Welcome on my User talk



Dear WikiBayer, I think you don't removed autopatrollers permission of 64andtim because you added patrollers right on here account per on his request WM:RFH, so, please remove them, because in patrollers group also contains autopatrolled rights. 😊 ~~ αvírαm|(tαlk) 17:08, 29 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

igWP article creation

Just to note that I see the article "Ranjeet Yadav (journalist)" at w:ig: which seems to indicate the issue at haWP is elsewhere. I haven't had a change to more fully explore that space, and may not for some days, so flagging it for other eyes. :-)  — billinghurst sDrewth 04:05, 12 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

[1] Johannnes89 (talk) 10:48, 12 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Billinghurst and WikiBayer: I have identified multiple domains which are frequently used related to this xwiki spam: [2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23]
Johannnes89 (talk) 14:02, 13 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
oops, accidentally send before posting all the links. Question is: should we put these link on the spam blacklist or just monitor them (it seems to me, that the intention is not linkspam but spamming those people/companies, so they might just shift to using new links for those page creations?) --Johannnes89 (talk) 14:07, 13 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
... some more links [24][25][26] Johannnes89 (talk) 14:27, 13 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I'm considering setting up a global abuse filter to monitor page creations using these links? --Johannnes89 (talk) 14:30, 13 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Comment Comment @Johannnes89: THOUGHTS. I have a really light (proto-)filter at haWP that was doing some identification based on use of certain English-language words, so we could have an OR component that looks for the words and a section that looks for the problematic domains. I will also note that it haWP, igWP, etc. should be more used as identifying wikis, as the spam is also taking place in esWP and other wikis just more hidden among many more good edits. Re blacklisting, do it if they meet the blacklist criteria, otherwise we can prevent through the filter, if they are okay domains to use, though are abused through this user cases.  — billinghurst sDrewth 00:12, 14 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
fyi I'm using Special:AbuseFilter/338 to monitor IP/newbie page creations using any of the links I've identified and have added the content of your haWP filter to this global filter. Johannnes89 (talk) 19:32, 28 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Abuse filter #300

Hi! I'm a sysop on itwiki. Can you take a look at the global abuse filter #300? I noticed it has been triggering on itwiki, but the edits look mostly fine to me. As an example, the attempted edits on "Magi (Bibbia)" are pretty harmless. I also checked the last two months and only a few of them seem to warrant a trigger. I'm contacting you because the only thing I can see is that you edited the filter last, but feel free to ping other people. Thanks! --Titore (talk) 10:11, 22 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Titore It's true, there were false positives. But I wasn't aware of them because they got lost among the thousands of entries in the log. I have edited the filter a little.--𝐖𝐢𝐤𝐢𝐁𝐚𝐲𝐞𝐫 👤💬 16:41, 22 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]