Jump to content

User talk:Chenzw/Archives/Feb 2016

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Simple English Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
This is a Wikipedia user talk page.

If you find this page on a site that is not Wikipedia, you are viewing a mirror site. The page may be old and the owner of this page may not have a relationship with sites that are not Wikipedia. The original page is located at http://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Chenzw/Archives/Feb_2016.

Wikimedia Foundation
Wikimedia Foundation
This is the User talk page for Chenzw, where you can send messages and comments to Chenzw.


Bot training

[change source]

Would your bot like to eat a couple more diffs?

In this diff, a user changed the number of children that Paul Revere had to 69. Even if the bot is unwilling to revert such changes, we should somehow flag the addition of the number 69 for human review, wherever it occurs.

In this one, patriots were changed to loyalists (wrong), horseback was changed to pigback (also wrong), and other changes were made. All were vandalism. None were noticed by a human at the time. Not sure if these were within the capabilities of the bot, but here they are.

Your thoughts on the matter are welcome! Etamni | ✉   01:59, 1 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I have added both diffs to the training set as vandalism. I am not sure right now how we could go ahead with the flagging for review implementation, though – perhaps the abuse filter? The second diff is surprisingly within the capabilities of the bot – it was quite close to flagging the diff as vandalism. It is quite amazing how sometimes the bot will be able to recognise the vandalism-specific features. Chenzw  Talk  03:51, 1 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your friend is back

[change source]

Pleasee see this edit. The bot caught the vandalizm, but I think we have a sock of a blocked user who was previously editing the same page. Etamni | ✉   09:16, 1 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I wonder why I seem to be making a lot of new friends lately...  ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°  Chenzw  Talk  11:37, 1 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

school IPs

[change source]

Excuse me, Chenzw: The 166.216.130.0/24 range consists of school IPs. For what particular reason do you think they're abusing the sandbox? There have been worse edits and vandalism to the sandbox. Please consider giving them warnings, and then blocking if the "vandalism" ever gets worse. Angela Maureen (talk) 18:00, 1 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Over a period of 3 days, the range has made the following edits to the sandbox:
  1. https://simple.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Sandbox&diff=5312817&oldid=5312702
  2. https://simple.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Sandbox&diff=5312824&oldid=5312817 (also a legal threat)
  3. https://simple.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Sandbox&diff=5312831&oldid=5312828
  4. https://simple.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Sandbox&diff=5314136&oldid=5313669
  5. https://simple.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Sandbox&diff=5314208&oldid=5314159
  6. https://simple.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Sandbox&diff=5314488&oldid=5314229
  7. https://simple.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Sandbox&diff=5314549&oldid=5314491
For edits 4, 5, 6 in particular, there was no sign that the edits were used for testing of wiki markup/syntax. Taking into consideration past sandbox history from this range, I determined that those edits were an attempt at gaming the system by passing the edits off as "testing movie lines". We remind editors who are using the sandbox that they should not add "inappropriate things like copyrighted material, swearing, or other attacks in the sandbox", and that in spite of how most our warning templates invite editors to the sandbox, the sandbox should not be treated as a page which offers editors immunity to blocks.
I will not overturn the block. If you wish, you can ask Peterdownunder or Macdonald-ross to review the block. They are active on-wiki at the moment. Chenzw  Talk  00:37, 2 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
So I looked at these examples, and was rather shocked. It is very clear that the school range needed blocking. I had not realized that the sandbox edits needed regular watching, but will now do so more often. Macdonald-ross (talk) 10:27, 2 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • When someone edits the sandbox, they are able to see text that tells them where to make their edit. Would it make sense to add a reminder to that line about what is appropriate? Etamni | ✉   18:19, 2 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I'm afraid it is all too obvious that these editors went there because they thought they could get away with those comments without penalty. They will do whatever we let them do. Advice is only useful to people of good intent. Macdonald-ross (talk) 19:15, 2 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I enabled abuse filter 64 a while ago to tackle this problem. It is in warn-only mode. Chenzw  Talk  02:06, 3 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • While I agree that advice is only useful to people of good intent, the "advice" on that page would give us a stronger case when warning or blocking users for behavior there. Etamni | ✉   10:00, 3 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

21:02, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

Talk Page Stalker

[change source]
The WikiJaguar Award for Excellence
For your recent assistance responding to the request I left on someone else's talk page, I award you the WikiJaguar Award for Excellence in talk page stalking efforts. PokestarFan (talk) 21:43, 3 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

18:58, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

The bot goofed. See this edit to NASCAR. An IP changed the outdated "Nationwide" to the correct "Xfinity" -- reflecting a sponsorship change of one racing series that occurred nearly a year ago, but the bot reversed the change. I've corrected the article and dropped a note on the IP's talk page explaining that the warning was in error. Etamni | ✉   18:23, 8 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I have added the diff to the bot's training set. Thank you! Chenzw  Talk  03:59, 9 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 03 February 2016

[change source]
News, reports and features from the English Wikipedia's weekly journal about Wikipedia and Wikimedia

File upload

[change source]

Hi Chenzw, I saw your message on ST. Do let me know, here, when you're around so I can go about uploading the file. I should be around for a few hours. --Yottie =talk= 10:28, 14 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, I have granted the sysop flag. No T-shirt this time, though. Chenzw  Talk  10:37, 14 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much :) --Yottie =talk= 10:48, 14 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 10 February 2016

[change source]

Template signature

[change source]

I used Twinkle to apply Template:Firstarticle to a user talk page. During the process, my signature was not added to the template when it was done. I manually added it (and also manually changed the wording since it wasn't a perfect fit for the situation), but since you were the last person to edit the template, I thought you might be willing to check the code and see what is wrong with it. (If you need to test it, feel free to try it on my own userpage, and to delete it afterward.) Etamni | ✉   06:54, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like some of the signatures were accidentally left out in this wiki's Twinkle configuration. I have fixed them here. You may need to bypass your browser cache for the changes to take effect. Chenzw  Talk  07:10, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. I don't use that one too often, but I'll check it out later. Etamni | ✉   07:32, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

16:16, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

False positive

[change source]

Hi Chenzw, ChenzwBot automatically reverted an IP editor's helpful changes to Peninsula. Details are on the user's talk page - the user was only trying to correct a fact. I have restored the user's changes.

It would be really helpful if you could make a special page to report false positives, rather than having to post on your talk page every time. Thank you for your consideration, << S O M E G A D G E T G E E K >> (talk) 00:41, 18 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, thanks for the report. I have added the good edit to the bot's database; it will be able to differentiate such edits better in future. I will try to see if I can get a page up for the reporting. Chenzw  Talk  01:56, 18 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 17 February 2016

[change source]
News, reports and features from the English Wikipedia's weekly journal about Wikipedia and Wikimedia

For the bot's data set

[change source]

This one is definitely vandalism: [33] Etamni | ✉   07:35, 22 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Added! However, glancing quickly at the current code, I suspect the bot will still be fooled by this "higher-order" vandalism. We will see how it goes anyway. Chenzw  Talk  14:54, 22 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Screamo page revision

[change source]

I just recently tried editing and fixing the page "Screamo" as there were numerous grammatical errors and facts that did not relate to the genre and my changes were reverted i implore you revert the reversion. — This unsigned comment was added by 72.10.97.232 (talk • changes).

Hi, thank you for reporting this mistake. I have undone the reversion and made some adjustments so that this will not happen again. Chenzw  Talk  14:54, 22 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

18:22, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

Hello Chenzw and Nepaxt! I was reverting some vandalism on Immigration to Canada and accidentally restored some vandalism rather than removing it. I know I'm new to Simple Wiki, but I do have some experience over at en-wiki. I'm used to using Twinkle or Huggle. :) Bear with me here! Hope all is well! Chrisw80 (talk) 16:21, 24 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, glad to see you here; I hope you will stay and continue to contribute here! Chenzw  Talk  16:26, 24 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! I'll do my best. Also figured out what happened, you were reverting from earlier in the page history, not what I had reverted. :) Sorry about that! Best wishes. Chrisw80 (talk) 16:29, 24 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 24 February 2016

[change source]
News, reports and features from the English Wikipedia's weekly journal about Wikipedia and Wikimedia

20:12, 29 February 2016 (UTC)