User talk:Amalthea

Hello, and welcome to my talk page.

If I post on a talk page please respond there. I'll be watching it for a while. No need to {{talkback}} me unless you think I missed it.
If you start a conversation here, I'll reply here (unless you request otherwise, here or on your talkpage), so please watch this page.

Archives

Archive 1 (2006-04-24 – 2008-12-11)
Archive 2 (2008-12-10 – 2009-05-15)
Archive 3 (2009-05-07 – 2009-10-30)
Archive 4 (2009-10-04 – 2010-05-28)
Archive 5 (2010-05-28 – 2011-05-10)
Archive 6 (2011-05-09 – 2012-05-26)
Archive 7 (2012-04-08 – 2013-12-15)
Archive 8 (2014-01-01 – )

This page has archives. Sections older than 14 days may be automatically archived by .

Twinkle edit summary question

Hiya Amalthea, do you know why using Twinkle to post a vandalism warning gives the edit summary "General note: Unintentional vandalism/test on..."? I'm pretty sure that for the last two vandalism warnings I've left, I chose uw-vandalism and not uw-tests. I expected to see "General note: Vandalism on..." Is it me? Thanks, Maedin\^talk 18:08, 1 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Maedin,
it was recently requested to change it since {{uw-vandalism1}} doesn't actually mention "vandalism", so the old "Caution: Vandalism" was a bit harsh. See WT:TW#first warning test/vandalism, but I'm always open for better suggestions. Cheers, Amalthea 14:37, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

Hallo, sorry for not responding sooner. May I suggest "inappropriate" as a much better wording for the summary than "unintentional"? It makes us look a bit like fools when someone replaces, say, "owl" with "penis" or "wassup?" and then we call it unintentional! I don't think it's in our favour to appear so naïve, :) Maedin\^talk 06:19, 6 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps "General note: Nonconstructive editing on..."? That would more closely parallel the actual words of the warning. PleaseStand ^(talk) 16:12, 6 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Updated it to "Nonconstructive editing", for now.
Maedin, I myself don't leave any warnings for first-time poop&penis vandalism (to not encourage the vandal), and start with level 2+ warnings for any subsequent vandalism to avoid looking like a fool myself. :) Amalthea 16:27, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

That's great, thank you! Just right, :) Maedin\^talk 18:41, 6 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

SPI and Twinkle

Hey there Amalthea. SPI was recently updated to use a new template, {{SPI case status}}. More information about it can be found at AN. Could you update Twinkle so that it adds that template? Currently, [1] and [2] are still using the old templates. Thanks, NW (Talk) 22:22, 5 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Örks. Will do as soon as possible, subzero time ATM. Thanks, Amalthea 16:28, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Friendly

You seem to be the expert on Friendly, how to I make it so it doesn't add pages I tag to my watchlist? That is the only part of Friendly I have installed. CTJF83 chat 04:09, 6 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

From Wikipedia:FRIENDLY#Configuration

if( typeof( FriendlyConfig ) == 'undefined' ) FriendlyConfig = {};
FriendlyConfig.watchTaggedPages			=	false;

–xeno^talk 16:16, 6 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, xeno, that's exactly how. Ctjf83, remember to bypass your browser cache after the change to your skin script file. Amalthea 16:31, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Thank you both. CTJF83 chat 18:19, 6 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Proxies

Is there any set process for checking whether an IP is a proxy? I'm very suspicious that 216.66.59.41 (talk · contribs) is Brexx editing through a proxy, but don't know how to go about checking.—Kww(talk) 16:43, 6 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There is no one method, no. It's a non-trivial question: there are many types of proxies, some good, some bad, some easy to detect, some hard. Often the outgoing IP is different then the IP you connect to so portscans aren't always revealing either, and you'll have to rely on secondary information.
For quick checks, I usually start by googling the IP or visiting whatismyipaddress.com which, for most open proxies, gives you a strong hint.
The IP you mention was used by Brexx, yes, I blocked it for a short while. Short because I don't know what exactly what kind of server is behind the IP.
Amalthea 17:03, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Probed around some more. There's a set of 8 proxy IP addresses there (not aligned on a /29, for some odd reason). Many had Brexx-like edits, so I blocked the set for two weeks to match the block you had installed.—Kww(talk) 21:10, 6 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ah. The anonymizer he uses here is hotspotshield.com. I'll try to look into what other IPs that uses tomorrow, and how stable they appear to be. From a glance a longer block might be appropriate, has been used by other socks before as well, but of course by legitimate users as well. Amalthea 21:40, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

My security software won't even let me visit that site.—Kww(talk) 21:44, 6 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

MOTD deletion

We could be June for another one. Simply south (talk) 21:51, 6 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Amalthea 14:53, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

Sudafedfiend8

Thanks for doing the check on the above. You are right to say that most of their contributions are positive. This is fine when they just get on with things. Unfortunately, they do get into disputes on occasion, and in those situations their use of socks does get disruptive (e.g. edit warring, voting more than once at AfD). I am pretty sure that if I look at the articles they edit again in a month or so there will probably be another dozen socks, and it seems a bit pointless just playing whack-a-mole with what look like throwaway accounts anyway. Do you think it is worth just letting them get on with it, and just checking now and again to make sure they are not being disruptive? Quantpole (talk) 09:58, 8 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I sometimes write that if I see beneficial or potentially beneficial editing in the hope that a socker might just stick to one account. I try to encourage those editors to become a welcomed community member again, I for one am happy to welcome anyone back if I see a genuine willingness to change. Not that this has ever worked so far, and most won't even read it, but I remain optimistic.
The last batch of socks has strong article overlap, and undos other edits while representing himself as multiple people. That's quite clear abuse of multiple accounts and damaging to our editing process. As long as that doesn't change you should keep reporting them so that they are at least recognizable as socks.
Cheers, and sorry for the late reply, Amalthea 14:49, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

SPI case for you

Hi Amalthea, when you get a minute can you check out Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Karmaisking and e-mail me what you think? Once you dive in, it should be fairly obvious why I've asked for a second opinion. You can either mail me directly or send it to Functionaries, whichever you'd prefer. Thanks. --Deskana (talk) 18:09, 8 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Also, if you could check this one out for me too, I'd appreciate it. I'm pretty sure they're unrelated, but I'd like a second opinion. --Deskana (talk) 20:47, 8 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

OK, that just took ages to work through. Sent mail to you, but feel free of course to forward it to func-en if it needs further input. Can I push the second one till tomorrow? It's past my bed time. :)
Cheers, Amalthea 22:45, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

Sure. Thanks for the help. --Deskana (talk) 22:50, 8 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Amalthea. Just a note that I changed the template of the sockpuppet investigation. I hope I have not overreached. BigK HeX (talk) 18:06, 16 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Of course not, sorry for my going AWOL right in the middle of that, and thanks to Deskana for commenting in my stead. Amalthea 07:38, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

Brexx proxies (probably)

Not worth a formal checkuser, but Brexx seems so adamant on User talk:Tiredofbeingsorry that a checkuser will exonerate him that it's probably worth a few seconds to see what kind of anonymizer he used for future reference.—Kww(talk) 22:42, 9 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

SoxBot 19 tasks (FFD, PUI, Speedy Images)

They're now moved to the new framework, and are working again. (X! · talk) · @854 · 19:30, 10 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, X! Amalthea 07:35, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

More friendly

Hello Amalthea. I went to see why friendly talkback ignores the preference to not insert a heading and saw that you were recently tinkering with User:Ioeth/friendlytalkback.js. It looks like it isn't checking FriendlyConfig.insertHeadings like User:Ioeth/friendlywelcome.js does, but since I've forgotten the majority of my programming skills (and never did learn js anyway), I thought it might be better (safer?) to ask if you wouldn't mind having a go at it. Thanks in advance! —DoRD (talk) 22:15, 13 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Not this shit again!

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Fridae'sDoom (talk • contribs) 02:27, 13 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

vs.

{{subst:xsign|02:27, 13 July 2010 Fridae'sDoom}} = —Preceding unsigned comment added by an unknown user

eh??? –xeno^talk 22:50, 13 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It appears to be because in Template:Xsign/month , the substed form is stripping the string to {{s , but I could've sworn this was working before??? –xeno^talk 22:54, 13 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

How dare you be busy in real life when I need your help. I'm calling my congressman. –xeno^talk 17:57, 19 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Check out {{Str sub long}} which was changed to use {{str index any}} a couple days ago, which isn't safesubstable.
Cheers, Amalthea 07:34, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

AH! Serves me right for not doing my own leg-work. Now, please - no more wikibreaks - you're kind of essential personnel. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Xeno (talk • contribs) 14:20, 20 July 2010 (UTC) <-- it works. thanks =) –xeno^talk 14:26, 20 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Can promise no such thing, I'm afraid, the next two or three weeks will likely keep me just as busy. But as it turns out, Wikipedia didn't grind to a halt in the week I was absent, so I'm hopeful it will survive a few more.
And your congressman called, he says unless you want him to conquer my homeland there's not much he can do. Amalthea 16:55, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

I need some help...

...And Ale jrb told me to come here. Basically I'm trying to figure out a way to fix the English flag on HJ Mitchell's userpage so that it shows up in both Monobook and Vector correctly. Currently the flag is in the right spot in one skin and wrong in the other (depending on what skin the talk page stalker who most recently tried to help is using). I think that the best solution would be to write a piece of code that would read which skin (and browser) you are using. Currently it is working for Monobook and not working for Vector. I noticed that in the HTML of this page there's this bit of code: 

Umm... Would something like {{REVISIONUSER}} work? Mr. R00t ^Talk 19:47, 15 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There's no such magic word, and there can't be since it'd break the parser cache (would require frequent re-parsings or duplication). You also can't include stylesheets from user page wikicode.
One approach would be to add support for some user styling into the site-wide javascript to try and fix this, either by allowing users to inject generic "safe" styles (which is difficult) or by allowing specialized things like page-absolute positioning or logo-overrides. You will not get consensus for this though (WP:MYSPACE and all).
Thus the only real solution (and thereby the best solution) is to avoid using such hacks. FWIW, the version you link to that supposedly works for monobook doesn't actually work for me, since the font-size I use here is different from the norm, which affects my page layout, which in turn defeats any such absolute positioning hacks. The supposed vector-version didn't work for me at all since I had the Wikipedia logo hidden in that skin, so the flag overlapped the navigation links. It's impossible to anticipate all this, so as I said the only real solution is to keep one's user page content inside the defined content area.
Sorry, I know that's not really the help you were looking for. :)
Amalthea 16:39, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

That's fine. Mr. R00t ^Talk 17:24, 20 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Pending Changes, Batch Protect and Twinkle

Hello, Amalthea. You have new messages at AzaToth's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

For whenever you have the time. NW (Talk) 01:43, 19 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

User:Grey eclipse

Hi, a vague block message ("Please don't") with nothing on the talk page could use a little explanation. On that talk page would be fine with me. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 04:41, 20 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Given that you haven't been editing for a little while, I don't consider this urgent but I brought it at WP:ANI instead. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 04:57, 20 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Email got my attention, replied at ANI. Thanks & Cheers, Amalthea 07:30, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

Template talk:Archive box collapsible#Sandbox sync

Ping. Would you be okay with the sync if manual style overriding was incorporated? Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 11:51, 20 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Replied there, thanks for the reminder. Cheers, Amalthea 16:16, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

Cheers! Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward: not at work) - talk 18:38, 20 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Image

Hello Amalthea!! I would like ask you one thing, i made my contribution in 2 images in the Resident Evil 5 article, but one person just put out these 2 images. The first image is this one, every game have a soundtrack and in Wikipedia is no exception to have one image in his article... :-/ the second one, is this, to identify other cover designe of the game... He said "too may non-free images not necessary for identification"... i saw in some articles five or more pisctures with non-free rational... What is the problem for these one to identify the subject..?! :-/ Really, i don´t like to make "edit wars", so I wanted to consult an administrator for the occasion... Thanks!! All the best!! Light Warrior ^{Conspiracy?!?} 17:06, 20 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You know, you could just ask me. I'm not the boogey-man. ;) Firstly, I can only edit a limited amount of articles. It's not possible for me to monitor each and every article for their amount of non-free images, even though I am aware there are many articles out there that use images in violation of WP:FU. That doesn't mean it's alright for the Resident Evil 5 to be the same. In the case of RE5, it already has cover art as the lead image and I don't feel adding the Gold Edition cover is fair use, as the game is already identified. It's also a duplicate image btw, already uploaded by User:Bloodios. Perhaps it could replace the lead image, but I would discuss that on the article's talk page first. I felt the soundtrack image was redundant, as it supports very little critical commentary. I don't feel that strongly about that one though.--Atlan (talk) 17:27, 20 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Unnecessary Template Footer Movies

Hello Amalthea i just visited this article Ajith kumar and i felt this [Blockbuster and Hit movies of Thala] just does not make any sence. no other actor has even tom cruise or will smith. i think it should be removed,it is one sided.Sunnu308 (talk) 05:32, 21 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]