User talk:Stwalkerster/Archive May 2009

Wikipedia Signpost: 11 May 2009

• News and notes: Wikimania 2010, usability project, link rot, and more
• Wikipedia in the news: Quote hoax replicated in traditional media, and more
• Dispatches: WikiProject Birds reaches an FA milestone
• WikiProject report: WikiProject Michael Jackson
• Features and admins: Approved this week
• Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
• Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 22:28, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

ACC

Hey there.

I've been inactive for a while, and was wanting to return to ACC, but my account (chrisch) is suspended for inactivity. Any chance of getting it turned back on? :)

Chrisch^Talk 13:54, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

 Done Stwalkerster [ talk ] 17:27, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

Inquiry

How come Helpmebot answers my commands that I send it in a PM sometimes, but doesn't answer me at other times? It will always answer !Helpmebot status, but !fetchall, !helpme, etc. it picks and chooses when it will respond. I hope you're doing well :-) Killiondude (talk) 05:37, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Hmm... weird. It could be silenced at those points. If it doesn't respond again like that, try !helpmebot fetchall, !helpmebot helpme, etc. Stwalkerster [ talk ] 06:57, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia Signpost: 18 May 2009

• From the editor: Writers needed
• Special report: WikiChemists and Chemical Abstracts announce collaboration
• Special report: Embassies sponsor article-writing contests in three languages
• News and notes: Wiki Loves Arts winners, Wikimania Conference Japan, and more
• Wikipedia in the news: Arbitrator blogs, French government edits, brief headlines
• WikiProject report: WikiProject Opera
• Features and admins: Approved this week
• Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 13:37, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your help!

LawDiva (talk) 21:09, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks so much for your help!

LawDiva (talk) 22:00, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

William Windsor (goat)

re. William Windsor (goat)

When I checked your contribs, I saw the minor edits, but I missed your addition of the infobox;

I see it now.

Consequently, I love you and want to have your babies.

I will develop a barnstar in your honour.  Chzz  ►  00:27, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

To a fellow IRC-helper

Hi Stwalkerster. I'm not an admin, but I do a fair amount of quality-control on Wikipedia - maybe you've spotted 1 or 2 warnings I've issued in the past. Of course I know that you do a lot of helping on the IRC system. We both know the system usually works very well, provided users are given fair and appropriate, escalating warnings, eventually being reported if they continue.

But it seems it can happen that the odd user is harder to rein in. Such is the case I fear with this user - would you say I've given them sufficient, clear warnings?

However, to my surprise, when I duly reported them, a single overseer apparently dismissed all my concerns in short shrift.

I think that, with your background, you too may have a contribution to make to what I had hoped might be a greater debate?

Equally, if I've missed some valid points of policy or protocol, I'd be grateful if you could point such things out to me, as you see fit. Thanks in advance for any time you could spare to this. Trafford09 (talk) 11:40, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

Update: I've edited the above link for the user report, to point to its new location. Trafford09 (talk) 01:48, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

ACC Test

I think we should make an ACC test that ACC users have to complete (and pass) before they get an account...What do you think?   «l| Ψrometheăn ™|l»  (talk) 03:53, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Not a bad idea, it would help to prevent issues like the above from occuring. Stwalkerster [ talk ] 10:23, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia Signpost: 25 May 2009

• License update: Licensing vote results announced, resolution passed
• News and notes: New board member, flagged revisions, Eurovision interviews
• Wikipedia in the news: Wikipedia: threat or menace?
• WikiProject report: WikiProject LGBT studies
• Discussion report: Discussion Reports and Miscellaneous Articulations
• Features and admins: Approved this week
• Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
• Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 04:14, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Good evening, and my apologies

Good evening. Earlier on the ACC when I created the account, it appeared that it only had one edit. The criteria had appeared to say that less than fifteen edits was inactive. I had misunderstood that it had to include all of the criteria. Would you consider allowing me back on the ACC team and adding back my permission now that I know that it must satisfy all of the criteria? Thank you for your time. Regards, T3chl0v3r (talk) 00:59, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Few questions first:

1. what would you do with the SUL link?
2. what would you do if the request had a red number next to the email address (give as many circumstances as you can think of)
3. an account request of "HighFlyMarketing" is flagged as needing an account creator: upon investigation, a similarly named account "High_Fly_Marketing" has no edits, no log entries, and was created 2-ish years ago. what would you do?
4. a request is marked as invalid because it contains bad characters. what are these characters?

thanks, Stwalkerster [ talk ] 01:31, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Answers:

1. The Guide does not say. I saw it before but forgot what this link does. An SUL on Wikimedia Projects is a unified login, so I am inferring it is to check the Global account for the requested username?
2. That would mean that that email address had multiple requests, I would ban them from the ACC unless there was a good reason in the comment.
3. The account is inactive, I would go ahead and create the account, assuming I had the flag to do so.
4. One such is the hash sign # or / | [] {} @ Also all numbers. T3chl0v3r (talk) 01:50, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Responses:

1. oops. but yeah, check any accounts with the same requested name are not active, and there is no global account etc.
2. wrong. there are plenty of legit reasons why a user would make more than one request. only if they make bad requests in bad faith should they be banned.
3. wrong again. look at the username requested.
4. good. also usernames that are valid IP addresses are invalid, but MediaWiki will stop you from creating those accounts.

I'll give you the first one, as that's close enough. 2 isn't particularly worrying, as only interface admins can ban afaik (if I'm wrong, that's getting changed software-side rapidly). 4 is also good, although the tool should automatically filter most of those. however, your answer to 3 is plain worrying. Stwalkerster [ talk ] 02:01, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Could you kindly spell out how to handle Similar account requests like 3. The guide doesnit give me the full picture. Thanks, T3chl0v3r (talk) 02:23, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

The username suggested violates username policy. The similarity of the two accounts doesn't come into it. Stwalkerster [ talk ] 10:03, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Hello, I'm sorry that didn't read up on this before I did it. I am just trying to help people out. I have poured over the guides. If I can take another test would you consider giving me back my account that now has been deleted? I'm sorry for causing trouble. T3chl0v3r (talk) 21:23, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for your assistance.  Fyyer  22:00, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

User talk:90.209.171.90

Am I wrong to assume that banned anon IP are not allowed to edit their own talk page? This guy keeps removing the warning tag and ISP info I left behind, is there any way you can stop this guy? --Dave1185 (talk) 22:51, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

Heh, you're a bit late :P. They are allowed to non-disruptively edit their talk page, but I've protected it from non-admin editing now until the block expires, and restored the ISP tag. The warning tag you left is pointless, because they're already blocked. Stwalkerster [ talk ] 22:52, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

• Maybe, as it is only useful to a certain extent to stop some persistently disruptive anon IP cold in their track, knowing that we are able to trace them and which country they are from. But not in this case, it would seem... if you look at the edit history of the anon IP and the complaint he has gotten, it says a lot since it is easy to deduce that it is a static IP which is easier to block than a dynamic IP with... perhaps, a harder form of soft block like requiring the anon IP to edit by registering an account first. In which case, if he/she starts to be funny again... then there's no two ways of knowing what you're going to do about it next, right? Anyway, thanks for the help and cheers~! --Dave1185 (talk) 00:31, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Hi

what is meant by SHA-512 commitment code -SubashChandran⁰⁰⁷ ׀ sign! 17:22, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

Hi! See WP:Committed identity :D Stwalkerster [ talk ] 17:43, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks -SubashChandran⁰⁰⁷ ׀ sign! 13:43, 30 May 2009 (UTC)