HRWiki talk:WikiTroll

From Homestar Runner Wiki

Revision as of 02:30, 24 April 2005

Rollback link?

Okay, on the WikiTroll page it has instructions for reverting a page back to a previous version. In it, it says:

Next, click the "rollback" link near the upper right side of the page (directly to the right of the most recent author's name).

However it doesn't have a rollback link by the most recent author's name... do these instructions need to be revised?

--Kilroy 19:05, 28 Sep 2004 (MST)

Yes, of course. I have changed the text to refect this. -- Tom 10:26, 29 Sep 2004 (MST)

In these instructions, I noticed that the two sections are sysop and non-sysop. What is sysop, and how do I get it? Its really annoying reverting edits the non-sysop way.

First off, please sign your posts, -erson. Second off, a sysop is just an Admin, which is a user with different rights (blocking an IP, for example). To become an admin, another one must appoint it to you. →FireBird

Semi off topic, but semi on. It's a very nice diversion from studying for your psychology exam that you're going to fail anyway to go through the trolled pages and check out all the...well...trolling ^_^ --Southpaw018 20:47, 3 Nov 2004 (MST)

Trolling or not?

I notice many IP's are starting to troll, then deleting the trolling afterwards. Is this still considered trolling? -- FireBird|_Talk

It depends really. If it is something like they are adding "adsfafsd" to a page and then removing it, I'd think that's more a new person testing on a page instead of the sandbox. If it's something that's defacement, then it's still defacement. Do you have a specific example in mind? -- Tom 02:26, 13 Nov 2004 (MST)

A new user (daunrealist) posted "I am dumb" and "I spelled grammar and Mozillaa wrong" on my talk page, but then deleted it. I told him to stop, but he just said he was "commenting". --FireBird|_Talk

Namespace

Shouldn't this be in the HRWiki namespace instead of the main one? --[[User:Kilroy|Kilroy/_talk]] 17:18, 22 Nov 2004 (MST)

Probably. I was wondering how long it would take for someone to notice. I'll move it now. -- Tom 18:37, 22 Nov 2004 (MST)

New Format

Although I agree that the new format looks nicer, I have two concerns:

• By archiving the offense, we're adding to the exposure of spam. If people are really curious about the offense, they could find it in the old format with a few mouse clicks.
• It's more difficult for people to contribute to the spam page. Before, it was rather straightforward; now people have to figure out formatting for the chart when they add a submission. Perhaps we could devise a system in which people can add a simple comment and another person reformat it later; this adds an extra step, but is more convenient for those less familiar with Wikipedia who still wish to defend the sanctity of the Wiki. =) --FortyTwo

I actually agree with you about the degree of difficulty. It is a big increase. I was actually thinking of saying something in the instructions about, "Yeah, and if you can't figure that table out, just do your best down at the bottom of the page and someone will fix it for you." As to the archive of the old stuff, MediaWiki keeps every edit for every page anyway. We might need to develop some kind of subpage archive, which I would want to make kind of fancy or something, but I was going to wait until the end of the month. -- Tom 21:38, 14 Dec 2004 (MST)

P.S.: I added the note. I'd also like to add that this format is just to make my job a little easier. All those links are the pages I check before I block someone. It's totally selfish on my part... -- Tom 21:45, 14 Dec 2004 (MST)

I saw the note and I understand your reasons for wanting easy access to the offense. Thanks for your quick response! -- FortyTwo

It seems kind of cluttered now (and a whole lot more confusing). But whatever is easier for the admins. It's not like it matters. →FireBird

64.246.132.*

I actually didn't block 64.246.132.116, and I won't block 64.246.132.182 for its last edit because of the nature of their IP addresses. These edits really aren't that bad, and from what I noticed the software did in the time after I blocked "spacemonkey", it seems to be that is who to blame. The software blocks anonymous editors that have the same IP as a blocked user, and I know a bunch were auto blocked while he/she was blocked. The only way to deal with these dynamic IP people is with quick reverts to discourage them. If it gets bad, I don't mind a short temp block, but I don't like blocking legitimate users that might get caught in the same range. Anyway, it just seems that this person thinks they are funny or something, and I imagine they might know Renegade Master in real life. Bah. -- Tom 12:50, 1 Jan 2005 (MST)

Yes, why is he so determined to troll?! -woddfellow2|✎ 22:12, 10 Jan 2005 (MST)

Archive?

The troll list is getting fairly long; can we archive some of the older entries to make it shorter to edit? If someone is a repeat offender, a glance at their "contributions" should reveal that. --FortyTwo 22:43, 11 Jan 2005 (MST)

Okay, good idea. How much should I leave here though? One month? Two? -- Tom 15:39, 12 Jan 2005 (MST)

We could probably group them by month, then have just the current and previous month's troll list posted (so, now we would have December and January). Even just dividing by month would help the page, since then people could edit just one section instead of the whole page. It would also make it clearer to first-time reporters where they should place their edits. Thanks! -- FortyTwo 19:51, 12 Jan 2005 (MST)

I think you have the right idea with knowing previous offenders by their contributions listing. I suppose if we created an archive page, I could just put all but the most recent few months there. I don't know what you mean by adding to different months though, since each new entry is placed at the bottom of the list regardless of if they've defaced before. -- Tom 23:48, 12 Jan 2005 (MST)

Yes, that list is getting too fragging long. It takes too long to load. How are we going to archive the older entries? -woddfellow2|✎ 13:35, 14 Jan 2005 (MST)

Oh, almost forgot about this. HRWiki:WikiTroll Archive works for me. -- Tom 19:51, 14 Jan 2005 (MST)

pertmywert

I would like something done with pertmywert. It's driving me nuts. It seems as though he thinks that his userspace is his own website. If you try to talk to him through his talk page he will get mad and erase your comment, as well as your userspace. He also insults people with crap (see "here). He just doesn't get it, and I see no way to contact him. →[[User:FireBird|FireBird]]

Hey sorry firebird

post something on my page to tell me what i am doing wrong please

[[User

Pertmywert|pertmywert]]

New Spammer thing I noticed

We now have a type of spammer that claims to be unspamming in the summary of change box. Example: 209.88.103.215. Just wanted to let people know, as it confused me for a moment. -- Tom 13:31, 23 Mar 2005 (MST)

Testing Outside of Sandbox = Trolling?

I am trying to decide whether or not to ad 217.87.196.142 to the troll blotter. He/she seems to be testing, so it would probably be mean to add his/her IP address to the troll blotter. What should I do? —woddfellow2|✎ 11:31, 30 Mar 2005 (MST)

My advice for the moment is to do nothing; I think the maxim "Please do not bite the newcomers" applies here. As of this writing, the IP in question only has two contributions, which are hardly anything to get worked up about. If the user does it again, then I suggest a gentle note on his or her talk page explaining that these actions are inappropriate. Only after that would I believe that a formal sanction was warranted. — It's dot com 12:30, 30 Mar 2005 (MST)

The use of the test template might also be good as well. -- Tom 19:14, 2 Apr 2005 (MST)

Block IP Blocks

Is it possible to delete a block of IP addresses? 69.50.1* has been spamming over and over and over and over and over and OVER again, (his favorite targets are Peasant's Quest (don't ask me why!), HRWiki:FAQ, Talk:FAQ, and HRWiki talk:FAQ) but his IP address shifts ever so slightly each time. He doesn't seem to realize that the Wiki now automatically adds a nofollow tag to links. It's really annoying. The alternative would be to block each and every IP address he could theoretically post through, but that's likely in the neighborhood of several thousand (give me a while and I could give you the exact number) and it's possible you might accidently block a legit user. --Jay 07:41, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)

The smallest third frame I've seen him use is 166, and the largest is 187. My math gives that the smallest and largest he's probably capable of are 160 and 191. That gives him 8,190 possible different IP addresses! Ow! So if block-blocking isn't possible, he's going to be around for a while... ugh. --Jay 07:45, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)

He's still around and still spamming. Isn't there ANYTHING you can do? --Jay 06:13, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)

If anyone cares (which doesn't seem to be the case), I've officially seen him use a 191 third frame. I doubt he can go higher, based on what I know about IPs. I hate you all and I will chop all of your heads in half with trumpets. --me again