|
|
| (181 intermediate revisions by 26 users not shown) |
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| <noinclude> | | <noinclude> |
| {{:UDWiki:Administration/Vandal Banning/TalkHeader}} | | {{:UDWiki:Administration/Vandal Banning/TalkHeader}} |
| {{:UDWiki talk:Administration/Vandal Banning}}
| |
| </noinclude> | | </noinclude> |
|
| |
|
| = Bots Discussion = | | = Bots Discussion = |
| ==Regarding the New Header==
| |
| So the way the new header is set up it rolls up a week every Saturday and the Day counter runs from 0-6. That way we can visibly keep track of when the page should be purged without actually having to go through too much trouble of browsing the votes beforehand. Should make things a little bit easier while making this page take up less space in [[A/VB]]'s ToC and page. --<small>[[User:Karek#K|Karek]]<sup><font face="Monotype Corsiva">[[User:Karek/ProjDev/OmegaMap|maps?!]]</font></sup></small> 23:12, 11 April 2011 (BST)
| |
| :Of course, it gets purged much more often than one week at this point in time. I've been purging every couple of days to keep it from breaking A/VB with unclusion calls ({{tl|vndl}} and sigs).I like the idea, though. I think it would help if we all deciding to put all new reports at either the top or the bottom. {{User:Vapor/sig}} <sub>22:29, 12 April 2011</sub>
| |
| ::It can't/shouldn't now. That was because of stuff added to both this page and the A/VB archive page that I removed and had less to do with large amounts of page use. Generally new reports have always been at the top for all admin pages.--<small>[[User:Karek#K|Karek]]<sup><font face="Monotype Corsiva">[[User:Karek/ProjDev/OmegaMap|maps?!]]</font></sup></small> 02:42, 13 April 2011 (BST)
| |
| :::We'll see. We had a lot of vandal cases in March b/c of jokes and actual legitimate vandalism. We're half way through April and already quite a bit of vandal data and the bots aren't letting up. As the month progresses both the bot page and the a/vb archive will be competing for inclusion size. Plus it looks neater if there aren't 40 bot reports. But I am willing to do the once a week purge to see how it goes. {{User:Vapor/sig}} <sub>03:37, 13 April 2011</sub>
| |
| ::::Case in point: if you check [[UDWiki:Administration/Vandal_Banning/Archive/2011_03]] at this very moment, it is broken due to inclusion calls. I've made a template - {{tl|bot}} which should be a smaller inclusion size. This might help and might also trim down on the clutter. It is basically {{tl|vndl}} without bot talk page, vandal data, or discussion links. {{User:Vapor/sig}} <sub>16:12, 13 April 2011</sub>
| |
|
| |
|
| ==Adbot section== | | == Return of old, already banned, bots == |
| Anyone have an actual problem with putting the adbot section back on the main page, and not archiving them for more than a few days? It's the way we used to treat adbot permas, and it was mistakenly left off the page when it was upgraded (see Hagnat's fist VB case for the month) <small>-- [[User:Boxy|<span style="color: Red">boxy</span>]] <sup>[[User talk:Boxy|<span style="color: Red">talk</span>]] • [[The Rules|teh rulz]]</sup> 14:52 15 July 2009 (BST)</small>
| |
| :I will only agree to it if you put it through an arduous policy process.--{{User:J3D/ciggy}} 14:53, 15 July 2009 (BST)
| |
| ::I unironically agree with J3D. --[[User:Cyberbob240|Cyberbob]]<sup>[[Template_talk:VandalBanningNotice|POST HERE]]</sup> 14:54, 15 July 2009 (BST)
| |
| :::Repairs to pages that were messed up don't need to go through A/PD unless there are some real objections to the actual changes <small>-- [[User:Boxy|<span style="color: Red">boxy</span>]] <sup>[[User talk:Boxy|<span style="color: Red">talk</span>]] • [[The Rules|teh rulz]]</sup> 15:02 15 July 2009 (BST)</small>
| |
| ::::Obviously there's no "need" but it sets a much nicer precedent because you just know how much the "give an inch take a mile" deal is played out around here. Putting this thing onto A/PD should be the number 1 choice because it safeguards against any more accidental changes of this nature as well as dealing with the precedent issue, but I would have been happy with at least some kind of attempt to open a dialogue about it first. --[[User:Cyberbob240|Cyberbob]]<sup>[[Template_talk:VandalBanningNotice|POST HERE]]</sup> 15:06, 15 July 2009 (BST)
| |
| A spambot edit creates a page which then spawns at least 3 more (A/VB report, User Page to issue a warning? and then a record of the ban) How is that really useful or sensible? What is wrong with the idea of just report and ban in such obvious cases? --[[User:Honestmistake|Honestmistake]] 15:10, 15 July 2009 (BST)
| |
| :They don't get recorded on A/VD, just VB (whichever system we use). I think the creation of the user page just for the adbot template may have been so that people could easily tell that the spambot had already been dealt with, so avoiding multiple reports. But I don't see that as much of an issue, when A/VB is so quite these days. In any case, I don't see any reason whatsoever for archiving of the report <small>-- [[User:Boxy|<span style="color: Red">boxy</span>]] <sup>[[User talk:Boxy|<span style="color: Red">talk</span>]] • [[The Rules|teh rulz]]</sup> 15:16 15 July 2009 (BST)</small>
| |
| ::Once this drama is settled, and I have the energy I'll go back and delete the reports made plus the adbots' pages from the last few months (no matter who "wins" the old system will be in place because we all agree on that front I think). --[[User:Cyberbob240|Cyberbob]]<sup>[[Template_talk:VandalBanningNotice|POST HERE]]</sup> 15:18, 15 July 2009 (BST)
| |
| :::Agreed. --{{User:Rosslessness/Sig}} 15:50, 15 July 2009 (BST)
| |
| ::::Will the bots bans be archived? or just removed weekly? {{User:DanceDanceRevolution/sig}} 03:19, 16 July 2009 (BST)
| |
| :::::Removed weekly, from my reading of it. {{User:Linkthewindow/Sig}} 03:36, 16 July 2009 (BST)
| |
| ::::::How irritating, it requires the same work (because either way, you are making a record of your ban of the bot) but with the added annoyance of having to come to A/VB every week and remove them. {{User:DanceDanceRevolution/sig}} 04:06, 16 July 2009 (BST)
| |
| :::::::You're worried about having to edit A/VB ''once a week''? The wiki is seldom that peaceful. In practice, they'll just be wiped whenever someone notices (and it doesn't even have to be a sysop, other users making new reports can do it). I think you're just pissed because of your spimbot game :p <small>-- [[User:Boxy|<span style="color: Red">boxy</span>]] <sup>[[User talk:Boxy|<span style="color: Red">talk</span>]] • [[The Rules|teh rulz]]</sup> 10:09 16 July 2009 (BST)</small>
| |
| ::::::::Oh my god I forgot about that, now I'm angrier than ever! --[[User:DanceDanceRevolution|<span style="color:black"><u><big>ϑϑℜ</big></u></span>]] 10:14, 16 July 2009 (BST)
| |
|
| |
|
| ==Spambots==
| | Over the past couple of days, bots who were previous banned have been spamming again. Has the recent update of the wiki somehow unbanned them? <small>-- [[User:Boxy|boxy]] 10:35, 27 December 2014 (BST)</small> |
| So, are any of these doing anything for you? Does it make you want to buy those stuffs? They really seem to like this wiki for some reason. --{{User:A Helpful Little Gnome/Sig}} 18:48, 14 July 2009 (BST)
| |
| :They attack most wikis. I'm on a few at the moment who have had some troubles with them. See main page for an extra comment- if they don't agree to our demands, I shall rally a counter-spam unit to spam their contact desk. Mwa ha ha. You in? {{User:DanceDanceRevolution/sig}} 18:58, 14 July 2009 (BST)
| |
| ::I will prepare my Nekkid Romping Gnome division (NRG) for this assault. --{{User:A Helpful Little Gnome/Sig}} 19:09, 14 July 2009 (BST)
| |
|
| |
|
| == adbot user pages ==
| |
|
| |
|
| should we have a schedule deletion discussion about the removal of adbot user pages ? or is it covered any of the current criteria ? IMHO, creating user pages for adbot was always stupid, and we should remove them and any reference to them from the wiki. --[[User:Hagnat|People's Commissar Hagnat]] <sup>[[User_talk:Hagnat|[talk]]] [[wcdz|[wcdz]]]</sup> 17:03, 15 July 2009 (BST)
| | == Hmm == |
| :You should read. I've already said I'll delete all instances of the adbot template as well as the cases going back a few months. It will most likely happen either tomorrow or on the day after. --[[User:Cyberbob240|Cyberbob]]<sup>[[Template_talk:VandalBanningNotice|POST HERE]]</sup> 17:07, 15 July 2009 (BST) | | It's been a few years, but we're getting a wave of bots again. Thoughts? {{User:Bob Moncrief/Sig}} 01:57, 29 March 2020 (UTC) |
| ::I did read, but what if you fail to delete them all ? what if they are created in the future ? shouldnt there be a criterion to deal with them ? --[[User:Hagnat|People's Commissar Hagnat]] <sup>[[User_talk:Hagnat|[talk]]] [[wcdz|[wcdz]]]</sup> 17:21, 15 July 2009 (BST) | | :Hopefully it's just a random burst, not a consistent thing? --{{User:A Helpful Little Gnome/Sig}} 04:26, 29 March 2020 (UTC) |
| :::I can't fail to delete them all because I simply went off "What Links Here" from the template page. Durr. As for the rest, I don't see why not. I'll go make the scheduled vote right now. --[[User:Cyberbob240|Cyberbob]]<sup>[[Template_talk:VandalBanningNotice|POST HERE]]</sup> 17:26, 15 July 2009 (BST)
| | :::More spammers stuck inside? I gather fraud attempts are way up at the moment. --[[User:Rosslessness|<span style="color: MidnightBlue ">R</span><span style="color: Navy">o</span><span style="color: DarkBlue">s</span><span style="color: MediumBlue">s</span><span style="color: RoyalBlue"></span>]][[User_Talk:Rosslessness|<span style="color: RoyalBlue">l</span><span style="color: CornflowerBlue">e</span><span style="color: SkyBlue">s</span><span style="color: LightskyBlue">s</span>]][[User_Talk:Rosslessness/Quiz|<span style="color: LightBlue">n</span><span style="color: PowderBlue">e</span>]][[Monroeville Many|<span style="color: PaleTurquoise">s</span>]][[The Great Suburb Group Massacre|<span style="color: PaleTurquoise">s</span>]]<sup>[[Location Page Building Toolkit|<span style="color: DarkRed">Want a Location Image?]] </span> </sup> 08:01, 29 March 2020 (UTC) |
| ::::If you do so, remember to add a seld-delete clause on the deletion request itself once it gets approved. Nothing to be left behind of an adbot accuont. --[[User:Hagnat|People's Commissar Hagnat]] <sup>[[User_talk:Hagnat|[talk]]] [[wcdz|[wcdz]]]</sup> 17:40, 15 July 2009 (BST)
| | :Has it been going on for a while? Like beyond this week? {{User:DanceDanceRevolution/sig5}} 10:11, 29 March 2020 (UTC) |
| :::::(scheduled deletions aren't the same thing as speedy deletions) --[[User:Cyberbob240|Cyberbob]] 17:41, 15 July 2009 (BST)
| | ::No, not yet. I just realized I've gotten complacent because we've had so few. If it continues for more than a week or so we can ponder other options. {{User:Bob Moncrief/Sig}} 17:19, 29 March 2020 (UTC) |
| | | :::Hopefully it's just a flareup for now... {{User:DanceDanceRevolution/sig5}} 23:31, 29 March 2020 (UTC) |
| ==Wait.== | | ::::Yeah, like acne. --{{User:A Helpful Little Gnome/Sig}} 23:36, 29 March 2020 (UTC) |
| Why does this need to be a whole separate templated page again? The only reason we use templates for admin pages is because it makes them easier to archive and this section isn't going to be archived. Surely it would be simpler just to have it as a separate heading on A/VB itself? --[[User:Cyberbob240|Cyberbob]]<sup>[[Template_talk:VandalBanningNotice|POST HERE]]</sup> 17:13, 15 July 2009 (BST)
| | :::::Yeah.... acne.... {{User:DanceDanceRevolution/sig5}} 00:14, 30 March 2020 (UTC) |
| :then you'd have to check [[A/VB]], which i believe most users dont. When they have the current month on their watchilist, they simply check it. This also make it easier to identify what this page is about, leaving the other pages to be edited by content that is relevant for those pages --[[User:Hagnat|People's Commissar Hagnat]] <sup>[[User_talk:Hagnat|[talk]]] [[wcdz|[wcdz]]]</sup> 17:19, 15 July 2009 (BST)
| | Anyone want to review this? They're still here, and popping them isn't helping. --{{User:A Helpful Little Gnome/Sig}} 22:33, 13 April 2020 (UTC) |
| ::Everyone has A/VB on their watchlist anyway, or should. --[[User:DanceDanceRevolution|<span style="color:black"><u><big>ϑϑℜ</big></u></span>]] 10:04, 16 July 2009 (BST)
| | :Do you think the captcha needs to be updated? If so I can try to get in touch with Kev. {{User:Bob Moncrief/Sig}} 14:36, 14 April 2020 (UTC) |
| :It's a lot better off at the top of the monthly archives, it's the one that is edited the most, and where people get sent after editing one of the VB cases. No point making people go to the A/VB main page as well, just to deal with adbots. But it could be simply added to the A/VB header that gets added to the monthly archives <small>-- [[User:Boxy|<span style="color: Red">boxy</span>]] <sup>[[User talk:Boxy|<span style="color: Red">talk</span>]] • [[The Rules|teh rulz]]</sup> 10:26 16 July 2009 (BST)</small>
| | ::Considering we all have better things to do than continuously ban spambots, probably worth asking! {{User:Stelar/sig}} 20:47, 14 April 2020 (UTC) |
| | | :::I guess whoever has his ear, go for it. --{{User:A Helpful Little Gnome/Sig}} 23:47, 14 April 2020 (UTC) |
| == Bot Rush ==
| |
| | |
| With the current bot rush, what about changing the way bots are filed in order to cut down space that gets eaten? We could for instance use the day as header and then file the vndl-templates underneath along with the sig of the serving op. --{{User:Spiderzed/Sandbox/Sig}} 12:38, 28 March 2011 (BST)
| |
| :Maybe just use sig of the op and day as the sig says, as me and i think vapor have been doing. it's only a formality for accountability etc. not really important -- {{User:DanceDanceRevolution/sig4}} 14:00, 28 March 2011 (BST) | |
| ::I used my own header for a bit but then just started adding to the top header. At the rate they're coming in, they're being cycled a day or two later so it doesn't matter much. We honestly could do without headers and just stack the {{tl|vndl}} template with timestamp to reduce clutter. At least for the time being. {{User:Vapor/sig}} <sub>14:22, 28 March 2011</sub> | |
| :::Cut away headers, file the newest on the top with vndl and sig? Sounds like a plan to me. I'll change it tomorrow unless someone produces an outcry. --{{User:Spiderzed/Sandbox/Sig}} 22:17, 28 March 2011 (BST) | |
| :::I dig that. As long as the headers aren't stinking up the main A/VB contents then I'm happy. -- {{User:DanceDanceRevolution/sig4}} 00:41, 29 March 2011 (BST) | |
| ::::Might just want to link to bot user pages rather than using tl:vndl. Too many template calls were killing A/VB. Had to cycle everything except today's bots. {{User:Vapor/sig}} <sub>01:14, 29 March 2011</sub> | |
| | |
| == Othpeli ==
| |
| I'm amused that Othpeli created a page advertising for jobs In Christian education on a website that is about a zombie apocalypse. Granted, it is probably automated and was trawling for wikis, but it's still funny. --{{User:Akule/sig}} 01:16, 15 April 2011 (BST)
| |
| | |
| == Extensions ==
| |
| We should totally ask for [http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:SpamBlacklist Extension:SpamBlacklist]. After all, we got an update this month: why not strike while the iron's hot? {{User:Revenant/Sig}} 15:26, 27 April 2011 (BST)
| |
| | |
| {{cquote||We have the [http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:Username_Blacklist Username Blacklist] extension. Could this help in our spambot related problem?|~[[Image:Vsig.png|link=User:Vapor]] <sub>19:33, 27 April 2011</sub>}}
| |
| :Not really; not only is it obsolete, but the bots are using random names which can't really be filtered. Updating to the replacement [http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:TitleBlacklist Extension:TitleBlacklist] would probably help, but only somewhat. Still, every measure we can get in place will do some good. {{User:Revenant/Sig}} 02:20, 28 April 2011 (BST)
| |
| ::Hmm. Well I suppose we could add it to the list of things we'd like Kevan to fix. We also have the [http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:ConfirmEdit ConfirmEdit extension] which I believe can be configured by syspos without the need to access the backend. If I'm reading correctly, it can be configured to require capcha when URLs are added and has options to whitelist certain URLs, whitelist groups (like [[UDWiki:Autoconfirmed Users]]), and whitelist users with confirmed emails. There is a similar line of discussion happening on [[UDWiki_talk:Administration/Policy_Discussion/Semi-protection#Ideas_for_implimentation this policy discussion]]. ~[[Image:Vsig.png|link=User:Vapor]] <sub>06:11, 28 April 2011</sub> | |
| :::The default configuration for ConfirmEdit has it display a CAPTCHA for adding a URL, creating an account, and messing up a login. I don't recall ever seeing any of these. Might be time to create a test account and see if any of them come up…<br/> The only thing listed as sysop-editable for ConfirmEdit is a URL whitelist, everything else requires sys''admin'' privs. Our [[MediaWiki:Usernameblacklist|Username Blacklist]] is sysop-editable, but I defy you to come up with any regex that will match the bots we've been getting.<br/> [http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:Check_Spambots Extension:Check Spambots] looks very nice… {{User:Revenant/Sig}} 08:02, 28 April 2011 (BST)
| |
| | |
| == [[Template:Spam Page|Spam Page]] ==
| |
| | |
| :''Relevant conversation moved from main page.''
| |
| Got. Would you mind using the {{tl|Spam Page}} template on them? <small>-- [[User:Boxy|boxy]] 07:08, 1 May 2011 (BST)</small>
| |
| :mmmk so instead of posting here? any reason? i mean i don't even look at the page to begin with. i just spot the bot in RC and report it.-- [[Image:Boobs.sh.siggie.gif|link=User:Sexualharrison|18px]] <small> [[User talk:Sexualharrison|<span style="color:Red">bitch</span>]] </small><small>00:02, 2 May 2011 (utc)</small>
| |
| ::[http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php?title=Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:Spam_Page&hidelinks=1 This is why]. {{User:Revenant/Sig}} 02:58, 2 May 2011 (BST)
| |
| ::Also post a report here. But I'd like to see the pages wiped as soon as possible so that they don't get picked up by search bots. You don't even have to put the template on, a simple page wipe would do <small>-- [[User:Boxy|boxy]] 03:56, 2 May 2011 (BST)</small>
| |
