Jump to content

User talk:Hersfold

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Carabera (talk | contribs) at 21:49, 4 April 2009 (→Bot). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

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


Good one!

Same thinking at [1]. MBisanz talk 04:05, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I'd noticed you'd run the script right after me. Glad I'm not crazy. :-) Hersfold (t/a/c) 04:07, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

WP:UAA

I saw that you removed my report from WP:UAA because you thought you already blocked Investorscapital (talk · contribs) and the UAA report was spelled wrong. However, this user still hasn't been blocked yet. Did you forget to block this user? Thanks for taking a look at this. Best, Cunard (talk) 07:44, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Odd; I could have sworn I'd blocked the user, and when I checked one of the links in your report to verify and got an error message that the user wasn't registered, so I assumed that's why the bot hadn't removed the report. Oh well - the user is blocked now. Sorry for the confusion. Hersfold (t/a/c) 08:57, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for blocking the spammer. Regards, Cunard (talk) 20:26, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

LoveGame

Hey Hersfold, remember about Dance-pop? Well i believe he/she is back. Take a look at the contributions of this user. Though the user is not doing any bad edits now, there are instances of the same aggravasion and provoking. Please can you keep an eye? --Legolas (talktome) 06:57, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You're right, my sock sense is tingling. You're welcome to file a WP:SPI report if you're concerned, though. Hersfold (t/a/c) 22:18, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hmmm. Maybe we should give him/her sometime to see whether he/she continues the same thing. I have a feeling that that previous block was for good. I do see a change in editing style, very mild aggravasions, and keeping good faith. A change has come to follow the consensus and not treat everything as own. Hence, though i am very sure this is our Dance-pop, but not an SPI at this stage. I want to see more of his work from now on and then later maybe. Cheers!!

P.S. The image at the edit talk page is simply HII-LL-AA-RRIOUS !! --Legolas (talktome) 05:59, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia Signpost — 2 March 2009

This week, the Wikipedia Signpost published volume 5, issue 9, which includes these articles:

Delievered by SoxBot II (talk) at 08:13, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

reply

You left me this message on my talk page:

For this diff: [2]. I do hope you were being sarcastic (and in fact it's because I assume you were I downsized the fish), but please take some time to review WP:CANVASS. We greatly frown upon canvassing of any sort at AfD, regardless of its effectiveness, as it greatly undermines the usefulness of these debates. I appreciate your willingness to see that articles remain here, but it's much better to do that by spending time working on the article than by trying to convince random passerby that it's worth keeping as is. Thank you.

Yes, I was accused of canvassing, but I don't think I canvassed. To your other point about adding to the conent of the page, that is exactly what I feel I trying to do, contacting interested parties to see if they could opine and hopefully add content to the page. The page was only up for a few weeks. Perhaps people in his industry would contribute to the page if given more time to view it. Thanks Mwalla (talk) 16:41, 2 March 2009 (UTC)mwalla[reply]

Another question, reading the comments on the Articles for deletion page, it seems clear that the consensus feels that he does not qualify under the guidlines for acedemics. Perhaps he should be judged as a psychotherapist. Also, I tried to avoid distracting the discussion with attacks on other editors, but as the page goes to deletion review, it seems that perhaps I should have made the claim that the first nomination for deletion was motivated by someone who consistently accuses my of vandalism even when my edits are upheld by other admin. Finally, since the page was only in existence for two weeks, I do not feel that contacting five or six editors and informing them of the debate constitutes canvassing. It would be different if I had contacted my online friends and told them how to vote. That is not what I did. Clearly, I was being sarcastic when I mentioned that I have to do a better job canvassing. I have not even been an editor on wikipedia long enough to know that canvassing is a violation.Mwalla (talk) 13:58, 4 March 2009 (UTC)mwalla[reply]

Replied at the DRV. Hersfold (t/a/c) 18:18, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

IP Vandalism

hi Hersfold. Please an immediate block for this IP. Mass adding bad External links to all the Indian film articles. Please help. --Legolas (talktome) 11:16, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

User has been blocked. Try WP:AIV next time though. Hersfold can't be online 24 hours a day! Martinmsgj 11:45, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, Martin. Legolas, because of college and all, I'm online very infrequently (despite what my status thing may say, so unless I'm actually actively editing, it's faster to go to AIV. Hersfold (t/a/c) 16:26, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Will do. A biiiiiiiiiiiig thanks. --Legolas (talktome) 06:21, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion review for Fred M. Levin

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Fred M. Levin. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedy-deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Stifle (talk) 09:04, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Number four and counting.... thanks. Hersfold (t/a/c) 18:18, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Here is a free lesson on canvassing...

Copy of table from WP:CANVASS removed

So, in my case, we had limited scale, a neutral message, audience was non-partisan, and it was done in the open. Get it? Mwalla (talk) 21:22, 6 March 2009 (UTC)mwalla[reply]

You're quickly becoming disruptive with this. This situation has been looked at by several people and determined to be canvassing by all of them. This is all irrelevant, however, because as I've said before, I DO NOT CARE. Your canvassing had the reverse of the intended effect at the AfD, and I believe I've received your assurances it won't happen again. That's all that really matters in my eyes, so the issue can be dropped. Continuing to harp on about this is not going to help you. Go back to editing articles, and let's move on, please. Hersfold (t/a/c) 22:16, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

86.158.233.205

You seem to be keeping an eye on Nangparbat/Algebraic123—apparently he's back as 86.158.233.205; similar reverts and absense of punctuation marks. –Capricorn42 (talk) 19:59, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Kinda vaguely - I've tried to pull away from that some as the situation became a little more unclear, and I don't think the sockpuppetry/block evasion is entirely intentional. His service provider jumps around too much, to the point we'd need to hardblock a few /16 (really big) IP ranges, which I don't see as worth it. I'll keep an eye on it, though. Hersfold (t/a/c) 21:59, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry about that edit. I just redirected it to the contribs. I don't know why I would suspect to do it, but I somehow felt the urge. Carabera (talk) 20:20, 29 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Adopt

I am newly turned contributor of en.wikipedia. I belong to Kashmir. Till now I mostly edit or expand articles related to Kashmir and Kashmiri people. I am member of few Wiki Projects like Project India, Project Jammu and Kashmir, Project Indian Television. Project Islam > Muslim scholars task force. I am not interested in engaging myself in discussions of disputed articles (May be later). I want to create and expand articles on Kashmir.
I want a mentor who can assist me, Sometimes I need to ask question regarding policies and procedures.
So, if its ok with you, I request you to adopt me and help me.

Thanks and Regards Oniongas (talk) 20:35, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm certainly around if you need help, although my activity lately has been somewhat sparse because of my college work. I'm not sure I'd be around often enough to provide you with really reliable help, particularly if you need an answer to something quickly. I also know very little if any knowledge about that particular field, so I wouldn't be of much help with those articles. For those reasons, I'm a bit hesitant to say yes, although again, I am always open for general questions and the like. If you feel you do need someone to be more active in helping you out, I can try to find someone else to formally adopt you. Let me know what works for you. Hersfold (t/a/c) 22:13, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion review for Gail Trimble

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Gail Trimble. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedy-deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. MBisanz talk 05:15, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Personal attack and usless use of talk page

Um, I think that the user Iknoweverythingandyouknownothing Just personally attacked me (see my talk page). He/she was using a talk page for non-wikipedian reasons (check his/her contributions) and does not know what Wikipedia (WP) is for. Could you talk to him/her for me please. Thanks!!! --Miagirljmw14 Miagirljmw~talk 16:13, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It also appears from a glance at the histories of both, that Iknoweverythingandyouknownothing was created by Fred is AWESOME, making it a puppet. And we know how Wiki loves puppets. Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 17:01, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, guys, both accounts have been blocked. Hersfold (t/a/c) 18:21, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism of The Fame Ball Tour

Please see this. Continuous warnings havent resolved anything. The user continuously deletes info under the pretext of WP:NOTDIR which excludes tour dates. I have raised an ANI. --Legolas (talktome) 13:22, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If you posted at ANI, why are you posting here? There's no need to inform me of everything needing admin attention. Hersfold (t/a/c) 15:36, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
However, taking a look at things, Smanu's edits do not qualify as vandalism. He's making a good-faith effort to improve the page, and does have a point as the policy is not clear on that matter. Therefore, this is a content dispute that has turned into an edit war, and blocks will soon be in order to enforce WP:3RR, which I note both you and Smanu have already broken. The only reason I'm not blocking you now is because I don't think you've been properly warned about it. However, blocks and protection will be used if the edit war continues. Hersfold (t/a/c) 15:46, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I understand i was wrong. If you would like to place a block I'll be happy to accept it. No hard feelings. --Legolas (talktome) 05:22, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Well it's a bit late now... Hersfold (t/a/c) 05:36, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Capital and Whales

Hi Hersfold
Many thanks for the diving whale, which I have incorporated into the surreal video on YouTube illustrating my song "The Capital 1980"
The Capital 1980
David
Dwsolo (talk) 15:29, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Cool! Glad it was useful. :-) Hersfold (t/a/c) 15:36, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I can get your opinoin on one thing

I was also wondering if I could get your opinoin in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Airi & meiri. I am personally not sure what to think any more.Valoem talk 18:47, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'd rather not comment on the discussion itself, since you've asked me to do so, however I'm open to answering any questions you have about the relevant policies and all. Note I'm not accusing you of canvassing; it doesn't look like you've gone on a posting spree, and your message isn't biased either way, but I'd still rather avoid posting in the discussion just to be on the safe side. Hersfold (t/a/c) 19:03, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Second question I am attempting to create an article on De Lorenzo's Tomato Pies. This is basically the Lombardi's of New Jersey. I was wondering if you knew any good review websites with a compilation of reviews and if you would be interested in helping co create this article. Valoem talk 19:16, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I have no knowledge of any such sites at all, and don't think I'm familiar enough with it to be of much use. Thanks for the offer, though. Hersfold (t/a/c) 19:22, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

DreamGuy, again

Within hours of getting unblocked, User:DreamGuy is up to his old tricks. He just removed a bunch of consensus edits (and some other ones) on the Ambigram page and removed a lot of comments on the Talk:Ambigram page that he disagreed with (mostly, perhaps all, mine). I'm leaving this message on your talk page (and User_talk:Protonk's and User_talk:Daniel Case's) because of your involvement in his recent block. Thanks. RoyLeban (talk) 19:19, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

*headdesk* I'll see what the other two think about this. But yeah, it's not looking good. Hersfold (t/a/c) 19:26, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar!

The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
A big thank you for dealing with all those vandals and deleting pages during the time non-admins couldn't edit! :) Versus22 talk 20:38, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, but since I didn't do a whole lot during that time I must respectfully decline. I do appreciate it, though. :-) Hersfold (t/a/c) 21:20, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

CadenS

I've put his unblock request on hold, with my comment below. Could you have a look? Should he be unblocked, I'll make it very clear that he's on last chance row, though. Black Kite 21:49, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia Signpost — 9 March 2009

This week, the Wikipedia Signpost published volume 5, issue 10, which includes these articles:

Delivered by §hepBot (Disable) at 23:38, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for removing the block and for your reply. It was good to know that at least someone understood what I personally went through on that ANI from hell. As you know from your own personal experience, it does not feel good to be accused of being a racist, especially when it's not true. I can only hope that User:XMarX never does that again. No editor deserves that type of incivility. Caden S (talk) 18:42, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Umm...

Hey! I've got an unusual request for you. Do you think you can indefinitely semi-protect my user page? I ask because I made an edit (see my history), and I think that I might be inviting vandalism. Thanks, Murphy2010 (talk) 23:44, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your user page hasn't been hit yet - if it starts getting attacked heavily, let me know, but we don't protect pages pre-emptively. Sorry. Hersfold (t/a/c) 23:57, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks anyway.... (I'm embarrassed. My last request was, ah, nearly the same thing, but for an article. Sigh.) Murphy2010 (talk) 00:35, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That's fine. Read through the policy if you get the chance, might help some. See you later tonight. Hersfold (t/a/c) 00:49, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Help channel

Nobody told you to "fuck off". You were removed from the help channel and eventually banned from it because you kept rejoining and trolling. If you need help editing, you are welcome to ask a question here with the helpme template. Hersfold (t/a/c) 03:20, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

1. i was playing sims at the time. my bored borther came on here and spamed it up for revenge on me irl. 2. yes, roux told me to fuck off. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Miyalana (talk • contribs)

  1. You disconnected as "miyalana" and reconnected as "PANACAKES" within the space of a minute. I find it extremely unlikely that anyone else was involved - see WP:BROTHER.
  2. I am now aware that that happened, however from that sound of it you kept talking to him for over half an hour when he was giving you clear instructions on how to proceed. I'm not surprised he eventually got irritated with you.
If you can promise that the sort of trolling you did will not happen again, I will unban you. However, I'm still not pleased that you're continuing to blame someone else when the logs clearly show you were the one trolling. Hersfold (t/a/c) 03:35, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Frequently used idea and approved areas

The Frequently used idea are needs updating seriously and now the future of the approved area is questioned. Please see the discussions at Wikipedia talk:Motto of the day/Nominations#Help with FUI and Approved area discussion. Simply south (talk) 20:26, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Meat Loaf discography

In the last few weeks anonymus users made several attempts to write new data without source. Plese help (for example: you could partial block this article so only users with account could change this article).

Sunset2007b (talk) 07:59, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No, the article has not been subject to high enough levels of vandalism, and this seems to be a content dispute. Please see our protection policy for more information. In the future, the proper place to make these requests is WP:RFPP, not by forum-shopping on five different admin's talk pages. Hersfold (t/a/c) 18:18, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Firestarter Mini Monster Truck

Hello,

I'm not sure if you recall, but you provided me with some sound advice when I had previously created a page concerning my monster truck, named 'Firestarter'. I had run into a great deal of resistance when initially posting my page, regardless of the fact that there are countless pages on Wikipedia concerning individual monster trucks, and I ended up withdrawing my entry. The main problem with the page, it seemed, was that the truck had not made it's public debut at the time the page was created.

Well, my truck has now made it's debut in front of around 70,000 people at a sold out Ford Field in Detroit, Michigan, and I drove for the major monster truck promoter Feld Motorsports at the very popular Monster Jam. I can now provide external links referencing the truck at the event on various monster truck websites, copies of the official driver's itinerary and event format given at the driver's meeting, and personal photos and video of the truck driving at Ford Field. The event was also covered by the Speed Channel, and will be airing in the near future.

How would you suggest I proceed in order to avoid all the problems I experienced earlier, if indeed you believe I now have enough information to justify creating a page?

Thanks in advance for your assistance.

Kildare2 (talk) 14:59, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm still not sure it meets our notability guideline, and you still definitely have a conflict of interest about this. The page at WP:BESTCOI should give you the best way to handle this, which in a nutshell would be don't write the article. As I'm sure was explained to you last time, editors with a conflict of interest will very often inadvertently advertise their company/group/truck/whatever or otherwise violate one or more of our policies without intending to. It's much easier to request the article and wait for someone else to start writing the article; once this has happened, you are welcome to recommend changes and additions and provide sources for the article on its talk page.
I know this probably isn't the answer you were expecting, but regardless it would be your best course of action here. If you have any more questions, feel free to let me know. Hersfold (t/a/c) 18:26, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for assisting me in making my page more suitable for Wikipedia, however I find your 'conflict of interest' statement somewhat puzzling. You have countless pages dedicated to individual monster trucks (Taurus, Grave Digger, Shattered, Bear Foot, Bigfoot, Jetix, Black Stallion, Clydesdale...I could go on and on) who have pages nearly identical to my own, drive for the same promotions company, and some of which even drove with me at the very same show I debuted in. Are they suspect of self promotion as well?

As for having someone else write the article, I mean, I could start a tab on the subject of my truck, go over to my buddy's house and have him write the article on my behalf, but why would you have me do such a thing? The page still gets written in the end, and it's kind of pointless busy work...but if that's what you need me to do, I guess I'll have to.

As for the picture I provided, I'm going to upload a photo which does not appear on my official webpage, and I will attempt to include all relevant information you require regarding copyright...but let me state here that I am going to be the owner of the picture, and it will most likely have been taken by the owner of the truck...me!

Thanks again. Kildare2 (talk) 20:44, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Conflict of interest doesn't necessarily have anything to do with the subject being notable; it's the problem that since you have a personal relationship to the subject, when writing about it here you may introduce some sort of bias into the article whether you intend to or not. You'll also have a harder time judging if the subject is in fact notable; this is best done by someone who has no involvement with the subject at all, because after all, if they think it's notable the first time they hear of it, chances are others will be of the same opinion. There's a long list of other reasons why it's inappropriate to edit with a conflict of interest, all outlined on the guideline page. I find it doubtful that the other articles you've mentioned were written by someone with a similar conflict of interest, and so they are a moot point.
As for having someone else write the article, I meant someone who has no relationship to you. To have a "buddy" write the article for you as you suggest would not only defeat the purpose (he'd then have the same COI you have), but would also violate our policy on meatpuppetry, or having others edit on your behalf. Don't do that. As I said, you can request at a relevant Wikiproject or at requested articles that someone begin researching your truck and look into making an article.
Uploading a picture would be fine, just make sure you upload it under a free license such as the GFDL or a Creative Commons license. Remember also that we do not allow images uploaded under a "non-com" or "non-commercial use only" license, nor do we allow images that are licensed for use only on Wikipedia. This is because our content is frequently used elsewhere, and our licensing requires that we allow this to happen within certain restrictions. Hersfold (t/a/c) 21:03, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have made some of the improvements you suggested, including expanding on the specifications of the vehicle, and including a picture which meets copyright requirements. I'm also waiting on another viable third party reference with a national publication. Really, you have been of great assistance to someone who is not all that familiar with Wikipedia, thanks yet again. Kildare2 (talk) 04:49, 15 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Need some help

Hi, remember me? Well I need some help: you remember all the drama we went through that time, right? Well I think he might have a few more socks. (I overheard him talking to one of his friends on the phone, and I think he may have created a few accounts via school). I don't think he's used any of them yet, but I think it would be best if my IP was hardblocked with IP exempt on my account to prevent him from using them. If that isn't possible, is there a way I can disable editing from a specific computer? (He does not have access to my computer, but he does have access to the laptop, which shares the same IP). I'd rather drop the hammer on this before it begins. I'll let you know if I find anything else, I'm snooping through web history atm. Thanks in advance. Inferno, Lord of Penguins 19:50, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see anything standing out in web history Inferno, Lord of Penguins 20:01, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
We don't do blocks on request, especially not when the only evidence for doing so is hearsay. If you have a concern of sockpuppetry, I'd recommend that you file a WP:SPI report for further investigation. Depending on the operating system, you may be able to change some settings on his computer to deny access to Wikipedia, however I'm not sure how to do that myself. It'll probably be covered in the help files. Hersfold (t/a/c) 21:06, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You find the hosts.ini file and add en.wikipedia.org, I believe. //roux   21:11, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't know you stalked my talk page... :-) Hersfold (t/a/c) 21:12, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I don't... *shifty eyes*//roux   21:16, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, shoot, shoulda read WP:BLOCK. And thanks roux, I think that worked. Inferno, Lord of Penguins 22:17, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock user

Hey Hersfold.

I was just horsing around on Wikipedia and I don't remember how, but I ran into the talk page of a blocked user. His name is Patches1998 I believe? He seems to have a bit of trouble with getting unblocked. I just thought maybe you could look into the situation since you were the "blocker" of this user. Carabera (talk) 19:58, 15 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I took a look earlier, but didn't comment as I wanted someone else to review it. Looking now, I agree with Mangojuice's assesment. If Patches wants to be unblocked, he can made a request himself. Hersfold (t/a/c) 00:38, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]


The Wikipedia Signpost  — 16 March 2009

Delivered by §hepBot (Disable) at 22:53, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Harassment issues

No, sir, my allegation wasn't that the user was actually harassing me in real life, just that the depth of his Wikipedia harassment was causing me consternation that someone that obsessive could do such a thing. Thank you. Ks64q2 (talk) 06:29, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Again, without links of any sort I don't know what I'm looking for. If you could provide some, that would be a great help. Hersfold (t/a/c) 06:36, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

My talk page

Hello. I see you were the admin who blocked my IP address. As I posted on the page of John Norrison, I came across these edits by chance, and am utterly dumbfounded at what's been going on here without my knowledge. I shall not bore you with the personal details, but I will be ensuring my son never has access to Wikipedia, and possibly the Internet, again. Quite why he chose to act in the way he did is beyond me. I would like all of the very inappropriate comments taken off my talk page. But I see a comment from another user saying that just deleting this will not make it disappear from the records. Can you explain what I need to do? Thank you, and my sincere apologies for what has taken place. 79.76.35.40 (talk) 16:36, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

They can be edited off, but that's about all that can be done. They will remain in the page history, but you have to go looking for them then. I do appreciate your help in resolving this, though. Hersfold (t/a/c) 16:52, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, thank you for that. I will remove all content then. My concerns were at the comments near the top of the page. A user says these edits will remain in the archives - is this out of my control? I'm only too glad to help, but I'm still disgusted at this. 79.76.35.40 (talk) 17:07, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
As I said, any edit made will be recorded in the page history - there's nothing you can do about this. Hersfold (t/a/c) 17:14, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, thanks for your help. I appreciate it. 79.76.35.40 (talk) 18:23, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Edit conflict

And that's why I edit conflicted trying to fix my strikethrough. But thanks. Useight (talk) 06:32, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oops. Sorry about that. Menti and I have kinda been stalking the page, and we both got fairly excited when we saw you switch. Thanks for your support. :-) Hersfold (t/a/c) 06:54, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Glad to support, and glad to keep it exciting and suspenseful. Useight (talk) 07:01, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Abuse Filter 34

Shouldn't this be configured to disallow the edits it looks for, rather then just log them?— Dædαlus Contribs 06:40, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Right now we're still in a "log-only" phase for most of these, but I'll take a look at it. It'll probably be warning-only first, though, so they can still do it if they really want to. Hersfold (t/a/c) 06:58, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Looking at the logs, it seems pretty accurate. I'll write up a warning and set it to warn/disallow in a moment. Hersfold test sock (talk) 08:19, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nangparbat does not quit!

But here has audacity to ask when block expires. New policy: time off for bad behavior? --Boston (talk) 15:21, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Why don't you try working with him instead of repeatedly trying to get him banned which is what you've done since the beginning. Try having some good faith. --→ Ãlways Ãhëad (talk) 22:46, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Filter 52

Should include moves as well as edits -- that's where the majority of these have historically been (ab)used. Could you add that? Thanks, NawlinWiki (talk) 21:11, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oh yeah. Duh. Hersfold (t/a/c) 21:13, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

IP account

Hi. Its me, Carabera.

I wanted to say that there is a user that is vandalising and attacking users and vandalising articles, leaving messages on them like: "I HAVE TO POOP!!!" and similar things. He has beel blocked several times but has not stopped vandalising and attacking. I'm not demanding you to do this, but I think you should indefinetely block him. Carabera (talk) 00:32, 20 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You should probably visit WP:AIV for this sort of thing. In any case, Hersfold can't do much about it without knowing the IP... //roux   00:37, 20 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ok. Here is the IP adress. 166.38.50.61. Carabera (talk) 00:59, 20 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
That IP address hasn't made or attempted to make any edits for two weeks. If you have a more recent address, you can report it to AIV, as you'll usually get a faster response there. Hersfold (t/a/c) 01:48, 20 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sock smelling expertise required

I saw your note on User:Nangparbat, and was wondering if you could take a look at this ANI report I filed ? Abecedare (talk) 20:19, 20 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Clear_Books

A while back you deleted a page I created. Please can you read the discussion I created on it to try and rectify? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Clear_Books Thanks TimFouracre (talk) 11:41, 21 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Content of the talk page (now deleted under WP:G8 as an orphaned talk page) was:

I would like to create an article on http://www.clearbooks.co.uk

I have attempted this twice and both times it has been deleted.

There are a number of accounting software packages listed here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_accounting_software

and I want to add Clear Books to that list but cannot do so until a wiki page has been created.

Will there be any objections if I try a third time?

Tim, the reason the page was deleted both times was because the article did not assert why Clear Books was notable. Since Wikipedia is a worldwide encyclopedia, we limit the topics we cover to those that can demonstrate that they are significant in some way. Most generally, this is done by providing several sources that provide significant coverage of the subject written independently of the subject in a reliable fashion (more detail on what this involves is covered at WP:RS). These sources show that the subject is significant enough that other people or organizations took note of their own accord and decided to write about it; this can be due to something newsworthy, or simply being a widely recognized subject in their related field. Looking back at the deleted article, the only source you provided was the homepage linked above. This is not considered to be reliable, since it is written by the company themselves. In order to create an article on this, you will need to find several other sources of the sort I've described, and then make sure that your article addresses why the company is notable in a neutral manner. If you can do this, then let me know and I'll take a look at what you've got. If you have any questions, please feel free to ask me, or if I'm not around, at the new contributor's help page. Hersfold (t/a/c) 22:47, 21 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your feedback. TimFouracre (talk) 09:27, 22 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted Page

Yes... I agree that the page I created, Tom Mucciolo, is an autobiography, and it only took a few deletion messages for to figure that out. I also understand that I should let others post notable information about me for this to be an encyclopedia reference in a non promtional manner.

I should have read the guidelines more carefully before typing my bio into Wikipedia as if I were just adding content.

Sorry about that!

So, my question is: Should I wait for the page to be deleted or delete it myself?

Thanks,

Tom TMucci (talk) 13:59, 21 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Tom, it looks like the discussion has already been closed, so it seems to be a bit of a moot point now. Thank you for taking the time to read through our policies; I understand that they're not the most apparent things at first, but I'm glad you figured them out. I would like to invite you to continue contributing elsewhere, though - Wikipedia's a big project and we can always use some new hands. Happy editing! Hersfold (t/a/c) 22:51, 21 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your comments and I am happy the page is now deleted. My 21-year old son is best friends with the son of Milly Quezada, a famous Latin singer. My son calls me and says "Dad, you should be on Wikipedia, Milly is on there!" The rest is my vain attempt at thinking this was simply a matter of posting my bio! The word "notable" is operative. Lesson learned!

Even moar template help

Hey, remember User talk:Hersfold/Archive 20 (August 2008)#moar template help and {{Iw-matrix}}? I've been trying to sort out a way to allow the user to transclude more self-generated rows at the bottom (for non-english, non-wikipedia wikis, eg m:User:Xeno/iw-matrix). See the recent changes to m:Template:Iw-matrix for what I've already tried. i must admit I haven't spent too much time try to do this myself; that's partly because I'm rusty with parser functions, but mostly because I still don't quite understand how you sorted it out in the first place. ;> anwyays, if you have a minute. feel free to work on it here or at meta and use my userspaces in either place as a sandbox as well. obviously this isn't critical. –xeno (talk) 01:01, 22 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'll try to take a look at it soon - not sure if I'll have a whole lot of time tonight and almost certainly won't tomorrow since I'm moving back into my residence hall after spring break. I'll let you know what I come up with. :-) Hersfold (t/a/c) 01:17, 22 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks =) At your convenience, I'm in no rush. –xeno (talk) 01:34, 22 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Check it out: User:Hersfold/Hersfold's Sandbox has the main template, iw-matrix, and User:Hersfold/Hersfold's Sandbox/Template has iw-matrix/lang. It should now be able to handle any language of any project except wikispecies (because the editcount tool doesn't do species from what I can tell). It can also accept advanced userrights for any project, including the English Language ones. To avoid confusing things, I have named all of the parameters, so this is no longer backwards compatible. You'll need to update the other instances of the template when this goes into use. Hersfold (t/a/c) 16:40, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
That's solid! cheers mate. Feel free to implement it on both projects for proper attribution. I don't think many people are using it so I'll follow up to fix the transclusions. –xeno (talk) 16:45, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Will do, I'll fix up the documentation over there too. Hersfold (t/a/c) 16:58, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Damn fine work on the template, I just updated mine over at meta and it works great. –xeno (talk) 05:35, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Awesome! Hersfold (t/a/c) 05:41, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for replying to the email! We can all learn from each other. Cheers! --  Chzz  ►  03:02, 22 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry

My bad on the vandalism. Jerk roommates like to well... be jerks. Sorry for the hassle. 67.190.81.211 (talk) 05:43, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

enwikt bot questions

Would you mind responding to queries at wikt:Wiktionary talk:Votes/bt-2009-03/User:HersfoldBot for bot status? Thanks.—msh210℠ 16:58, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oops, I didn't realize there were any. Thanks for the notice! Hersfold (t/a/c) 16:59, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:Wetman88

This user has responded to your second chance offer with some article changes and is now asking to be unblocked. It looks like a fairly substantial expansion of an article, with sources. I leave second chances up to the admin who offers it, though, so it's up to you. Mangojuicetalk 17:02, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

User:Mattkachu evading block, again

Dif here. Thanks!--Vidkun (talk) 18:23, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

And gone. Thanks. Hersfold (t/a/c) 19:01, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 23 March 2009

Delievered by SoxBot II (talk) at 04:04, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete

Hi Hersfold, a small request. Can you please delete User:Legolas2186/La Isla Bonita? I dont need it anymore. --Legolas (talktome) 10:39, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Hersfold (t/a/c) 12:06, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. --Legolas (talktome) 12:37, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Ryulong

An Arbitration case involving you has been opened, and is located here. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Ryulong/Evidence. Please submit your evidence within one week, if possible. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Ryulong/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, MBisanz talk 23:23, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

UC Bill

Hello... I didn't want to revert you, but is it really the best idea right now to blank Bill's user page and lock him out completely? Today's actions are not acceptable, but given his past contributions shouldn't we try to find out what has happened first? (I've posted more to this at the AN/I entry about his actions here.) --Ckatzchatspy 23:43, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome to overturn it if you (or ANI) want - personally, though, from what I saw on his talk page before and after the threat I think it's a lost cause. I trust you to do the right thing. :-) Hersfold (t/a/c) 23:45, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the quick reply. I'd just like to restore the user page for now, if that is OK. Perhaps we can allow talk page access in a day or two to see if circumstances have changed? (I'll wait for your response before doing anything.) By the way, I have added to my post at AN/I to make certain that no-one thinks I'm questioning you personally; it is just that the whole event is rather perplexing. Thanks again. --Ckatzchatspy 00:31, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
That's fine - in fact, I'll go revert myself on his user page now. Hersfold (t/a/c) 01:29, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Following this up, we generally have a pretty firm policy to allow people to vent on their talk page (quite a bit, in some cases) after being blocked. UC Bill said a lot of stuff, but he didn't threaten violence against anyone or anything which really seems to me to justify an immediate indef block. The threat of disruption is probably just blowing off steam.
If he were to follow through, that's another thing, but we usually don't pile on like that.
I recommend returning the block to the original duration. If he hangs himself by actually going off and committing indef-blockable abuse afterwards, so be it - I and a lot of other admins will be watching closely for a while afterwards, and we or you can reblock in that case.
Thank you. Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 03:18, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I patrol unblock requests a lot - general convention (which admittedly does vary a lot) is that users get three unblock requests. Good behavior and well-thought out reasoning gets a user more chances, while demonstrating that you have no interest in improving the project will significantly shorten that amount. Bill not only demonstrated that he wasn't willing to contribute, but his conduct got progressively worse, which is quite something considering how it began. That said, if someone feels as though the indef block is not appropriate, I am fine with them reducing it. However, I will not do so myself; Wikipedia is not anyone's soapbox, particularly not for clearly disruptive users, and I see no reason why we should permit someone to vent in that manner. Hersfold (t/a/c) 03:23, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Sorry, I'm not trying to harass... No-one likes being wrong, and even fewer like to be told they are wrong. But to err is human. What I was trying to say in my last message is that I understand why you didn't reverse the block. What I missed out was that I would have a lot more respect for you if you had rectified the error yourself. Ohconfucius (talk) 06:51, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Chiming in. What you did was beyond. There was no reason to block email from the account and no reason to replace the user page of the individual in question with the indefblocked template (especially without removing the temp category.) Indeffing a long-term productive contributor for an outburst on their talk page while they blocked is patently against standard practice. Blocking email from an account that has not abusively used the email this user feature and is not expected to abusively use the feature is specifically against policy. Please confirm that you will not repeat this behavior. Thank you. Hipocrite (talk) 13:21, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ohconfusius, your first message came off very incivil; even if you were offering your support, it sounded like you were insulting me. Sorry if I misunderstood.
To both of you, however, I feel my action is appropriate and made it clear that other administrators were free to modify my actions if they felt otherwise. I will confirm no such thing, Hipocrite, as I am well within my rights to use the tools as I see appropriate. I made no breach of policy, as he posted a clear intention to continue disruption of the site and I responded accordingly. I would further point out that the block has been reduced now, so this is somewhat a moot point. Hersfold (t/a/c) 18:34, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You believe the email block was appropriate, and was not a breach of policy? What led you to believe he was going to abuse the email-this-user feature? Hipocrite (talk) 03:18, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
His threat of disruption. Hersfold (t/a/c) 03:20, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
He threatened to abuse the email-this-user feature? Where? Hipocrite (talk) 03:21, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Not specifically, no. Hersfold (t/a/c) 03:25, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You stated that you felt email abuse was extremely likely. I'm trying to understand the reasoning that went into your evaluation process, and if that can be corrected. I do not believe that email abuse was extremely likley in this case. If I misunderstood your statements, and you did not think it was extremely likley, or you used more than your gut feeling that he was an email abuser in the making, then please make that clear. Hipocrite (talk) 15:11, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Any advice for adminship?

I applied for adminship on the 24th of March. The block from last November is a bump in the road to becoming an admin. Do you have any advice for becoming a sysop? -BlueCaper (talk) 02:08, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I still strongly feel that you're not experienced enough to be an administrator. I would recommend you spend several more months involving yourself in administrative areas such as WP:XFD, New page patrol, and various backlog work to demonstrate your understanding of policies better. Your block last November will very likely take some time to recover from, and you'll need to demonstrate that the community would be able to trust you with the tools. I've left further advice on your RfA. Hersfold (t/a/c) 03:15, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, so what policies will I need to review in the meantime? -BlueCaper (talk) 12:55, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This list would be a good start. Hersfold (t/a/c) 18:35, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Clarification

A little clarification. When somebody is using the talk page of an article for forum like info like this, I believe it is perfectly ok to remove such content? Clarify. Also when an user is pointing out some info, but is deemend as forum like by somebody wrongly and continuing forum like conversation themself, is it fine to strike out that part and note that it can be discussed? Well I suppose that provoked the old blocked user who we all know has come back under new name. Suggestions? --Legolas (talktome) 04:58, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, your actions look fine there. If they get particularly troublesome, let me know. Hersfold (t/a/c) 05:01, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ya sure. I knew it was the same user, but thought may be changed his/her ways. Alas!! It only took a little disagreement for hte user to come back to old ways, check my talk page. --Legolas (talktome) 05:05, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, I see the see there is a disscussion about me. User:Legalos has called me Dance-pop, which I assume is meant to be a bad user, I am not this user (no evidence is provided by Legalos2186). This would be considered trolling in internet terms, this behavior is unacceptable on Wikipedia as it contridicts a Wikipedia policy. If it continues I will contact a user to investigate said behavior. All the best Has Anybody Seen My Disco Stick? 05:49, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
A checkuser has just confirmed that you are Dance-pop. You are now blocked indefinitely for block evasion. Hersfold (t/a/c) 05:54, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Hers, I just saw regarding this block. Sad really . Well I just changed the internal wikilink for Check user from WP:CU to WP:RCU in the block template in the users talk page as WP:CU leads to Wikipedia:Clean up. Hope its fine. --Legolas (talktome) 06:59, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oops. Hersfold (t/a/c) 07:02, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Filter 61 / Interstate 5 in Washington

This false positive definitely didn't come from the edit_delta. I originally wrote it in a different format, but it was changed by someone else along the way. That line is supposed to exclude blankings which almost invariably include reference blankings too. |This filter is supposed to catch ref blankings if scale that doesn't blank entire articles so allowing the filter to continue if the edit_delta is >= -1000 is totally appropriate. I think I caught the error and I'll be fixing it right now. - Mgm|(talk) 09:41, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ohh, ok. Sorry about that. Hersfold (t/a/c) 18:26, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Spam

Hi, I'm seeing a spam link "Check 1cate!" on Template:Citation and various other templates, not sure how to remove it though. Any ideas? Jvhertum (talk) 16:10, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Where are you seeing this? The link isn't in the template itself, so it's probably being used in the template on a particular article. Hersfold (t/a/c) 18:28, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I cannot reproduce this anymore. I was seeing the spam link on multiple citation templates. The problem must have solved itself :) Jvhertum (talk) 16:06, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, then, glad it's sorted. Hersfold (t/a/c) 17:04, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your bot request

Hi Hersfold I wanted to let you know that Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/HersfoldBot has been approved. Please visit the above link for more information. Thanks! BAGBot (talk) 07:05, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Welcoming plus Adoption

Thank you Hersfold for the welcome and hopefully someone will adopt me. --KingLeian (talk) 05:22, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome! Feel free to let me know if you need anything. Hersfold (t/a/c) 05:28, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Requesting articles where at? --KingLeian (talk) 05:30, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You can request an article at WP:RA. Hersfold (t/a/c) 05:38, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
not to bother you again but just was wondering I don't know what I should write for an article? any ideas? thanks --KingLeian (talk) 05:47, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Don't really have any, no - you might want to look through WP:1ST, though. It'll give you some instructions on how to proceed and maybe some ideas. Hersfold (t/a/c) 05:56, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Transwiki bot thing

Wow after visiting your user page and talk page I am impressed and going to get me some cool widgets, as well! I had a late thought about the Transwiki bot thing you organized. Can the new program parse out the things Wikipedia has in parenthesis after the word when doing a comparison for duplicates, for a recent example (Wikipedia) w:Shaw (woodland) <=> wikt:shaw? If not doesn't it sound like a good idea. Goldenrowley (talk) 05:19, 28 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That should be possible; I'll add it to the list of future updates. Hersfold (t/a/c) 05:23, 28 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Now we have a minor problem it is tagging the articles as 2009-02 which means imported in February 2009. They should be 2009-03, changed to 2009-04 on April 1s. If this is too much programming I'd be fine with just 2009 without a month. Goldenrowley (talk) 18:06, 28 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Another comment, sorry. All in all the bot is wonderful but I think the Bot's colorful signature is too long, its 3 lines of codes long and repeats the same for each line entry, which will cause page size maximums in no time.Goldenrowley (talk) 19:05, 28 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Aww, but it's the same as mine. :-( Ok, I'll log in and make it a bit simpler. As for the date thing, that is odd; I think I've fixed it now, but I'll double check on the bot's next run. Apparently as far as Java is concerned, January is the 0th month and not the 1st. I should have the updates loaded soon - I'm streamlining some of the other code as well to prep it for working on other projects. Hersfold (t/a/c) 19:10, 28 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Another bot question. Could you please take a look at what happened with Output impedance, especially on the WT side? On the WP side, the bot said it was transwikied. So I changed it to a soft redirect, only to have the soft redirect reverted because the article was missing on WT. So I'm wondering what happened over on WT. Did the page ever make it over there? Was it deleted over there? Something else? - TexasAndroid (talk) 14:46, 1 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The bot imports all the articles to WT's Transwiki: namespace so they can be cleaned up into proper dictionary entries before they go "live". The page is here and doesn't seem to have been worked on yet aside from the bot removing the transwiki template. The bot was having some issues yesterday due to an "upgrade" I made, but this wasn't one of them. Hersfold (t/a/c) 17:39, 1 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Helpme

Phoebe tells me that I should look at howwikipediaworks.com Fiendishx (talk) 19:31, 28 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That should help too, yeah. Let us know if you need anything! Hersfold (t/a/c) 19:33, 28 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 30 March 2009

Delievered by SoxBot II (talk) at 20:05, 31 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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)[reply]

It's just an april fools joke. :-) Hersfold (t/a/c) 01:49, 2 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I know. Be sure to sign my new guestbook soon! Carabera (talk) 12:46, 2 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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)[reply]

Hi, me again

Hello, dude, thanks for replaying on my e-mail sent! You can talk to me at: [3]. 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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]
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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
What about the request form? Remember my message saying I got confused immediately? Carabera (talk) 17:01, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
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)[reply]
What do you mean by coding? Carabera (talk) 20:57, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
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)[reply]
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."
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Hersfold&oldid=281778986"