User talk:Billinghurst/2020

Active discussions
Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.


Hi Billinghurst!
How I'm haven't permission to view the filter 214, I'm contacting you (the last to edit it). We have some problems with the filter 214 on ptwikipedia, with many users reporting problems to edit because of it. This is an example. What the problem with that edit?
Happy new year! !Silent (talk) 12:02, 4 January 2020 (UTC)

@!Silent: it isn't my filter, it is the stewards particularly Tegel and Jon Kolbert. I have made it local only, and suggest that you follow up with them, it isn't one that I follow.  — billinghurst sDrewth 12:12, 4 January 2020 (UTC)
Thanks Billinghurst! !Silent (talk) 14:33, 4 January 2020 (UTC)

@!Silent: After looking at this situation without a tired head, my reflections … This filter's update in November and operations following were below the standard expected for the communities. rate of change indicates that increase rate, and for the target of the filter that is way out of expections. In defence of the situation, global filters logs are often very busy here, and filtering down to filter level can sometimes be not be undertaken sufficiently in the busy world, or not suitably see the impacts at a local level as well as you can. (meta view of ptWP 214 and ptWP view of global-214). Noting that I forget what you can and cannot see, as it is a long time since I have no or limited rights and views.

It is my opinion that the naming or tagging of the filter didn't (and still doesn't) provide suitable information to communities to be able to know what was going on, being targeted or how it should be managed. Further that nobody in your community had any vision of the filter, or anything interpretative to be able to provide comment, feedback or anything useful to provide feedback. I believe that there are reasonable solutions to this issue.

I would encourage your community to consider (discuss?) how stewards and meta administrators can provide a better service with regard to global abusefilters; also to consider how your (local) community could have better ability to understand and address the negative impacts and false positives of filters (whilst still maintaining the required security), and maybe try to address such components at Stewards' noticeboard in a helpful and solutions-focused manner. If your community does have a discussion I can provide comment or further information, though my knowledge of Portuguese is limited to the word "Leste" and I rely on Google Translate, though that can often be suitable.

I hope that helps and we can generate something better.  — billinghurst sDrewth 00:51, 5 January 2020 (UTC)

Today's mystery...

After deleting a bot created Commons user page I decided to run the link through COI. You know how sometimes you wish you hadn't started something!! Do you know anything about There are literally 1000s of links and the site - I guess - seems ok. Weirdly the userpage link didn't actually connect to anything on there. Ho hum. Cheers --Herby talk thyme 11:01, 5 January 2020 (UTC)

COIBot and Commons are a mystery to me how or what it actually sees. I think that there is a relationship invloving the moon, solar flares, day of the week / divided by the month to the inverse power of the year, multiplied by the number of newbies x 1/number of wikis. Don't quote me exactly, there may be an exponential factor applied to one of those.  — billinghurst sDrewth 11:12, 5 January 2020 (UTC)

Using title blacklist to prevent usernames ending with semicolons

It seems you are the title blacklist expert! Maybe you can help me. Until phab:T238285 is resolved, we should prevent creation of accounts that end in a semicolon, since the path-style links to the users won't work (e.g. w:Special:Contributions/Printf("Herro_World"); vs using a query string). It seems Title blacklist is the right place to do this. I did some testing at testwiki:MediaWiki:Titleblacklist but nothing worked. I would guess an entry like User:.*;$ <newaccountonly|errmsg=titleblacklist-forbidden-new-account-semicolon> would do the trick? MediaWiki:Titleblacklist-forbidden-new-account-semicolon hasn't been created yet, by the way. I figure we should tell the user they have to chose a username that doesn't end in a semicolon, rather than show the generic message. Any assistance is appreciated. Best, MusikAnimal talk 23:53, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

@MusikAnimal: [Oh dear, seriously troublesome when a nuffy like me is considered an expert from simple action repetition.] I would think that it would work though I have never tried terminating characters it is usually somewhere regex for me. Also I have not looked at xwiki errmsg'ing, wouldn't a local MW msg require the person to be creating here, and wonder whether that would need to be something set as a global msg with default text (and delivered through translatewiki). An alternative would be to use an abusefilter as done at Special:AbuseFilter/173, though again that has a generic message as it is xwiki, and we just have the one global msg.  — billinghurst sDrewth 01:36, 22 January 2020 (UTC)
I did test some of the global rules with a custom errmsg on testwiki and the message showed up undefined, so you're probably right. I guess let's just use the default message, as hopefully this bug will be fixed soon. I'm confident in my regex, but I couldn't get anything to work on testwiki, which gave me pause. For instance I was able to create User:Test20200121 despite testwiki:Special:Diff/412928. Does User:.*;$ <newaccountonly> look right to you? Maybe I should just go for it? I'll of course test immediately and revert if something looks off. Also, do you know why the title blacklist log is empty? MusikAnimal talk 01:59, 22 January 2020 (UTC)
@MusikAnimal: Email being prepared, soon to be coming.  — billinghurst sDrewth 03:13, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #397

Wikidata weekly summary #398

Wikidata weekly summary #399


  The Original Barnstar
You're the best 02:32, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #400

ASBS notes followup

Hi. Did anything end up happening with the ASBS notes? Should I file a request at Meta:Requests for deletion#Requests for undeletion? --Yair rand (talk) 07:11, 28 January 2020 (UTC)

@Yair rand: There is content at Affiliate-selected Board seats/2019/notes that is subsequent to the deletions. Whether it is sufficient, I am loathe to comment.  — billinghurst sDrewth 11:05, 28 January 2020 (UTC)


Hi Billinghurst, these three accounts slipped through the blacklist, would appreciate if you can tweak it. Thanks. Minorax (talk) 13:33, 2 February 2020 (UTC)

Hi. For LTAs, there are always those that get through the blacklist, it is too easy to circumvent for a determined user. The listings that I do are primarily to stop reasonable imitations, not to stop the LTA; trying to do that game is just feeding the troll. There are better means to inhibit the LTA, or to quickly respond.

To note that the best spot for requests to be put is Talk:Title blacklist it means that any admin can manage them, and allows for good process.  — billinghurst sDrewth 21:29, 2 February 2020 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #401



Could you please replace "utili1sateur" with "utilisateur" in Special:AbuseFilter/181? The typo was introduced in Special:AbuseFilter/history/181/diff/prev/2814 and prevents all new users from writing on the page (the id gets obsolete every month because the page is archived by renaming).


Orlodrim (talk) 22:57, 5 February 2020 (UTC)

@Orlodrim:   Done Ugh, not certain how I picked up that typo. I have also updated the filter for the page archiving. Noting that I am still awaiting the update to the abuse filters of the ability to filter based on wiki, which will be the best way to exclude frWP for Lomita's pages. Maybe soon.  — billinghurst sDrewth 01:07, 6 February 2020 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #402


Hello, thanks for the message on my talk page. Yes, I know that I should educate myself and I will do it in the future. Best regards, Zoranzoki21 (talk) 01:54, 13 February 2020 (UTC).

filter this crap?

Is there any way to automatically find this crap (I presume this is global)? This has been going on for .. years? --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 09:31, 13 February 2020 (UTC)

@Beetstra: toollabs:global-search/ so search.  — billinghurst sDrewth 11:11, 13 February 2020 (UTC)
I was more thinking of an abusefilter. We've been seeing a lot of this crap where the beginning of the article or a section is spammed with a link. Many of them are blacklisted on en. --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 11:18, 13 February 2020 (UTC)
No idea. I would have thought that if it is problematic that enWP would have been first to find it, and to fix it. I would think that it is a more mature spamming / editing rather than a naive attempt by spambots. It is presumably a WP thing long, it isn't something that I see at the sister wikis like WSes, Commons, Meta or WD. Once they publish the abusefilter update that allows filters to pick WPs, then it might be something to consider.  — billinghurst sDrewth 11:32, 13 February 2020 (UTC)

COIBot monitoring of server ip

Hi there,

I saw you used COIBot many times, so I was wondering if you might know the answer to this. A series of accounts tried to spam several SEO ad farm-like urls on nl:wikt yesterday. We manually compiled a list of domains to search for any other spam attempts that may have gone unnoticed, but it is not unlikely that they will create more of such domains in the future. Most of these domains are hosted on 3 or 4 servers with nothing else on it, and I noticed that COIBot does do something with the hosting ip. Do you know if it is possible to add those to the monitoring list so it also reports any spam attempts with new domains hosted on those servers? Or does it not work that way? Where would we do that? Sumurai8 (talk) 00:05, 16 February 2020 (UTC)

Hi @Sumurai8: No, COIBot is not able to proactively monitor new domain names based on their creation, ie. that we constantly reverse DNS an IP address to get domains hosted. I have talked to Beetstra whether it is possible to monitor based on an underlying IP address appearing in a report (... long story ...), and at this time, the best we can do is look at the WhatLinksHere through the "track" in the IP part of a XWiki bot report, eg. in the following report User:COIBot/XWiki/ see the IP section
(LinkSearch: meta s/meta | en s/en | es s/es | de s/de | fr s/fr | ru s/ru | zh s/zh | simple s/simple | c s/c | d s/d | Wikipedias: top 20 · 40 · major wikis · gs )
(Reports: Report <-track | XWiki | Local | en | find entry)       (DomainTools: whois | AboutUs | Malware? | Alexa)(Search: Google | en (G) | fr (G) | de (G) | meta (G) | backlinks |  links ←)

It would be great if we could reactively push an IP and say run all the crap that relates to this IP, but that is lots of grunt and collection.

To further assist, you can run some searches for contents of COIBot reports—I have search engine forms on my user page—so you something like "" COIBot/Xwiki and "" all COIBot

If you are in IRC with a cloak, do note that you can sit in #wikimedia-external-linksconnect and there are queries available, see Small Wiki Monitoring Team/IRC.

If you are casual spambot-fighter, please feel welcome to just put request on Poke's talk page in {{XWikiSummary}} and ping Herbythyme, myself, or your trained administrator/steward/... as we are normally going to be online during a day. If you are monitoring a lot of spam-type activity there is also scope to grant access to Poke.

If you just have a big list of crap that we are going to head straight to blacklisting, then just collectively add them to one request at Talk:Spam blacklist using {{LinkSummary}}. That becomes an easy task to process AND it will generate the COIBot reports.  — billinghurst sDrewth 02:05, 16 February 2020 (UTC)

@Sumurai8: what we currently can do is to ask COIBot to save a linkreport for the IP, like has been done for the server That report then contains all the domains that have been added to Wikipedia (in this case 3), and all additions. COIBot does not detect whether other domains on the server exist (that would be work for a reverse DNS, which is linked from the linksummary template'). There is no reason why we couldn't run a report-request on a regular basis. I will add you to the list of users who are allowed to use the /Poke-functionality. --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 05:21, 16 February 2020 (UTC)
Thank you both for your help :-) Sumurai8 (talk) 10:33, 16 February 2020 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #403

Pechkurov's spam links

There is a typo in one regex – it should be \blyricstranslate\.com/ru/pechkurov-aleksej instead of \blyricstranslate.\com/ru/pechkurov-aleksej (the dot should be escaped). --jdx Re: 06:17, 19 February 2020 (UTC)

  Done 👍  — billinghurst sDrewth 07:20, 19 February 2020 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #404


I take it it has quarantined itself just in case...? Nothing much seems to be happening --Herby talk thyme 10:55, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

<shrug> ping Beetstra  — billinghurst sDrewth 11:08, 27 February 2020 (UTC)
@Herbythyme: It's baaaaaaack.  — billinghurst sDrewth 22:54, 27 February 2020 (UTC)
Happy for you to leave them there if the bot is not playing along. I just grab them and push them through manually, which is never a fuss. I have grabbed these from the history,  — billinghurst sDrewth 10:21, 29 February 2020 (UTC)


Hey, is this a mistake? Minorax (talk) 13:28, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

Yes, of course, thanks. <deskthunk>  — billinghurst sDrewth 13:30, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

Hater, again

Hi, Billinghurst. Here we have that WMF-banned editor. This account has no edits in any wikispace, but he sends hate e-mails [2]. That account should be globally banned. If WMF requires, I can forward them the hate content sent via e-mail. Kubura (talk) 23:55, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

(saw this by chance)
Hi, I just locked this account (Hasley reported it at Steward requests/Global) :-) Regards --Schniggendiller (talk) 00:14, 2 March 2020 (UTC)
@Kubura: Whilst I can try to help, the stewards are the best to be able to assist in this regard. If it is a problem doing it in the open at Meta, or directly with a steward, do remember that you can email them at stewards  — billinghurst sDrewth 02:52, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #405

New ip range of the arab spammer

See the xwiki contribs of Could you please update Special:AbuseFilter/202 and add the range --WhitePhosphorus (talk) 07:30, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

  Done @WhitePhosphorus:  — billinghurst sDrewth 09:07, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #406

PayBackThyme (talk · contribs) user page deleted

@Billinghurst: My user page was deleted by you. I try to spend more time on contribution and wanted User page to come up slowly over a period. Kindly let know if I am not supposed to maintain my User Page or if there is a specific criteria? Regards -PBT PayBackThyme (talk) 05:15, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

Globally blocked vandal, new account

[3] Kubura (talk) 21:38, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

The same as this one [4]. Kubura (talk) 21:39, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

@Kubura: I haven't been either a steward or a checkuser for years, so the best you can get from me is sympathy on non-global wikis, and on global wikis some assistance with abuse filters. If we have a xwiki pest you will need to have it resolved by local checkusers and more broadly by stewards.  — billinghurst sDrewth 22:07, 12 March 2020 (UTC)
Thanks. Where is a page on Meta where I can report his IP and new account actions? Kubura (talk) 22:47, 12 March 2020 (UTC)
For stewards it will be one of SN or SRG depending on what you are trying to achieve.  — billinghurst sDrewth 01:53, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

Karen Horney Quotes page on WikiQuote shows a dead link

Hello, I removed an external reference Dead Link from Karen Horney Quotes page and added a working Karen Horney Quote External Link but you have removed it and marked as "unreliable source".

I think it is better to have a working Karen Horney Quote External Link instead of an external Dead Link again at Karen Horney Quotes.

Is this a reliable external link on Architecture ? If these types of too many external links are valid on Wikipedia then why not other working Karen Horney Quote External Link ?

It shows 74 links by "brainyquote" and that are "reliable" on all the pages but when I added three links that all are marked as "unreliable source" and removed.

Could you please answer to this? Template:Ping Billinghurst

Thanks. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ayaz.ashraf (talk)

@Ayaz.ashraf: I am not here to argue about others use of other unreliable sources, this is not a comparative game of "whataboutism". Your proposed site is unreliable and out of scope. You also are repeatedly just adding the one unreliable source. I would suggest that you look to do the work for the original sources of the statements, which will make quality additions within the scope of the site, not unreliable additions which do not much add value to the site. Lift your goals to develop an authoritative product.  — billinghurst sDrewth 10:47, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
@Billinghurst: Thank you for the quick reply.

Wikidata weekly summary #407

Objection to deletions

Hi Billinghurst, would you please state your rationale for these deletions at Template talk:Main Page/WM News? EllenCT (talk) 09:33, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

Chill your jets. Give someone an opportunity to type some paragraphs.  — billinghurst sDrewth 09:34, 12 March 2020 (UTC)
Could you please clarify? I don't understand whether you have any objections independent of the discussion which has already taken place. There is a March 16 deadline for comments on the item. Please accept my apologies if I seem to be hasty. EllenCT (talk) 09:40, 12 March 2020 (UTC)
An administrator has said that they consider this contentious information for our main page; and this is text on the main page being discussed. When I have time to consider it and make comment, then I may, or I might keep neutral. At this point, I am returning to the status quo.  — billinghurst sDrewth 09:46, 12 March 2020 (UTC)
Do you agree that the information is contentious; if so, in what way? EllenCT (talk) 09:51, 12 March 2020 (UTC)
Now you are being pushy. Uncool.  — billinghurst sDrewth 11:02, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

Please excuse my pushiness. EllenCT (talk) 03:33, 22 March 2020 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #408

Wikidata weekly summary #409

About chauvinisme and not only

Hello. Please comment your decision: [5]. To whom is it adressed? --Derslek (talk) 16:04, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

@Derslek: My closing statement is addressed to the readers of Wikimedia Forum and those who have commented

  • The facts, as the parties see it, have been expressed.
  • There is some general commentary.
  • That forum seems to have exhausted its ability to act.

If you think that there is a further requirement of the community, then the typical means to address some such specific matters is a request for comment. The forum has no further ability than to direct you to your options. The alternate is you address it directly to the stewards as they have acted and only they have the means to further act, use special:emailuser/stewards for that contact.  — billinghurst sDrewth 20:33, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

  • It's did not explained on what basis I was expelled from the Tatar Wikipedia. There must be an explanation for everything and there must be Consensus on every desicion. Is not it? --Derslek (talk) 18:20, 3 April 2020 (UTC)
    Discussion has been had on the page, and it is not the place for further conversation. I have suggested means to progress if you believe that there is more to do.  — billinghurst sDrewth 22:26, 3 April 2020 (UTC)

You've got mail

--Alaa :)..! 21:16, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

@علاء: diff for creating a report, and from the report we can use the SBL gadget to easily blacklist. Beetstra or I can grant you that access if you wish to add domains for checking, and I am happy to take instructional remarks. I leave such comments all the time.  — billinghurst sDrewth 03:36, 18 March 2020 (UTC)
Hello @Billinghurst:. Thanks a lot, and yes if you can grant me this access it'll be too helpful to me, as there's a lot of Arabic spam websites that need to be listed. Thanks on advance --Alaa :)..! 19:10, 19 March 2020 (UTC)
@علاء:   Done, though it will be slow to take effect. If you think there is value in having a local page at your wiki to report matters with local control and local access, as we do with user:COIBot/Poke, then chat with Beetstra, otherwise have fun at poke adding away. Generally for a xwiki report, I use {{XWikiSummary}} at Poke.  — billinghurst sDrewth 20:15, 19 March 2020 (UTC)
Further, for the domain there are too many hits in the history to generate a report, and I think that a request for a blacklisting should go via talk:spam blacklist. Beetstra are you able to purge the data for that domain as user:COIBot/XWiki/ says too many reports, though it seems that there have just been so many equivalent deletions as the not enormous numbers online. @Praxidicae: I think that we have an Arabic language equivalent of junk news sites we have been noting at enWP.  — billinghurst sDrewth 20:25, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

Thanks Billinghurst. I opened SBL request. When I found new links I'll put it on User:COIBot/Poke, and probably after few months we can make local page (need good community arrangements). Thanks again --Alaa :)..! 03:19, 25 March 2020 (UTC)

ummm... --Alaa :)..! 01:16, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

That talk page is controlled by many and has criteria for blacklisting. Based on its use I don't see that I have the ability to blacklist the url based on one request, no community support, and without seeing evidence of conflict of interest editing. All I can do is let the community reach a consensus. If you believe that it needs to be unarchived, and conversation continued, then feel welcome to bring it back.  — billinghurst sDrewth 11:41, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #410

Wikidata weekly summary #411

Wikidata weekly summary #412

Delete request frwikinews

Hi, I'm sysop on the french Wikinews. I reverted your delete request because it's not clear that the page is a spam. But if you have informations I dont know, could you enlighten me on this? --SleaY (talk) 23:01, 24 April 2020 (UTC)

@SleaY: It is a spambot. I had marked 5-10 xwiki, deleted about another 10, and added the repeating component to an existing global abuse filter. Up to you what you do with it, but it is the edit of a spambot. I think that my experience and reputation around global spam management should be enough of an indication that I know spambots. FWIW I found that spambot back to early 2014 from my searches this week.  — billinghurst sDrewth 01:16, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Thanks. I'm not questioning your experience (actually, I don't know you). I'm just uncomfortable with deleting a page blindly. --SleaY (talk) 02:11, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Interesting approach though to revert first, and then ask questions second. Always some value in checking people's rights and credentials, and Special:CentralAuth from any wiki is a great place to do that.  — billinghurst sDrewth 02:27, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Thanks for the advice again. I don't want to be confrontational. I deleted dozens of pages flaggued as a been created by a spambot because it was clear that thoses pages was spam. But it usual on all wikimedia projects I know to remove a deleting request when it does not clearly satisfies criteria for speedy deletion. Also, the simple fact that you are a "high graded" user on wikimedia projects don't make things clear. But your answers make me believe that yours actions are not often questionned by a "litle" sysop like me. So I understand why you did that. --SleaY (talk) 15:09, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
@SleaY: Apologies if I came across in a way that was seeming superior, that was not my intention. You are probably right that I am not often queried on my labelling of spambots, my muddy footprints have been on WMF wikis for years, through stewardry, and later roles. That said, I value and rank the work of all administrators equally, well I try to, and I was truly trying to provide a useful link that I regularly use when looking for user's crosswiki contributions and credentials. I have no issue being questioned on my actions, and it is right of you to challenge me if you think that I am acting that way. 👍 I did feel it a little unusual the order that you took, though you did end up here questioning the page, so all is good.  — billinghurst sDrewth 01:47, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #413


Hi! The IRC channel where I'd usually ask COIBot to make an XWiki report doesn't seem to work anymore; how do you request COIBot make reports? Regards, Vermont (talk) 00:03, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

@Vermont: It is responding, though very tardily. I had a 12 hours response in IRC to a command yesterday. It is just working through backlogs at this time following a change to how some people scheduled jobs so that meant a lot of bots started to get monitored again. :-( Patience is all I can suggest. Beetstra is watching it, and I am guessing fiddling with the feeds. I can see it rolling through files, though don't have a count of number, so it may be a couple of days, it could be a week. When I have a chance to dig further, then I will.  — billinghurst sDrewth 01:44, 30 April 2020 (UTC)


FYI I've unblocked User:Hasley - I assume the block as an open proxy or zombie was a mistake? Either way, thought I should inform you that I reverted your administrator action. --DannyS712 (talk) 00:20, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Ugh! Thanks. <deskthunk> Multitasking fail.  — billinghurst sDrewth 01:00, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
It appears that it comes about when I am extending a block and the block link, and the change block vertically align, though with an inopportune latent screen, it bumps down just enough and wham. I have changed the screen width (again) to stop that alignment, will see what else I can do.  — billinghurst sDrewth 01:34, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #414

Wikidata weekly summary #415

Wikidata weekly summary #416

Wikidata weekly summary #417


When you have a minute :-) could you take a look at this and the associated Xwiki rep. So far so good. And then maybe run this one - spot the difference... So is the bot not working correctly on this one? Equally is the vast amount of link placement appropriate or is it just me? I was hoping I'd find a pattern in the placement but given the bot reports no such luck. Appreciated --Herby talk thyme 15:25, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

@Herbythyme: As I understand it, the reports need a coincidence of the factors mentioned at the top of the reports. When I get an opportunity I will run report xwiki through IRC, andt this way it ignores the username aspects (see Small Wiki Monitoring Team/IRC for detail). Do note the "gs" link in the linksummary templates as that does the globalsearch of usage, and my quick way in now.  — billinghurst sDrewth 01:29, 27 May 2020 (UTC)
Many thanks. I guess there is the additional - if a site gets that much Wiki exposure is it a legit source or simply cleverly spammed...? Cheers --Herby talk thyme 06:44, 27 May 2020 (UTC)
Don't know, either way it is back to the local wiki level, so suggest it be raised at the forums at enWP where it can be investigated who like to have a full opinion. It isn't ours to bomb.  — billinghurst sDrewth 11:03, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #418

Wikidata weekly summary #419


question Hello I have a problem with the titleblacklist I recently added a regular expression to the "*.\bwikibayer" ... entry, as characters were frequently exchanged. According to the gggg&tbaction=new-account&tbnooverride=1 API test everything should work now, but some accounts through the titleblacklist. Example: "WikiBayer Report me on Meta" I prefer not to mente others Accounts now:

regular expression:

.*\b[vw]iki(\s|)b[ae](i|y*)[ae]r.*      <newaccountonly|antispoof>

Do you know where the problem is?--𝐖𝐢𝐤𝐢𝐁𝐚𝐲𝐞𝐫 👤💬 14:39, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

@WikiBayer: There is some quirk in antispoof <-> regex that has not been fully identified/explained. I would suggest having a duplicative approach. Have a standard .*username.* with the antispoof, and have a regex variation without antispoof. For those that sneak through we update the regex. Yes it less than perfect. Generally title blacklist is a rough tool, and the LTA responds to the angst that he sees among people. To me, as long as it is not being seen as representing me as a doppelganger account, then WGAF. I am not going to let a snivelling troll spoil my time. If I need to go and edit and enjoy why I came here for a few days, sweet! Others can manage the trolls for that time.  — billinghurst sDrewth 07:03, 12 June 2020 (UTC)
Thank you I have now removed antispoof and made a second entry--𝐖𝐢𝐤𝐢𝐁𝐚𝐲𝐞𝐫 👤💬 11:17, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #420


Hi, also cc Xaosflux. I wonder what is your opinion regarding this diff. Thank you. --Base (talk) 12:12, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

template:fishing.  — billinghurst sDrewth 13:25, 17 June 2020 (UTC)
@Base: their edit of the page acknowledges that they read it... — xaosflux Talk 14:59, 17 June 2020 (UTC)
That edit summary is quite a battleground and uncivil behavior but I give him my last bit of patience that as he has seen that warning. I will commit to keep what I said and I think that's all he needs to know. — regards, Revi 15:11, 17 June 2020 (UTC)
I have zero issues with administrators taking actions that are the consensus of the community and where the outcomes are neither a surprise nor excessive to manage the situation. If someone wishes to block a long-standing member of the community for an extended period, I believe that they should alert the community to that to confirm their action; or the admin can demonstrate that there is a pre-existing consensus of the community for that sort of action. In this situation with the use of a partial block, it could have been handled without the unintended consequences.

  Question: who was aware of the extended consequences of a block at meta flowing through to those other services; and where is our documentation for admins and users? I sort of remember though it is not front and centre of my mind. We need to improve that component of our education. [I will state that we rarely do block long-standing community members.]  — billinghurst sDrewth 22:26, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

I can't speak for the original block as I'm not TSD; but for me - I don't consider partial block as an option at all, for the reason @ my userpage. — regards, Revi 06:00, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

Global AbuseFilter

Hi there! I was wondered about this tool. Do this tool also able to block someone from doing any actions in Wikimedia project? There's a case in mswikipedia I don't know how but I think this tool is over response and block in wide range. Most of ip address in Malaysia was blocked and I think it's the filter that block the main ip address that caused the sub-ip address being blocked too. Can it be turn off or slow down it's response? CyberTroopers (talk) 14:56, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

Actually I'm not pretty sure yet if it's happens because of this filter or not but someone told me this might be the cause of most blockage among ip user. CyberTroopers (talk) 15:00, 17 June 2020 (UTC)
@CyberTroopers: Yes, global abuse filters are active at msWP, you can see them working at ms:Special:Abuselog. If you are interested in tracking a specific global filter, you can add "global-nnn" in the appropriate filter field, similarly if you are wanting to track a specific action that filters are taking. If you have specific concerns about filters, then you can ping me here, or at my talk page at msWP if we need a review. There are options we can take.

In general we do review actions taken from Special:Abuselog though it can be very busy, and drilling down to a local level to find a false positive is not easy among all the noise. With regard to disallowing edits from IP ranges, that is not usual abusefilters, while possible, we are more likely to log it.  — billinghurst sDrewth 22:35, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

Oh, with regard to IP blocks, that would be left to stewards and visible through special:GlobalBlockList, it is not something that I have seen that we wish to do through filters.  — billinghurst sDrewth 22:46, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #421

Wikidata weekly summary #422


Art thou Canadian or something? Why art thou reverting my edits on "O Canada" articles despite me adding reliable sources and cleaning up the formattings? 02:34, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

Your additions are out of scope. Please look to understand the scope of Wikipedias as encyclopaedias, not as hosts for all language translations of the song. Apart from anything else, you would be in breach of copyright of each of the translations.  — billinghurst sDrewth 11:16, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #423

Vitriolic language

Hi Billinghurst, I disagree. The use of "vitriolic language" has continued. Can this be opened again?

examples ː

..that they couldn't give a fuck about what the Community thinks of a change

....sends a clear message to all of us: the finger, with both hands. They took us for a bunch of patsies and they really belive we are. I've never seen such a contemptuous attitude. This is nauseating. Indeed, #NotMyFoundation.

I could use less vitriolic language there, but I kindof feel like communicating vitriol is a bit of the point. Nattes à chat (talk) 10:26, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

It is an emotional and passionate topic to some people, and that is what you are seeing. If they are not throwing insults at each other, I don't see anything particularly worthy of intervention on the referenced page.  — billinghurst sDrewth 12:26, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

Editing news 2020 #3

12:48, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #424

Usernames related to the user account "Tegel"

According to Special:Diff/19774742, I saw that in Special:Listusers/Tegel there was a mistake that you made. Would you please fix it? 04:28, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

Don't fuss it.  — billinghurst sDrewth 05:19, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #425

Wikidata weekly summary #426

About my edits on L.A.X & DJ Tunez page

Hello, I earlier made an edit on the pages of some Nigerian artiste & those few but important changes were reverted, I don't spam & the links aren't associated or affiliated to me. Am not running promotions/ads on wiki, I know the guide lines & I don't break the rules... I only edit Wikipedia pages with some website updates and due to the way they present their articles, I use them on wiki to build the encyclopedia... Please I feel the changes I made should be added back & not reverted. Daniel vic (talk) 07:42, 30 July 2020 (UTC)

I have put a link on your English Wikipedia talk page to their Teahouse. Please use that link, discuss your issues and understand about reliable sources and external links.  — billinghurst sDrewth 07:46, 30 July 2020 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #427

My Domain Blocked By Wikipedia Billinghurst

Hi, I checked my website very carefully and I'm sure that it doesn't violate the Community Standards. Could you please reconsider my website? please team wikipedia review it again and unblock it able to share with my fans. Reagrds, pcbeducation —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Hamsi97 (talk)

@Hamsi97: Please put a request in the appropriate section of Talk:Spam blacklist. Such requests are to the community and shouldn't be managed on a user talk page.  — billinghurst sDrewth 08:03, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #428


Hi. Do you know where the links to the graphs when visiting e.g. Special:AbuseFilter/1 comes from? (Editing filter 1 (see also a graph of recent actions)) I've looked here and there and can't find the script/file. I'd like to update the URL to use the new Toolforge URL schema ahead of the total deprecation of the domain. Thanks, —MarcoAurelio (talk) 11:27, 16 August 2020 (UTC)

MediaWiki:Abusefilter-edit-subtitle either search in or use ?uselang=qqx in the url.   Done  — billinghurst sDrewth 12:57, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
Thanks. I did an advanced search for ptwikis on the MediaWiki namespace and found nothing. I shall try again and see if the options I selected where right. —MarcoAurelio (talk) 15:33, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
@MarcoAurelio: search insource:/.*ptwikis.*/. Needs to be regex search from memory, rather than a straight string.  — billinghurst sDrewth
Aye, that's what I was doing wrong. I was searching plain text instead of regex. Thanks for your assistance once again and have a nice day. —MarcoAurelio (talk) 13:51, 17 August 2020 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #429

Addition of IDs from VIAF

Hi! I've noticed that you recently added through d:User:Magnus Manske/authority control.js some new BAV IDs (P8034) using old BAV property (P1017). This is due to a problem of obsolesce in the gadget itself, which has been recently reported but not yet solved. If you want, you can try d:User:Bargioni/moreIdentifiers, which performs the same talk of Magnus's gadget but is kept updated more frequently; it has only a little problem which prevents from adding NUKAT, but all other IDs work well. For any doubt ask me. Thank you very much! --Epìdosis 15:23, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #430

Wikidata weekly summary #431

Editing news 2020 #4

15:11, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

Why are some kids allowed to tamper with user accounts

One of the Arabic Wikipedia users accessed my account as a user and deleted it !! How is it allowed? Why did you not stop him and punish him? My page and my account as a user with you is years old, and I had added it and you agreed to it! BASEL SANNIB.SANEEB (talk) 22:01, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

No idea what you are talking about. Any action at arWP will be based on a community consensus, either immediate or through local policy. Take it up at arWP. At arWP I am just a general user and do not participate in the administrative decision-making.  — billinghurst sDrewth 22:05, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #432

Wikidata weekly summary #433

Wikidata weekly summary #434

Wikidata weekly summary #435

Global account restriction

Now correct me if I am wrong, but if the global community were to desire imposing a global account restriction on slowking4, then the best method to do so would be in a separate RFC. Is that correct? I couldn't help but notice that Requests for comment/Global ban for Poetlister was closed while the Global ban policy still looked like this. Could we not do a similar thing in this case with a