Wikipedia talk:Cleaning up vandalism/Tools

Hyperbole rewording

I think the wording regarding patrolling the recent changes old school style 'nearly impossible' is a little over-exaggerated. I've reworded it to 'difficult to accomplish'. I regularly do RC Patrol old school style, and I do it successfully - I certainly don't find it impossible to do. Lradrama 08:49, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

"Vandalism information" picture

I don't understand the point of this item, under "Rollback Scripts." It doesn't seem to add information, or relate to the article. Is it funny? If so, I don't get it. Should it be deleted? Everything Else Is Taken (talk) 18:17, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Why are my edits tagged?

I would like to know why my two most recent edits received the "possible BLP issue or vandalism" tag. They are not vandalism. Whatever automated process is adding this tag is faulty. 75.163.196.7 (talk) 03:45, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

The tag is working fine if this is the edit you're referring to. I've replied on your talk page. Sincerely, Ugog Nizdast (talk) 10:28, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

"Am I Needed...?" tool

I have stumbled upon this tool, Am I Needed To Counter Vandalism? and added a mention to the bottom "Other" section of the page. It could be a useful adjunct to the Defcon score, as Defcon just shows the rate at which possible vandalism is taking place, but this new indicator claims to show whether vandalism is "slipping through" at that moment: Noyster (talk), 12:40, 20 December 2014 (UTC)

Redundant information

There are two nearly-identical copies of this page on Wikipedia, with only a few differences. Should we merge the other version of this page into this one so that they can be maintained as one page? Jarble (talk) 20:33, 6 January 2016 (UTC)

My edits are tagged as possible BLP issue or vandalism

My recent edits to [1] were tagged as possible BLP issue or vandalism. This is not the case. I merely expanded policy positions sections on legislation relevant to the politician. Can someone remove these tags? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chuckduck764 (talk • contribs) 17:44, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

Replied on Talk:Phillip Scott (politician): Noyster (talk), 00:07, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

Mobile anti-vandalism?

Are there any good mobile anti-vandalism tools for an Android phone? I'm looking for something like Huggle, but for mobile. Banaticus (talk) 15:35, 14 August 2016 (UTC)

@Banaticus: See User:Plantaest/TwinkleMobile. Plantaest (talk) 18:47, 27 September 2022 (UTC)

New Huggle improvements: what do you think?

The WMF Collaboration Team is looking into ways to improve Huggle. We've proposed a suite of new tools aimed mostly at helping reviewers get better information about edits in the queue. There's a page on Mediawiki that describes the project's goals and proposed improvements.

We want to hear from the Huggle community, so please check out the ideas presented and tell us what you think on the project Talk page. —JMatazzoni (WMF) (talk) 20:49, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

Merger proposal

I propose that Wikipedia:Counter-Vandalism Unit/Tools be merged with Wikipedia:Cleaning up vandalism/Tools. Both the pages are identical and it will be easy to manage them as one. A merge was proposed before but no progress. If anyone has a better name which suits both pages, feel free to propose. ‐‐1997kB (talk) 05:30, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

Support - The articles are identical for the most part. There are some bits of information on each page that would need to be preserved. There is no apparent value in maintaining two pages that contain near exact copies of each other. As far as the naming issue, I suggest Wikipedia:Counter-Vandalism Unit/Tools be maintained. I know others will have one page or the other they prefer; however, I find the CVU page to be more user friendly and visually aesthetic. Operator873^CONNECT 06:00, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

@1997kB:,@Operator873:, for more than 1 year of no further discuss or objection, I am interpreting the consensus to be Support and have thus completed the merging. Let me know if I am not doing it right. Xinbenlv (talk) 23:10, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

Xinbenlv, Thanks for the merge. ‐‐1997kB (talk) 02:08, 13 July 2019 (UTC)

User : Kendall-K1 Warning Vandalism

This user has been invaded, deleted, removed so much good quality pictures, information from Wikipedia. Need watch and check, or maybe block from editing. Please be advised. Thanks so much. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Homealone1990 (talk • contribs) 21:57, 1 November 2018 (UTC)

I think this is reported in the wrong place but if anybody cares to look I think you will find that what we have here is an SPA (Homealone1990) with a serious WP:OWN problem and that the user that they are complaining about is not at fault. --DanielRigal (talk) 00:08, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

Next time, please try reporting such incidents at WP:AIAV. Anonymuss User (talk) 15:19, 13 December 2018 (UTC)

Homechallenge55 User Take it Off On Yuri Lowenthal Filmography Video Games Same Voice Actor Still In Other Games The User Take it Off Not On Yuri Lowenthal Filmography Wall Anymore Deathsix (talk) 06:48, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Defunct tools

A discussion over at STiki, a tool which has ceased to function correctly, has prompted me to look at the tools listed on this page. There are several which are no longer functional or being kept up to date. Shouldn't these be trimmed from the list? Orphan Wiki 23:11, 24 June 2020 (UTC)

Orphan Wiki, hi - I'd support removing tools which are no longer functional or being updated. I'm saddened by the loss of Stiki - it was a great way to find old vandalism that had slipped through the net. Don't suppose you know of any other tools that provide a queue of older diffs that need looking at? GirthSummit _(blether) 08:37, 25 June 2020 (UTC)

Yeah I will miss STiki a lot, and to this date, I don't know of any other tool which is proficient at picking up on vandal edits which had been missed by Bots and RC Patrol. I'd be keen to have a look at using one if another exists though. Orphan Wiki 19:58, 26 June 2020 (UTC)

I have commented some non functional tools, can't check one that's runs on Mac OS. ‐‐1997kB (talk) 05:48, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

RfC

Hi wise Wikipedians on Cleaning up vandalism/Tools, there is an active RfC on m:WikiLoop/DoubleCheck/RfC:Levels_for_WikiLoop_DoubleCheck_Reviewers#Overview that we think you might be interested. Please join the discussion there. xinbenlv ^{Talk, Remember to "ping" me} 02:38, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

About hosting

As I found that there are many tools or scripts that are not hosted on Wikimedia servers. Should we add a disclaimer to all or make a different section for them?

Pinging @Ed6767: as you have done something in this direction. ‐‐1997kB (talk) 11:42, 16 August 2020 (UTC)

I'm honestly not sure, but encouraging people to move their scripts to toolforge or on wiki would be ideal, along with adding a disclaimer. They'll be blocked sooner or later anyway by new security headers being implemented. Ed talk! 11:57, 16 August 2020 (UTC)

I have added disclaimer to some tools. ‐‐1997kB (talk) 09:48, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

The problem some tools are not on WMF servers is wmf servers have certain flavor of tech stack preferences and limitations, such as not yet supporting a modern version of docker last time I check. Also asking all tools be hosted by WMF Servers might give the WMF foundation too much centralized control. I think it's ok to highlight tools that are on or not on WMF servers though. xinbenlv ^{Talk, Remember to "ping" me} 11:37, 27 August 2020 (UTC)