Wikipedia

User:MusikAnimal/Dashboard

< User:MusikAnimal


User
Talk link={{{3}}}
Dashboard
Articles
Scripts
Tools
Templates
Userboxes
Awards

Dashboard

User:Xenocidic/dashboard/users

Immediate requests Entries
Candidates for speedy deletion as attack pages 0
Wikipedians looking for help 1
...from administrators 2
Requests for unblock 101
Wikipedia semi-protected edit requests 82
Wikipedia extended-confirmed-protected edit requests 48
Wikipedia template-protected edit requests 14
Wikipedia fully protected edit requests 11
Wikipedia conflict of interest edit requests 60
Requested RD1 redactions 8
Candidates for speedy deletion as copyright violations 0
Candidates for speedy deletion 16
Open sockpuppet investigations 195
Click here to locate other admin backlogs


News

Administrators' Newsletter
September 2024
 
The Signpost
4 September 2024

Edit filters

Requested edit filters (WP:EF/R)

Warn about a Wikipedia mirror

Ed-Tech Press, also known as "Scientific E-Resources, is a Wikipedia mirror. They print copies of books that are just Wikipedia articles. Per WP:CIRCULAR, we should never cite them in articles. Unfortunately, these books are listed in Google Books, and there's no obvious warning on them. I've inadvertently cited them twice recently. While I really appreciate reversions like this one, it seems like this is an area where an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. Could we please have an abuse filter set up for this string:

|publisher=Scientific e-Resources

which should catch most {{cite book}} uses? If it would be great if it could produce a warning message like "Ed-Tech Press and Scientific E-Resources are Wikipedia mirrors. They are not reliable sources and should not be cited in articles per WP:CIRCULAR." I think that the 'warn' setting should be sufficient. WhatamIdoing (talk) 01:42, 7 July 2024 (UTC)

Thank you making this request - this publisher is just the worst. There is deliberately no attempt to identify the nature of the copied materials; it's just a straight up scam. There are three things I usually search for: "Ed-Tech Press", "Scientific e-Resources" (which is typically displayed when a google books link is resolved in a template), and the URL of "edtechpress.co.uk". I do agree with the warning being sufficient as I don't recall this ever being used on-wiki by a bad-faith actor. Sam Kuru (talk) 02:35, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
Yeah. Possible filter code for catching this could be:
page_namespace == 0 &
!contains_any(user_groups, "bot", "sysop", "extendedconfirmed") & (
   mirrors := "(?:\|publisher\s*\=\s*(?:(?:[Ss]cientific [Ee]\s?-\s?[Rr]esources)|(?:Ed\s?-\s?[Tt]ech [Pp]ress)))|(?:\|url\s*\=\s*edtechpress\.co\.uk)";
   added_lines irlike mirrors &
   !(removed_lines irlike mirrors)
)
I would create a log-only filter at first, and if it does well, ramp it up to warn. – PharyngealImplosive7 (talk) 22:05, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
Thanks for this. I understand that starting as a long-only filter is common, and I've no objection. WhatamIdoing (talk) 00:20, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
@WhatamIdoing, Kuru, and PharyngealImplosive7: If there is consensus for deprecation, it could just be added to 869 (hist · log), which might be better than a new filter just for this. Most likely Deferred to WP:RSN. EggRoll97 (talk) 18:48, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
@EggRoll97, I don't think that it should be handled through the RSP system. It's not a case of "deprecated at RSN"; instead, it's a case of "banned by policy" (Wikipedia:Verifiability#Wikipedia and sources that mirror or use it being the most relevant policy). The deprecation message wouldn't be appropriate. Instead, I think it needs a message that is specific to Wikipedia:Mirrors and forks. WhatamIdoing (talk) 21:44, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
Requires more information Do you have any diffs to go off of by chance for this? It would be helpful to see this being added in a diff to be able to test a possible filter on one. EggRoll97 (talk) 06:26, 1 August 2024 (UTC)
Sure. Look at this one. WhatamIdoing (talk) 17:25, 1 August 2024 (UTC)
Still doing... I've been trying to build this filter, but I'm running into syntax errors. Still working on it, but this one seems to be taking time. EggRoll97 (talk) 13:40, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
Thanks for working on it. WhatamIdoing (talk) 19:37, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
I'm getting syntax errors, but I'm not sure what exactly is going wrong. This may be past my expertise, I'm not sure why it's throwing Expected a ) at character 53, not found (found T_STRING bot instead). From all I can tell, the code above seems fine, but batch testing doesn't like it, and I've got no idea currently on how to fix it. I've tried adding more parentheses, but everything seems to be closed up, so it shouldn't be throwing the error as far as I'm aware. EggRoll97 (talk) 05:40, 20 August 2024 (UTC)
Would finding another pair of eyes be helpful? We could ask at VPT. WhatamIdoing (talk) 05:50, 20 August 2024 (UTC)
There is supposed to be a comma after user_groups(example). Sorry I didn't notice this before. – 2804:F1...A7:C558 (talk) 15:29, 20 August 2024 (UTC)
I've added the comma. – 2804:F1...A7:C558 (talk) 15:34, 20 August 2024 (UTC)
I actually happened to try that when trying to build the filter in /test, adding the comma removes that error there, but adds a new syntax error on line 4, Syntax error detected: Expected a ) at character 256, not found (found T_ID added_lines instead). EggRoll97 (talk) 19:02, 20 August 2024 (UTC)
Maybe additionally the mirrors := declaration? Supposedly needs a semicolon at the end: User-defined variables.
I've added that in too. – 2804:F1...A7:C558 (talk) 19:56, 20 August 2024 (UTC)
Testing at 1323. Apologies for this taking so long, I've been a bit busy with other matters. EggRoll97 (talk) 06:24, 24 August 2024 (UTC)
\o/
Congratulations. I hope that the testing proves conclusive. WhatamIdoing (talk) 20:09, 24 August 2024 (UTC)
Just noting here that there have been no hits so far. We might want to wait for another 2 weeks and if there are still no hits then, consider deleting the filter. – PharyngealImplosive7 (talk) 22:38, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

New users adding sock / block templates to other user's pages

  • Task: Disallow new users / IPs from adding block templates including sock blocking templates to users that aren't blocked
  • Reason: In general there's almost no reason for any but the most seasoned IPs or new accounts to add block templates that are typically automatically added by the blocking admin. Either a total block of new users adding block templates, or only for non-blocked accounts.
  • Diffs: Special:Diff/1184722881 (likely) single-time vandal doing this type of disruption happening on an administrator's page. This user may have been auto-confirmed, so this may need to apply to all non-ECP+ users.

GeorgeMemulous (talk) 23:57, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

I'm making some regex right now, but what I'm concerned about is that this edit is from over a year ago. Do you have any other more recent examples? Because otherwise, it wouldn't be necessary to create a whole new filter. – PharyngealImplosive7 (talk) 02:11, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
Don't we already have 1157 (hist · log) that does this purpose? Codename Noreste 🤔 Talk 03:00, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
Clearly that didn't stop this particular instance of disruption. Although, I can't think of many times this was added recently. I do know of an LTA that's recently been adding unblock requests to their own pages as an already unblocked account, so maybe that could be added? Either way, disruption is disruption, but if it isn't that common I suppose a filter is unnecessary. GeorgeMemulous (talk) 18:35, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
Just stumbled upon an example from just now of a disruptive editor adding a block template to an unblocked IP's page. See here. Not disallowed by any existing filter. GeorgeMemulous (talk) 23:56, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
803 (hist · log) could probably also be adjusted for sleeper accounts like this one. Nobody (talk) 05:44, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
Filter 2 — Actions: none
Last changed at 01:46, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

Articles

Administrator intervention against vandalism (WP:AIV)

Reports

Bot-reported

User-reported

Requests for page protection (WP:RFPP)

Backlog CLEAN!

Permissions

Account creator (WP:PERM/ACC)

Account creator

Sorry, unregistered users cannot be granted permissions due to technical restrictions. Please create an account in order to request user account permissions.

User:TMorata

On Sept 21st I will be offering a training to beginner editors during the World Congress of Audiology in Paris We will introduce participants to Global Audiology. I anticipate I will need to allow the creation of some new accounts at the same time, so I ask for this user right from Sept 21 to 23rd. I already hold this permission with both Portuguese and testwiki. Thank you TMorata (talk) 14:42, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

AutoWikiBrowser (WP:PERM/AWB)

AutoWikiBrowser

Sorry, unregistered users cannot be granted permissions due to technical restrictions. Please create an account in order to request user account permissions.


User:Pachu Kannan

Requesting access for updating census data of highly populated Indian villages in Kerala state and other human settlements on this planet in future. Pachu Kannan (talk) 10:12, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

User:Bunnypranav

I would like access to AWB to fix CheckWiki issues more efficiently than I currently do using WPCleaner. I also want to streamline typo fixing as part of WP:TYPO. I understand I have been denied it twice in the recent past, but I strongly believe that I am fit for getting the permission now, as I gained significantly more experience and done more constructive edits. Bunnypranav (talk) 14:01, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

 Automated comment This user has had 2 requests for autowikibrowser declined in the past 90 days ([1][2]). — MusikBot talk 14:10, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

User:Johnjbarton

I want to change a string "2019 redefinition of the SI base units" to "2019 revision of the SI" across pages that define the SI units. If it works well I may do similar edits in future. I have experience with Wikipedia and scripted file editing generally. Thanks. Johnjbarton (talk) 22:07, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

Mass message sender (WP:PERM/MMS)

Mass message sender

Sorry, unregistered users cannot be granted permissions due to technical restrictions. Please create an account in order to request user account permissions.
New page reviewer (WP:PERM/NPR)

New page reviewer

Sorry, unregistered users cannot be granted permissions due to technical restrictions. Please create an account in order to request user account permissions.

User:Garsh2

Good day. I previously requested this permission but was declined due to lack of editing time on this account (I worked on an IP previously but have no way to prove this). At the risk of appearing too eager for this permission, I am requesting it again as I now have lengthier editing experience. I have demonstrated experience in AfC, AfD, CSD, draftification, and article creation. I also maintain rollbacker and pending change permissions. I believe I can be help bring down the NPP backlog and have the experience and policy understanding that is necessary to do so accurately. Garsh (talk) 01:31, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

 Automated comment This user has had 1 request for new page reviewer declined in the past 90 days ([3]). — MusikBot talk 01:40, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

User:Freedom4U

I think I can consider myself fully back from my wikibreak now and I'd like to request NPP rights again. I haven't participated in any AFDs or AFCs since I returned but hopefully that won't be a problem because I've only been away for about half a year. ~ F4U (talk • they/it) 03:31, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

Pending changes reviewer (WP:PERM/PCR)

Pending changes reviewer

Sorry, unregistered users cannot be granted permissions due to technical restrictions. Please create an account in order to request user account permissions.

User:CosmLearner

Hello! I have read Wikipedia:Reviewing_pending_changes. I want to become a pending changes reviewer. ZeetBaralWiki 15:21, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

Oppose...has weak grasp of copyright/license, verifiability, and MOS. We're only a week-ish out from their block for contradicting citing sources and copy-pasting from AI. DMacks (talk) 18:14, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
 Not done agree with DMacks -Fastily 09:43, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
Noting for the record I have now DE/CIR-blocked them. DMacks (talk) 02:41, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

User:Jy Sandford

I edit AusPol pages, and I'd like to be able to approve edits made to them :) No stress if I need more of a track record of edits - I totally understand. Jy Sandford (talk) 23:44, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

 Automated comment This user has 94 edits in the mainspace. — MusikBot talk 23:50, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

User:Tvfunhouse

I have reviewed the criteria for receiving this permission, and feel my contribution history demonstrates an adequate knowledge of creating, expanding, and patrolling articles in accordance to Wikipedia policies. Tvfunhouse (talk) 00:54, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

User:MarkRosenbaum

Heyo, I'm writing to request the Pending Change Reviewer permission. I'm well versed in the use of tools such as RCPatrol and after reading Wikipedia:Reviewing_pending_changes I believe I'd be a good fit for the Pending changes reviewer permission. Thanks for your consideration, Mark MarkRosenbaum (talk) 21:49, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

User:Kingsmasher678

I would like to be able to help with the backlogs present in this area, and feel that I have enough experience to help out. I feel that my track record in this general area is quite good. Thanks, Kingsmasher678 (talk) 19:59, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

User:TyphoonAmpil

See Wikipedia:Requests_for_permissions/Rollback#User:TyphoonAmpil i anti-vandalism edits 🌀TyphoonAmpil Tools 04:00, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

 Automated comment This user has had an account for 17 days. — MusikBot talk 04:10, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
 Request withdrawn Per Fastily and wait 30 days 🌀TyphoonAmpil Tools 07:08, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
Rollback (WP:PERM/R)

Rollback

Sorry, unregistered users cannot be granted permissions due to technical restrictions. Please create an account in order to request user account permissions.

User:Vasil3fonov

Hello to anyone concerned.

I am requesting rollbacker rights, having done so before without the knowledge of having to warn users after undoing their edits, and I believe I now have a substantial track record of doing so ever since promising to fulfill that role. I now also have a good idea of how to use tools such as Twinkle effectively, which have greatly helped my work against vandalism.

Thanks for taking your time to read my request. Best regards, Vasil3fonov (talk) 16:56, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

 Automated comment This user has had 1 request for rollback declined in the past 90 days ([4]). — MusikBot talk 17:00, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
You are still consistently failing to notify editors when you revert their edits (e.g. 1, 2, 3). Why? It's important to leave a notification for every revert you make. Are you aware that we have tools such as Twinkle or Ultraviolet that make this extremely easy? -Fastily 09:43, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
The three sole examples of me not doing it from the past month and a half, which you are referring to, are the same single person, making the same changes over and over to player statistics tables through different IPs for the past 12+ months. I looked up different pages that match the categories of the ones I've undone, and the user has been warned multiple times, to no effect, making the same edit again and again. They then stop editing from that IP and start doing the same exact edits from a new one. They have been warned multiple times by multiple users for the exact same edit yet still repeatedly undo other users' work without any explanation when they are clearly in the wrong. Examples of this are 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, etc., etc.; some of those edits were way over a year ago, and I am only referencing the ones that the user has been warned for (there are thousands of other such cases from tens, if not hundreds of different IPs) that they haven't been warned for by users who revert their edits. In this case, I have decided that reaching out to the user is futile and I believe that in such extreme examples, that should be an option. What is the point of a warning the user when it is clearly proven that they will keep doing it from new IPs and never read the original talk page anyway?
I have not failed to warn a single other user for the time period since I had promised to do so, which I believe is the whole point of rollback rights in the first place. I strongly believe that this specific, and definitely irregular, case is not sufficient to justify the denial of the rights. However, this is just my point of view on the topic and if you really believe that I am in the wrong and that I should repeatedly (and foolishly) warn the same user for the same thing that they will not stop doing, and expecting a different result, then maybe I do not really need rollback rights in the end if that is to be your final verdict.
Thanks, Vasil3fonov (talk) 11:31, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
You're clearly missing the point. The notifications aren't for you, they're of value to the patrolling admin and anyone interested in curtailing/tracking abuse. If you had tried the tools I linked above, you would know that notifying an editor takes a grand total of 3 clicks and 5 seconds. If that's still too much effort for you, then it's high time for you to explore other aspects of Wikipedia that don't involve counter-vandalism. The very fact that you spent more time to compose this nonsensical essay for the sake of argument strongly suggests to me that you are not ready for rollback. Nonetheless, I have reviewed your contributions since your previous request and you haven't made enough reverts for me to determine whether you'd be able to use rollback correctly. -Fastily 19:49, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
Fair enough, I can totally agree with the final sentence and I think that would've sufficed. I can't figure out how to use Twinkle and that's on my end. When I use the "rollback" or "vandalism" button, it just opens the user's talk page and I need to manually put in the specific warning template each time. That's more effort than you've pointed out and not something I'm willing to do in cases such as the one you've labelled "nonsensical". And now that I've mentioned the "case", that user is already reverting my reverts of their edits despite the issued warnings on their other IPs' talk pages, but I suppose that's not something that can be dealt with by any available tools to me or the admins.
And just to be clear, I wasn't arguing for the sake of it, I really do believe I've missed the point of rollback in general, so I will withdraw my request and won't submit one in the future. Vasil3fonov (talk) 20:46, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
That's not accurate. We have multiple avenues for dealing with long term abusers, namely WP:AIV, WP:SPI, WP:RFPP. According to your edit history, I see you've made a handful of requests to RFPP, a single edit to AIV, and no edits to SPI. I do suggest you try those first before throwing up your hands and proclaiming that all is lost. To be clear, I'm happy to grant you rollback if you can both demonstrate a need for it and understanding of how to use it appropriately. Apologies if I sounded harsh above. If you do decide to take up RecentChanges patrol, then I hope to see you back here. Closing as  Not done per your request. -Fastily 00:52, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
I will look into other ways to counter the issue then, thanks for the advice. And I see my previous mistake, it's definitely not your fault for replying in that way, so no offence taken. Cheers, Vasil3fonov (talk) 07:57, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

User:2RDD

Hi everyone, I'm 2RDD. I've been editing Wikipedia for a year now and have made over a thousand edits. I'm passionate about maintaining article quality and combating vandalism. I believe Rollbacker rights would help me make a bigger impact. I'm eager to take on this responsibility and contribute to our community's mission. Thanks for considering my request! Best, 2RDD (talk) 10:03, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

 Automated comment This user has had 1 request for rollback declined in the past 90 days ([5]). — MusikBot talk 10:10, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
 Not done Sorry, but you have very little experience reverting vandalism. Please request when you have a track record of reverting vandalism. Malinaccier (talk) 13:21, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

User:TheProEditor11

Hey, I would like to request for the rollback permission because I am engaged in rollback activities very much for some time. This permission would be very helpful and will make my Wiki activity very easier. Moreover, I am experienced enough with enough edits and edit time in Wikipedia. I have read everything about this tool and will abide by all the rules too.! Thanking you! TheProEditor11 (talk) 10:52, 8 September 2024 (UTC) TheProEditor11 (talk) 10:52, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

 Not done I reviewed your contributions and found little to no recent anti-vandalism work. If you're still interested in this tool then please spend at least a month actively patrolling RecentChanges (Twinkle & Ultraviolet can help with that) before reapplying. Also, please ensure that you are consistently warning editors when you revert their edits. Thanks, Fastily 19:37, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

User:TryAgainSooner

Hello! I would like access to rollback rights in order to use tools such as Huggle that require rollback rights. Most of my edits have been anti-vandalism work, and I feel that access to these tools would help me revert and warn more effectively. I would like to mention that there may be a few problems with my edits that anyone reviewing may bring up:

1. In my first few reverts (using only the built-in undo tool) before I was auto-confirmed, I did fail to notify some of the users I was reverting. This is mainly because I didn't yet have access to RedWarn, Twinkle, or Ultraviolet in order to warn users quickly. Secondly, I was not aware of the correct procedure to deal with Vandalism. Now, however, almost every revert has been using Ultraviolet or RedWarn and I have been giving warnings to every user. I believe I have a sufficient track record of doing this that you can see in my contribs. I have read all relevant procedures relating to Rollback and how to deal with Vandalism, including Wikipedia:Vandalism, Wikipedia:Rollback, Wikipedia:Reverting, as well as Wikipedia:Username policy. You can also see in my contribs that after I read the relevant procedures but before I was autoconfirmed, I manually warned some of the users that I was reverting.

2. I am applying slightly before I have one month of experience. If I need to reapply in two weeks or so, I will be happy to. However, I believe that my track record shows that a large majority of my reverts have been helpful and demonstrate good understanding of the policy as I've learned it.

Thanks TryAgainSooner (talk) 17:06, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

 Automated comment This user has 139 edits in the mainspace. — MusikBot talk 17:10, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
 Request withdrawn Totally thought I had more main space edits/reverts. Will re-submit when I reach a month and around 250 main space edits. TryAgainSooner (talk) 17:55, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

User:TyphoonAmpil

Hello i have Over 200 mainspace edits. Im patrolling Special:RecentChanges. i use Ultraviolet. i Don't have edit warring. i Meet Criteria for Rollback. 🌀TyphoonAmpil Tools 03:58, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

 Not done I noticed you started actively editing 2 weeks ago. While I appreciate your enthusiasm, I'd like to see you spend at least a month gaining experience editing Wikipedia before assigning you advanced permissions. Also, please ensure that you are consistently warning editors when you revert their edits (I recommend using tools such as Twinkle or Ultraviolet which makes this extremely easy). Thanks, Fastily 06:53, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

BRFAs

Bot Name Status Created Last editor Date/Time Last BAG editor Date/Time
KiranBOT 10 (T|C|B|F) Open 2024-09-07, 13:04:48 Usernamekiran 2024-09-08, 16:19:37 Never edited by BAG n/a
PonoRoboT 2 (T|C|B|F) On hold 2024-07-20, 23:38:17 Primefac 2024-08-04, 23:49:03 Primefac 2024-08-04, 23:49:03
Platybot (T|C|B|F) Open 2024-07-08, 08:52:05 Primefac 2024-08-25, 20:09:43 Primefac 2024-08-25, 20:09:43
Leaderbot (T|C|B|F) Extended trial 2024-08-10, 12:32:53 Leaderboard 2024-09-08, 11:47:11 SD0001 2024-09-08, 10:35:46
SodiumBot 2 (T|C|B|F) In trial 2024-07-16, 20:03:26 Novem Linguae 2024-08-08, 07:10:31 Primefac 2024-08-04, 23:51:27
DannyS712 bot III 74 (T|C|B|F) In trial 2024-05-09, 00:02:12 DannyS712 2024-07-21, 02:39:35 TheSandDoctor 2024-07-13, 22:20:18
StradBot 2 (T|C|B|F) In trial 2024-02-17, 03:20:39 SD0001 2024-02-17, 05:58:51 SD0001 2024-02-17, 05:58:51
CapsuleBot 2 (T|C|B|F) Extended trial 2023-06-14, 00:14:29 Capsulecap 2024-01-20, 02:36:30 Primefac 2024-01-15, 07:40:39
AussieBot 1 (T|C|B|F) Extended trial: User response needed! 2023-03-22, 01:57:36 Hawkeye7 2024-02-18, 23:33:13 Primefac 2024-02-18, 20:10:45
DoggoBot 10 (T|C|B|F) In trial 2023-03-02, 02:55:00 Ammarpad 2024-09-09, 12:57:47 Primefac 2024-01-15, 07:40:49
BaranBOT 4 (T|C|B|F) Trial complete 2024-09-07, 12:48:45 DreamRimmer 2024-09-09, 12:15:17 ProcrastinatingReader 2024-09-07, 15:23:28
PrimeBOT 39 (T|C|B|F) On hold 2023-05-11, 12:48:50 Primefac 2024-08-16, 10:37:20 Headbomb 2023-07-02, 17:38:58
Retrieved from "https://en.wiki.x.io/w/index.php?title=User:MusikAnimal/Dashboard&oldid=1013833114"