Bureaucrats, checkuser, Interface administrators, interwiki, Administrators (Semantic MediaWiki), Curators (Semantic MediaWiki), Editors (Semantic MediaWiki), staff, Suppressors, Administrators
83,693
edits
Category talk:Active administrators of this wiki/Archive 2012-13: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
m
Category talk:Active administrators of this wiki/Archive 2012-13 (view source)
Revision as of 10:20, 21 September 2017
, 21 September 2017→It's happening again: fix recursive double redirects
Hoof Hearted (talk | contribs) |
Hoof Hearted (talk | contribs) m (→It's happening again: fix recursive double redirects) |
||
| Line 31: | Line 31: | ||
:And again it happened. I have protected several critical pages to stop editing as a result. Is it possible to restrict editing by new [[user]]s? Say max of 10 pages or something? Just an idea... [[User:TeraS|TeraS]] ([[User talk:TeraS|talk]]) 22:52, 29 September 2012 (PDT) | :And again it happened. I have protected several critical pages to stop editing as a result. Is it possible to restrict editing by new [[user]]s? Say max of 10 pages or something? Just an idea... [[User:TeraS|TeraS]] ([[User talk:TeraS|talk]]) 22:52, 29 September 2012 (PDT) | ||
:: I think no. But [[:Category:MediaWiki|MediaWiki]] contains the option to add them manually to the editors group (this is currently - and by default - done automatically). But then, some admins have to observe the RSS feed for newly registered users and then, just after enabling them (for editing), watch them... It's also just an idea... --[[Wolf Peuker|Wolf]] | <small>[[User talk:Peu|talk]]</small> 05:42, 30 September 2012 (PDT) | :: I think no. But [[:Category:MediaWiki|MediaWiki]] contains the option to add them manually to the editors group (this is currently - and by default - done automatically). But then, some admins have to observe the RSS feed for newly registered users and then, just after enabling them (for editing), watch them... It's also just an idea... --[[Wolf Peuker|Wolf]] | <small>[[User talk:Peu|talk]]</small> 05:42, 30 September 2012 (PDT) | ||
:::Actually, I've seen wikis implement edit | :::Actually, I've seen wikis implement [[edit throttle]]s for non-autoconfirmed (new) users, the user is only allowed to make a certain amount of edits within a certain period of time. I think that would be a better idea then having the admins manually authorize each and every new account created. '''[[User talk:Elassint|Elassint]]''' 30 September 2012 | ||
:::: This makes me curious. Is it done by a regular MediaWiki extension? Can you point on this example wiki, any further description? --[[Wolf Peuker|Wolf]] | <small>[[User talk:Peu|talk]]</small> 06:44, 30 September 2012 (PDT) | :::: This makes me curious. Is it done by a regular MediaWiki extension? Can you point on this example wiki, any further description? --[[Wolf Peuker|Wolf]] | <small>[[User talk:Peu|talk]]</small> 06:44, 30 September 2012 (PDT) | ||
::::: I liked [[ | ::::: I liked [[edit throttle|edit throttling]] - will see if I can dig up anything on it. (Thanks for pinging me on this [[Wolf Peuker|Wolf]] Best, [[MarkDilley]] | ||
I really think that we need to look at appropriate [[:Category:MediaWiki|MediaWiki]] keyword filter extensions. I briefly raised this issue [[User talk:Elassint#Spammers - and new account names|here]]. Personally, I'm not sure that total '[[:Category:OpenEdit|open editing]]' is compatible with our current protection against [[spammer]]s/[[vandal]]s - in our current software config. Yes, we do have active [[sysop]]s who can help out - but I'm sure that after our latest bombardment, and the gallant efforts of [[User:TeraS|TeraS]] - this is likely to lead to grumpy sysops . . . because we seem to be constantly 'fire-fighting', rather than letting the software do the work for us. WikiIndex should ''not'' be used for blatant promotion of religious opinions, sexual disfunction drugs, or financial help products (unless they are clearly referring to an established and fuctional wiki). [[User:Hoof Hearted|Hoof Hearted]] • <small>[[User talk:Hoof Hearted|talk2HH]]</small> 06:49, 30 September 2012 (PDT) | I really think that we need to look at appropriate [[:Category:MediaWiki|MediaWiki]] keyword filter extensions. I briefly raised this issue [[User talk:Elassint#Spammers - and new account names|here]]. Personally, I'm not sure that total '[[:Category:OpenEdit|open editing]]' is compatible with our current protection against [[spammer]]s/[[vandal]]s - in our current software config. Yes, we do have active [[sysop]]s who can help out - but I'm sure that after our latest bombardment, and the gallant efforts of [[User:TeraS|TeraS]] - this is likely to lead to grumpy sysops . . . because we seem to be constantly 'fire-fighting', rather than letting the software do the work for us. WikiIndex should ''not'' be used for blatant promotion of religious opinions, sexual disfunction drugs, or financial help products (unless they are clearly referring to an established and fuctional wiki). [[User:Hoof Hearted|Hoof Hearted]] • <small>[[User talk:Hoof Hearted|talk2HH]]</small> 06:49, 30 September 2012 (PDT) | ||
: On a related note, WikiIndex's system administrators should '''really''' install the [[mw:Extension:CheckUser|CheckUser extension]] and give [[bureaucrat]]s/administrators/a new group access to the | : On a related note, WikiIndex's system administrators should '''really''' install the [[mw:Extension:CheckUser|CheckUser extension]] and give [[bureaucrat]]s/administrators/a new group access to the [[Check user]] special page (the privacy policy ''may'' need to be adjusted), because right now, it's all too easy for a [[vandal]] to register multiple accounts from the same [[IP address]] and vandalize. With the CheckUser extension installed & properly configured, administrators (or other privileged users) can get the user's underlying IP and ban it in case of persistent vandalism. | ||
: For this particular vandal, blocking the IP range <code>216.66.0.0/16</code> might help. --[[User:Jack Phoenix|Jack Phoenix]] ([[User talk:Jack Phoenix|talk]]) 06:59, 30 September 2012 (PDT) | : For this particular vandal, blocking the IP range <code>216.66.0.0/16</code> might help. --[[User:Jack Phoenix|Jack Phoenix]] ([[User talk:Jack Phoenix|talk]]) 06:59, 30 September 2012 (PDT) | ||
:: Thanks for your thoughts Jack. I think I blocked the IP range OK ([[Special:Contributions/216.66.0.0/16|here]] - did I do it correctly?). I'm only a sysop, so I don't think I can access the relevant IP tools to check these types of features. Can you recommend any specific MW extensions we can use to block specific words or phrases - for both username creation, and body text editing? [[mw:Extension:AbuseFilter|AbuseFilter]], as recommended by [[User talk:Elassint|Elassint]] [[User talk:Elassint#Spammers - and new account names|here]] looks promising, but it appears way to complicated for me :( [[User:Hoof Hearted|Hoof Hearted]] • <small>[[User talk:Hoof Hearted|talk2HH]]</small> 07:29, 30 September 2012 (PDT) | :: Thanks for your thoughts Jack. I think I blocked the IP range OK ([[Special:Contributions/216.66.0.0/16|here]] - did I do it correctly?). I'm only a [[sysop]], so I don't think I can access the relevant IP tools to check these types of features. Can you recommend any specific MW extensions we can use to block specific words or phrases - for both [[username]] creation, and body text editing? [[mw:Extension:AbuseFilter|AbuseFilter]], as recommended by [[User talk:Elassint|Elassint]] [[User talk:Elassint#Spammers - and new account names|here]] looks promising, but it appears way to complicated for me :( [[User:Hoof Hearted|Hoof Hearted]] • <small>[[User talk:Hoof Hearted|talk2HH]]</small> 07:29, 30 September 2012 (PDT) | ||
I think words / phrases / websites can be [[blacklist]]ed, will that help right now? [[MarkDilley]] | I think words / phrases / websites can be [[blacklist]]ed, will that help right now? [[MarkDilley]] | ||
: Our current system is 'reactive', and relies on crats with specific expertise on editing said blacklist AFTER we have been bombarded (of which I have no expertise, and other sysops which do appear to have, arn't crats). But as we are at the moment, I don't see how we can blacklist 'usernames' . . . . JugglingTooManyBalls.com :p [[User:Hoof Hearted|Hoof Hearted]] • <small>[[User talk:Hoof Hearted|talk2HH]]</small> 08:49, 30 September 2012 (PDT) | : Our current system is 'reactive', and relies on crats with specific expertise on editing said blacklist AFTER we have been bombarded (of which I have no expertise, and other sysops which do appear to have, arn't crats). But as we are at the moment, I don't see how we can blacklist 'usernames' . . . . JugglingTooManyBalls.com :p [[User:Hoof Hearted|Hoof Hearted]] • <small>[[User talk:Hoof Hearted|talk2HH]]</small> 08:49, 30 September 2012 (PDT) | ||
::I agree, but that is the system we have now. Look forward if we can come up with a plan of action - preferably [[Meatball:SoftSecurity]]. (I still don't know what the difference is between a bureaucrat and sysop - much prefer flat wiki with way less the control being wielded with MediaWiki) - Best, [[MarkDilley]] | ::I agree, but that is the system we have now. Look forward if we can come up with a plan of action - preferably [[Meatball:SoftSecurity]]. (I still don't know what the difference is between a [[bureaucrat]] and sysop - much prefer flat wiki with way less the control being wielded with MediaWiki) - Best, [[MarkDilley]] | ||
:::On [[:Category:MediaWiki|MediaWiki]], it is detailed at [[Special:ListGroupRights]]. Basically, a [[bureaucrat]] is basically the top-tier level of management - and obviously have by far the greatest range of controls of the wiki site. [[Sysop]]s are the next level down, and obviously have less controls (sysops can protect pages, delete pages, block users, and edit the MediaWiki namespace - but not much more). Sysops have no way of interrogating say blocks of IP users, sysops can't say re-name user accounts, and sysops have no way of installing software extensions. We really DO need a couple more bureaucrats here . . . my nominations are still for TeraS, emijrp and Jack Phoenix. :-) | :::On [[:Category:MediaWiki|MediaWiki]], it is detailed at [[Special:ListGroupRights]]. Basically, a [[bureaucrat]] is basically the top-tier level of management - and obviously have by far the greatest range of controls of the wiki site. [[Sysop]]s are the next level down, and obviously have less controls (sysops can protect pages, delete pages, block users, and edit the MediaWiki namespace - but not much more). Sysops have no way of interrogating say blocks of IP users, sysops can't say re-name user accounts, and sysops have no way of installing software extensions. We really DO need a couple more bureaucrats here . . . my nominations are still for TeraS, emijrp and Jack Phoenix. :-) | ||
:::[[Meatball:SoftSecurity]] goes over my head . . . I'm only experienced in MediaWiki, whereas I suppose 'wiki old-timers' might be more experienced in other [[:Category:Wiki Engine|wiki engines]]. OK, I've just re-read the Meatball article. I agree in principle with its sentiments . . . we already [[ | :::[[Meatball:SoftSecurity]] goes over my head . . . I'm only experienced in MediaWiki, whereas I suppose 'wiki old-timers' might be more experienced in other [[:Category:Wiki Engine|wiki engines]]. OK, I've just re-read the Meatball article. I agree in principle with its sentiments . . . we already [[assume good faith]], along with all the other related values, and we also work 'UnlockedDoors' principle. But they leave us very vulnerable. OK, we have different [[sysop]]s who operate in different timezones, but if a determined spammer/vandal wishes to flood WikiIndex, a lone sysop can be easily overwealmed (and will often 'spoil' an otherwise constructive editing session for said sysop). 'Peer Pressure' wont stop religious vandals or online loan spammers - they have NO consience! Best, [[User:Hoof Hearted|Hoof Hearted]] • <small>[[User talk:Hoof Hearted|talk2HH]]</small> 15:37, 30 September 2012 (PDT) | ||
===The religious vandal RETURNS again!=== | ===The religious vandal RETURNS again!=== | ||