Wikibooks:Simple talk/Archive 6

Bot policy

Speaking of bots, I want to propose this,

Hello. To facilitate steward granting of bot access, I suggest implementing the standard bot policy on this wiki. In particular, this policy allows stewards to automatically flag known interlanguage linking bots (if this page says that is acceptable), which form the vast majority of such requests. The policy also enables global bots on this wiki (if this page says that is acceptable), which are trusted bots that will be given bot access on every wiki that allows global bots.

This policy makes bot access requesting much easier for local users, operators, and stewards. To implement it we only need to create a redirect to this page from Project:Bot policy, and add a line at the top noting that it is used here. Please read the text at m:Bot policy before commenting. If you object, please say so; I hope to implement in one week if there is no objection, since it is particularly written to streamline bot requests on wikis with little or no community interested in bot access requests. Techman224^Talk 20:51, 17 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Support Automanic approval and global bots. Techman224^Talk 20:53, 17 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support; Regards, Microchip08 ^(talk) 21:02, 17 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support Global bots, and the other if everyone else is cool with it. I suppose we can always remove bot permissions, etc. if there's a problem. --Cromwellt|talk|contribs 19:33, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support Abigor 04:41, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've added simple.wikibooks as global bots and automatic approval. Laaknor 08:05, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Implemented. —Pathoschild 20:58:53, 06 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Microchip08 21:03, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Font/skin on Wikibooks Simple

Hello folks, it looks like there is a different font on this simple.wikibooks than on the en.wikibooks. It is more difficult for me to read (thicker font). Is there a problem with the default CSS or is this by design? I have not changed any skins settings and am seeing the Monobook skin... --Jeffmcneill 03:11, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is the MediaWiki default, and is the same as English Wikibooks (and most WMF wikis). English Wikibooks Main Page, however, is a different font, compared to the rest of their wiki. Microchip08 07:03, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The font used here is the WMF wiki default (generic sans-serif, if I remember correctly). The fonts appear the same to me on both wikis. Tempodivalse 21:26, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

To help clear the inactivity

I would like to propose that Simple English Wikibooks becomes one of the first wikis to implement Global sysops. This would eliminate the backlogs, and, with only two active administrators, both of which are semi-, it sounds like a good deal with little disadvantages for such a small wiki. I propose to close this in a couple of days time, as I am doubtful of any input from other users! Please state whether there should be any restrictions. Thanks for your time.

Support

Support with no restrictions. Microchip08 00:11, 13 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support with no restrictions. We only have two admins, both are semi-active, so it's a good idea to have additional help when vandalism occurs. Tempodivalse 18:39, 15 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support - The project really needs a boost. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 18:41, 15 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support with no restrictions. Seddon 02:31, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose

Abigor 22:43, 15 May 2009 (UTC) No way[reply]
Why not? "No way" is not sufficient reason. Microchip08 22:43, 15 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No way is a good enough reason. No way to get non local users do adminwork here. Abigor 13:06, 17 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This project only has two admins, both of which are semi-active. Thus, administrative stuff is bound to get backlogged. If I remember correctly someone had to pester the stewards at meta earlier because the quick delete category was full after several weeks. Vandalism can go unnoticed for hours. Don't you think we could use some outside help? Tempodivalse 13:58, 17 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

we don't need outside help, please point me to the backlogs... Abigor 06:02, 23 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If there is no serious objections in the next few days, I will take steps on implementing this.

Microchip08 14:50, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think you don't have enough support to implent something like this.. 4 votes 75 3 support on oppose.. And this group isn't even created on Meta because there where a lot of opposes there. Abigor 16:57, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Don't worry, I disagreed with you implementing rollback so quickly. And outside help is needed: we clear backlogs quickly when one of us is active. However, neither you or me is active all the time, so there is bound to be some inactivity. We are both busy on other projects, and this is rather back burner. Microchip08 16:59, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You forgetting my point. There is no global admin group created, how do you want to activate it? Abigor 19:46, 27 May 2009

I am not sure about this, but I thought that it was activated, but no wikis had yet opted in, meaning that there was no need of any members. Microchip08 20:31, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

New bot: AEBot

I'm requesting the bot flag for AEBot ( talk | email | contribs | logs). It is an interwiki bot which uses pywikipedia. I've made four test edits with it, see 1, 2, 3 and 4. Thank you. TheAE talk 02:26, 13 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This comes under the automatic bot policy. Please poke the Stewards at Meta after your bot has either been running regularly for a week, or has amassed 100 edits. Microchip08 07:26, 13 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This wiki has no local bureaucrats, so you're stuck with the stewards at Meta if if you want a bot flag. Tempodivalse 18:40, 15 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please note that while stewards flip the switch (or not) it is the community

's decision whether to grant the bot flag or not. – Mike.lifeguard | ^@en.wb 00:58, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Even with automatic bot policy? Microchip08 00:59, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That is simply pre-approval of certain bots. The principle remains the same. I wasn't aware that had been implemented here, but since it has, then the bot is already approved by the community - just post to m:SRB – Mike.lifeguard | ^@en.wb 01:32, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Administrator assistance requested - crosswiki abuse

There is currently a person/bot who was creating masses of accounts on most WMF projects. There's a pattern to it - each username has ten characters, and the first and sixth ones are always capitalised. I've noticed one such username, RelpaSnoda ( talk | email | contribs | logs), being created over here as well. (They have all been created from open proxies, as confirmed by checkuser at en.wn.) This is far too much of a pattern to possibly be a coincidence, so I'm requesting a block on that account. I believe the stewards have already been alerted to this problem. Thank you, Tempodivalse 17:52, 22 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Verifying... Microchip08 17:53, 22 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

We are not going to block people here if the did vandalism on a other project. Every user is free to come here, a block will be given when he vandalize content here. Abigor 06:00, 23 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

....I don't think you understand. These are not people. These are automatically created, malicious vandalbots. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 06:03, 23 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I do understand but I am not going to block it without having edits. A steward can lock it globaly. Abigor 06:13, 23 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's nearly impossible to globally lock them all, given the large number that have been created. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 06:14, 23 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Rollback

Hello,

Why don't we activate rollback on Wikibooks. This could help active users that fight vandalism.. We could give it uppon request. Abigor 17:23, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Support Abigor 17:23, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Definite support, for reasons I outlined here. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 17:25, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support Will be useful for when we have vandalism. Tempodivalse 17:34, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Rollback is activated, please contact a administrator when you think you need it :) Abigor 17:53, 26 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

- Blimey, that was quick. We had to wait weeks on Wikipedia. Oh, and post-activation endorse. Microchip08 19:06, 26 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  It helps when you know your developers :-) Abigor 20:23, 26 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  omgoffwikiconspiracycabalthingy! Microchip08 20:47, 26 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Rollback request

Hallo, would it be possible for an admin to give me the rollback function? I am a sysop at en.wikinews and simple.wikiquote. Rollback would help me revert vandalism. Thanks, Tempodivalse 02:47, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Done - Thanks for helping - Abigor 08:33, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Tempodivalse 14:49, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Closure

Hello,

I have made a proposal to close this project during inactivity.

Best regards, Huib talk 19:25, 1 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Where? You could at least link to it. Thanks, Yotcmdr 19:27, 1 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I remember you opposing the last proposal; what has changed since then? Microchip08 19:28, 1 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]