User talk:28bytes/Archive 21

Archive 15

←

Archive 19

Archive 20

Archive 21

Archive 22

Archive 23

→

Archive 25

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

MSK unblock

Do you object to the unblock of Mistress Selina Kyle? Nobody Ent 19:40, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

LOL. A little late for folks to be asking me that, don't you think? 28bytes (talk) 19:47, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

Er... obviously I don't think so. Could put out a brewing Wiki-fuss... Nobody Ent —Preceding undated comment added 21:14, 22 February 2012 (UTC).

I think it was a terrible unblock, for a number of reasons. But I have no interest in creating additional drama over it. What's done is done. 28bytes (talk) 21:44, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. Hopefully done is done. Nobody Ent 22:00, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

Person disregrets information as bias opinionated facts

Please tell User:Berean Hunter to stop violating information on List of reportedly haunted locations in the United States as it was a perfect reference for any sources, and keeps violating other user as well.--GoShow (...............) 20:58, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

If you are having a dispute over the reliability of a source, start a disccusion on the article's talk page. If you are unable to come to an agreement there, open a thread at WP:Reliable sources/Noticeboard to get unbiased opinions from other editors. 28bytes (talk) 21:06, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

Test results a little scanty still

Hey 28bytes, I just pulled the data from the 28bot test (it's in a Google spreadsheet here, if you're curious), and it looks like the number of users warned was fairly low. There were only 13 registered editors and about 140 IPs (also, the IP cohort that got the test template was five times bigger than the control, though I think that's probably just due to small sample size). Would it be possible to run the test for another month and see if we can increase these numbers a bit? Apologies for making you switch this thing off and then asking you to switch it back on again, but a larger sample would make for better, clearer analysis. Let me know what you think. Maryana (WMF) (talk) 19:17, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Absolutely, no problem. I can easily undo my changes to the templates; anything else I need to do? 28bytes (talk) 19:21, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Incidentally, the numbers of reverts and warnings are somewhat low largely because the bot is very conservative in what it reverts. I opened a discussion on WP:VPR this week soliciting input for a change that would allow the bot do more types of reverts. 28bytes (talk) 19:22, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks! Maybe just double-check to make sure there's nothing funky in the randomization code? Though as I said, I'm 95% sure that it's just natural variance due to low sample size. Maryana (WMF) (talk) 19:51, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Randomization code? 28bytes (talk) 20:04, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Or however the bot goes about switching between the old templates and the new ones :) As I said, the two IP cohorts were somewhat uneven in size – in a randomized A/B test, the control and test groups should be split 50/50, not 20/120. Does that make sense? Maryana (WMF) (talk) 20:19, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Ah, I see. I don't have it randomized; the templates that are displayed are based on whether the IP's talk page already exists: User:28bot/templates/unregistered if it does, User:28bot/templates/unregistered-new if it doesn't. We could certainly modify those templates to randomly display different messages if needed. I could do that, or Stephen could - I presume he's already got some template switch code in place elsewhere he could drop in. 28bytes (talk) 20:31, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Ohh, okay, then that explains the difference in numbers! We should definitely add in randomization, because those two populations are slightly different – IPs without talk pages are less likely to be serial vandals, for instance – so they'll probably behave differently after the test, which will mess with the analysis. Here's the code we used to randomize Huggle and Twinkle templates:

<includeonly>{{subst:#switch: {{subst:#expr:{{subst:#time: s}} mod 2}}
|0={{subst:template/control|{{{1}}}|{{{2}}}}}
|1={{subst:template/test|{{{1}}}|{{{2}}}}}
}}</includeonly>

We just placed that over the old template we wanted to test (e.g., uw-vandalism1), and then reverted back when the test was over. Will that work for your purposes? Maryana (WMF) (talk) 21:06, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Sure, that's no problem; just to confirm you're looking to post a uw-test1 half the time and Stephen's message the other half, for both types of IPs (talk page vs no talk page yet)? 28bytes (talk) 21:10, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Yes, that's the idea. Sorry for the confusion, but all the more reason to extend the test :) Maryana (WMF) (talk) 21:20, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

No problem, I just figured Stephen would be handling the #switch stuff since he was editing the templates. I should have some time over the weekend to drop that in place. 28bytes (talk) 21:39, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Your request at BN?

I don't see why you withdrew your request? It didn't look controversial to me?---Balloonman ^{Poppa Balloon} 21:25, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Eh, you may be right. But I suppose I can always re-request it later if needed; I'm fine with "Plan B" for now. 28bytes (talk) 21:38, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

No problem, I just wanted to ensure that you were offended by my joke about changing your name to Z8bytes ;-)---Balloonman ^{Poppa Balloon} 22:46, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Nah. :) 28bytes (talk) 22:55, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Rhetoric?

AGK said "Why is a gallery of barnstars being drafted in to sit underneath the banned template? What 'policy-based reason' is there for that?", but you accuse me of escalating the rhetoric by answering his question, which he obviously already knew there was no need for? That doesn't seem quite right. And he did that in response to a 100% legitimate request from me for him to provide a policy based reason for reverting my edit, which can't be provided I don't think (or at least, hasn't yet). I can appreciate that you are not "on my team" in this discussion, and that's not an issue, but please try and be neutral if you're going to pass out admonishments. Ok, reading this over I know it's going to sound snippy (insert your own adjective here instead), but honestly I'm not trying to be (it's a gift?) and I hope you can read it in the same spirit I'm attempting to convey, which is not snippy. :)

I can also appreciate that what I did was unconventional (although, I've looked still further, and can't find where it's not allowed), and that sometimes jars people. -- Maelefique^(talk) 21:09, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Don't worry, I wasn't accusing you of anything; it was just a general request to de-escalate, since it seemed to be getting a little heated (but I could be wrong, of course.) I think your and AGK's positions are not that far apart, actually. 28bytes (talk) 21:13, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for clarifying, and not just editing "snippy" to "whiny" or "bitchy". :) (And I think you might be right about our positions) -- Maelefique^(talk) 21:16, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Ok, so before I get all excited again, I'm taking a deep breath, and typing here instead. Please read the last reply from AGK on his talk page, where he says he is going to remove the barnstar section. At this moment, AFAIK, there is no consensus as to what should be done with the page once it becomes unprotected and I feel I would be equally "right" in reverting it back to the barnstars gallery if he does that. Not necessarily because I want the barnstars there (I am actually ok with the original userpage that was there), but because he is now dictating what *will* be happening with that page, which (since I just recently had a chance to re-read it) kind of goes directly against WP:OWN does it not? (and if all this has been settled on the other pages and I just haven't read it yet, just ignore this rant pls/tnx) -- Maelefique^(talk) 23:33, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

I'd ask him nicely not to do that. Page was protected for a reason, perhaps you can request that Guerillo enforce the "no more changes without agreement" thing that's pretty much the point of the protection policy. Not sure what else you can do other than that. 28bytes (talk) 23:38, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

I will try that (I'm pessimistically not hopeful, but...) also, on the noticeboard there is at least some support for leaving it the way it is as well (minus my snarky comment). -- Maelefique^(talk) 23:44, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

I left him a note. 28bytes (talk) 23:45, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Looks like AGK and I are on the opposite sides of this one for some reason. I just realized that in my response to him, I've quoted you, at the time it seemed correct, but now, I thought maybe I should ask you first (hahah, I know, a little late!), I've quoted you here. 2 questions come to mind afterwards. 1) is it an etiquette no-no to quote from a user's talk page for some reason? (I would think not, there surely can't be any more expectation of privacy, but from an etiquette pov I can see how it might be frowned upon), and 2) have I quoted you out of context? This is definitely the more important of the 2 questions. I know that when you said what I quoted, you were referring to AGK not reverting the page, which I suppose does not necessarily mean you support the barnstars either. Anyway, I will watch here, if you want me to remove that, I will delete it with an "out of context" edit summary right away. -- Maelefique^(talk) 16:37, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Decided to err on the side of caution, replaced it already anyway, but would like your answers still please. -- Maelefique^(talk) 16:44, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

The quote was fine. I do appreciate that you asked, though. :) 9 out of 10 times you're better off not using "disingenuous", though. AGF and all that. "Mistaken" is often better in such contexts, for a variety of reasons. 28bytes (talk) 17:16, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Banning image

And to think I once mused over File:AnimatedStop.gif as a new image on the banned template when I was coding User:MBisanz/PermaBan. MBisanz ^talk 00:01, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Ha! I love it. At least it's friendlier than some icons. 28bytes (talk) 00:06, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

PumpkinSky CCI completed

The CCI is over, 719 of 729 articles found with no problems. Recommended reading: Great Dismal Swamp maroons, I added a quote: "These groups are very inspirational. As details unfold, we are increasingly able to show how people have the ability, as individuals and communities, to take control of their lives, even under oppressive conditions." --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:26, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the update, and thanks for your work getting it resolved. 28bytes (talk) 17:18, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

I added to your archive, with thanks, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:25, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

A story with a story, especially for you: Great Dismal Swamp maroons, DYK? - Enjoy your trip, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:17, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

Rlevse

I meant people who were involved with Rlevse that meets the qualifications WP:INVOLVED, which the other four mentors that he listed, plus many of the FAC editors that Rlevse/PumpskinSky attacked are. With the mentors, you are the only editor who I don't see any obvious pro- involvement with. Me and a few other editors even mentioned it in the last AN post. I fixed it. I was kinda struggling with proper word choice while writing it, as it was 1 am when I wrote it and my focus/memory pill faded away by then. I based it according to prior community concerns and fact based observations by many editors who weren't really involved in the discussion, including myself. I didn't mean to attack you in particular, so I really apologize about that. Secret ^account 06:46, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarification, and for the apology (accepted, of course.) An editor I respect recently made the comment that all of these people should have their contributions vetted for plagiarism, which really pissed me off as I am one of "those people" and have worked very hard to fight plagiarism and copyright violations with very little thanks for it. So I'm a little sensitive at broad strokes being used to paint groups of people I happen to be a member of. Obviously I can ignore things like general admin-bashing, since there are hundreds of admins, but when it's a group of 5 people that are being described in a certain way, I really can't let an inaccurate description pass without comment. 28bytes (talk) 06:58, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

I am another one of "these people" but already used to being told at DYK how (insert strong word ... or read the ever repeated remarks there) our work is. I repeat as well: I had no history with Rlevse (other than receiving DYK approvements and credits). I think PumpkinSky is not a danger to the project from a copyright point of view, and could be unblocked without any mentor, as a whole lot of people would scrutinize every line anyway. Keep it simple. - Having said that, I am not even sure he would WANT to return to this welcoming scene, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:02, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Adminstats

I am sorry it is taking so long. The crontab is in place but it appears the bots code is hanging and the script for the bot just stops. I am currently looking for the bug and am trying to get the bot started as fast as possible. At least the code is in place though.—cyberpower (Chat)(WP Edits: 519,932,468) 22:26, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

No worries, take your time. 28bytes (talk) 22:30, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Create a page

How do I create a page? ⁄MSD⁄ (talk) 00:20, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

• (talk page stalker)Search for it, and when it doesn't show up, click the red link in the "you may create the page" sentence, but, for article creation, it's recommended that you use article wizard and/or draft in your userspace.Jasper Deng (talk) 00:24, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

I replied on your talk page. 28bytes (talk) 04:24, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

User:Kiko4564

Could you please have a look at this editor's use of rollback tools? You restored this right to him yesterday, but I think it is clear that he does not know how to use it properly. He used the tool to revert a bunch of edits of mine that were not vandalism. I see from his talk page that at least five other editors have also had problems with his rollbacks just today. Thank you. 148.177.1.210 (talk) 22:25, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

Unfortunately I am about to go offline; could you please post this to WP:AN? If any admin feels rollback should be removed after they investigate I have no objections at all if they do so. 28bytes (talk) 23:05, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

28bytes, the user has now been indefinitely blocked for violating the terms of their unblock, and I've revoked rollback for continued abuse of Huggle and the tool as well. Eagles 24/7 (C) 18:18, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for following up on this, I appreciate it. 28bytes (talk) 18:52, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

There's also an ANI discussion on the block if you're interested: WP:ANI#Reblock of User:Kiko4564 & User:Kiko4564 (alt): review please. Eagles 24/7 (C) 19:10, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll take a look. 28bytes (talk) 19:11, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

Interesting fact that can't make DYK

I recently read Isotopes of Xenon, finding that its heaviest "stable" isotope actually is unstable. Unfortunately, there was way less than 1500 bytes of prose added in the process of the addition (by another editor).Jasper Deng (talk) 01:18, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Page creation

Okay, thanks. ⁄MSD⁄ (talk) 01:36, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Hi

Can I block my own IP ? so that when I forget to login, or the internet hiccups and I get logged out in the middle of an edit, it doesn't confuse people as to who made the edit ? Penyulap _talk 09:44, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Interesting question. Technically, yes, it could be done. I'm pretty sure it'd be against the blocking policy, though; since you don't "own" the IP, if your ISP reassigned it to someone else, that other person would probably get very grumpy trying to figure out why they couldn't edit. 28bytes (talk) 09:59, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

So a custom blocking template or note would be in order, to assist the next owner ? Penyulap _talk

Heh, you mean like "You are currently not able to edit because the person who previously had this IP address didn't want to edit logged out"? Feel free to request that at WP:AN or WT:BLOCK but I think you'll probably encounter some skepticism. 28bytes (talk) 10:19, 4 March 2012 (UTC)