User talk:Leucosticte

Spam filter help

You're a wizzo on MW - can you help me with a spam filter problem please? I'm getting The following text is what triggered our spam filter: https://secure when trying to edit an article (though I thought that sysops should be able to automatically by-pass spam filters). I've tried editing our MediaWiki:Spam-whitelist, but without success. Any clues? TIA Sean, aka Hoof Hearted • _{Admin / 'Crat} • talk2HH 12:04, 21 May 2014 (UTC)

My regex-fu isn't very good, unfortunately. Leucosticte (talk) 01:18, 22 May 2014 (UTC)

@Sean: Could you give the url you are adding? (without the "https://", so it won't trigger the url blacklist) --YiFei | talk 03:45, 25 May 2014 (UTC)

YiFei, sorry for the late reply, the (non-secure) url is http://secure.travellerspoint.com - it is for the Travellerspoint wiki.

Yikes - even the non-https url is blocked by the spam filter — The following text is what triggered our spam filter: http://secure – try using 'nowikii', hope I can save this edit! Thanks in advance :)))) Sean, aka Hoof Hearted • _{Admin / 'Crat} • talk2HH 22:36, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

http://secure.travellerspoint.com is now whitelisted. The problem belongs to "cure" part, but I cannot find the cause easily in MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist or meta-wiki:Spam_blacklist --YiFei | talk 14:16, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

Article or cat?

here: WikiIndex talk:Community portal#Template:Inactive. You support the keeping of articles, but the discussion is about the keeping of category tags in articles or keeping articles about currently dead Wikis in categories. Please be precise in what You advocate.Manorainjan (talk) 21:52, 6 August 2014 (UTC)

LogoLinking

Do You have an opinion on that? Please place Your vote on this. Manorainjan (talk) 11:23, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

Would You please explain precisely why You can not support Option 1 or 2?Manorainjan (talk) 12:31, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

I'm just wondering about the details of implementation. Leucosticte (talk) 12:56, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

Did You miss his demonstration on what the Bot is about to do? 10 test edits? Manorainjan (talk)

Why is it not using link= Leucosticte (talk) 14:18, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

Please for clarity's sake give a full example of what You mean. Manorainjan (talk)

What if we did it like this instead? Leucosticte (talk) 14:39, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

I don't understand why you want to have the logo (which is uploaded here, and contains any necessary copyright or author info) link to the off-site wiki; when you have a clearly visible 'external link' right next to the logo? Sean, aka Hoof Hearted • _{Admin / 'Crat} • talk2HH 13:11, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

What do you think the typical user would like or expect to happen when they click on a logo? You might be right, though; I notice that on Wikipedia, even on the main page, when you click an image it takes you to the image page, not the article that the image is about. On the other hand, if you click the logos at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page#Wikipedia.27s_sister_projects it takes you to the wiki, rather than the image page for the logo. Leucosticte (talk) 14:19, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

This is another discussion! Like here: WikiIndex talk:Community portal#Endless discussions .2F.2F useful work

First the deviations from the common path need to be corrected. Then, after cleaning this and possibly other alterations, new features like the one You suggest, can be implemented by one run of another bot. If we would run a bot now to change the way the click on the logo would lead to, the current deviations might be exempted, creating more diversity in the way things are handled. Sooner or later bot constructions would have to handle a quite confusing amount of exemptions for the tiniest tasks.

Right now it is about how the page links to the logo file, not where the click on the logo leads to. If You call for 'endless' discussion, the linking question will be delayed and Your suggestion would rather not be dealt with at all, because after the finalising of the linking question I would not push Your idea to decision and You have to promote Your advanced cause yourself after everybody got enough of 'endless' discussions already. You may be thinking to make Your life easier by jumping on my train, but I will say You got no ticket and You will end in a place where You did not want to and would have to go back first. ;-) Manorainjan (talk) 14:55, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

I don't think it's necessary to do two edits. The bot can envision what the page will look like after making the first edit (rather than actually making that first edit) and then figure out what the second edit would be, and then do it all in one edit. Leucosticte (talk) 15:00, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

Ignore what I told and see what happens ...Manorainjan (talk)

Template

Why don't You use that template yourself? Manorainjan (talk) 14:34, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

Let sleeping dogs lie

Oh, shit, too late ;-) Manorainjan (talk)

The person may have kinda unilaterally taken care of the problem anyway, by changing their online identity (and maybe their real world identity too), and removing a lot of content from the Internet that linked them to those identities, so that stuff posted here is less likely to follow them. I should note that their role in Prisoners Rights Wiki and the personal bliki was pretty minimal. I helped them set up the MediaWiki installations, and I think that beyond that, they made few, if any, edits. It might be okay to keep a couple of images of this person, but there aren't a lot of articles to put those images in, and the articles that do mention that person don't have a lot of content concerning them. Leucosticte (talk) 15:31, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

Resolved

So I call that Theshatteredpan.org deletion question as resolved.

One question still bothers me. What means "the site was taken down permanently due to the principal funder's objections to certain content related to nudity and child sexuality."?

Why was it necessary to have more than one funder? Is a little bliki that much expensive? I thought every child can fund such on their pocket money.Manorainjan (talk) 13:54, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

PS: You mentioned to have archive material about that bliki. It went up and down so fast, that we do not even have a copy of the logo. Do You? Manorainjan (talk) 13:59, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

If you prefer, you could replace "principal funder's" with "owner's mother's". As for the logo, yeah, although I'm sure it's available on the Internet too, if you know where to look. Leucosticte (talk) 14:19, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

I do not prefer certain statements according to my linking. I prefer to have it in the way it describes the facts truthfully.

So, is it true, that it was the mother of Phoenix objecting to the nudity on that bliki? Is it true, that Phoenix mother was the principal funder of theshatteredpan.org? Would that not contradict Your statement, that this URL, sorry, this domain ;-) was or still is Yours? Unless You are 'their' mother. Or is the mother of Your 'Ex' still funding Your domain? Manorainjan (talk) 15:01, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

Phoenix was the founder (or gave permission for it to be founded, perhaps; I forget what exactly happened); I was the owner. So the owner's mother would be my mother. Leucosticte (talk) 15:04, 4 September 2014 (UTC)