Just wanted to let the wider community (who don't necessarily follow wikitech-l) know about this.
-Chad
---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Tim Starling tstarling@wikimedia.org Date: Fri, Aug 22, 2008 at 2:14 AM Subject: [Wikitech-l] $wgCentralAuthAutoNew=true To: wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
$wgCentralAuthAutoNew is now enabled, which means new accounts created in the usual way automatically become global accounts, they don't need to manually merge.
-- Tim Starling
_______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
So a vandal has to make one account en can spam on all wiki's? Is there global blocking?
2008/8/22, Chad innocentkiller@gmail.com:
Just wanted to let the wider community (who don't necessarily follow wikitech-l) know about this.
-Chad
---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Tim Starling tstarling@wikimedia.org Date: Fri, Aug 22, 2008 at 2:14 AM Subject: [Wikitech-l] $wgCentralAuthAutoNew=true To: wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
$wgCentralAuthAutoNew is now enabled, which means new accounts created in the usual way automatically become global accounts, they don't need to manually merge.
-- Tim Starling
Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Huib Laurens wrote:
So a vandal has to make one account en can spam on all wiki's? Is there global blocking?
Yes. See http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Global_blocking
Matt Flaschen
On Fri, Aug 22, 2008 at 9:43 AM, Matthew Flaschen matthew.flaschen@gatech.edu wrote:
Huib Laurens wrote:
So a vandal has to make one account en can spam on all wiki's? Is there global blocking?
Global blocking only works for IP addresses at this time (it was designed specifically that way).
For global accounts, we have global "locking", which does pretty much the same thing.
2008/8/22 Casey Brown cbrown1023.ml@gmail.com
On Fri, Aug 22, 2008 at 9:43 AM, Matthew Flaschen matthew.flaschen@gatech.edu wrote:
Huib Laurens wrote:
So a vandal has to make one account en can spam on all wiki's? Is there global blocking?
Global blocking only works for IP addresses at this time (it was designed specifically that way).
-- Casey Brown Cbrown1023
Note: This e-mail address is used for mailing lists. Personal emails sent to this address will probably get lost.
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Although this may solve some problems at the larger communities, it might create a problem at smaller communities. Previously trolls could be detected because they was editing as anonymous, now they will be more likely to operate as logged in users.
If this shall be of real benefit somehow the smaller communities should be able to report a global user as troublesome. Turned around this could also lead to a small community blacklisting an otherwise good contributor.
All in all, I think it has to be carefully considered wetter it is necessary to make some special tools to deal with global trolls.
One simple measure could be to mark a global user as troll, and then lower the threshold to belove an autoconfirmed user. Such a mark should be visible in recent changes. This will somewhat limit the troll. A steward could then lift this global "ban" if a community has misplaced the mark, or a local admin in another project could remove the mark locally.
John
On Fri, Aug 22, 2008 at 9:43 AM, Matthew Flaschen matthew.flaschen@gatech.edu wrote:
Huib Laurens wrote:
So a vandal has to make one account en can spam on all wiki's? Is there global blocking?
Global blocking only works for IP addresses at this time (it was designed specifically that way).
-- Casey Brown Cbrown1023
Note: This e-mail address is used for mailing lists. Personal emails sent to this address will probably get lost.
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
On Fri, Aug 22, 2008 at 7:41 AM, vacuum@jeb.no wrote:
Although this may solve some problems at the larger communities, it might create a problem at smaller communities. Previously trolls could be detected because they was editing as anonymous, now they will be more likely to operate as logged in users.
On the whole, it does make things easier across the board, both for legitimate users and trolls. Holes in the net at one wiki are suddenly holes in the net for everyone. Small and large wikis alike need to watch out for this. If you're not already, it may be handy to watch edits from new accounts at [[Special:Contributions/newbies]].
If this shall be of real benefit somehow the smaller communities should be
able to report a global user as troublesome. Turned around this could also lead to a small community blacklisting an otherwise good contributor.
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Steward_requests/SUL_requests#Requests_for_lo...
Could perhaps be expanded, but there is such a mechanism in place. Ultimately, improved communication between wikis is probably always going to be a net benefit. If all else fails, there's always [[m:metapub]].
Just some quick thoughts, -Luna
Casey Brown wrote:
On Fri, Aug 22, 2008 at 9:43 AM, Matthew Flaschen matthew.flaschen@gatech.edu wrote:
Huib Laurens wrote:
So a vandal has to make one account en can spam on all wiki's? Is there global blocking?
Global blocking only works for IP addresses at this time (it was designed specifically that way).
My mistake. However, it's still possible to run a checkuser then do a global block on IP's that come up.
Matt Flaschen
On Fri, Aug 22, 2008 at 8:38 AM, Huib Laurens sterkebak@gmail.com wrote:
So a vandal has to make one account en can spam on all wiki's?
No, there's no need for them to make an account first.
Small wikis are now spammed with unacceptable usernames which contain libelous messages. Is it an option to block the IP addresses behind those vandals not to create an account anymore?
On Sun, Aug 24, 2008 at 7:17 AM, Anthony wikimail@inbox.org wrote:
On Fri, Aug 22, 2008 at 8:38 AM, Huib Laurens sterkebak@gmail.com wrote:
So a vandal has to make one account en can spam on all wiki's?
No, there's no need for them to make an account first. _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Aphaia wrote:
Small wikis are now spammed with unacceptable usernames which contain libelous messages. Is it an option to block the IP addresses behind those vandals not to create an account anymore?
Tricky if they're on floating IPs; I've seen a few autocreations on en:wiki that are offensive when you run them through Google translation, and blocked them there- but I think it's in the nature of SUL that these users will not edit on every wiki, and to try and weed these accounts out is impractical. If they are going to cause trouble on a non-native wiki, they will be spotted soon enough.
On Sun, Aug 24, 2008 at 7:17 AM, Anthony wikimail@inbox.org wrote:
On Fri, Aug 22, 2008 at 8:38 AM, Huib Laurens sterkebak@gmail.com wrote:
So a vandal has to make one account en can spam on all wiki's?
No, there's no need for them to make an account first. _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
-- KIZU Naoko http://d.hatena.ne.jp/Britty (in Japanese) Quote of the Day (English): http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/WQ:QOTD
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com Version: 8.0.169 / Virus Database: 270.6.19/1665 - Release Date: 10/09/2008 19:00
When such usernames are spotted, please report them to stewards on #wikimedia-stewards, so we can lock & hide the accounts.
2008/9/11 Phil Nash pn007a2145@blueyonder.co.uk
Aphaia wrote:
Small wikis are now spammed with unacceptable usernames which contain libelous messages. Is it an option to block the IP addresses behind those vandals not to create an account anymore?
Tricky if they're on floating IPs; I've seen a few autocreations on en:wiki that are offensive when you run them through Google translation, and blocked them there- but I think it's in the nature of SUL that these users will not edit on every wiki, and to try and weed these accounts out is impractical. If they are going to cause trouble on a non-native wiki, they will be spotted soon enough.
On Sun, Aug 24, 2008 at 7:17 AM, Anthony wikimail@inbox.org wrote:
On Fri, Aug 22, 2008 at 8:38 AM, Huib Laurens sterkebak@gmail.com wrote:
So a vandal has to make one account en can spam on all wiki's?
No, there's no need for them to make an account first. _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
-- KIZU Naoko http://d.hatena.ne.jp/Britty (in Japanese) Quote of the Day (English): http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/WQ:QOTD
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com Version: 8.0.169 / Virus Database: 270.6.19/1665 - Release Date: 10/09/2008 19:00
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
I tried but stewards then available couldn't handle UTF-8 Asian scripts. And it has continued from the end of July. Some jawiki* blocked those ranges (see checkuser-l for details) for months. I rather now worry about spamming libelous messages. After it was logged on user creation log and other logs, it cannot be removed.
On Fri, Sep 12, 2008 at 7:03 AM, Jon Harald Søby jhsoby@gmail.com wrote:
When such usernames are spotted, please report them to stewards on #wikimedia-stewards, so we can lock & hide the accounts.
2008/9/11 Phil Nash pn007a2145@blueyonder.co.uk
Aphaia wrote:
Small wikis are now spammed with unacceptable usernames which contain libelous messages. Is it an option to block the IP addresses behind those vandals not to create an account anymore?
Tricky if they're on floating IPs; I've seen a few autocreations on en:wiki that are offensive when you run them through Google translation, and blocked them there- but I think it's in the nature of SUL that these users will not edit on every wiki, and to try and weed these accounts out is impractical. If they are going to cause trouble on a non-native wiki, they will be spotted soon enough.
On Sun, Aug 24, 2008 at 7:17 AM, Anthony wikimail@inbox.org wrote:
On Fri, Aug 22, 2008 at 8:38 AM, Huib Laurens sterkebak@gmail.com wrote:
So a vandal has to make one account en can spam on all wiki's?
No, there's no need for them to make an account first. _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
-- KIZU Naoko http://d.hatena.ne.jp/Britty (in Japanese) Quote of the Day (English): http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/WQ:QOTD
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com Version: 8.0.169 / Virus Database: 270.6.19/1665 - Release Date: 10/09/2008 19:00
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
-- Jon Harald Søby http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Jon_Harald_S%C3%B8by _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
I can not see any request at the channel nor at http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Steward_requests/Global#Request_for_global_.2...
You can also mail these usernames to the mailinglist if You prefere, some stewards are reading this list *and* are doing locking.
Best regards, E.
2008/9/12 Aphaia aphaia@gmail.com
I tried but stewards then available couldn't handle UTF-8 Asian scripts. And it has continued from the end of July. Some jawiki* blocked those ranges (see checkuser-l for details) for months. I rather now worry about spamming libelous messages. After it was logged on user creation log and other logs, it cannot be removed.
On Fri, Sep 12, 2008 at 7:03 AM, Jon Harald Søby jhsoby@gmail.com wrote:
When such usernames are spotted, please report them to stewards on #wikimedia-stewards, so we can lock & hide the accounts.
2008/9/11 Phil Nash pn007a2145@blueyonder.co.uk
Aphaia wrote:
Small wikis are now spammed with unacceptable usernames which contain libelous messages. Is it an option to block the IP addresses behind those vandals not to create an account anymore?
Tricky if they're on floating IPs; I've seen a few autocreations on
en:wiki
that are offensive when you run them through Google translation, and blocked them there- but I think it's in the nature of SUL that these users will
not
edit on every wiki, and to try and weed these accounts out is
impractical.
If they are going to cause trouble on a non-native wiki, they will be spotted soon enough.
On Sun, Aug 24, 2008 at 7:17 AM, Anthony wikimail@inbox.org wrote:
On Fri, Aug 22, 2008 at 8:38 AM, Huib Laurens sterkebak@gmail.com wrote:
> So a vandal has to make one account en can spam on all wiki's?
No, there's no need for them to make an account first. _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
-- KIZU Naoko http://d.hatena.ne.jp/Britty (in Japanese) Quote of the Day (English): http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/WQ:QOTD
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com Version: 8.0.169 / Virus Database: 270.6.19/1665 - Release Date: 10/09/2008 19:00
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
-- Jon Harald Søby http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Jon_Harald_S%C3%B8by _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
-- KIZU Naoko http://d.hatena.ne.jp/Britty (in Japanese) Quote of the Day (English): http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/WQ:QOTD
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Jon Harald Søby wrote:
When such usernames are spotted, please report them to stewards on #wikimedia-stewards, so we can lock & hide the accounts.
Is there a way of doing that without IRC? I'm not set up for it, and can't afford to pay for it right now.
Phil
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Steward_requests/Global#Request_for_global_.2... E.
2008/9/12 Phil Nash pn007a2145@blueyonder.co.uk
Jon Harald Søby wrote:
When such usernames are spotted, please report them to stewards on #wikimedia-stewards, so we can lock & hide the accounts.
Is there a way of doing that without IRC? I'm not set up for it, and can't afford to pay for it right now.
Phil
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Elisabeth Anderl wrote:
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Steward_requests/Global#Request_for_global_.2... E.
Thanks, I've tried that, but somehow there seems to be some lack of comprehension here. I can't spare the time to report each and every global account that breaches username policy, I have enough else to do. Perhaps I'll just leave it and, er, write some articles.
On Thu, Sep 11, 2008 at 8:05 PM, Phil Nash pn007a2145@blueyonder.co.uk wrote:
Elisabeth Anderl wrote:
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Steward_requests/Global#Request_for_global_.2... E.
Thanks, I've tried that, but somehow there seems to be some lack of comprehension here. I can't spare the time to report each and every global account that breaches username policy, I have enough else to do. Perhaps I'll just leave it and, er, write some articles.
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Well, we're tryint to catch as many as we can, and we monitor regularly the logs That said, that wiki page, irc or mailing list are other 3 different channels to request a lock&hide if we missed some
*Sigh*! There is no lack of comprehension, You applied for global rollback, that is something different.
To report an username (or a daily list from Your blocks) is taking just as much time (or less) as the locking itself btw.
But no problem, thanks, E.
2008/9/12 Phil Nash pn007a2145@blueyonder.co.uk
Elisabeth Anderl wrote:
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Steward_requests/Global#Request_for_global_.2...
E.
Thanks, I've tried that, but somehow there seems to be some lack of comprehension here. I can't spare the time to report each and every global account that breaches username policy, I have enough else to do. Perhaps I'll just leave it and, er, write some articles.
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Elisabeth Anderl wrote:
*Sigh*! There is no lack of comprehension, You applied for global rollback, that is something different.
I just went to the link I was advised. It makes no sense that an Admin on one wiki should not be able to globally block an obviously offensive or disruptive user, wherever it arises. That's just counterproductive to have to jump through so many obscure hoops. It doesn't take much: Username -> right click menu -> apply for global blocking. End of.
1. feel free to bring up a discussion at Meta, that local sysops should be able to block globally, 2. You did went to the link but then opened a request in the wrong section for something completely different. My link pointed to Request for global (un)lock and (un)hidinghttp://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Steward_requests/Global#Request_for_global_.28un.29lock_and_.28un.29hiding 3. if You wish to global lock accounts atm, there is no other way to do this than to request stewards rights, or propose a new user group that can lock global accounts, but that has to be discussed at Meta first too,
thanks, E.
2008/9/12 Phil Nash pn007a2145@blueyonder.co.uk
Elisabeth Anderl wrote:
*Sigh*! There is no lack of comprehension, You applied for global rollback, that is something different.
I just went to the link I was advised. It makes no sense that an Admin on one wiki should not be able to globally block an obviously offensive or disruptive user, wherever it arises. That's just counterproductive to have to jump through so many obscure hoops. It doesn't take much: Username -> right click menu -> apply for global blocking. End of.
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
- feel free to bring up a discussion at Meta, that local sysops should be
able to block globally,
It has zero chance to be passed. As it happened with the global rollback vote, a bunch of en.wp users just would show up and vote against it does not matter what. Just because an idea that an admin on a different project can block a en.wp user apparently seems to be unbearable.
Cheers Yaroslav
2008/9/13 Yaroslav M. Blanter putevod@mccme.ru:
- feel free to bring up a discussion at Meta, that local sysops should be
able to block globally,
It has zero chance to be passed. As it happened with the global rollback vote, a bunch of en.wp users just would show up and vote against it does not matter what. Just because an idea that an admin on a different project can block a en.wp user apparently seems to be unbearable.
Understandably so - the requirements to become an admin on a small project are much lower than on enwiki. If enwiki wanted lower standards for adminship, then RfA wouldn't be such a nightmare.
It has zero chance to be passed. As it happened with the global rollback vote, a bunch of en.wp users just would show up and vote against it does not matter what. Just because an idea that an admin on a different project can block a en.wp user apparently seems to be unbearable.
Understandably so - the requirements to become an admin on a small project are much lower than on enwiki. If enwiki wanted lower standards for adminship, then RfA wouldn't be such a nightmare.
Actually I believe it is more difficult to become admin on ru.wp than on en.wp but this is irrelevant for this discussion.
Cheers Yaroslav
2008/9/13 Yaroslav M. Blanter putevod@mccme.ru:
It has zero chance to be passed. As it happened with the global rollback vote, a bunch of en.wp users just would show up and vote against it does not matter what. Just because an idea that an admin on a different project can block a en.wp user apparently seems to be unbearable.
Understandably so - the requirements to become an admin on a small project are much lower than on enwiki. If enwiki wanted lower standards for adminship, then RfA wouldn't be such a nightmare.
Actually I believe it is more difficult to become admin on ru.wp than on en.wp but this is irrelevant for this discussion.
315,538 articles counts as a small project these days? Wow!
2008/9/13 Yaroslav M. Blanter putevod@mccme.ru:
- feel free to bring up a discussion at Meta, that local sysops should be
able to block globally,
It has zero chance to be passed. As it happened with the global rollback vote, a bunch of en.wp users just would show up and vote against it does not matter what. Just because an idea that an admin on a different project can block a en.wp user apparently seems to be unbearable.
Cheers Yaroslav
With the number of former en admins around with adminship on other projects their attitude is not unreasonable. Giving people a back door way to regain active powers like blocking on en (passive powers are less of a problem) isn't acceptable. Equally active powers go the other way. Do you really want people blocked cross project because they screwed up on en?
"Yaroslav M. Blanter" putevod@mccme.ru writes:
It has zero chance to be passed. As it happened with the global rollback vote, a bunch of en.wp users just would show up and vote against it does not matter what. Just because an idea that an admin on a different project can block a en.wp user apparently seems to be unbearable.
Considering that I would be equally apalled by having an administrative action from enwiki forced upon me, I cannot say that I'm surprised. Different projects have different standards and all that.
Anders Wegge Keller wrote:
"Yaroslav M. Blanter" putevod@mccme.ru writes:
It has zero chance to be passed. As it happened with the global rollback vote, a bunch of en.wp users just would show up and vote against it does not matter what. Just because an idea that an admin on a different project can block a en.wp user apparently seems to be unbearable.
Considering that I would be equally apalled by having an administrative action from enwiki forced upon me, I cannot say that I'm surprised. Different projects have different standards and all that.
-- // Wegge
I think it should be clear of the context in which this thread has developed- that of obviously offensive or disruptive usernames; I have only this evening seen accounts auto-created on en:wiki by a known vandal that have obviously been created on other wikis in the hope that somehow they will slip under the radar. I've blocked on en-wiki, but that does not stop the perpetrator vandalising other wikis right now. My suggestion of an automated request to globally block remains; it would still be up to the stewards on Meta to decide.
Cheers.
"Phil Nash" pn007a2145@blueyonder.co.uk writes:
I think it should be clear of the context in which this thread has developed- that of obviously offensive or disruptive usernames;
My point exactly. At some point i saw an enwiki policy that usernames containing non-ascii characters was so offensive that it warranted a permanent block. I don't know if that particular policy still stands, but that is beside the point in this case. The actual problem with blocking "offensive" usernames is that what offends in one language could be a perfectly normal name in another. For instance, would you block the user "I fart"?
Anders Wegge Keller wrote:
"Phil Nash" pn007a2145@blueyonder.co.uk writes:
I think it should be clear of the context in which this thread has developed- that of obviously offensive or disruptive usernames;
My point exactly. At some point i saw an enwiki policy that usernames containing non-ascii characters was so offensive that it warranted a permanent block. I don't know if that particular policy still stands, but that is beside the point in this case. The actual problem with blocking "offensive" usernames is that what offends in one language could be a perfectly normal name in another. For instance, would you block the user "I fart"?
I agree about differences of language- however, that is one reason I suggest that only obviously disruptive names should be globally blocked, of the F*CK J*WS/N*GGERS variety. Each wiki should be open to decide whether a name is offensive within their policies, global or not. As for en-wiki, we allow Unicode names, including Kanji and other character sets but there is very little chance of an offensive name being detected since most accounts are created but do not ever edit. Watching Special:ListUsers would be a full-time occupation otherwise.
However, with known vandals slipping over to other wikis to create accounts and taking advantage of SUL, again a request for global blocking to protect all wikis should be useful and accessible (I note the link that was posted yesterday, but I doubt many en:wiki Admins will be aware of it).
And no, I would't block "I fart", but only because I've spent some time in Denmark and know what it means. Other admins may not have been so lucky.
Cheers.
-- // Wegge http://blog.wegge.dk - Her hænger jeg også ud. http://geowiki.wegge.dk/wiki/Forside - Alt om geocaching. Bruger du den gratis spamfighther ser jeg kun dine indlæg *EN* gang.
-- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean.
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com Version: 8.0.169 / Virus Database: 270.6.21/1669 - Release Date: 12/09/2008 14:18
2008/9/13 Phil Nash pn007a2145@blueyonder.co.uk:
I think it should be clear of the context in which this thread has developed- that of obviously offensive or disruptive usernames; I have only this evening seen accounts auto-created on en:wiki by a known vandal that have obviously been created on other wikis in the hope that somehow they will slip under the radar. I've blocked on en-wiki, but that does not stop the perpetrator vandalising other wikis right now. My suggestion of an automated request to globally block remains; it would still be up to the stewards on Meta to decide.
That would be the best method. Stewards are there to act when it's unambiguously a good idea (e.g. global IP blocks on the worst crosswiki vandals), and are properly very conservative in what they do. So projects should feel safe with them.
- d.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
Phil Nash wrote:
Elisabeth Anderl wrote:
*Sigh*! There is no lack of comprehension, You applied for global rollback, that is something different.
I just went to the link I was advised. It makes no sense that an Admin on one wiki should not be able to globally block an obviously offensive or disruptive user, wherever it arises. That's just counterproductive to have to jump through so many obscure hoops. It doesn't take much: Username -> right click menu -> apply for global blocking. End of.
Maybe have a local enwiki Javascript guru right a handy little option for admins to do this.
- -- Cary Bass Volunteer Coordinator
Your continued donations keep Wikipedia running! Support the Wikimedia Foundation today: http://donate.wikimedia.org Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. Phone: 415.839.6885 x 601 Fax: 415.882.0495
E-Mail: cary@wikimedia.org
On Thu, Sep 11, 2008 at 7:58 PM, Phil Nash pn007a2145@blueyonder.co.ukwrote:
Jon Harald Søby wrote:
When such usernames are spotted, please report them to stewards on #wikimedia-stewards, so we can lock & hide the accounts.
Is there a way of doing that without IRC? I'm not set up for it, and can't afford to pay for it right now.
Phil
IRC doesn't cost anything, by the way. You can also find a client that's best for you via this nice article on enwp that I often refer people to: < http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_IRC_clients%3E. If there's an emergency and you need to get on IRC, you could always use the web interfaces like http://chat.wikizine.org/ and http://java.freenode.net/.
It is now systematically done on jawiki*; offensive user names are created in one of jawiki* and then spammed to other wikis. First it was spammed jawiki* alone. Now enwiki* are also targeted toolserver said.
On Fri, Sep 12, 2008 at 6:50 AM, Phil Nash pn007a2145@blueyonder.co.uk wrote:
Aphaia wrote:
Small wikis are now spammed with unacceptable usernames which contain libelous messages. Is it an option to block the IP addresses behind those vandals not to create an account anymore?
Tricky if they're on floating IPs; I've seen a few autocreations on en:wiki that are offensive when you run them through Google translation, and blocked them there- but I think it's in the nature of SUL that these users will not edit on every wiki, and to try and weed these accounts out is impractical. If they are going to cause trouble on a non-native wiki, they will be spotted soon enough.
On Sun, Aug 24, 2008 at 7:17 AM, Anthony wikimail@inbox.org wrote:
On Fri, Aug 22, 2008 at 8:38 AM, Huib Laurens sterkebak@gmail.com wrote:
So a vandal has to make one account en can spam on all wiki's?
No, there's no need for them to make an account first. _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
-- KIZU Naoko http://d.hatena.ne.jp/Britty (in Japanese) Quote of the Day (English): http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/WQ:QOTD
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com Version: 8.0.169 / Virus Database: 270.6.19/1665 - Release Date: 10/09/2008 19:00
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org