This user has administrator privileges on the English Wikipedia.

User talk:Excirial

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search


Excirial
  User:Excirial User_Talk:Excirial User:Excirial/Awards User:Excirial/Mail User:Excirial/Dashboard User:Excirial/Programs User:Excirial/Playground User:Excirial/Sketchbook User:Excirial/Blocknote  
  Userpage Talk Awards E-Mail Dashboard Programs Sandbox Sketchbook Blocknote  
 
Talk

User:MusikAnimal/spamublock[edit]

Made this today and saw you're also active at patrolling Special:AbuseFilter/499. Maybe you'll find this useful :) MusikAnimal talk 20:40, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

@MusikAnimal: It certainly is useful - and it is really practical that it includes support for a custom template as well. Normally i like to tag a page with a G11 template using Twinkle sans deleting it (To explain to the user the page was removed). After that i wait till it is done and reloads the page, then delete it, and then i head to the users talk page to use twinkle to block the user. Since it took me two lines and a set of comma's to merely explain the steps it down it pretty much equals: Too much clicking required.
I just gave it a whirl and it seems to do precisely what it advertises: Less clicking and waiting! I did make a small tweak over here though. I got two handy scripts running that list new users and new pages in the sidebar. I use both of those often but unfortunately they pretty much push the entire toolbox (And the link by this script) out of view. So, after some fiddling i moved the link to a tab instead. Excirial (Contact me,Contribs) 21:44, 20 February 2015 (UTC)
Yeah cactions is much better. I use Vector so it's far more accessible that way, actually! I think I might also create a custom template to add the G11 notice, but I'll leave it out of the core script just to keep things basic and open to customization. I can't find the template Twinkle uses, though... do you know what template that is?
I like how you source the original author's home of the scripts in your monobook.js, as opposed to using the gadget or what have you. Maybe you can source User:MusikAnimal/spamublock.js's original home too, now that I've changed it to use cactions? :) Thanks for the suggestions! MusikAnimal talk 22:13, 20 February 2015 (UTC)
@MusikAnimal: I am now back to using your version of the script again - i only ever switch to person scripts is to make sure i don't cause minor trouble for other people when my own vast javascript knowledge doesn't seem to produce the result i want. On matters that i actually do have some clue about: I believe you are looking for this lovely template: {{Db-spam-notice}}? Face-smile.svg
Also, may i add a suggestion for the script? I tried cobble something together myself but my vast javascr.... wait, i just used that joke already. Ahem. What i was saying: Beyond filter 499 users sometimes create spam pages directly into the main article space. The effective result of this is the same: Page is deleted, user is blocked. Would it be possible to support this scenario as well in the script? I suppose it would be something akin to "If the page is in the main article space fetch the first contributor of the page, then delete and block that user the same way it is done now". I believe Twinkle uses something similar to determine which editor it should template if a page is send to CSD. It would sure be a great help for dealing with all the non userpage spammers out there. Excirial (Contact me,Contribs) 21:15, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
Haha, no problem. I actually was thinking to expand to handle multiple scenarios, as I also run into {{uw-softerblock}} situations, which the same actions occur except it's a different template and block options. With your suggestion only the supported namespaces changed, so I believe this edit does the trick, but please confirm :) MusikAnimal talk 21:22, 23 February 2015 (UTC) no no no no no, sorry that doesn't do it, do not attempt to use it MusikAnimal talk 21:26, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
Ok, so you're right I'll need to fetch the page creator and block that user. Definitely can be done. I'll modify the confirmation pop up to say the name of the user who will be blocked, just so we don't make any mistakes. Sorry for the confusion, for some reason I that just adding the new namespace would work. Thanks for the suggestion, and keep them coming if you have any others! MusikAnimal talk 21:31, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────I think I have this done now. I tested deleting a mainspace page on testwiki and it deleted it as G11, blocked the page creator (me) and left me the template as it the script normally does. Let me know if you have any issues. The script does not yet tell you who the page creator is, so be sure to check the page history first.
I was going to take this a step further and turn it into a more comprehensive blocking script, but then I said to hell with it and now I'm trying to make the missing blocking module for Twinkle. No sense it designing and implementing my own interface when Twinkle has that much already done, and seemingly blocking is the only thing missing from it! Best MusikAnimal talk 23:45, 26 February 2015 (UTC)
@MusikAnimal: I'll give it a whirl this evening - thanks! By the way, you may be interested in this script which was made by Animum (talk · contribs) as well. The script itself adds a dropdown containing the various blocking reasons, and each option expands into another menu containing various block durations. I have been using it for years now and it works wonders; it does lack the "Delete a page and then then block" option though. I suppose it might have some or might serve as a decent base for a twinkle module. Excirial (Contact me,Contribs) 07:28, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

Rod Mc Kuen's Voice[edit]

According to the World Book Encyclopedic, it did mention that Rod ruined his vocal chords from shouting, and that his voice was very hoarse. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:306:BDC5:6DC0:81B1:4A7A:D3DC:D191 (talk) 20:51, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

Hello from George8211[edit]

Me again. Is it worth going through today's edits on Edinburgh Academy and Merchiston Castle School for socks/meat, or not worth the bother? —George8211 / T 21:56, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

Also, Merchisuckpoo should probably be blocked as offensive username. —George8211 / T 21:57, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

Reported James 123234 / Page: Tyler[edit]

Hi, since you were beating me to the reverts on Tyler, I figured I'd go ahead and knock out the ARV after he did another after your final warning. ROBERTMFROMLI | TK/CN 19:00, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

Hello from IzzysGirl[edit]

I work in a school and when I came to Wikipedia to look up something, I get a message about "new messages". It was puzzling for a few minutes, being chastised for my "unconstructive" editing, which was compared to vandalism on pages like Nero, Goje and Mount Aso . . . pages to which I've never been . . . and being warned that I would be blocked from editing. I looked at the pages that were edited and was even more confused . . . then I realized I WASN'T LOGGED IN!!! Whew . . . I logged in . . . but the message still appeared. What do I need to do to separate myself from the students?

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:170.235.207.25&redirect=no

Thanks!

IzzysGirl (talk) 13:49, 20 March 2015 (UTC) IzzisGirl
@IzzysGirl: Hi IzzysGirl,
A very late reply since i haven't been around for a while, so perhaps you already managed to evade the barrage of warnings on the IP's talk page. Based on your explanation i have an idea what might have happened at the time. After you log in into your account you are automatically redirected to the page you were visiting before you actually logged into your account. My gamble would be that you were looking at the talk page of user 170.235.207.25 at the time you were logged in. So after you logged in, you were redirected to the previous page you were looking at, which happened to be the userpage of the IP address. Excirial (Contact me,Contribs) 13:38, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

Twinkle block[edit]

Hey Excirial! I see you have been less active as of late, and frankly, I don't like it. Get back to work! We're not paying you for nothin! :) Seriously though, when and if you do become active again soon, I was wondering if you'd be willing to help test the new Twinkle Block module. Let me know if you're interested! And hopefully you don't mind that I keep coming back to you about getting input for all of my scripts :) Hope all is well MusikAnimal talk 15:32, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

@MusikAnimal: Definitely a lot better than the past couple of weeks. The seasonal flu usually passes with me sneezing twice but this one managed to knock me flat for a week and took another two to go away entirely. This also left with with a somewhat sizeable lit of "Things that should already have been done last week" that I've been busy clearing out. It might take another while before i'm back to full steam editing but i manage to find create gaps here and there for some quick editing, so at least there is some progress!
But enough about me making excuses for my lax behaviour on the job as of late! I'd definitely like to give a hand with testing the new block module for twinkle. If it works as well as EasyBlock and as conveniently as the spam user script i am one happy platypus. As said it might take a little while before i get some real results though as i am currently a still a busy bee instead of a platypus. Excirial (Contact me,Contribs) 14:16, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
No worries, your health comes first! Just so you know Twinkle block is sort of like a the protection module but for blocking. Full-featured, but it will require one or two more clicks to do some of the same operations EasyBlock does. However it gives you full control to set whatever options you need, and make all the templated blocks. I believe people may end up using the two scripts in tandem, as they sort of serve different needs. The spamublock functionality will eventually be merged in. Anyway, if you see any settings that you think should be set for the presets (e.g. block duration should be longer for this offense, etc etc), just let me know. Thanks and hope you feel better! MusikAnimal talk 15:38, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
I guess I should tell you how to install the test block module. Add the following to the *bottom* of your common.js (or monobook): importScript('User:MusikAnimal/Twinkle-block.js');. This is actually a hack of sorts. It will override your existing Twinkle warn module and add the block module after one second, which is the only way to do it until it gets merged into Twinkle's core script. The Block menu option should show on any user-related page, again after one second. Thanks again MusikAnimal talk 15:41, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
@MusikAnimal: I added it, and i now see a lovely new tab with a lot of options. I didn't have spare time for an in depth test so i naturally ended up poking around it for an hour once i started (Ah, life's priorities!). There is a few things that i think might be worth mentioning:
  • If you select a block template that does not allow a linked article or block rationale the respective fields for them are made inactive (grayed-out). I would suggest making them invisible instead to save some space and to prevent any initial confusion as to why they are not click able.
  • I would suggest renaming the "Generic Block" preset to "Custom Block" and move it down somewhat. Since about every block template in existence is covered by the tool the need for a custom block should be fairly rare. If it is indeed intended to be a generic block i would suggest checking "Block account creation" and "Autoblock any IP addresses used (hardblock)" by default for registered users and "Block account creation" for IP users as those will be user 99% of the time for a generic block. By the way, i love that the block template list is different for IP users and registered users. That really makes things easier.
  • If you check or uncheck the option to leave a block template, all other entered settings are reset. I doubt that will be done often, but i did lose an edit summary or two during the tests i did.
Aside from those usability suggestions i am kind of stunned i cannot get the thing to malfunction as that is normally a skill i am quite proud of. Blocking works, reblocking works, omitting critical data is caught, adding garbage data to the duration field is detected and reported to the user, not checking any action generated an error, attempting to block yourself generated a notice, even IPv6 addresses are correctly detected as IP addresses and provide the user with the IP block options. By the way, you are aware that it is a time-honored tradition that new code should be buggy right?
But... after meticulous checking of the script i did find two errors that needed to be corrected and i have taken the liberty to do so myself as soon as i spotted them. See this revision for the changes i made. Seeing the complete lack of real problems i figured i might just as well make the Paedocypris i angled up sound like a grandiose catch for a second. Face-smile.svg Excirial (Contact me,Contribs) 19:49, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
Haha thank you Excirial! This was very helpful. I'm a bit surprised you couldn't find bugs either, to be honest! That's why I come to you :) To be fair however I've had the Twinkle maintainer do several code reviews, but I don't think he did any actual hands-on testing. I'll have an update for you before too long. Best! MusikAnimal talk 21:49, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
I updated the script last night with your recommendations. Feel free to give it another whirl and let me know if you think of anything else to improve :) Thanks! MusikAnimal talk 20:59, 24 April 2015 (UTC)

Regarding an edit "I" made[edit]

Hi there.

At 10:15 p.m., 4/11/15, I was viewing the Wikipedia page on the "Baldric" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baldric) when I received a message from you claiming you had revised one of my edits at 20:10, 9/30/13 on the "History of Earth" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Earth). Now, while the revision seemed valid, I would be remiss if I did not tell you that I did not make the edit in question, have never edited that Wikipedia page, nor have I made any edit on any Wikipedia page, and do not have a Wikipedia account. While I have not been personally affected by your revision, or your massage informing me of it, it seems the culprit of this edit is still at large and has yet to suffer any scolding for his actions. I am concerned why you thought that I had made the edit edit, and that the actual vandal has gone unscathed. I'm sorry if this message seems in any way petty, tedious, or inconsequential.

I'm sure you'll figure this out, Adam

IP addresses, Wikipedia and you
IP addresses, Wikipedia and you.
If you have no account on Wikipedia the Mediawiki software that runs Wikipedia will recognize you based on your IP Address as opposed to your username - this mechanism ensures that it is still possible to communicate with editors who are editing anonymously. There is one catch though. IP Addresses are assigned to you by your Internet Service Provider and based on the service provider they may be static or might be used to represent many people at the same time. As a result you might see a message that was intended for another user that user or had previously used the same address you were assigned. The orange "You have a new message!" bar displayed will be visible as long as the IP editor has not visited the talk page and looked at the message. In your case it seems that the then-owner of the IP address was warned but never looked at the warning, and no-one did so in the meantime (So when you visited Wikipedia, you were suddenly provided with a notification regarding a rather ancient message).
This issue is a frequent source of confusion so I've opted to create an image that explains the situation. (Click to enlarge). Excirial (Contact me,Contribs) 20:11, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

Blocked IP having just edited[edit]

So it says on [IP's talk page] that it has been blocked for three months, yet I just reverted a vandalism edit from them, have they been unblocked or is this some kind of evasion? Thanks, cnbr15 12:45, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

@Cnbr15: The block is actually from April last year (1 April 2014) so it has been expired for a while now. If it starts to generate another vandalism spree it can earn itself a new one though Face-smile.svg. Excirial (Contact me,Contribs) 13:15, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
Alright then, thanks! I'll keep an eye on it to make sure it doesnt! cnbr15 13:18, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

Hello from 40.133.4.194[edit]

I am confused. I got a message from you saying that I had removed information from William Mason's page as well as Gustav Mahler's page even though I have never been to either of their pages. 40.133.4.194 (talk) 19:12, 6 May 2015 (UTC)