User talk:Arcane

Welcome to WikiIndex - glad you are here and want to know more about your "helping others with MediaWiki instillation" - sounds cool! Best, MarkDilley

You are, always, a boon to those you help Arcane.... Thank you... TeraS (talk) 19:15, 21 January 2013 (PST)

Can you get a screenshot?

And it looks like the page was not able to save? Best, MarkDilley

Hi, MediaWiki, logos, etc

Hi, good to see someone with good MediaWiki skills around here! :)

Do you known what threshold MediaWiki uses for breaking out of 'stub' article to full-on 'good' article?

And how are your logo creation skills? We really need a favicon for WikiIndex ...

Best, Sean, aka Hoof Hearted • _Admin • talk2HH 07:45, 15 March 2013 (PDT)

Sturmkrieg

You say that people can make articles for forks of wikis. That is what sturmkrieg.com would have to be. They are a fork of the original Sturmkrieg project. Sturmkrieg needs to be about the Sturmkrieg Empire wiki, because that is the original. If Alex wants to create a historically revisionist version, he can do that. You should know that he has been banned from a German website on the same topic for being sympathetic to the Red Army. Sturmkrieger (talk) 08:40, 15 March 2013 (PDT)

Sturmkrieg pages

The background for the Sturmkrieg Empire is the predecessor for sturmkrieg.com. If we're relegated to sturmkrieg.tk, why should they get Sturmkrieg when they are in fact the fork? Regardless, why should they get a title that implies that they are somehow the main Sturmkrieg. The original background was the Sturmkrieg Empire, before Inquisitor Ehrenstein and Dondrekhan decided to turn it away from what it was supposed to be. If I have to have to start an article with some sort of different name, it implies that they are somehow the actual version and displays preference to them. Sturmkrieger (talk) 15:41, 15 March 2013 (PDT)

Hey - group hug

Hi - thanks for your comment on my talk page. There is no need to appologise to me, but thanks anyway :)))) And I wish to appologise to you - I didn't mean to point any fingers at you. We were all new here once, and I certainly made my fair share of mistakes. You clearly have some great ideas and talents (I've noticed the results of your work on SuccuWiki, and TeraS is obviously very pleased with your efforts!). I think I was just getting a little annoyed by the petty attitude of that User:Sturmkrieger. Keep up your great work here! :) Sean, aka Hoof Hearted • _Admin • talk2HH 10:43, 20 March 2013 (PDT)

Template:Sysop

the page can be undid to revision 168381. It worked well. But now there's noinclude in noinclude without exiting.

<noinclude>

[[:Category:Active administrators of this wiki|Active administrators of this wiki]] tag their page with '''{{tl|sysop}}'''.
<noinclude>[[Category:Active administrators of this wiki]]
[[Category:People templates]]
[[Category:Housekeeping templates]]</noinclude>

--YiFei | talk 06:49, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

edit summary

Please delete the edit summary too or replace the summary with the word "spam" when deleting spam pages or the spam remains forever in the deletion log and for a few hours on the main page due to the log appearing on recent changes.--Comets (talk) 01:54, 29 May 2013 (PDT)

Did not know that. Will make sure to do that in the future. Arcane (talk) 04:25, 29 May 2013 (PDT)

Bigotry wiki

It's down again due to the webhost being @$$clowns. They fixed it once, and I'm trying to get them to do it again. We'll be moving at some point. The Sturmkrieg project forum is also down. We can discuss things at the wiki DPL forum here: http://www.Sturmkrieg.us/Forum:Index#.UbZ8vPZvzLs --Inquisitor Ehrenstein (talk) 18:28, 10 June 2013 (PDT)

Thanks for letting me know. I'll set up an account soon and drop on by. Hope the hosting issues get resolved soon. Arcane (talk) 05:50, 11 June 2013 (PDT)

Were you prevented from logging on? I've noticed that the ConfirmEdit sometimes doesn't work. Inquisitor Ehrenstein (talk) 14:36, 11 June 2013 (PDT)

I was blocked from setting up an account due to having a dynamic IP address that the DNSBL identified as one belonging to a vandal or a troll (I've had that happen to me on another wiki before). I was wondering if you couldn't set me up an account to get around that. Arcane (talk) 18:22, 11 June 2013 (PDT)Arcane

I created your account. I used the same email address as at Bigotry Wiki. Inquisitor Ehrenstein (talk) 21:42, 11 June 2013 (PDT)

I managed to get into my new account, changed my password, got to the point I was about to create a forum avatar, then it logged me out and refuses to accept my account password. Not sure what's going on. I also saw an error message about one of your widgets being messed up. If you want, you can send me an email via WikiIndex's email feature, we can swap personal email addresses, and we can communicate that way. Arcane (talk) 02:28, 12 June 2013 (PDT) Arcane

Talk page replies

MediaWiki is not a email engine. Please post replies directly on the original talk page. (See Help:Talk pages for how to use talk pages. (I wonder why don't we have that? ) ) --YiFei | talk 12:54, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

I noticed you've moved my replies in the past, and while I mostly thought it strange, I'm afraid I must ask you to please not do so in the future for a few reasons:

• This is not Wikipedia. The link you provided is helpful, but those rules are not necessarily applicable everywhere.
• The method of reply used is not improper to my knowledge, as posting replies on the original talk page only sends one user new message updates, especially if they have email updates enabled.
• I have sent messages like the ones you have complained about in the past to other users without problems before.
• The messages I was sending to another user (who in this case happens to be a fellow admin on another wiki) were to discuss how to communicate with each other more efficiently since the web host our wiki was on was making direct communication there difficult, and both of us getting replies to each other was vital.
• The methods we used to communicate did not violate any rules here, and we communicated in a similar manner to each other on the wiki we were discussing without a problem.

In short, please do not remove replies from my talk pages or others in the name of your interpretation of how they should be used from now on, at least not without consulting Mark Dilley first. Arcane (talk) 08:03, 12 June 2013 (PDT)Arcane

OK, but how do we keep track of what message we're replying to? Email engines have something like:

Dear Lorem, 

    Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipisicing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor 
incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud 
exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor 
in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur 
sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est 
laborum.

Ipsum

On 00:00, 01 January 2013, Lorem wrote:
>Dear Ipsum, 
>
>    Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipisicing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor 
>incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud 
>exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor 
>in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur 
>sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est 
>laborum.
>
>Lorem

That would be quite good. Or can we make replies like putting them in italics? --YiFei | talk 11:07, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

Sturmkrieg

inquisitorsasha@sturmkrieg.de

I reset your password an added you to IP block exemptions. Inquisitor Ehrenstein (talk) 11:20, 13 June 2013 (PDT)

Forum

I've moved to a VPS server, and I got the forum set up. It's available again. You can access it here:

http://forum.sturmkrieg.com/ Inquisitor Ehrenstein (talk) 22:04, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

Bigotry wiki is back

Inquisitor Ehrenstein (talk) 02:17, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

Block no-edit users?

I personally  Oppose about blocking users like DalscoraZoows (talk | contribs | deleted | block log | uploads | logs | abuse log | user list), they do no harm. What they do is just creating accounts. If they vandal, Abuse Filter would disallow them. In addition, what if they're not spammers, and see an admin block them, what would they feel? --YiFei | talk 08:21, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

Still on this topic: Why did you block Fcuscdrmeh3 (talk | contribs | deleted | block log | uploads | logs | abuse log | user list)? Why you think they're spammers? I sometimes block them because some of them does the account spam, such as 198.27.74.0/24, which have:

Special:Permalink/171577#Block no-edit users? (≥342 user created)

This proves that the IP range is full of spammers. --YiFei | talk 05:31, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

? --YiFei | talk 02:25, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

Sorry, force of habit. I know the abuse filter is up, but a lot of spam accounts still seem to get through, and I guess it's a knee jerk reaction to just block them automatically. Besides, I don't have checkuser rights, so I can't tell if it's one IP spamming multiple accounts. Arcane (talk) 03:48, 29 July 2013 (UTC)Arcane

Ok, I'll try to ask Jack for that on IRC. And I don't think there's a lot. Monitoring Special:AbuseLog lists all the triggers. --YiFei | talk 03:58, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

I didn't know that, thanks. Also, thanks for being willing to ask Jack about getting me checkuser rights. Arcane (talk) 04:10, 29 July 2013 (UTC)Arcane

You're welcome. But unfortunally, I haven't got any messages from him, and he's usually offline until about 14:00 (UTC) (when I'm going to sleep) BTW, here's the output from a bot: (04:23:54) <wm-bot2> zhuyifei1999: Last time I saw ashley they were talking in the channel, they are still in the channel #mediawiki at 7/29/2013 12:15:47 AM (4h8m6s ago) --YiFei | talk 04:28, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

┌───────────────────┘
Congratulations! You're now a Check User. --YiFei | talk 09:22, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

So far you haven't used Special:CheckUser yet, have you? --YiFei | talk 09:21, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

No, but the one I just blocked posted spam as their very first edit (feel free to check), so I didn't need it. Also, I had to go check the WikiIslam page to make sure the icon change was legit, since that page has been hit by religious spammers before. Arcane (talk) 10:26, 30 July 2013 (UTC)Arcane

Hello Arcane and YiFei, I read this thread here and I know thats one of the biggest problem for a admin of a wiki. I'm the founder and admin of iSC Pedia 3.0 and what I know that all admins must not block ip adresses direct. Wait a while and talk to this user than decide it to block him or not.

For user who vandals at WikiIndex block them immediately.

Thanks to talk to you Suriyaa iSC (talk) 13:21, 30 August 2013 (UTC) (PS: Sorry, for my wrong english.)

Recent talk page spam

Dou you find any common words in them? They are our main spam source now. --YiFei | talk 17:22, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

Haven't really noticed, but I'll start keeping an eye out from now on. Arcane (talk) 18:02, 2 August 2013 (UTC)Arcane

Hello

Hello Arcane, I'm Suriyaa iSC and I'm new here at WikiIndex. I want to ask you if I write a article about my german wiki iSC Pedia 3.0. See you Suriyaa iSC (talk) 13:10, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

Special:AbuseFilter/28

Abuse filter conditions should be something like "something would do something". Not just a string. If you learnt some programming, you'll know a non-empty string can be changed to a "True", so it would just match anything. --YiFei | talk 08:43, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know that. I'm a novice at using AbuseFilter, but my intention was to make a filter blocking a repeated abusive troll's spamming efforts. Also, I do have some programming experience (granted, I'm a beginner in some areas), so your comment about "If you learnt some programming" was not only unnecessary, but frankly, I found that highly insulting and condescending. Arcane (talk) 12:37, 16 September 2013 (UTC)Arcane

Sorry. Some people may see some other meaning than my original one. I just can't find a better way to express myself. If you would like to, please tell me how (using "You should know" is just even worse). --YiFei | talk 14:44, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

Also, "Block" and "Remove from groups" on without "Warning" is just too dangerous. What if a good-faith editor just came up with a cool idea and tried to edit, and BOOM! he's blocked... Good thing is that there isn't. --YiFei | talk 15:05, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

It's alright, I accept your apology. Also, simply explaining why what I did was ineffective and potentially damaging to good faith editors (like you did with your second reply) is both helpful and assuming good faith without coming off as potentially offensive. In this case, you made an excellent point, my intentions were good, but I now see how I could have caused good faith editors harm, and I appreciate your bringing my lack of foresight to my attention. Arcane (talk) 16:33, 16 September 2013 (UTC)Arcane

Sent you an e-mail (address is the one you use it for mailing lists). --YiFei | talk 08:24, 18 September 2013 (UTC)

Thank you. :) Arcane (talk) 12:55, 18 September 2013 (UTC)Arcane

Thank you Arcane

For the spammer hint! Hoping all is well, write to you soon TeraS (talk) 02:53, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

Blocks

Use Range blocks if necessary. ;) That's much faster than blocking individual IPs. Such as 175.44.0.0/19 would be a good idea according to Whois.net BTW, please don't block IPs indef (IP owners may change). --YiFei | talk 09:02, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

Forgot about range blocking, thanks for reminding me.. Also, good point, infinite blocks are a bad idea. Arcane (talk) 12:43, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

 :D --YiFei | talk 12:54, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

Check user request

Hi please check Special:CheckUser/192.74.228.233. --YiFei | talk 09:12, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

Did that. They all seem to be spammer names from the same types of browser and computers. Arcane (talk) 12:22, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. --YiFei | talk 12:59, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

Should we have alternative infoboxes besides Template:Wiki?

Discussion here. --MarvelZuvembie (talk) 19:45, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

LogoLinking

Do You have an opinion on that? Please place Your vote on this. Manorainjan (talk) 11:25, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

Request for ServerMove concerns

I wanted to be sure to draw your attention to the upcoming ServerMove and solicit your help in making the transition a positive rather than negative experience. Please take a moment to visit ServerMove and curate the list of concerns. Thanks! -- BrandonCsSanders (talk) 22:38, 14 November 2014 (UTC) (call forwarded by Manorainjan (talk) 23:13, 14 November 2014 (UTC))

SuccuWiki

0_o 173.255.192.138 07:08, 4 January 2015 (UTC)

Please take action against Abd

overlooked. Impossible to "personal attack" an IP. Use a registered account, get more respect, or go away.

Left this as an edit summary for vandalism/reverting a topic he doesn't like. He has a long history of getting banned and edit warring on other wikis. He has a long pattern of edits here where he tries to uselessly fuck up comments he doesn't like. –maelstr0m 173.255.192.138 19:46, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

Please use an explanatory edit summary when reverting

[1] Leucosticte (talk) 17:44, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

You made an unannounced change to a redirect page and turned into a policy draft based on something you contested on my talk page. You did not put it up for consensus or a separate page for discussion, you just did it, overwriting a legitimate redirect in the process. Do such a thing again, and your block will begin. Arcane (talk) 17:49, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

Why do we have a cross-namespace redirect of that sort? There's a difference between edit warring in general (a suitable topic for a mainspace page, edit warring) and edit warring as practiced on WikiIndex (which would be the topic of a project namespace page on the subject, Project:Edit warring). I don't see why you view such an edit as disruption rather than permissible bold editing.

But, even if WikiIndex does have some unusual accepted practice concerning cross-namespace redirects, I don't see why you are now making block warnings about my inadvertently deviating from that practice. You seem to be making a big deal about rather minor incidents lately. It strikes me as odd. I don't know why you worry so much, and feel a need to begin paving the way for such drastic action, when everything is mostly going fine here. Leucosticte (talk) 17:58, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

Please unblock Sophie Wilder

Special:Contributions/Sophie Wilder – The sysop who blocked Sophie Wilder is now gone, and you know as well as I do that opposing Leucosticte is neither "trolling" nor "harassment". There are rational reasons to be upset with Leucosticte's behavior; the block wasn't deserved, especially under the given excuse of "trolling/harassment". --Michaeldsuarez (talk) 14:24, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

If I could reasonably guarantee they aren't going to try edit warring for the sake of openly opposing a user they have made clear they plan to go to war against openly if they were unblocked, I would. I certainly sympathize with their motives, but without a way to contact them and discuss this issue, I cannot render a judgment as to the wisdom of your request at this time. Arcane (talk) 14:45, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

Use your head: Sophie Wilder is clearly a RationalWiki user. That leads us to RationalWiki user "Bicycle Wheel". You have a RationalWiki account and can communicate with "Bicycle Wheel" there. --Michaeldsuarez (talk) 14:50, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

Michael, I would prefer not to import issues from here elsewhere if I can avoid it. I would be willing to unblock her to the point she can edit her talk page, and if you will inform her I did so, I'd be happy to start a dialogue with her. Arcane (talk) 18:34, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

Is it not possible to unblock Sophie Wilder in so far as she is allowed to edit her talk page in order to discuss this matter? I do not think a sysop from here should visit other wikis to "offer" unblocking discussion. The user wanting to be unblocked should come here and try his/her case. But from my previous experience from being blocked by User:Hoof Hearted I can tell that in my case he also blocked my talk page and absolutely everything, so that it was impossible for me to even talk to the blocking sysop in any way, in clear contradiction to the blocking message. So, maybe You can check this details and lift some of the restrictions in order to make discussion possible. And if Michaeldsuarez still has the desire to support her case, he can inform her about the change. Manorainjan (talk) 17:02, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

I could not change the settings for the block to allow just talk page editing only, so I did a temporary unblock so she can come here and plead her case, though this is provisional, based on what happens, and will be reinstated should what caused problems before happen or if our attempt at discussing things ends unsatisfactorily. Arcane (talk) 18:38, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

I doubt there will be further disputes. Pretty much everything that Sophie would have wanted done, Koavf did, and those actions were upheld by community decision (or indecision). Leucosticte (talk) 19:34, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

Manual:$wgBlockAllowsUTEdit – You have to change the wiki's configurations to allow blocked users to use their talk pages. By default, blocked users can't use their talk pages. I hope that no one here blocked people while assuming that they could request to become unblocked on their talk pages when they actually can't. Unfortunately, it looks like the people here have made that assumption. Haven't you noticed that nearly no one ever requests to be unblocked? If you're planning to keep the default configuration, then you keep to set expiration dates for blocks, since users can only speak once they're unblocked again. Unless you change the configurations, then infinite blocks should be done away with. --Michaeldsuarez (talk) 20:21, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

You make a valid point, Michael, I shall ask we look into changing this. Arcane (talk) 20:24, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

Somebody should also add a task to Phabricator suggesting that the default be changed to true. Leucosticte (talk) 20:25, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

Unfortunately, MediaWiki's default settings shouldn't be changed. The defaults are that way for a reason. Wikipedia's unblocking system requires infrastructure: unblock templates, unblock categories, and people watching those categories. These three things don't exist on new wikis, especially new wikis operated by inexperienced people. Experience from helping new wiki founders at Wikia back in 2009 tells me that most new wiki founders don't know how to built templates such as "Template:Unblock" or don't watch Special:RecentChanges and other maintenance pages. Changing defaults would require changing what is expected from new wiki operators. Treating each new new operator equally requires low expectations. Raising expectations means putting people who don't know what they're doing down. --Michaeldsuarez (talk) 20:40, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

If these issues are a problem, then sysops can just check the box to block the user from editing their talk page. Leucosticte (talk) 20:54, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

Weigh in on WikiIndex:Proposal: domain name change#Poll?

I wanted to be sure to draw your attention to a potential decision to change the domain of this wiki. I hope you'll weigh in with your opinion. Thanks! BrandonCsSanders (talk) 20:10, 13 March 2015 (UTC)

Blocking and notifications

I saw the mentioning of eMail in Your blocking comment. I was always wondering, if blocked users do get notifications from watched pages? --Manorainjan 07:13, 9 August 2017 (PDT)

That should be true as far as I know. Arcane (talk) 07:21, 9 August 2017 (PDT)

I think, that users who are blocked for ever should not get notifications at all. There is quite some possibility, that trolls create an account that they allow to be blocked and receive from their notifications about all pages of their interest. One can set pages to watch even in blocked mode, as far as I have noticed myself on de:wikipedia ;-) Than the troll can cause disturbance easily as IP editor with changing IPs. This is too much of a convenience for blocked people. Maybe one can remove the email address from the blocked account and add this to a separate black list. Than notification must stop, whatever the setting in the account is. What do You think?? Manorainjan 07:28, 9 August 2017 (PDT)