Position vacant: WIKI ANGEL OF DEATH. Low pay, fantastic opportunities, lots of cookies *. Requires: immaculate judgement, sharp scythe, efficient attitude. Automatically pissing off querulous idiots advantageous. Apply at Special:Recentchanges or Special:Newpages.
With RickK taking (what is hopefully just) a rest, we need admins manning the pumps.People think of me as an ardent inclusionist, but I don't think anyone can call themselves an "ardent inclusionist" after doing Newpages patrol. About 20-40%, depending on time of day, will be immediately speedyable. Really, about 20-40%. You'll gain a deep and personal insight into what makes someone into an axewielding deletionist. ("HITLER? IF HE'S SO DAMN NOTABLE HE CAN WRITE HIS OWN ARTICLE! DELETE!")
Anyway, we need patrollers. Please get on Special:Newpages and Special:Recentchanges and do your bit to hold the tide back.
(r3m0t is beta-testing some very nice tools for making RC patrol a lot easier, and Newpages would easily be handled in the same sort of way. If you have Firefox with Greasemonkey, have a word with him on IRC. CoolCat also has some nice tools working with IRC, as does CryptoDerk. Have a look.)
- d.
On 6/22/05, David Gerard fun@thingy.apana.org.au wrote:
Position vacant: WIKI ANGEL OF DEATH. Low pay, fantastic opportunities, lots of cookies *. Requires: immaculate judgement, sharp scythe, efficient attitude. Automatically pissing off querulous idiots advantageous. Apply at Special:Recentchanges or Special:Newpages.
I took a look at NewPages yesterday. But every time I'm bored I spice up my life with RecentChanges, and there's always something I can stick my nose into.
Half the time it's a vandal of some sort and it's fun to sit on their IP address and check out what else they've been doing.
OK. I have a weird idea of fun.
Nothing like a elaxing time on RC patrol. suddenly all the wikipolitics just fade away and it's just you and a bunch of vandels who never seem to learn.
On 6/22/05, David Gerard fun@thingy.apana.org.au wrote:
(r3m0t is beta-testing some very nice tools for making RC patrol a lot easier, and Newpages would easily be handled in the same sort of way. If you have Firefox with Greasemonkey, have a word with him on IRC. CoolCat also has some nice tools working with IRC, as does CryptoDerk. Have a look.)
Mind telling us if and where we can find r3m0t's and Coolcat's tools?
--Mgm
After a lot of digging (I went through RickK's talk page in the end - glad it was undeleted!) I've found #en.wikipedia.vandalism, which is Cool Cat's vandal-detector bot in its own channel on Freenode.
r3m0t's thing is probably Humanbot, which is inactive at the moment (I only realised after install Greasemonkey and then the script - d'oh!)
HTH
Dan
On 22/06/05, MacGyverMagic/Mgm macgyvermagic@gmail.com wrote:
On 6/22/05, David Gerard fun@thingy.apana.org.au wrote:
(r3m0t is beta-testing some very nice tools for making RC patrol a lot easier, and Newpages would easily be handled in the same sort of way. If you have Firefox with Greasemonkey, have a word with him on IRC. CoolCat also has some nice tools working with IRC, as does CryptoDerk. Have a look.)
Mind telling us if and where we can find r3m0t's and Coolcat's tools?
--Mgm _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
On 6/22/05, Dan Grey dangrey@gmail.com wrote:
After a lot of digging (I went through RickK's talk page in the end - glad it was undeleted!) I've found #en.wikipedia.vandalism, which is Cool Cat's vandal-detector bot in its own channel on Freenode.
r3m0t's thing is probably Humanbot, which is inactive at the moment (I only realised after install Greasemonkey and then the script - d'oh!)
No, r3m0t is betaing a greasemonkey based tool that will preload recent changes for you to look at and approve or disapprove in various ways. I tested it the other day; it wasn't bad but it's really designed for nonadmins (it can mark stuff as speedy but it won't do the actual deletes and it doesn't use one-click rollback).
I've got an idea for implementing CDVF as a server application (in Tomcat) to much the same effect.
Kelly
I am sure this is what they are doing, but:
Wouldn't it be easy to detect when article sizes or content fluctuated wildly and mark that as worth checking into? Wouldn't it also be easy to check for new articles created without any Wikilinks? That would probably flag a good heap of the random vandalism right off the bat (dedicated vandals would of course be more subtle, but that's not a new thing). A little red flag for profanities would also probably work as well. This seems like something which could be easily hardwired into MediaWiki -- if condition X, add a list to this edit to Special:Checkup or something like that. But I don't know much about that, and know the developers are few, so it is just a thought, and one they have probably already had.
FF
On 6/22/05, Kelly Martin kelly.lynn.martin@gmail.com wrote:
On 6/22/05, Dan Grey dangrey@gmail.com wrote:
After a lot of digging (I went through RickK's talk page in the end - glad it was undeleted!) I've found #en.wikipedia.vandalism, which is Cool Cat's vandal-detector bot in its own channel on Freenode.
r3m0t's thing is probably Humanbot, which is inactive at the moment (I only realised after install Greasemonkey and then the script - d'oh!)
No, r3m0t is betaing a greasemonkey based tool that will preload recent changes for you to look at and approve or disapprove in various ways. I tested it the other day; it wasn't bad but it's really designed for nonadmins (it can mark stuff as speedy but it won't do the actual deletes and it doesn't use one-click rollback).
I've got an idea for implementing CDVF as a server application (in Tomcat) to much the same effect.
Kelly _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
On 6/22/05, Fastfission fastfission@gmail.com wrote:
I am sure this is what they are doing, but:
Wouldn't it be easy to detect when article sizes or content fluctuated wildly and mark that as worth checking into? Wouldn't it also be easy to check for new articles created without any Wikilinks? That would probably flag a good heap of the random vandalism right off the bat (dedicated vandals would of course be more subtle, but that's not a new thing). A little red flag for profanities would also probably work as well. This seems like something which could be easily hardwired into MediaWiki -- if condition X, add a list to this edit to Special:Checkup or something like that. But I don't know much about that, and know the developers are few, so it is just a thought, and one they have probably already had.
FF
a lot of vanadlism involves adding or changeing only one word. With new articles anything small is worth cheack. However since using firefox you can check a page about once every 5 seconds (you open them in lagre batches and view the diffs) it is often quicker and simpler to cheack everything.
Here's a question for y'all as a newbie to RC patrolling.
So I've got CDVF going, and I've imported the admins. So is it now simply a job of sitting here and trying to check diffs as quickly as possible?
It strikes me that must waste *a lot* of effort - lots of people must check the same edit.
Dan
Yea, yea. I'm working on that.
I've got a database running that imports all new changes, and will allow a client to retrieve changes and see who has checked them.
I'm still diddling with the schema.
On 6/22/05, Dan Grey dangrey@gmail.com wrote:
Here's a question for y'all as a newbie to RC patrolling.
So I've got CDVF going, and I've imported the admins. So is it now simply a job of sitting here and trying to check diffs as quickly as possible?
It strikes me that must waste *a lot* of effort - lots of people must check the same edit.
Dan _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
Gregory Maxwell wrote:
Yea, yea. I'm working on that.
I've got a database running that imports all new changes, and will allow a client to retrieve changes and see who has checked them.
I'm still diddling with the schema.
On 6/22/05, Dan Grey dangrey@gmail.com wrote:
Here's a question for y'all as a newbie to RC patrolling.
So I've got CDVF going, and I've imported the admins. So is it now simply a job of sitting here and trying to check diffs as quickly as possible?
It strikes me that must waste *a lot* of effort - lots of people must check the same edit.
Dan
But that's no better than the old "mark this change as patrolled" system - - you are relying on someone else to check the diff! And what if they too are a vandal, or don't bother to fix it?? Anyway, with CDVF, admin reverts are already detected and removed from the table, and diffs can be manually removed from the table (click in the "X" column), so the number of diffs that actually need checking is lower than you might think.
- -- Alphax OpenPGP key: 0xF874C613 - http://tinyurl.com/cc9up http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alphax There are two kinds of people: those who say to God, 'Thy will be done,' and those to whom God says, 'All right, then, have it your way.' - C. S. Lewis
On 6/22/05, Alphax alphasigmax@gmail.com wrote:
Here's a question for y'all as a newbie to RC patrolling.
So I've got CDVF going, and I've imported the admins. So is it now simply a job of sitting here and trying to check diffs as quickly as possible?
It strikes me that must waste *a lot* of effort - lots of people must check the same edit.
But that's no better than the old "mark this change as patrolled" system
- you are relying on someone else to check the diff! And what if they
too are a vandal, or don't bother to fix it?? Anyway, with CDVF, admin reverts are already detected and removed from the table, and diffs can be manually removed from the table (click in the "X" column), so the number of diffs that actually need checking is lower than you might think.
Eh, I solve this by marking who patrolled it and the client will have complete visability into that..
So, you could make items not appear on your list if they've been patrolled by two people or one person you really trust. Or anything else you'd like. I can also store flags set by RCers so they can mark suspicious edits for later evaluation.
Also, this will be totally decoupled from the realtime flow of edits... so you can work in realtime or you can look at the edits from last night that no one reviewed yet.
I'm only working on the backend infrastructure (well I'm 80% done now I think), this will need to be integrated into CDVF before it's useful. I suspect the interface will take more time than the :30 minutes it took me to write an irc->sql gateway. :)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
Gregory Maxwell wrote:
Eh, I solve this by marking who patrolled it and the client will have complete visability into that..
So, you could make items not appear on your list if they've been patrolled by two people or one person you really trust. Or anything else you'd like. I can also store flags set by RCers so they can mark suspicious edits for later evaluation.
Also, this will be totally decoupled from the realtime flow of edits... so you can work in realtime or you can look at the edits from last night that no one reviewed yet.
I'm only working on the backend infrastructure (well I'm 80% done now I think), this will need to be integrated into CDVF before it's useful. I suspect the interface will take more time than the :30 minutes it took me to write an irc->sql gateway. :)
Awesome :)
- -- Alphax OpenPGP key: 0xF874C613 - http://tinyurl.com/cc9up http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alphax There are two kinds of people: those who say to God, 'Thy will be done,' and those to whom God says, 'All right, then, have it your way.' - C. S. Lewis
Alphax wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
Gregory Maxwell wrote:
Eh, I solve this by marking who patrolled it and the client will have complete visability into that..
So, you could make items not appear on your list if they've been patrolled by two people or one person you really trust. Or anything else you'd like. I can also store flags set by RCers so they can mark suspicious edits for later evaluation.
Also, this will be totally decoupled from the realtime flow of edits... so you can work in realtime or you can look at the edits from last night that no one reviewed yet.
I'm only working on the backend infrastructure (well I'm 80% done now I think), this will need to be integrated into CDVF before it's useful. I suspect the interface will take more time than the :30 minutes it took me to write an irc->sql gateway. :)
Awesome :)
I agree. That's the RC checker from hell.
On 23/06/05, Gregory Maxwell gmaxwell@gmail.com wrote:
Eh, I solve this by marking who patrolled it and the client will have complete visability into that..
So, you could make items not appear on your list if they've been patrolled by two people or one person you really trust. Or anything else you'd like. I can also store flags set by RCers so they can mark suspicious edits for later evaluation.
Which is *exactly* what I was thinking of (so :p Alphax and Geni! :-) )
The only problem I see is authentication - how can you be sure that the person patrolled the edit is really who they say they are?
Dan
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
Dan Grey wrote:
Which is *exactly* what I was thinking of (so :p Alphax and Geni! :-) )
The only problem I see is authentication - how can you be sure that the person patrolled the edit is really who they say they are?
(insert plan to integrate OpenGPG with MediaWiki here)
Well, somehow, you would authenticate yourself with the database server, and then authenticate yourself with Wikipedia... or something... in the same way that IRC cloaks and username changes are done - make an edit under your login to confirm it is you.
- -- Alphax OpenPGP key: 0xF874C613 - http://tinyurl.com/cc9up http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alphax There are two kinds of people: those who say to God, 'Thy will be done,' and those to whom God says, 'All right, then, have it your way.' - C. S. Lewis
On 6/22/05, Fastfission fastfission@gmail.com wrote:
I am sure this is what they are doing, but:
Wouldn't it be easy to detect when article sizes or content fluctuated wildly and mark that as worth checking into?
This is quite easy and CDVF already flags "large" edits. (I catch a lot of vandalism that way.)
Wouldn't it also be easy to check for new articles created without any Wikilinks?
That's harder because you have to actually fetch the edits to check for that.
Kelly