User talk:~riley

Please use on Steward requests/Global "|hidename=1" --𐐎ikiBayer 👤💬

@WikiBayer: Hey WikiBayer, this is probably the least detailed talk page message I have received - if you are looking for something to come of it, I recommend expanding on what you are discussing and including examples. As you can see from my many requests on SRG, I do know and use hidename when I believe the username will be suppressed. If I missed clicking the hidename button on TwinkleGlobal on a request, my apologies! ~riley (talk ) 17:07, 31 January 2020 (UTC) Reply

This is only meant as a hint. Youmade 2 requests yesterday with abusive usernames without hiding the names.I have left out the details here on purpose not to spread them further.-𐐎ikiBayer 👤💬 17:34, 31 January 2020 (UTC) Reply

I usually opt for direct communication rather than hinting, but to each their own. Thanks, just took a look - I thought I hit the button on the one that involved your username, the other I just completely forgot. ~riley (talk ) 17:48, 31 January 2020 (UTC) Reply

Hello friendly Global Sysop! Here is the information you requested...Bot873 (talk) 20:01, 1 February 2020 (UTC) Reply

Hello friendly Global Sysop! Here is the information you requested...Bot873 (talk) 20:01, 1 February 2020 (UTC) Reply

20:04, 3 February 2020 (UTC)

Again [1]. This is fresh. Kubura (talk) 22:13, 5 February 2020 (UTC) Reply

Done, ty! Dec/Jan/Feb are, as usual, a mess! --Vituzzu (talk) 13:49, 8 February 2020 (UTC) Reply

• No problem, I get it! :) ~riley (talk ) 19:29, 8 February 2020 (UTC) Reply

Hi Riley, kindly take a look at Meta talk:Interface administrators and see if my suggestion is appropriate enough. Minorax (talk) 08:32, 9 February 2020 (UTC) Reply

• Done, Minorax. ~riley (talk ) 08:48, 9 February 2020 (UTC) Reply

19:10, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

You were right about that! Dthomsen8 (talk) 19:58, 10 February 2020 (UTC) Reply

• @Dthomsen8: Thank you for posing the new question! I appreciate you being willing to do that and all the more appreciate you advocating for female editors. Immediately after you posted your first question, a female editor voiced concerns that I may not have initally thought of due to my male perspective. ~riley (talk ) 20:05, 10 February 2020 (UTC) Reply

Viva la difference!--Dthomsen8 (talk) 20:23, 10 February 2020 (UTC) Reply

Dthomsen8 Hope my answer is what you were looking for, let me know if I misunderstood. ~riley (talk ) 20:35, 10 February 2020 (UTC) Reply

Hi. Would you mind merging special:abusefilter/234 into special:abusefilter/96. Some of the terms are already there, and it would seem to be a minor tweak to the existing filter. I am seeing numerous overlaps of 234 with existing filters which seems a bit of a waste, about 1 in 8-10 seem unique. I have been trying to minimise overlap, but when we get one turning up four times, then we have a level of excess. [Wish there was an easier way to exclude another filter, however, they are not sequential in action (as it was explained to me).] Thanks.  — billinghurst sDrewth 21:44, 10 February 2020 (UTC) Reply

• Hi billinghurst - I meant to remove any overlapping from 96 in favor of 234 as it's more specific spam. Do you mind if I go that route rather than merge those and the unique ones into 234? If not, I understand. ~riley (talk ) 21:46, 10 February 2020 (UTC) Reply

  The repeats are not just with /96.

  Shopping spam is shopping spam, so not certain why we would want to see it separately listed with yet another filter with the same resulting actions. If we were trying to manage different actions, or trying to manage some minutiae, or have some exclusions, then sure, but for same same same I am not understanding what you would be achieving.  — billinghurst sDrewth 22:00, 10 February 2020 (UTC) Reply

  might be some value in looking for added lines (no need to do as links) "pbase.com/topics" and some of those types of legitimate #notlegitimate url snippets, which we can probably blacklist, or write those snippets into AF/69 if there is some valid use, though abused by "newusers". Seeing those snippets in COIBot reports is difficult, especially where there are already a number of legitimate uses of domains.  — billinghurst sDrewth 22:11, 10 February 2020 (UTC) Reply

• @Billinghurst: Shopping spam is shopping spam, but it is the medication spam I was hoping to break out into it's own AF (like gambling spam, etc). As always, I have trusted your judgement and I don't have any opposition to you merging or changing as you see fit. :) ~riley (talk ) 22:26, 10 February 2020 (UTC) Reply

"scowiki":[
{
"defaultRollbackPrefix":"Revertit edit o [[Special:Contributions/2ドル|2ドル]] ([[User talk:2ドル|tauk]]), chynged back tae last version bi 1ドル:",
"defaultUndoSummary":"Undid edits by [[Special:Contributions/2ドル|2ドル]] ([[User talk:2ドル|talk]]) to last revision by 1ドル",
"defaultUndoPrefix":"Undid edits by [[Special:Contributions/2ドル|2ドル]] ([[User talk:2ドル|talk]]) to last revision by 1ドル: ",
"speedySummary":"Requesting deletion",
"speedyWarnSummary":"Notification about SD (1ドル)",

@Thiswouldnormallybea'vandalisminprogress'noticeboard,ifyoudon'thaveone,leaveout.Youcouldkeepintheuserpageifyouwant.
"report":[
{
"pageReport":"User:MJL/Vandals",
"regexReport":"\\*\\s?\\{{2}I?P?vandal\\s?\\|\\s?1ドル\\s*?\\}{2}",
"regexReport2":"\\*\\s?\\{{2}I?P?vandal\\s?\\|\\s?1ドル\\s*?\\}{2}",
"sectionReport":"1ドル",
"withoutSectionReport":true,
"textReport":"*{{vandal|1ドル}} \u0026ndash; Vandalism after final warning. ~~~~",
"textReportIP":"*{{IPvandal|1ドル}} \u0026ndash; Vandalism after final warning. ~~~~",
"summaryReport":"Reportin [[Special:Contributions/1ドル|1ドル]].",
"autoReport":true
}
],
"speedy":[
{
"name":"Nonsense",
"template":"{{delete|Nonsense}}"@translateplease
},
{
"name":"Vandalism",
"template":"{{delete|Vandalism}}"@translateplease
},
{
"name":"Spam",
"template":"{{delete|Spam}} __NOINDEX__"@translateplease
},
{
"name":"Test page",
"template":"{{delete|Test page}}"@translateplease
},
{
"name":"Empty page",
"template":"{{delete|Empty page}}"@translateplease
},
{
"name":"No useful content",
"template":"{{delete|No useful content}}"@translateplease
},
{
"name":"Out of project scope",
"template":"{{delete|Out of project scope}}"@translateplease
}
],
"rollback":[
{
"name":"Content removal",
"summary":"unexplained content removal",@english?
"warn":"content-removal"
},
{
"name":"Vandalism",
"summary":"revertin vandalism",
"warn":"vandalism"
},
{
"name":"Nonsense content",
"summary":"purely nonsense content"@translateplease,addwarningifapplicable
},
{
"name":"Spam/Unnecessary links",
"summary":"unnecessary links or spam"@translateplease,addwarningifapplicable
},
{
"name":"Test edit",
"summary":"test edits, please use the sandbox"@translateplease,addwarningifapplicable
},
{
"name":"Use Scots, not English",
"summary":"removal of Scots",
"warn":"english"
},
],
"warn":[
{
"summaryWarn":"sending warning (level 1ドル)",
"sectionWarn":"Wairnin",
"countWarn":"2",
"vandalism":[
{
"tags":[
{
"1":"Template:Uw-vandalism1",
"2":"Template:Uw-vandalism2"
}
],
"templates":[
{
"1":"{{subst:uw-vandalism1|1ドル}} ~~~~",
"2":"{{subst:uw-vandalism2|1ドル}} ~~~~"
}
]
}
],
"content-removal":[
{
"tags":[
{
"1":"Template:Uw-delete1",
"2":"Template:Uw-delete2"
}
],
"templates":[
{
"1":"{{subst:uw-delete1|1ドル}} ~~~~",
"2":"{{subst:uw-delete2|1ドル}} ~~~~"
}
]
}
],
"english":[
{
"tags":[
{
"1":"Template:uw-english1",
"2":"Template:uw-vandalism2"
}
],
"templates":[
{
"1":"{{subst:uw-english1|1ドル}} ~~~~",
"2":"{{subst:uw-vandalism|1ドル}} ~~~~"
}
]
}
]
}
]
}
]
}
],

If I add the above to SWViewer/config.json, I won't break anything right? –MJL ‐Talk‐ ^☖ 23:09, 10 February 2020 (UTC) Reply

• @MJL: See changes ~riley (talk ) 23:23, 10 February 2020 (UTC) Reply
  • Why not use levels 3 and 4 of warnings? I notice you have them for vandalism. ~riley (talk ) 23:25, 10 February 2020 (UTC) Reply
    • I suppose you could use them, but our policy only requires a single warning before a block may be implemented. Warning a user a third time seems redundant since they're already eligible to be blocked in most cases. –MJL ‐Talk‐ ^☖ 23:42, 10 February 2020 (UTC) Reply

• Meta-Wiki administrators