Based on my experience in previous years, I have no doubt April 1 will bring out a lot of pranksters. We had a lot of mess before. Are there any preparations to keep things under control this year? If not, we should organize something ASAP.
Mgm
MacGyverMagic/Mgm wrote:
Based on my experience in previous years, I have no doubt April 1 will bring out a lot of pranksters. We had a lot of mess before. Are there any preparations to keep things under control this year? If not, we should organize something ASAP.
You could get a two-fer by announcing that WP is now "completed" and that therefore no further editing is necessary, then protect (or semi-protect?) all pages for the 48 hours necessary to catch all timezones.
:-)
Stan
On 19/03/07, Stan Shebs stanshebs@earthlink.net wrote:
MacGyverMagic/Mgm wrote:
Based on my experience in previous years, I have no doubt April 1 will bring out a lot of pranksters. We had a lot of mess before. Are there any preparations to keep things under control this year? If not, we should organize something ASAP.
You could get a two-fer by announcing that WP is now "completed" and that therefore no further editing is necessary, then protect (or semi-protect?) all pages for the 48 hours necessary to catch all timezones.
:-)
I like it :)
On 3/19/07, James Farrar james.farrar@gmail.com wrote:
On 19/03/07, Stan Shebs stanshebs@earthlink.net wrote:
MacGyverMagic/Mgm wrote:
Based on my experience in previous years, I have no doubt April 1 will bring out a lot of pranksters. We had a lot of mess before. Are there any preparations to keep things under control this year? If not, we should organize something ASAP.
You could get a two-fer by announcing that WP is now "completed" and that therefore no further editing is necessary, then protect (or semi-protect?) all pages for the 48 hours necessary to catch all timezones.
:-)
I like it :)
Or just revert the database back 48 hrs after the fun's all run its course...
"What April 1? There was no April 1 this year, we skipped straight to the Second..."
On 3/19/07, Stan Shebs stanshebs@earthlink.net wrote:
You could get a two-fer by announcing that WP is now "completed" and that therefore no further editing is necessary, then protect (or semi-protect?) all pages for the 48 hours necessary to catch all timezones.
Hell, let's just http redirect the whole site to uncyclopedia
On 3/20/07, Stan Shebs stanshebs@earthlink.net wrote:
You could get a two-fer by announcing that WP is now "completed" and that therefore no further editing is necessary, then protect (or semi-protect?) all pages for the 48 hours necessary to catch all timezones.
Why miss out on this golden opportunity to make thousands of people realise that anyone can edit Wikipedia?
Steve
On 3/19/07, Steve Bennett stevagewp@gmail.com wrote:
Why miss out on this golden opportunity to make thousands of people realise that anyone can edit Wikipedia?
"user:Anyone" doesn't seem to exist. Here's someone's golden opportunity.
It's not available for creation... but not sure if it exists or is just not available to be created.
Philippe ----- Original Message ----- From: Ron Ritzman To: English Wikipedia Sent: Monday, March 19, 2007 8:04 PM Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] April Fool - how to prepare for the onslaught
On 3/19/07, Steve Bennett stevagewp@gmail.com wrote:
Why miss out on this golden opportunity to make thousands of people realise that anyone can edit Wikipedia?
"user:Anyone" doesn't seem to exist. Here's someone's golden opportunity.
_______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
On 3/20/07, Philippe Beaudette philippebeaudette@gmail.com wrote:
It's not available for creation... but not sure if it exists or is just not available to be created.
Yeah I couldn't work out a way of distinguishing between a non-existent user, and a user who has never done anything.
Steve
On 3/20/07, Steve Bennett stevagewp@gmail.com wrote:
Yeah I couldn't work out a way of distinguishing between a non-existent user, and a user who has never done anything.
Steve
Like this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&user=Anybody
On 3/19/07, geni geniice@gmail.com wrote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&user=Anybody
Wikipedia, the encyclopedia that anybody can edit but anybody never has.
On 20/03/07, Ron Ritzman ritzman@gmail.com wrote:
Wikipedia, the encyclopedia that anybody can edit but anybody never has.
The encyclopedia that Anybody can edit, but Nobody never has. (How's that for grammar?)
The encyclopedia that Anybody can edit, but Nobody never has. (How's that for grammar?)
Who cares about the grammer? The actual information is wrong:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Nobody
;)
Who cares about the grammer? The actual information is wrong:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Nobody
;)
I'm going to reply to myself before anyone beats me to it:
Nobody has editted Wikipedia.
On 3/20/07, Thomas Dalton thomas.dalton@gmail.com wrote:
Who cares about the grammer? The actual information is wrong:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Nobody
;)
I'm going to reply to myself before anyone beats me to it:
Nobody has editted Wikipedia.
Or, better yet:
The encyclopedia that Anybody can edit, but Nobody has.
On 20/03/07, Thomas Dalton thomas.dalton@gmail.com wrote:
Or, better yet:
The encyclopedia that Anybody can edit, but Nobody has.
I thought of that, but I don't like it. It should be "and Nobody has" rather than "but", but then it doesn't work.
I'll settle for a semi-colon, I think.
The encyclopaedia that Anybody can edit; Nobody has.
On 3/21/07, Thomas Dalton thomas.dalton@gmail.com wrote:
I thought that was the intention... "Nobody has." is not a full sentence, even if you treat "Nobody" as a name.
What's a "full sentence"? This is perfectly grammatical: I have not eaten. Jonathan has.
Steve
On 3/20/07, Deathphoenix originaldeathphoenix@gmail.com wrote:
On 3/20/07, Thomas Dalton thomas.dalton@gmail.com wrote:
Who cares about the grammer? The actual information is wrong:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Nobody
;)
I'm going to reply to myself before anyone beats me to it:
Nobody has editted Wikipedia.
Or, better yet:
The encyclopedia that Anybody can edit, but Nobody has. _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
We should change the tagline for april fools to that!
On 3/26/07, ยท Firefoxman enwpmail@gmail.com wrote:
We should change the tagline for april fools to that!
We should definitely change it to *something*. :-)
"From Wikipedia, an infinite number of monkeys on an infinite number of typewriters"?
What has it been changed to in the past?
On 27/03/07, Omegatron omegatron+wikienl@gmail.com wrote:
"From Wikipedia, an infinite number of monkeys on an infinite number of typewriters"?
"From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia that anyone BUSH IS GAY LOLOLOLOLOLOLOL can edit."
- d.
On 3/27/07, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
"From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia that anyone BUSH IS GAY LOLOLOLOLOLOLOL can edit."
Wikipedia, the free bathroom wall^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^Hencyclopedia that anyone can vandalize^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^Hedit.
Better yet, unprotect the main page just for that day.
On 3/28/07, Ron Ritzman ritzman@gmail.com wrote:
On 3/27/07, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
"From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia that anyone BUSH IS GAY LOLOLOLOLOLOLOL can edit."
Wikipedia, the free bathroom wall^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^Hencyclopedia that anyone can vandalize^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^Hedit.
Better yet, unprotect the main page just for that day.
Been done:
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&page=Main_Page
On 3/28/07, geni geniice@gmail.com wrote:
Better yet, unprotect the main page just for that day.
Been done:
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&page=Main_Page
Ok, how about this. At 12:00AM EDT on April 1st, nominate the mage page for deletion and leave it open for 24 hours.
Then again, that's probably been done too.
On 3/28/07, Ron Ritzman ritzman@gmail.com wrote:
On 3/28/07, geni geniice@gmail.com wrote:
Better yet, unprotect the main page just for that day.
Been done:
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&page=Main_Page
Ok, how about this. At 12:00AM EDT on April 1st, nominate the mage page for deletion and leave it open for 24 hours.
Then again, that's probably been done too.
Yes
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Votes_for_deletion/Main_Page
On 3/27/07, Omegatron omegatron+wikienl@gmail.com wrote:
On 3/26/07, ยท Firefoxman enwpmail@gmail.com wrote:
We should change the tagline for april fools to that!
We should definitely change it to *something*. :-)
No thankyou it was anoying enough the last time someone decided to mess around with the system messages.
On Mar 27, 2007, at 11:12 AM, geni wrote:
On 3/27/07, Omegatron omegatron+wikienl@gmail.com wrote:
On 3/26/07, ยท Firefoxman enwpmail@gmail.com wrote:
We should change the tagline for april fools to that!
We should definitely change it to *something*. :-)
No thankyou it was anoying enough the last time someone decided to mess around with the system messages.
Oh come on, that was hilarious.
A bad idea, and we shouldn't aim to repeat it, but still. I'll bet dollars to donuts (and I like donuts) that most people who looked at that laughed.
The issue isn't that these things aren't funny. It's that our main purpose isn't humor. :)
-Phil
On 3/28/07, Omegatron omegatron+wikienl@gmail.com wrote:
"From Wikipedia, an infinite number of monkeys on an infinite number of typewriters"?
I kind of like that idea. I think we should do something centralised, because if we don't, 30 different Wikipedia subgroups will all decide that *they're* going to do something. Better one gag than 30.
Steve
On 3/27/07, Steve Bennett stevagewp@gmail.com wrote:
On 3/28/07, Omegatron omegatron+wikienl@gmail.com wrote:
"From Wikipedia, an infinite number of monkeys on an infinite number of typewriters"?
I kind of like that idea. I think we should do something centralised, because if we don't, 30 different Wikipedia subgroups will all decide that *they're* going to do something. Better one gag than 30.
The April 1 Main Page project has some excellent material lined up; I don't think people will be disappointed.
On 3/28/07, Michael Noda michael.noda@gmail.com wrote:
The April 1 Main Page project has some excellent material lined up; I don't think people will be disappointed.
Where? I couldn't find any pointers at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Main_Page
Steve
On 28/03/07, Steve Bennett stevagewp@gmail.com wrote:
On 3/28/07, Michael Noda michael.noda@gmail.com wrote:
The April 1 Main Page project has some excellent material lined up; I don't think people will be disappointed.
Where? I couldn't find any pointers at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Main_Page
Apparently http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:April_Fool%27s_Main_Page
On 3/28/07, Andrew Gray shimgray@gmail.com wrote:
On 28/03/07, Steve Bennett stevagewp@gmail.com wrote:
On 3/28/07, Michael Noda michael.noda@gmail.com wrote:
The April 1 Main Page project has some excellent material lined up; I don't think people will be disappointed.
Where? I couldn't find any pointers at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Main_Page
Apparently http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:April_Fool%27s_Main_Page
That would be last years.
Thomas Dalton wrote:
Who cares about the grammer? The actual information is wrong:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Nobody
;)
I'm going to reply to myself before anyone beats me to it:
Nobody has editted Wikipedia.
Correcting one's own edits sometimes leads to more errors. (grammer/grammar, editted/edited) ;-)
Ec
On 20/03/07, Ray Saintonge saintonge@telus.net wrote:
Thomas Dalton wrote:
I'm going to reply to myself before anyone beats me to it:
Nobody has editted Wikipedia.
Correcting one's own edits sometimes leads to more errors. (grammer/grammar, editted/edited) ;-)
The first rule of the Internet is that any post correcting a typo must itself contain a typo :)
On 3/20/07, James Farrar james.farrar@gmail.com wrote:
The first rule of the Internet is that any post correcting a typo must itself contain a typo :)
I thought the first rule of the Internet is to not talk about the Internet. :o)
On 3/20/07, Ryan Wetherell renardius@gmail.com wrote:
I thought the first rule of the Internet is to not talk about the Internet. :o)
No that's the second rule. The first rule of the Internet is to not talk about the Internet :o)
On 21/03/07, Ron Ritzman ritzman@gmail.com wrote:
On 3/20/07, Ryan Wetherell renardius@gmail.com wrote:
I thought the first rule of the Internet is to not talk about the Internet. :o)
No that's the second rule. The first rule of the Internet is to not talk about the Internet :o)
And the third rule is that when someone shouts "stop!", goes limp or taps out, the pedantic discussion is not over :)
Erm, can we get back to the topic?
On 3/21/07, James Farrar james.farrar@gmail.com wrote:
On 21/03/07, Ron Ritzman ritzman@gmail.com wrote:
On 3/20/07, Ryan Wetherell renardius@gmail.com wrote:
I thought the first rule of the Internet is to not talk about the
Internet. :o)
No that's the second rule. The first rule of the Internet is to not talk about the Internet :o)
And the third rule is that when someone shouts "stop!", goes limp or taps out, the pedantic discussion is not over :)
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
On 3/21/07, MacGyverMagic/Mgm macgyvermagic@gmail.com wrote:
Erm, can we get back to the topic?
I've got the solution:
We just need to identify and block the troublemakers on the first.
Just IP block (hard, not AO) 0.0.0.0/0 for the 48 hrs...
Wikipedia: The encyclopedia that anybody can edit... NOT.
Creating an account from an account refers to a user creating an account at Special:Userlogin while logged in. for example, see my log, you'll see 'Gary Kirk created new user account: Kirkbot'.
On 22/03/07, George Herbert george.herbert@gmail.com wrote:
On 3/21/07, MacGyverMagic/Mgm macgyvermagic@gmail.com wrote:
Erm, can we get back to the topic?
I've got the solution:
We just need to identify and block the troublemakers on the first.
Just IP block (hard, not AO) 0.0.0.0/0 for the 48 hrs...
Wikipedia: The encyclopedia that anybody can edit... NOT.
-- -george william herbert george.herbert@gmail.com
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
On 20/03/07, Thomas Dalton thomas.dalton@gmail.com wrote:
The encyclopedia that Anybody can edit, but Nobody never has. (How's that for grammar?)
Who cares about the grammer? The actual information is wrong:
I could have sworn that was what I checked before posting :) Oh well...
Yeah I couldn't work out a way of distinguishing between a non-existent user, and a user who has never done anything.
Steve
Like this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&user=Anybody
-- geni
Actually, that won't do anything because if the account was created from another account it won't show up in the new account log for that user. You need to go to their user page. If there's a "User contributions" link the user exists, otherwise the user does not. --Mets501
On 3/20/07, Mets501 mets501wiki@gmail.com wrote:
Actually, that won't do anything because if the account was created from another account it won't show up in the new account log for that user.
Created from another account? What do you mean?
Steve
On 20/03/07, Mets501 mets501wiki@gmail.com wrote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&user=Anybody
Actually, that won't do anything because if the account was created from another account it won't show up in the new account log for that user.
I don't know what "created from another account" means, but no log entry is very simple - created before late 2005, when the log was put in place.
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&user=Anybody
Actually, that won't do anything because if the account was created from another account it won't show up in the new account log for that user.
That also won't work for accounts made before the user creation log was invented. The way to tell is to look at their contributions list.
If the user page link is red or blue, they exist. It if it gray, they do not.
Compare these two: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Anybodyx http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Anybody
Angela
On 3/20/07, Angela beesley@gmail.com wrote:
If the user page link is red or blue, they exist. It if it gray, they do not.
Compare these two: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Anybodyx http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Anybody
Woot, the authoritative answer.
Out of curiosity, if it's possible to show a grey link, you'd think it would be possible to show something more explicit like "There is no user with this name."..
Steve
On 3/20/07, Steve Bennett stevagewp@gmail.com wrote:
Yeah I couldn't work out a way of distinguishing between a non-existent user, and a user who has never done anything.
The only definitive method for determining whether an account exists is [[Special:Listusers]].
On Mar 19, 2007, at 5:33 PM, MacGyverMagic/Mgm wrote:
Based on my experience in previous years, I have no doubt April 1 will bring out a lot of pranksters. We had a lot of mess before. Are there any preparations to keep things under control this year? If not, we should organize something ASAP.
I think the easiest thing to do would be to get a page where recent changes to the encyclopedia can be looked at together so that we can see what's going on. Secondarily, the ability to make targetted lists of pages that we can watch and see when get changed would be useful.
Once we have those, all we need is some admins who can look at a calendar and who are sensibly mirthful - that is, unwilling to accept crap in the articlespace, and tolerant of amusing hijinks in the project namespace.
-Phil
On 3/19/07, MacGyverMagic/Mgm macgyvermagic@gmail.com wrote:
Based on my experience in previous years, I have no doubt April 1 will bring out a lot of pranksters. We had a lot of mess before. Are there any preparations to keep things under control this year? If not, we should organize something ASAP.
Just make April 1 of every year Spring Cleanup day and be done with it: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Naconkantari/cleanup