The logic here is correct. This filter is intended to prevent user from attempting to rename themselves by moving their userpage. This creates a bunch of userpages that have to be deleted under U2, and confuses the hell out of the newbie when they can't log in under the new name. This filter is intended to stop that and give advice on how to properly request a rename, although it hasn't been fully activated yet.
• Filter 30: Fixed as suggested.
• Filters 34, 46, 50: It looks odd to me too, but according to Wernda = is equivalent to ==, and no syntax errors occur with it.
• Filter 50: Not fixing that myself as I'm not the best with regexen, but I'll suggest it in the notes.
• Filter 53: Fixed as suggested, but the filter is still disabled.
• Filter 59: The recent contributors thing fixed as suggested, and again I'm uncertain on the regex, but will suggest it.
• Filter 61: We usually don't use new_wikitext or old_wikitext because they're slower than molasses and hang up the wiki. Added_lines should work, but again, I'll need to run those by others.

Thanks again for your help! Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 21:05, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Smile!

Carabera (talk) has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Go on, smile! Cheers, and happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Bot

Hi.

I noticed that you have a new bot. I would like you to help me create a request for approval for a bot if you would please. You don't have to do this, but if you want to, make a request for an anti-vandalism bot for me. The bot name is CaraBot. I have the account up and going already. Carabera (talk) 00:41, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

The form is pretty straight-forward; what is it you need help with? Also, you may want to make a userpage for the bot first, describing what it does and other information about it. You can use mine as an example. Keep in mind, though, that you should make the userpage using your main account, not the bot's. The bot should make no edits without approval. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 01:24, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

Its just that I got confused when I saw the form. I also forgot to add in that I also want the bot to be able to report unappropriate user names. I'll notify you when I get the userpage up and going. I also will start replying like you do now.Carabera (talk) 01:33, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

I just got the bot's userpage up and going. Put in its purposes, its status, and an emergency block button for admins. Carabera (talk) 12:37, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

What about the request form? Remember my message saying I got confused immediately? Carabera (talk) 17:01, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

Well, the form is asking for information that the BAG will need when reviewing your request. I'll go down the list and cover everything, since you haven't said what it is that's confusing you:

• Automatic or Manually Assisted: Most anti-vandalism bots are automatic. If this is the case, then you will need to specify if the bot is supervised (you're watching the actions it takes so it can be shut down in the event of a problem), or if it is unsupervised (it may log its actions to a file somewhere, but you're not watching it edit. Manually assisted means the bot will ask for your approval before any edit it makes, sort of how AutoWikiBrowser works. This probably isn't ideal for an anti-vandalism bot, since you may as well just use Huggle for that.
• Programming Language(s): Fairly straight forward, this is the computer program language you're using for the bot. Examples include Java, Python, C, AutoWikiBrowser, etc. It may also help to mention any Wikipedia-specific libraries you're using, such as MER-C's Java class.
• Function Overview: What the bot does, briefly. In your case this would be something like "The bot monitors recent changes and the new user log to revert vandalism and report policy-violating usernames."
• Edit period(s): Most vandalism bots run continuously from a server such as the Wikimedia Toolserver. You may also be able to run the bot a few hours each day; whatever you plan the bot's schedule to be, include that here. For example, my bot runs about once every two days, or whenever the backlog starts to get more than a few articles in it.
• Already has a bot flag (Y/N): Take this line out, it doesn't apply to new bots.
• Function Details: Here's where you provide full detail on what the bot does and how it works. In your case, you would specifically want to mention how the bot determines an edit to be vandalism, and how it determines a username to be illegal. You'll also want to say what actions the bot will take when it finds vandalism; I'm assuming it will revert the edit in most cases, but will it revert to itself? Will it revert the same page more than once in X hours? Will it warn a user? Will it report someone after X warnings? Will it monitor the abuse filter logs to check for attempted vandalism? Will it revert or warn older users? Will it handle some vandalism differently depending on the severity? How often will it make edits (often called the rate limit or throttle speed)? Those are only a few of the topics you would need to cover here.

Before you start coding in earnest, though, please take some time to review the bot policy if you haven't already. Also keep in mind that usually bot operators have been around long enough to demonstrate that they can be trusted to operate an automated account; this level of trust is nowhere near the same as it is for adminship, but it does still exist. We also have several other bots and software applications that fulfill both of these roles; the various ClueBots, Huggle, Twinkle, the Abuse Filter, etc...

Anyway, I hope this helps some; if you do still have questions, let me know. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 18:44, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

What do you mean by coding? Carabera (talk) 20:57, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

If you don't know what coding is, should you really be writing a bot? ~~ [ジャム]^[t - c] 21:33, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

Lets put it this way. Hersfold will ban the bot indefinetely until I learn more on programming. Just put this for the reason of the ban. "Account was originaly going to be a bot but is banned from Wikipedia until its owner learns more about programming." Carabera (talk) 21:49, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

Uh, yeah. I kinda assumed you at least knew how to write a computer program when you said you were writing a bot. Try learning Python or Java - those shouldn't be too difficult for someone just starting.

In the future, it may help to know what exactly you're getting into before you start. I know we recommend the "dive-right-in" kinda thing on Wikipedia, but things like bots require a decent bit of prior knowledge before you can really carry through with them. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 01:04, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

		The Helping Hand Barnstar
		For your helping me and other wikipedians. I appreciate your help very, very much. Carabera (talk) 21:39, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 16:05, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Unblock

Ah, didn't know that. Sorry about wasting your time. Have a great day. Inferno :  Chat  17:55, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

No, that's fine, someone had to review it anyway. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 19:03, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia Signpost: 6 April 2009

• Special report: Interactive OpenStreetMap features in development
• News and notes: Statistics, Wikipedia research and more
• Wikipedia in the news: Wikia Search abandoned, university plagiarism, and more
• Dispatches: New FAC and FAR nomination process
• WikiProject report: WikiProject China
• Features and admins: Approved this week
• Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe

Delievered by SoxBot II (talk) at 19:08, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

User:Yyem

Hi. The CU block on the IP 194.176.105.39 was placed by Dominic. The IP then spent some time abusing the unblock and helpme templates, so I temporarily modified Dominic's block to prevent talkpage editing. I removed this modification a few hours later on the assumption they would have gotten bored. So - the actual hardblock is Dominic's not mine, I'm just the janitor doing some post-block sweeping :) Euryalus (talk) 20:40, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Ok, I'll ask him about it soon. Thanks! Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 20:42, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

I should add my apologies for not making this clear in the edit summary for the post-Dominic block change. His summary was simply carried over into mine - I should have reworded it. Euryalus (talk) 01:22, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

User: the Triz

I am reporting to you that since the beginning this user has been disrupting wiki pages. He has cussed, riducled users who have tried to reach out to him. Here is some links, this is only a small taste of the uncivil barbaric comments he has made at other users. He has referred to others as nazis, mentally challegned, stupid, ignorant, bigoted, uneducated and so on.

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents&oldid=254865500#Disruptive_editing_and_personal_attack_by_possible_sock_User:130.17.92.17

I could create an entire archive of vulgar things this user has been saying to others.

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ADbachmann&diff=254561730&oldid=254539077

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:The_TriZ#Why_do_you_keep_undoing.3F

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AThe_TriZ&diff=266553634&oldid=262559883

Please ban this user once and for all, he disrespects, riducules, and has not done one productive edit. I humbly challenge you to look at this users history to find but ONE productive edit. 130.17.92.28 (talk) 22:36, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

I have no authority to ban users - please read the banning policy for what a ban involves and how they are placed. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 22:55, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Clarification again

Hey Hersfold is it legitimate to strikeout any addition to a talkpage which goes out of context of the matter under discussion. I just did so for the Lady Gaga discography page when one user started to write about his/her angsts against me on the talk page and completely deviated from the matter in discussion. I just said that I don't care what he has to say about me and told him to take it to user talk pages. Is it fine? I striked out some of my comments also as they deviated. That user previously has had problems with admins regarding his/her NPA ways. Just clariy me.--Legolas ^(talk2me) 04:51, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

P.S. Dancepop's back again. --Legolas ^(talk2me) 08:21, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

DougsTech

I just noticed your block, and I am unable to see any "repeated abuse of scripts". Am I missing something? (no opinion on the block, just curious) — neuro^{(talk)(review)} 23:05, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

...it would be nice if I could read more than '8th' before thinking LOOK, IT WAS TODAY! That would be asking too much of me, though. — neuro^{(talk)(review)} 23:32, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, that was a while ago. :-) I can probably go diff diving if you're really interested, but it's probably not worth it. :-) Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 06:05, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Ryulong arbitration

This is to notify you that a new workflow management method is being discussed at Wikipedia talk:Requests for arbitration/Ryulong/Workshop. You are being notified because you are an involved party in the Ryulong arbitration case.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, KnightLago (talk) 16:04, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

New wiki

Hi.

I found a wiki fouded by Jimbo called Wikia that lets you create your own wikis. With it, I created Factpedia. Maybe you would like to create an account on it. If you found a wiki, you can get adminship & bureaucracy. I just put this message here in case you were interested. If you want to sign up on Factpedia, here is a link to it. [2]. Carabera (talk) 00:14, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

Tell me if you are interested in the above occupation. You would be a good addition to the wiki since you create articles and do a lot of productive edits. Besides, I created the wiki today. Carabera (talk) 00:21, 10 April 2009 (UTC)