User talk:Hersfold/Archive 28 (April 2009)

← Previous archive - Archive 28 (April 2009) - Next archive →

This page contains discussions dated during the month of April 2009 from User talk:Hersfold. Please direct all current discussions there. Thank you.

---

April 1 - 15

Don't Do that!

Hi Hersfold.

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

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

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

Current events

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

Hi, me again

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

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

---

Serbian Wikipedia User: Aleksa Lukic

Abuse filter syntax

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

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

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

OK, let's try a few more:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Smile!

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

Bot

Hi.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

A barnstar for you!

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

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

Unblock

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

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

Wikipedia Signpost: 6 April 2009

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

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe

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

User:Yyem

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

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

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

User: the Triz

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Clarification again

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

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

Hey, sorry for missing this earlier. Usually it's better to ask them to strike out the comment rather than editing it yourself - it can be considered rude to edit others' comments, to the point some people get twitchy even if you're just correcting an obvious typo.

As for Love.Game, I'll take a look. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 02:54, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

User:Dance-pop's block has expired, although he hasn't been editing under that name for some time. In looking at Love.Game's edits, I'm definitely getting the impression he's not new (the first edit is pretty clear on that), but he's a lot better spoken than Dance-pop was. You're welcome to file an SPI for further investigation, but I'm not 100% convinced they're the same just now. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 03:09, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

It's starting the same way as User:GagaLoveGame. If you must notice you will see that every time the user comes back, the name is something to do with Lady Gaga the artist. My first suspicion. But since Dance-pop's block has expired he/she is welcome back. Thing is that initially the user will be doing good edits and assume good faith, but like last time, a minor disagreement will completely overturn his behaviour. This time I can see he really has a vengenace for me along with some other editors who are canvassing against me for a matter on the Talk:Lady Gaga discography page like this. I won't file an SPI, just I'm waiting and watching like last time. Cheers for your help, by the way what was the message on your talk page about some block? --Legolas ^(talk2me) 03:53, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

I had forgotten the previous LoveGame account. I'm not sure what message you're referring to, though...? Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 03:55, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

There was some message regarding a block from neuro I guess. --Legolas ^(talk2me) 04:02, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

That was concerning a block from some months ago. What of it? Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 04:23, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

(Outdent)Actually I was going to ask you a question regarding an editing problem I am facing but then thought maybe you are blocked. Previously when I edited I could use teh edit templates which come below the edit box, but now I can see those templates but somehow I can't click on it and use them in the edit page. Do you the reason? --Legolas ^(talk2me) 04:29, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

Not the faintest idea; they're working for me. You might want to try asking at the tech village pump, though, they may know the cause. Sorry. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 05:25, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

Ohh yeah, of course, bite me :D --Legolas ^(talk2me) 05:38, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

DougsTech

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

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

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

Ryulong arbitration

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

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

New wiki

Hi.

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

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

I actually do hardly any article writing, and I'm much too busy to do much elsewhere what with my Wikipedia work and off-wiki stuff. Thanks for the offer, though. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 02:47, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

Ryulong Case - personal invitation to participant PD

I'd like to invite you to visit User:Ncmvocalist/Ryulong-PD and continue to make proposals there; I've merged what we've said and proposed so far if that's okay. Ncmvocalist (talk) 20:31, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

Ok, I'll keep an eye on it. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 20:33, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

Happy Hersfold's Day!

Hersfold has been identified as an Awesome Wikipedian, and therefore, I've officially declared today as Hersfold's day! For your excellent work in administrative activities, enjoy being the Star of the day, Hersfold! Cheers, bibliomaniac15 00:33, 11 April 2009 (UTC) If you'd like to show off your awesomeness, you can use this userbox.

Yay! Thanks very much, I appreciate it. :-) Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 01:48, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

Thank you1

Thank you for resolving my issue. I really appreciate it. --Letatcestmoi94 (talk) 21:31, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

User:X1998

Hey, Hersfold, As you might have seen, I've been trying to work with X1998 about his/her block. There doesn't appear to be any block against the account nor against the IP they have provided. I tried to check for rangeblocks using the tool server link on the page, but all I keep getting is a blank page, so I'm not sure if there is a range block going on or not. He or she already has an account and says that he/she can't edit at all outside of the talk page. The issue I have is that after checking his/her history, X1998 seems to have been making good faith edits until the block kicked in somewhere around 20:30 April 11th. However, the bad news is that X1998 told me that the block doesn't expire until sometime in June. So anyways, I'm wondering if you have any idea as to how we should approach this. I'm not sure who the blocking admin is so I don't know who to contact to see if this is a game of good sock, bad sock, or if this is just an honest editor who's collateral damage in the IP rangeblock. The account is way too new (created less than a day ago) to give an IP block exemption, so I'm not exactly sure what options we have left. Your input would be greatly appreciated. Thanks, Icestorm815 • Talk 02:59, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Looking at his request again, he's not giving us the information we need. He typed the template in manually; it should provide the blocking admin and in some cases a block ID. He's either affected by an autoblock or a rangeblock; autoblock should be easy to handle since we can just remove it, but the rangeblock will probably involve talking to a checkuser. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 05:11, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia Signpost: 13 April 2009

• License update: Licensing vote begins
• News and notes: WMF petitions Obama, longer AFDs, UK meeting, and more
• Dispatches: Let's get serious about plagiarism
• WikiProject report: WikiProject Color
• Discussion report: Discussion Reports And Miscellaneous Articulations
• Features and admins: Approved this week
• Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
• Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe

Delievered by SoxBot II (talk) at 16:21, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

April 16 - 30

SchnitzelMannGreek

Hey hersfold. I'm having a discussion with SMG, and it does seem like he is being honest in what he says at the moment (Please remember I am the one who was being harrassed by the socks). I do think he is trying to repent and be a constructive contributor, and now that I think of it, a lot of the good hand socks look like a genuine attempt at a fresh start (The Polish Leader, etc.). He says he no longer has the password to the original SMG, so any further unblock requests are going to be made from User:Axis 666. Please reconsider the unblock request, I feel this is a good time to WP:AGF and allow him a last chance. Inferno, Lord of Penguins (talk) 02:23, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Just a short while ago one of the IRC bots reported a new user User:Axis Power of Schnitzel-Atens Greece. I don't care if he marries you - he will not be unblocked while he continues to engage in abusive sockpuppetry. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 02:27, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Would you be willing to reconsider if he stopped? Inferno, Lord of Penguins (talk) 02:29, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Doubtful. He'll need to demonstrate that we can trust him (unlikely considering the magnitude of his abuse) and that he's willing to edit constructively. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 02:32, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

I've reblocked User:Helfen derVineal to prevent use of his talk page, following this brilliant response. Should have done it earlier frankly. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 01:44, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

Mysterious Editing Problems

Hey, just wanted to thank you for your help on the help IRC regarding the mysterious editing problems I've been having. Sure wish we coulda gotten things figured out! Have a great day! Blessings, Filmcom (talk) 04:52, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Oh, sure. Sorry we couldn't help more, but at least we got you editing! Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 15:48, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Permission

Hi Hersfold,

I was just wondering if I could get your permission to use your really good table located here that explains all the buttons on the tool bar. It is really thorough, and being the lazy lady I am, it would take weeks for me to produce something as detailed as that. I would be using it to explain to my adoptees as you have if you wanted to know.

Thanks, Gaia Octavia Agrippa ^Talk | _Sign 11:43, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

You are more than welcome to use any of my lessons; in fact, you wouldn't be the first to do so. Please let me know if anything needs updating; I made those lessons over a year ago and some of them are rather out of date. Enjoy, and best of luck with the newbies! Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 17:55, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

Thank you. Gaia Octavia Agrippa ^Talk | _Sign 19:13, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

Mail

Check mail. — Rlevse • Talk • 13:23, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

Checked and replied. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 17:01, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

The 7th DC Meetup

Please be advised that a proposed Meetup/DC 7 is being discussed here. We need your help to figure out some of the details! You are being sent this notice because you previously expressed interest in such meetups. If you no longer wish to receive such notices, then please leave your user name here.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 23:02, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

Dance-pop

I am really getting tired of Dance-pop and his threats and personal attacks on talk pages. :( --Legolas ^(talk2me) 03:39, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

The user didn't even try to hide it, spelling Legolas' username wrong in the same way Dance-pop did, as did Dance-pop's various other socks. CarpetCrawler^{message me} 03:42, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

This user is also bordering on incivility with their response on my talk page, here, claiming that I'm a "rude little child" for warning them that they may have been uncivil in their message to Legolas on the above talkpage. CarpetCrawler^{message me} 03:48, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Its the same thing starting all over again. --Legolas ^(talk2me) 03:49, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Blocked, investigating the possible sock thing. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 04:23, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Now is bordering on racism. --Legolas ^(talk2me) 04:30, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Hence why he's blocked. Incidentially, checkuser confirms that User:I am Rorschach == User:Dr. Rorschach == User:Dance-pop. All blocks are being adjusted accordingly. I had them look at User:Love.Game as well since you had concerns about them too, and it was inconclusive. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 04:35, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

(Outdent)Thanks for your help Hersfold. I was really getting tired of the same things again. Well you would be happy to know I got a few barnstars for my work. It felt good to be appreciated. :) --Legolas ^(talk2me) 05:13, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

ArbCom notice cross-posting

Hersfold, I've noticed that lots of ArbCom notices are getting cross-posted to AN and the Committee's new noticeboard? Any particular reason the committee doesn't expect interested parties to watchlist the new noticeboard? Just b/c it's new, perhaps?--chaser - t 05:40, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

It's probably mainly to make sure as many people as possible are aware. I think a lot of new users especially hear "Arbitration" and run in fear, and as you said, the new page probably doesn't help the veterans much either. It's standard procedure now to cross-post at least to AN, and usually to one of the VP boards as well. To be honest, though, I'm probably not the best to ask; I was only appointed as a trainee clerk 14 hours ago and I'm still learning the ropes. :-) Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 06:41, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Jim Brandstatter

Hi thanks for fixing Template:Infobox_CollegeFootballPlayer but it still seems to have error messages: its still showing gobly goop next to his position. Can you fix that too? TomCat4680 (talk) 10:50, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

It looks like it's been fixed by now. Sorry for the delay, I've been really busy all day. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 05:25, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

No problem, I'm just glad it was fixed. Its up for DYK so it wanted to look pretty. TomCat4680 (talk) 11:08, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

TomCat4680 (talk) has given you a kitten! Kittens promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Kittens must be fed three times a day and will be your faithful companion forever! Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a kitten, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

Spread the goodness of kittens by adding {{subst:Kitten}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message!

Wikipedia Signpost: 20 April 2009

• Book reviews: Reviews of The Wikipedia Revolution
• Wikipedia by numbers: Wikipedia's coverage and conflicts quantified
• News and notes: New program officer, survey results, and more
• Dispatches: Valued pictures
• WikiProject report: WikiProject Film
• Features and admins: Approved this week
• Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
• Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe

Delivered by SoxBot II (talk) at 18:34, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Block evasion

Can you check the talk pages of users Cloverfield and Child funk. There's a possibility of a block evasion (can be Dance-pop again) whereas child funk is advicing on how to evade a block. Just thought of bringing this to your notice. --Legolas ^(talk2me) 05:59, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

I just thought I'd comment. If it turns out that Cloverfield is indeed a sock of Dance-pop, and is banned, then I believe that Child funk should receive a warning for giving the user advice on evadng a block. I don't think they should be banned, since they probably didn't know that evading a block automatically means a ban (They probably think if you evade a block and stay civil it'll all be OK.) CarpetCrawler^{message me} 06:02, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Open an SPI for a checkuser, please. Cloverfield Monsta looks pretty similar at first glance, but Child Funk seems a bit more well-spoken than Dance-pop's incarnations have been.

Carpet, I have no authority to ban anyone on my own; bans are placed by the community, and the standard way to receive one is the "no administrator is willing to unblock you" deal. That would apply to Dance-pop and any of his reincarnations, however a blocked user is not banned by default, even if the block is of indefinite length. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 16:34, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Ooooh, we know. We're not saying Child funk could also be a sock, nor was I saying that anyone should ban child funk. I was saying that if it turns out it's a sock of Dance-pop, Cloverfield I mean, Child funk should at least receive a warning for giving the user advice on how to evade a block. ;) Wait a second... I think we're getting mixed up. I had meant for you to BLOCK, not ban the user is they are a sock... I'm getting my words confused, since both words mean the same thing on message boards. My apologies for the confusion. CarpetCrawler^{message me} 19:06, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

It's no problem, it happens all the time. Anyway, if they are related, the SPI should figure that out. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 21:36, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks Hersfold. But I think you didnot understand my concern. Child Funk is not Dance-pop. I'm 100% sure. My concern is that he may be unknowingly telling Cloverfield on how to evade a block. I'll file an SPI for Cloverfield. --Legolas ^(talk2me) 07:25, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Oops I didnot know Carpet already responded. --Legolas ^(talk2me) 07:25, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Problematic decline

In reviewing the recent unblock requests, I noticed that you posted this before I had a chance to show the user how to go about requesting a change in user name. This decline is unacceptable, as it is stated that anyone blocked for an improper user name can have their name changed upon request, and that crats go ahead and perform this action. This is a notice to tell you that I will be contacting a crat to go ahead and work with the user in finding an appropriate username as is standard in these situations. Ottava Rima (talk) 18:13, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Don't bother, as I was working with that user via email shortly after that. He's already gotten a new account and will begin editing again soon.

In the future, if you do have a concern with something I've done, I'd really appreciate you talking with me first before you go running to the higher-ups. I find it somewhat rude that you didn't do this here. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 21:30, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Um, what do you think the above notice is? I appreciate that you attack me for not doing something in a response to the action of me doing it. Now, the amending of the block log means nothing, because the user is not shown -why- they were blocked and where the appropriate guidelines are. What you were supposed to do is what I am going to do, which is discuss with the user about changing their name to an appropriate name. There is no "accepting" or "declining" an unblock request in such situation. There is keeping a name or not keeping a name. Nothing more or less. Ottava Rima (talk) 21:46, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

I'm sorry if I misunderstood, but your notice above seemed to imply you were going to file a request with the crats whether I responded or not. In any event, I did discuss with the user the problem with their username, the other problems they were having (edit warring) and how to avoid both. When I felt the user had a satisfactory understanding of them, I released the block on his IP address to allow him to make a new account, something which is standard procedure when an account does not have any substantial edits attributed to it. I did what I was "supposed" to do; if I didn't do it the way you feel I should have, I'm sorry, but it's done now. There is no point in posting further at User talk:KillYourselfNow, as that account is no longer active. The user is back editing, with a name that is acceptable under policy. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 21:51, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

"I did discuss with the user the problem with their username" Then do so in public next time so people looking at unblock requests can see that. Now, by unblocking the IP and having him create a new name, he is currently using another name to continue possible edit warring. What should have happened is that he has his user named changed, which is recorded in his block log as being blocked for it, then having him warned about edit warring publicly. Having a problematic username plus problematic edits is used to determine if a user should be blocked. Now, in the future, people can look at the account and not see that he had a very problematic username and was possibly edit warring under that account (although very slowly). Ottava Rima (talk) 22:02, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Ottava, he emailed me. It seemed easier at that point to continue the discussion by email, and I noted such in the block log. If you believe I would unblock a user who I felt would continue edit warring, you are sorely mistaken. I am keeping an eye on his contributions. Contrary to your apparent belief, I am not being irresponsible here. Now if you do not mind, I have better things to do than be subject to baseless accusations of abuse. Good day. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 23:10, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

The only one mentioning abuse is you. I simply stated above that I was going to contact a crat so the user can rename. Obviously, the user cannot apply for a rename while blocked. The justification to having renaming instead of them creating a new name is so that 1. the history of them having a faulty user name can be taken into consideration if there is any problem and 2. a detailed history of their previous 5 edits to a page that could be construed as a content dispute can be more easily followed. Does it have anything to do with you? Not really, as it is a Crat matter and not an admin matter. However, since he appears to have created a new account, the history cannot easily be taken into consideration if there are any problems that develop. The lack of visibility makes it impossible for other people to see if the matter was even being dealt with. Both considerations are important for the future. Ottava Rima (talk) 23:24, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

(outdent) Ottava, this happens all the time. You can see a comment from Jayron on the talk page now telling him to make another account, not to file a rename request. I don't see why you're making such an issue out of this, because it really isn't one. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 23:32, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

If you check my contribs, you will see multiple dealings with crats in dealing with such cases and if you ask around IRC you will find more there. As I have stated, it is already to late, but I explained the necessary aspects above in pursuing a rename as opposed to a brand new account. I'm not making an issue out of it at all. My first statement was to mention that I was going to discuss it with some crats so that you would know what was going on, and my later statements were an explanation as to why renaming is more appropriate than allowing him to make a new name. Users requesting the ability to edit after being blocked for an inappropriate name is simply a Crat matter and has nothing to do with powers of either you or I, so there is nothing here about you in any regard. Ottava Rima (talk) 01:15, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the idea - I kinda stole it ;)

Well, I've got SMG on simple, so we'll see how this works out. That was a very good idea - so far it looks promising. Anyways, thanks. Inferno, Lord of Penguins (talk) 21:05, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Inferno, Lord of Penguins (talk) has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy munching!

Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!

You're welcome. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 21:35, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Move over redir

Hiya. Would you be able to move Coat of Arms of Edmonton back to Coat of arms of Edmonton per the standard naming practices? Another user moved it earlier today, and it's incorrect. Ta. //roux   02:07, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

In the middle of ArbCom clerking, will do once I'm done. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 02:08, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

 Done. Again, sorry for the delay - this is the first ArbCom case I've been assigned to, and I had to read through all the instructions for how to open it. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 02:28, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Transwiki, Long Articles for review

The new Hersfold bot is working great, is my new friend. On the Long Articles review page, what does this mean: "follow the bot's directions to have the page automatically imported for use here"? Perhaps a link to the Bot's instructions would clear that up... and/or just list the instructions if they're short. I also think the one entry there right now (terms for Gays) can be imported to Wiktionary, would make a good translation table for the word "Gay". Goldenrowley (talk) 04:01, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

The {{ManualTranswiki}} template provides the instructions, but I can make that clearer. The list of terms for gay unfortunately needs to be taken care of with a manual copy/paste, though - it's too big and has too many revisions for the bot to handle with import. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 04:21, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Template:Iw-matrix be needing more languages

whenever you get a chance, it would be nice if we could bump up the maximum number of langs supported by the template. cheers, –xeno ^talk 06:20, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

I've added parameters so it can handle up to 30 custom projects. I'm reluctant to add much more, as there is a practical limit to how big this template can be. In testing it in my sandbox, the size of the content in the edit box is only 851 bytes; however once the template (with 30 custom projects listed) gets expanded, it's up to over 300 kilobytes. That's large enough to make some slower connections start to freak out; for reference, ANI is at this time about 150 KB in the edit box. If you feel as though more are needed, let me know, but please make sure they're really needed first. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 20:44, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Yikes! Fair enough =) Thank you very much for this. –xeno ^talk 20:53, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Ryulong/Workshop/Ncmvocalist-PD

I did want to make some more proposals, but I don't have enough time to get through them - so unless I make a note to the contrary, you can assume I'm done. As there are some new proposals (in the principles section), you may wish to make your views known, as well as revise relevant previous comments you've made. If that can be done in the next 2-3 days, that would be great. Ncmvocalist (talk) 08:03, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the note, I'll take a look. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 19:08, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Trolling

Call me a Troll all you like, but I'm neither the first nor the last to complain about Abd's driving need to write a novel everytime he makes a post. While it would be simple to say that I could voice such a complaint without humor, it should be noted that polite requests for him to be concise have fallen on deaf ears. For him to heap the responcibility of reading posts which are literally more than 1000 words onto those attempting to deal with him on the off chance he has something to say that he hasn't already said over and over again on a previous 1000 word post is distruptive and distracting.

I make no apologies for my attitude and I'll take my warnings/blocks when they come. But what are you going to do about him?198.161.174.194 (talk) 19:39, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

If it becomes a problem, then I will speak with him, and if necessary reformat posts as the clerk. Right now, you're the only one complaining, and not politely at that. Nobody is asking you to participate in the case. If you don't wish to read the posts, don't. Please consider this a last warning: further disruptive comments will result in your being restricted from commenting on Arbitration cases. In looking through your history, your most recent comment does not appear to be an isolated incident. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 19:45, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Fourteen wikipedians endorsed the view that his writing is disruptive. With the two best responces being written better than I could ever say.

He has stated that he is capable of expressing himself clearly but chooses not to do so, and that the burden he places on others to decode his prolix maundering is of no interest to him. Such a calculated gesture of contempt for his colleagues has no place here. Short Brigade Harvester Boris (talk) 21:09, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Agree. I don't understand how Abd's continued invitations to not read his posts if we don't want to take the time square with his desire to be taken seriously and have attention paid to his views. Franamax (talk) 08:48, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

I'll count that second quote as my responce to you inviting me not to read his posts. So as long as I'm on my last warning and he's thumbing his nose at (other) people politly asking him not to be disruptive, when does he get warned?198.161.174.194 (talk) 20:27, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia Signpost: 27 April 2009

• Book reviews: Reviews of Lazy Virtues: Teaching Writing in the Age of Wikipedia
• News and notes: Usability study, Wiki Loves Art, and more
• Wikipedia in the news: Wikipedia Art dispute, and brief headlines
• WikiProject report: Interview on WikiProject Final Fantasy
• Features and admins: Approved this week
• Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
• Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe

Delivered by SoxBot II (talk) at 04:18, 29 April 2009 (UTC)