User talk:Miment - Revision history

Tarrasque89: removed link to resolved issue

2011-06-18T04:15:25Z

removed link to resolved issue

← Older revision		Revision as of 04:15, 18 June 2011
Line 61:		Line 61:
	== Page deletion request ==		== Page deletion request ==

-	In making panel descriptions I somehow inadvertently popped [[LIAB 56:12\/Description]]. Mind disbanding it? --[[User:GRuban\|GRuban]] 13:10, 23 March 2011 (UTC)	+	In making panel descriptions I somehow inadvertently popped LIAB 56:12\/Description. Mind disbanding it? --[[User:GRuban\|GRuban]] 13:10, 23 March 2011 (UTC)
	: Thank you! --[[User:GRuban\|GRuban]] 15:37, 23 March 2011 (UTC)		: Thank you! --[[User:GRuban\|GRuban]] 15:37, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

Abb3w: /* Bottery */ new section

2011-06-17T04:09:52Z

Bottery: new section

← Older revision		Revision as of 04:09, 17 June 2011
Line 68:		Line 68:
	Note, while #32 was linked as the first Hamstard comic, the site also has a few additional PNG strips (comic 1, 2, 11, 13, 18, 25, 26, and 27) not linked - as if Parson had draft strips that he uploaded but didn't publicly post. They probably should be uploaded, but I'm not sure how they should be linked in with the others. [[User:Abb3w\|Abb3w]] 20:17, 28 May 2011 (EDT)		Note, while #32 was linked as the first Hamstard comic, the site also has a few additional PNG strips (comic 1, 2, 11, 13, 18, 25, 26, and 27) not linked - as if Parson had draft strips that he uploaded but didn't publicly post. They probably should be uploaded, but I'm not sure how they should be linked in with the others. [[User:Abb3w\|Abb3w]] 20:17, 28 May 2011 (EDT)
	:::Hmmmmm... interesting. I'll upload them an list them in numeric order, after 53. (So it'll be 53, 1, 2, 11,...) Either that, or I'll dump em all in a gallery :P[[User:Miment\|Miment]] 21:48, 28 May 2011 (EDT)		:::Hmmmmm... interesting. I'll upload them an list them in numeric order, after 53. (So it'll be 53, 1, 2, 11,...) Either that, or I'll dump em all in a gallery :P[[User:Miment\|Miment]] 21:48, 28 May 2011 (EDT)
		+
		+	== Bottery ==
		+
		+	Hmmm. Tried to make a new user to see what changed. KittenAuth is now required for all new users! So I bet that's why spammer accounts are waaayyyy down. Though there are so many attempted registrations that sooner or later they'll squeeze a user through and I bet that's what happend here with Pilamy. [[User:Miment\|Miment]] 14:36, 16 June 2011 (EDT)
		+	:KittenAuth seems to have been required for a while; since May 30 or so. Schmuck registrations (though no SPAM edits) have continued since then, but now paused. So... probably no. Perhaps the bot gives up after a fortnight of fighting KittenAuth? Perhaps there have been further security tweaks by the [[ErfWiki:Bureaucrats\|Bureaucrat]] to make KittenAuth more universal than my initial tests indicated? Perhaps the bot has been given an upgrade in incompetence? I dunno. Regardless, it seems the [[The Spamming of Erfwiki\|SpamWar]]'s [[Turn]] has turned. Again. [[User:Abb3w\|Abb3w]] 00:09, 17 June 2011 (EDT)

Miment: /* Hamstard */

2011-05-29T01:49:30Z

Hamstard

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:49, 29 May 2011
Line 67:		Line 67:

	Note, while #32 was linked as the first Hamstard comic, the site also has a few additional PNG strips (comic 1, 2, 11, 13, 18, 25, 26, and 27) not linked - as if Parson had draft strips that he uploaded but didn't publicly post. They probably should be uploaded, but I'm not sure how they should be linked in with the others. [[User:Abb3w\|Abb3w]] 20:17, 28 May 2011 (EDT)		Note, while #32 was linked as the first Hamstard comic, the site also has a few additional PNG strips (comic 1, 2, 11, 13, 18, 25, 26, and 27) not linked - as if Parson had draft strips that he uploaded but didn't publicly post. They probably should be uploaded, but I'm not sure how they should be linked in with the others. [[User:Abb3w\|Abb3w]] 20:17, 28 May 2011 (EDT)
-	:::Hmmmmm... interesting. I'll upload them an list them in numeric order, after 53. (So it'll be 53, 1, 2, 11,...) [[User:Miment\|Miment]] 21:48, 28 May 2011 (EDT)	+	:::Hmmmmm... interesting. I'll upload them an list them in numeric order, after 53. (So it'll be 53, 1, 2, 11,...) Either that, or I'll dump em all in a gallery :P[[User:Miment\|Miment]] 21:48, 28 May 2011 (EDT)

Miment: /* Hamstard */

2011-05-29T01:48:42Z

Hamstard

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:48, 29 May 2011
Line 67:		Line 67:

	Note, while #32 was linked as the first Hamstard comic, the site also has a few additional PNG strips (comic 1, 2, 11, 13, 18, 25, 26, and 27) not linked - as if Parson had draft strips that he uploaded but didn't publicly post. They probably should be uploaded, but I'm not sure how they should be linked in with the others. [[User:Abb3w\|Abb3w]] 20:17, 28 May 2011 (EDT)		Note, while #32 was linked as the first Hamstard comic, the site also has a few additional PNG strips (comic 1, 2, 11, 13, 18, 25, 26, and 27) not linked - as if Parson had draft strips that he uploaded but didn't publicly post. They probably should be uploaded, but I'm not sure how they should be linked in with the others. [[User:Abb3w\|Abb3w]] 20:17, 28 May 2011 (EDT)
		+	:::Hmmmmm... interesting. I'll upload them an list them in numeric order, after 53. (So it'll be 53, 1, 2, 11,...) [[User:Miment\|Miment]] 21:48, 28 May 2011 (EDT)

Abb3w: /* Hamstard */ new section

2011-05-29T00:17:45Z

Hamstard: new section

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:17, 29 May 2011
Line 63:		Line 63:
	In making panel descriptions I somehow inadvertently popped [[LIAB 56:12\/Description]]. Mind disbanding it? --[[User:GRuban\|GRuban]] 13:10, 23 March 2011 (UTC)		In making panel descriptions I somehow inadvertently popped [[LIAB 56:12\/Description]]. Mind disbanding it? --[[User:GRuban\|GRuban]] 13:10, 23 March 2011 (UTC)
	: Thank you! --[[User:GRuban\|GRuban]] 15:37, 23 March 2011 (UTC)		: Thank you! --[[User:GRuban\|GRuban]] 15:37, 23 March 2011 (UTC)
		+
		+	== Hamstard ==
		+
		+	Note, while #32 was linked as the first Hamstard comic, the site also has a few additional PNG strips (comic 1, 2, 11, 13, 18, 25, 26, and 27) not linked - as if Parson had draft strips that he uploaded but didn't publicly post. They probably should be uploaded, but I'm not sure how they should be linked in with the others. [[User:Abb3w\|Abb3w]] 20:17, 28 May 2011 (EDT)

Charles: WELCOME BACK MIMENT!!!

2011-05-27T16:00:23Z

WELCOME BACK MIMENT!!!

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:00, 27 May 2011
Line 56:		Line 56:

	I agree with Gruben that You have done a Yeoman's effort in fighting spam. On behalf of this wiki-ian thank you greatly. [[Special:Contributions/152.131.9.69\|152.131.9.69]] 17:40, 29 April 2011 (UTC)		I agree with Gruben that You have done a Yeoman's effort in fighting spam. On behalf of this wiki-ian thank you greatly. [[Special:Contributions/152.131.9.69\|152.131.9.69]] 17:40, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
		+
		+	Welcome back mate, you've been sorely missed. We've got a new captcha called KittenAUTH for URL insertion as well as account creation and anon edits/creations. That plust the new [[MediaWiki:SpamBlacklist]] seems to be keeping them at bay. --[[User:Charles\|Charles]] 12:00, 27 May 2011 (EDT)
		+
	== Page deletion request ==		== Page deletion request ==

	In making panel descriptions I somehow inadvertently popped [[LIAB 56:12\/Description]]. Mind disbanding it? --[[User:GRuban\|GRuban]] 13:10, 23 March 2011 (UTC)		In making panel descriptions I somehow inadvertently popped [[LIAB 56:12\/Description]]. Mind disbanding it? --[[User:GRuban\|GRuban]] 13:10, 23 March 2011 (UTC)
	: Thank you! --[[User:GRuban\|GRuban]] 15:37, 23 March 2011 (UTC)		: Thank you! --[[User:GRuban\|GRuban]] 15:37, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

Abb3w: Undo cheerleader vandalism 54148 by 209.195.81.154 (talk)

2011-05-26T05:02:50Z

Undo cheerleader vandalism 54148 by 209.195.81.154 (talk)

← Older revision		Revision as of 05:02, 26 May 2011
Line 1:		Line 1:
-	~~Thats~~ not just ~~logic~~. ~~Thats~~ really ~~snesilbe~~.	+	==Main Page Control==
		+	<center>{{mainpagecontrol}}</center>
		+	Sand box with the main page code on [[User:Miment/Main]] before making changes... But be careful! The content for the main page comes from the above templates, not the main page code itself.
		+	==Regent==
		+	So, I noticed you added a statbox for Gobwin Knob, and one of the stats is "Regent: Parson". I'm curious as to what this is supposed to mean. Stanley still rules in the city, and Parson isn't exactly Chief Warlord either... is this just "who is going around looking at things to make them work"? [[User:Menlo Marseilles\|Menlo Marseilles]] 14:31, 31 October 2009 (UTC)
		+	:Yeah, that's basicly the idea.
		+	::I edited it to "city manager". There is a [[Hyatt]] Regency. --[[User:Raphfrk\|Raphfrk]] 22:38, 31 October 2009 (UTC)
		+	:::The position is called "Regent". I doubt people would get the two confused. You should change the text output back. No sense in changing the input too.[[User:Miment\|Miment]] 00:03, 1 November 2009 (UTC)
		+	::::Where does it say that? There is no reference to the title on [[First_Intermission_35]] (unless I missed it). If it is the official title, then sorry about that and I can change it back. Otherwise, I think it would be better to have a unique name for the function and city manager seems reasonable. --[[User:Raphfrk\|Raphfrk]] 20:05, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
		+	:::::Strange, I remember reading it somewhere, but not where. The wiki page on [[regent]] says "''A Regent Warlord is a warlord who rather than being a military commander, has special administrative bonuses when managing a city.''" Well, City Manager works, Regent works, it all works. ;P [[User:Miment\|Miment]] 21:01, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
		+	::::::That page doesn't have any links either (and is marked as speculation). I have posted a question on the author of that page's [[User_talk:Commander_I._Heartly_Noah\|talk page]]. --[[User:Raphfrk\|Raphfrk]] 21:21, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
		+	:::::::Ok, received a response, the reference is from [[First_Intermission_13]], it says that "The city had a regent warlord named Al Frappacino". It is 100%, but seems reasonable that the title is for warlords who are in charge of cities.--[[User:Raphfrk\|Raphfrk]] 23:39, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
		+	::::::::Alrighty then, I'm gonna go ahead and change back the template. Oh wait, nevermind. I see it's been done already. [[User:Miment\|Miment]] 03:06, 22 November 2009 (UTC)
		+
		+	==Edit links on the front page==
		+
		+	I commented on this on the [[Talk:Main_Page\|main page talk page]] --[[User:Raphfrk\|Raphfrk]] 20:05, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
		+
		+	==SPAM==
		+
		+	The bastards are relentless. Are you considering adding in some more [http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Manual:Combating_spam anti-spam] measures? I know there's the calculation check, but maybe you need an image instead or in addition. --[[User:Charles\|Charles]] 04:26, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
		+
		+	This is nuts! Harknell hasn't logged into the forum since the 8th of January, but hopefully Rob will see our posts and inform him or something. --[[User:Charles\|Charles]] 04:26, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
		+
		+	Already PMed him just asking him to let Harknell know. CCed yourself and Harknell in on it. Great work you've been doing to clear the spam out by the way. --[[User:Charles\|Charles]] 04:36, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
		+	{{FortuneCookie
		+	\|msg=I bow before the master wielder of the [[Banhammer]]
		+	\|from=Charles
		+	\|luckynumbers=
		+	}}
		+	Good work, the banning on links to external sites is a good call as well. We don't link the direct comic all that often. Some of the Real World References, sure but we can survive without that until something is installed. --[[User:Charles\|Charles]] 00:13, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
		+
		+
		+	Just a query, but does it make it easier for you if I put the user into the spammer category through their main page or through their talk/discussion page? I'm just noticing that you're generally putting them in the "Banned" Category on their talk/discussion page. --[[User:Charles\|Charles]] 01:19, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
		+
		+	OK, I'll start putting the Spammer category in their talk page. I think we have a heap of users with a talk page linked into the "Banned" category and a main page still linking to the Spammer page, so its difficult to distinguish who you've already banned from the list sorry. Would you like me to clear the pages of users you've already banned or let you delete them? --[[User:Charles\|Charles]] 01:25, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
		+
		+	Would it be possible to get a temporary promotion to admin, just to help with wielding the banhammer? Or am I more useful helping out with tagging the spammers and their pages for deletion? -- [[User:No one in particular\|No one in particular]] 04:27, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
		+
		+	I reckon we need more Bureaucrats and I'd put Miment down as the first in line for position as one. Beyond that, there should be another group created which can delete pages and give, at least, temporary banishments to Ip addresses and regular users. Maybe even edit protected pages. But the special thing would be that Admins can promote regular users to the group. You don't just need Bureaucrats --[[User:Charles\|Charles]] 04:43, 4 February 2011 (UTC)
		+
		+	*This is getting ridiculous. Any word on the image recognition filters yet? --[[User:No one in particular\|No one in particular]] 07:55, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
		+
		+	So, um, not that I'm complaining, but when did I earn the privelege of deleting spam? Happy to do so, but if it's an error... [[User:Jorgath\|Jorgath]] 15:29, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
		+
		+	Man, I took a peek at the Recent Changes, and it is all spam fighting. I was pulling my hair out on my own wiki with that, so I can totally empathize. Just dropping you a note to say thanks for your hard work grappling with the bad guys -- it is much appreciated! --[[User:Cayzle\|Cayzle]] 12 March 2011
		+
		+	: What Cayzle said, our compliments. How hard is it to stop new accounts from creating pages, for 5 days and/or 20 edits or something? That's what they do on Wikipedia, and it would clearly be a big help here. --[[User:GRuban\|GRuban]] 12:53, 23 March 2011 (UTC)
		+	:: Wow, this is really bad. You're doing an impressive job. It must be really tempting to just block all user accounts as soon as they're made. :-) --[[User:GRuban\|GRuban]] 15:04, 25 March 2011 (UTC)
		+
		+	Ooh! Nice tag-team hit![[User:Commander I. Heartly Noah\|CIHN]]
		+
		+
		+	I noticed they're all 8 character user names, starting with a capital letter, then 7 lower case letters. Is there some kind of automated filter you can put in so you don't wear out your ban hammer? --[[User:GRuban\|GRuban]] 20:54, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
		+
		+
		+	I agree with Gruben that You have done a Yeoman's effort in fighting spam. On behalf of this wiki-ian thank you greatly. [[Special:Contributions/152.131.9.69\|152.131.9.69]] 17:40, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
		+	== Page deletion request ==
		+
		+	In making panel descriptions I somehow inadvertently popped [[LIAB 56:12\/Description]]. Mind disbanding it? --[[User:GRuban\|GRuban]] 13:10, 23 March 2011 (UTC)
		+	: Thank you! --[[User:GRuban\|GRuban]] 15:37, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

209.195.81.154: zuPiEYKIojyNL

2011-05-26T05:01:35Z

zuPiEYKIojyNL

← Older revision		Revision as of 05:01, 26 May 2011
Line 1:		Line 1:
-	~~==Main Page Control==~~	+	Thats not just logic. Thats really snesilbe.
-	~~<center>{{mainpagecontrol}}</center>~~	+
-	~~Sand box with the main page code on [[User:Miment/Main]] before making changes... But be careful! The content for the main page comes from the above templates,~~ not ~~the main page code itself.~~	+
-	~~==Regent==~~	+
-	So, I noticed you added a statbox for Gobwin Knob, and one of the stats is "Regent: Parson". I'm curious as to what this is supposed to mean. Stanley still rules in the city, and Parson isn't exactly Chief Warlord either... is this just ~~"who is going around looking at things to make them work"? [[User:Menlo Marseilles\|Menlo Marseilles]] 14:31, 31 October 2009 (UTC)~~	+
-	~~:Yeah, that's basicly the idea~~.	+
-	~~::I edited it to "city manager". There is a [[Hyatt]] Regency. --[[User:Raphfrk\|Raphfrk]] 22:38, 31 October 2009 (UTC)~~	+
-	:::The position is called "Regent". I doubt people would get the two confused. You should change the text output back. No sense in changing the input too.[[User:Miment\|Miment]] 00:03, 1 November 2009 (UTC)	+
-	::::Where does it say that? There is no reference to the title on [[First_Intermission_35]] (unless I missed it). If it is the official title, then sorry about that and I can change it back. Otherwise, I think it would be better to have a unique name for the function and city manager seems reasonable. --[[User:Raphfrk\|Raphfrk]] 20:05, 3 November 2009 (UTC)	+
-	:::::Strange, I remember reading it somewhere, but not where. The wiki page on [[regent]] says "''A Regent Warlord is a warlord who rather than being a military commander, has special administrative bonuses when managing a city.''" Well, City Manager works, Regent works, it all works. ;P [[User:Miment\|Miment]] 21:01, 3 November 2009 (UTC)	+
-	::::::That page doesn't have any links either (and is marked as speculation). I have posted a question on the author of that page's [[User_talk:Commander_I._Heartly_Noah\|talk page]]. --[[User:Raphfrk\|Raphfrk]] 21:21, 3 November 2009 (UTC)	+
-	:::::::Ok, received a response, the reference is from [[First_Intermission_13]], it says that "The city had a regent warlord named Al Frappacino". It is 100%, but seems reasonable that the title is for warlords who are in charge of cities.--[[User:Raphfrk\|Raphfrk]] 23:39, 21 November 2009 (UTC)	+
-	~~::::::::Alrighty then, I'm gonna go ahead and change back the template. Oh wait, nevermind. I see it's been done already. [[User:Miment\|Miment]] 03:06, 22 November 2009 (UTC)~~	+
-		+
-	~~==Edit links on the front page==~~	+
-		+
-	~~I commented on this on the [[Talk:Main_Page\|main page talk page]] --[[User:Raphfrk\|Raphfrk]] 20:05, 3 November 2009 (UTC)~~	+
-		+
-	~~==SPAM==~~	+
-		+
-	The bastards are relentless. Are you considering adding in some more [http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Manual:Combating_spam anti-spam] measures? I know there's the calculation check, but maybe you need an image instead or in addition. --[[User:Charles\|Charles]] 04:26, 27 January 2011 (UTC)	+
-		+
-	This is nuts! Harknell hasn't logged into the forum since the 8th of January, but hopefully Rob will see our posts and inform him or something. --[[User:Charles\|Charles]] 04:26, 27 January 2011 (UTC)	+
-		+
-	Already PMed him just asking him to let Harknell know. CCed yourself and Harknell in on it. Great work you've been doing to clear the spam out by the way. --[[User:Charles\|Charles]] 04:36, 27 January 2011 (UTC)	+
-	~~{{FortuneCookie~~	+
-	~~\|msg=I bow before the master wielder of the [[Banhammer]]~~	+
-	~~\|from=Charles~~	+
-	~~\|luckynumbers=~~	+
-	}}	+
-	Good work, the banning on links to external sites is a good call as well. We don't link the direct comic all that often. Some of the Real World References, sure but we can survive without that until something is installed. --[[User:Charles\|Charles]] 00:13, 28 January 2011 (UTC)	+
-		+
-		+
-	Just a query, but does it make it easier for you if I put the user into the spammer category through their main page or through their talk/discussion page? I'm just noticing that you're generally putting them in the "Banned" Category on their talk/discussion page. --[[User:Charles\|Charles]] 01:19, 28 January 2011 (UTC)	+
-		+
-	OK, I'll start putting the Spammer category in their talk page. I think we have a heap of users with a talk page linked into the "Banned" category and a main page still linking to the Spammer page, so its difficult to distinguish who you've already banned from the list sorry. Would you like me to clear the pages of users you've already banned or let you delete them? --[[User:Charles\|Charles]] 01:25, 28 January 2011 (UTC)	+
-		+
-	Would it be possible to get a temporary promotion to admin, just to help with wielding the banhammer? Or am I more useful helping out with tagging the spammers and their pages for deletion? -- [[User:No one in particular\|No one in particular]] 04:27, 31 January 2011 (UTC)	+
-		+
-	I reckon we need more Bureaucrats and I'd put Miment down as the first in line for position as one. Beyond that, there should be another group created which can delete pages and give, at least, temporary banishments to Ip addresses and regular users. Maybe even edit protected pages. But the special thing would be that Admins can promote regular users to the group. You don't just need Bureaucrats --[[User:Charles\|Charles]] 04:43, 4 February 2011 (UTC)	+
-		+
-	*This is getting ridiculous. Any word on the image recognition filters yet? --[[User:No one in particular\|No one in particular]] 07:55, 9 February 2011 (UTC)	+
-		+
-	~~So, um, not that I'm complaining, but when did I earn the privelege of deleting spam? Happy to do so, but if it's an error... [[User:Jorgath\|Jorgath]] 15:29, 9 February 2011 (UTC)~~	+
-		+
-	Man, I took a peek at the Recent Changes, and it is all spam fighting. I was pulling my hair out on my own wiki with that, so I can totally empathize. Just dropping you a note to say thanks for your hard work grappling with the bad guys -- it is much appreciated! --[[User:Cayzle\|Cayzle]] 12 March 2011	+
-		+
-	: What Cayzle said, our compliments. How hard is it to stop new accounts from creating pages, for 5 days and/or 20 edits or something? That's what they do on Wikipedia, and it would clearly be a big help here. --[[User:GRuban\|GRuban]] 12:53, 23 March 2011 (UTC)	+
-	~~:: Wow, this is~~ really ~~bad. You're doing an impressive job. It must be really tempting to just block all user accounts as soon as they're made. :-) --[[User:GRuban\|GRuban]] 15:04, 25 March 2011 (UTC)~~	+
-		+
-	~~Ooh! Nice tag-team hit![[User:Commander I. Heartly Noah\|CIHN]]~~	+
-		+
-		+
-	I noticed they're all 8 character user names, starting with a capital letter, then 7 lower case letters. Is there some kind of automated filter you can put in so you don't wear out your ban hammer? --[[User:GRuban\|GRuban]] 20:54, 13 April 2011 (UTC)	+
-		+
-		+
-	~~I agree with Gruben that You have done a Yeoman's effort in fighting spam. On behalf of this wiki-ian thank you greatly. [[Special:Contributions/152.131.9.69\|152.131.9.69]] 17:40, 29 April 2011 (UTC)~~	+
-	~~== Page deletion request ==~~	+
-		+
-	~~In making panel descriptions I somehow inadvertently popped [[LIAB 56:12\/Description]]~~. ~~Mind disbanding it? --[[User:GRuban\|GRuban]] 13:10, 23 March 2011 (UTC)~~	+
-	~~: Thank you! --[[User:GRuban\|GRuban]] 15:37, 23 March 2011 (UTC)~~	+

Abb3w: Undo cheerleader vandalism 53848 by 95.111.33.115 (talk)

2011-05-26T03:54:16Z

Undo cheerleader vandalism 53848 by 95.111.33.115 (talk)

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:54, 26 May 2011
Line 56:		Line 56:

	I agree with Gruben that You have done a Yeoman's effort in fighting spam. On behalf of this wiki-ian thank you greatly. [[Special:Contributions/152.131.9.69\|152.131.9.69]] 17:40, 29 April 2011 (UTC)		I agree with Gruben that You have done a Yeoman's effort in fighting spam. On behalf of this wiki-ian thank you greatly. [[Special:Contributions/152.131.9.69\|152.131.9.69]] 17:40, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
-	~~That's 2 celver by half and 2x2 clever 4 me~~. ~~Thanks~~!	+	== Page deletion request ==
		+
		+	In making panel descriptions I somehow inadvertently popped [[LIAB 56:12\/Description]]. Mind disbanding it? --[[User:GRuban\|GRuban]] 13:10, 23 March 2011 (UTC)
		+	: Thank you! --[[User:GRuban\|GRuban]] 15:37, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

95.111.33.115: /* Page deletion request */

2011-05-26T03:27:01Z

Page deletion request

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:27, 26 May 2011
Line 56:		Line 56:

	I agree with Gruben that You have done a Yeoman's effort in fighting spam. On behalf of this wiki-ian thank you greatly. [[Special:Contributions/152.131.9.69\|152.131.9.69]] 17:40, 29 April 2011 (UTC)		I agree with Gruben that You have done a Yeoman's effort in fighting spam. On behalf of this wiki-ian thank you greatly. [[Special:Contributions/152.131.9.69\|152.131.9.69]] 17:40, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
-	~~== Page deletion request ==~~	+	That's 2 celver by half and 2x2 clever 4 me. Thanks!
-		+
-	~~In making panel descriptions I somehow inadvertently popped [[LIAB 56:12\/Description]]~~. ~~Mind disbanding it? --[[User:GRuban\|GRuban]] 13:10, 23 March 2011 (UTC)~~	+
-	~~: Thank you~~! ~~--[[User:GRuban\|GRuban]] 15:37, 23 March 2011 (UTC)~~	+

← Older revision		Revision as of 04:09, 17 June 2011
Line 68:		Line 68:
	Note, while #32 was linked as the first Hamstard comic, the site also has a few additional PNG strips (comic 1, 2, 11, 13, 18, 25, 26, and 27) not linked - as if Parson had draft strips that he uploaded but didn't publicly post. They probably should be uploaded, but I'm not sure how they should be linked in with the others. [[User:Abb3w\|Abb3w]] 20:17, 28 May 2011 (EDT)		Note, while #32 was linked as the first Hamstard comic, the site also has a few additional PNG strips (comic 1, 2, 11, 13, 18, 25, 26, and 27) not linked - as if Parson had draft strips that he uploaded but didn't publicly post. They probably should be uploaded, but I'm not sure how they should be linked in with the others. [[User:Abb3w\|Abb3w]] 20:17, 28 May 2011 (EDT)
	:::Hmmmmm... interesting. I'll upload them an list them in numeric order, after 53. (So it'll be 53, 1, 2, 11,...) Either that, or I'll dump em all in a gallery :P[[User:Miment\|Miment]] 21:48, 28 May 2011 (EDT)		:::Hmmmmm... interesting. I'll upload them an list them in numeric order, after 53. (So it'll be 53, 1, 2, 11,...) Either that, or I'll dump em all in a gallery :P[[User:Miment\|Miment]] 21:48, 28 May 2011 (EDT)
		+
		+	== Bottery ==
		+
		+	Hmmm. Tried to make a new user to see what changed. KittenAuth is now required for all new users! So I bet that's why spammer accounts are waaayyyy down. Though there are so many attempted registrations that sooner or later they'll squeeze a user through and I bet that's what happend here with Pilamy. [[User:Miment\|Miment]] 14:36, 16 June 2011 (EDT)
		+	:KittenAuth seems to have been required for a while; since May 30 or so. Schmuck registrations (though no SPAM edits) have continued since then, but now paused. So... probably no. Perhaps the bot gives up after a fortnight of fighting KittenAuth? Perhaps there have been further security tweaks by the [[ErfWiki:Bureaucrats\|Bureaucrat]] to make KittenAuth more universal than my initial tests indicated? Perhaps the bot has been given an upgrade in incompetence? I dunno. Regardless, it seems the [[The Spamming of Erfwiki\|SpamWar]]'s [[Turn]] has turned. Again. [[User:Abb3w\|Abb3w]] 00:09, 17 June 2011 (EDT)

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:00, 27 May 2011
Line 56:		Line 56:

	I agree with Gruben that You have done a Yeoman's effort in fighting spam. On behalf of this wiki-ian thank you greatly. [[Special:Contributions/152.131.9.69\|152.131.9.69]] 17:40, 29 April 2011 (UTC)		I agree with Gruben that You have done a Yeoman's effort in fighting spam. On behalf of this wiki-ian thank you greatly. [[Special:Contributions/152.131.9.69\|152.131.9.69]] 17:40, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
		+
		+	Welcome back mate, you've been sorely missed. We've got a new captcha called KittenAUTH for URL insertion as well as account creation and anon edits/creations. That plust the new [[MediaWiki:SpamBlacklist]] seems to be keeping them at bay. --[[User:Charles\|Charles]] 12:00, 27 May 2011 (EDT)
		+
	== Page deletion request ==		== Page deletion request ==

	In making panel descriptions I somehow inadvertently popped [[LIAB 56:12\/Description]]. Mind disbanding it? --[[User:GRuban\|GRuban]] 13:10, 23 March 2011 (UTC)		In making panel descriptions I somehow inadvertently popped [[LIAB 56:12\/Description]]. Mind disbanding it? --[[User:GRuban\|GRuban]] 13:10, 23 March 2011 (UTC)
	: Thank you! --[[User:GRuban\|GRuban]] 15:37, 23 March 2011 (UTC)		: Thank you! --[[User:GRuban\|GRuban]] 15:37, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 05:02, 26 May 2011
Line 1:		Line 1:
-	~~Thats~~ not just ~~logic~~. ~~Thats~~ really ~~snesilbe~~.	+	==Main Page Control==
		+	<center>{{mainpagecontrol}}</center>
		+	Sand box with the main page code on [[User:Miment/Main]] before making changes... But be careful! The content for the main page comes from the above templates, not the main page code itself.
		+	==Regent==
		+	So, I noticed you added a statbox for Gobwin Knob, and one of the stats is "Regent: Parson". I'm curious as to what this is supposed to mean. Stanley still rules in the city, and Parson isn't exactly Chief Warlord either... is this just "who is going around looking at things to make them work"? [[User:Menlo Marseilles\|Menlo Marseilles]] 14:31, 31 October 2009 (UTC)
		+	:Yeah, that's basicly the idea.
		+	::I edited it to "city manager". There is a [[Hyatt]] Regency. --[[User:Raphfrk\|Raphfrk]] 22:38, 31 October 2009 (UTC)
		+	:::The position is called "Regent". I doubt people would get the two confused. You should change the text output back. No sense in changing the input too.[[User:Miment\|Miment]] 00:03, 1 November 2009 (UTC)
		+	::::Where does it say that? There is no reference to the title on [[First_Intermission_35]] (unless I missed it). If it is the official title, then sorry about that and I can change it back. Otherwise, I think it would be better to have a unique name for the function and city manager seems reasonable. --[[User:Raphfrk\|Raphfrk]] 20:05, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
		+	:::::Strange, I remember reading it somewhere, but not where. The wiki page on [[regent]] says "''A Regent Warlord is a warlord who rather than being a military commander, has special administrative bonuses when managing a city.''" Well, City Manager works, Regent works, it all works. ;P [[User:Miment\|Miment]] 21:01, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
		+	::::::That page doesn't have any links either (and is marked as speculation). I have posted a question on the author of that page's [[User_talk:Commander_I._Heartly_Noah\|talk page]]. --[[User:Raphfrk\|Raphfrk]] 21:21, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
		+	:::::::Ok, received a response, the reference is from [[First_Intermission_13]], it says that "The city had a regent warlord named Al Frappacino". It is 100%, but seems reasonable that the title is for warlords who are in charge of cities.--[[User:Raphfrk\|Raphfrk]] 23:39, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
		+	::::::::Alrighty then, I'm gonna go ahead and change back the template. Oh wait, nevermind. I see it's been done already. [[User:Miment\|Miment]] 03:06, 22 November 2009 (UTC)
		+
		+	==Edit links on the front page==
		+
		+	I commented on this on the [[Talk:Main_Page\|main page talk page]] --[[User:Raphfrk\|Raphfrk]] 20:05, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
		+
		+	==SPAM==
		+
		+	The bastards are relentless. Are you considering adding in some more [http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Manual:Combating_spam anti-spam] measures? I know there's the calculation check, but maybe you need an image instead or in addition. --[[User:Charles\|Charles]] 04:26, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
		+
		+	This is nuts! Harknell hasn't logged into the forum since the 8th of January, but hopefully Rob will see our posts and inform him or something. --[[User:Charles\|Charles]] 04:26, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
		+
		+	Already PMed him just asking him to let Harknell know. CCed yourself and Harknell in on it. Great work you've been doing to clear the spam out by the way. --[[User:Charles\|Charles]] 04:36, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
		+	{{FortuneCookie
		+	\|msg=I bow before the master wielder of the [[Banhammer]]
		+	\|from=Charles
		+	\|luckynumbers=
		+	}}
		+	Good work, the banning on links to external sites is a good call as well. We don't link the direct comic all that often. Some of the Real World References, sure but we can survive without that until something is installed. --[[User:Charles\|Charles]] 00:13, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
		+
		+
		+	Just a query, but does it make it easier for you if I put the user into the spammer category through their main page or through their talk/discussion page? I'm just noticing that you're generally putting them in the "Banned" Category on their talk/discussion page. --[[User:Charles\|Charles]] 01:19, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
		+
		+	OK, I'll start putting the Spammer category in their talk page. I think we have a heap of users with a talk page linked into the "Banned" category and a main page still linking to the Spammer page, so its difficult to distinguish who you've already banned from the list sorry. Would you like me to clear the pages of users you've already banned or let you delete them? --[[User:Charles\|Charles]] 01:25, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
		+
		+	Would it be possible to get a temporary promotion to admin, just to help with wielding the banhammer? Or am I more useful helping out with tagging the spammers and their pages for deletion? -- [[User:No one in particular\|No one in particular]] 04:27, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
		+
		+	I reckon we need more Bureaucrats and I'd put Miment down as the first in line for position as one. Beyond that, there should be another group created which can delete pages and give, at least, temporary banishments to Ip addresses and regular users. Maybe even edit protected pages. But the special thing would be that Admins can promote regular users to the group. You don't just need Bureaucrats --[[User:Charles\|Charles]] 04:43, 4 February 2011 (UTC)
		+
		+	*This is getting ridiculous. Any word on the image recognition filters yet? --[[User:No one in particular\|No one in particular]] 07:55, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
		+
		+	So, um, not that I'm complaining, but when did I earn the privelege of deleting spam? Happy to do so, but if it's an error... [[User:Jorgath\|Jorgath]] 15:29, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
		+
		+	Man, I took a peek at the Recent Changes, and it is all spam fighting. I was pulling my hair out on my own wiki with that, so I can totally empathize. Just dropping you a note to say thanks for your hard work grappling with the bad guys -- it is much appreciated! --[[User:Cayzle\|Cayzle]] 12 March 2011
		+
		+	: What Cayzle said, our compliments. How hard is it to stop new accounts from creating pages, for 5 days and/or 20 edits or something? That's what they do on Wikipedia, and it would clearly be a big help here. --[[User:GRuban\|GRuban]] 12:53, 23 March 2011 (UTC)
		+	:: Wow, this is really bad. You're doing an impressive job. It must be really tempting to just block all user accounts as soon as they're made. :-) --[[User:GRuban\|GRuban]] 15:04, 25 March 2011 (UTC)
		+
		+	Ooh! Nice tag-team hit![[User:Commander I. Heartly Noah\|CIHN]]
		+
		+
		+	I noticed they're all 8 character user names, starting with a capital letter, then 7 lower case letters. Is there some kind of automated filter you can put in so you don't wear out your ban hammer? --[[User:GRuban\|GRuban]] 20:54, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
		+
		+
		+	I agree with Gruben that You have done a Yeoman's effort in fighting spam. On behalf of this wiki-ian thank you greatly. [[Special:Contributions/152.131.9.69\|152.131.9.69]] 17:40, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
		+	== Page deletion request ==
		+
		+	In making panel descriptions I somehow inadvertently popped [[LIAB 56:12\/Description]]. Mind disbanding it? --[[User:GRuban\|GRuban]] 13:10, 23 March 2011 (UTC)
		+	: Thank you! --[[User:GRuban\|GRuban]] 15:37, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 05:01, 26 May 2011
Line 1:		Line 1:
-	~~==Main Page Control==~~	+	Thats not just logic. Thats really snesilbe.
-	~~<center>{{mainpagecontrol}}</center>~~	+
-	~~Sand box with the main page code on [[User:Miment/Main]] before making changes... But be careful! The content for the main page comes from the above templates,~~ not ~~the main page code itself.~~	+
-	~~==Regent==~~	+
-	So, I noticed you added a statbox for Gobwin Knob, and one of the stats is "Regent: Parson". I'm curious as to what this is supposed to mean. Stanley still rules in the city, and Parson isn't exactly Chief Warlord either... is this just ~~"who is going around looking at things to make them work"? [[User:Menlo Marseilles\|Menlo Marseilles]] 14:31, 31 October 2009 (UTC)~~	+
-	~~:Yeah, that's basicly the idea~~.	+
-	~~::I edited it to "city manager". There is a [[Hyatt]] Regency. --[[User:Raphfrk\|Raphfrk]] 22:38, 31 October 2009 (UTC)~~	+
-	:::The position is called "Regent". I doubt people would get the two confused. You should change the text output back. No sense in changing the input too.[[User:Miment\|Miment]] 00:03, 1 November 2009 (UTC)	+
-	::::Where does it say that? There is no reference to the title on [[First_Intermission_35]] (unless I missed it). If it is the official title, then sorry about that and I can change it back. Otherwise, I think it would be better to have a unique name for the function and city manager seems reasonable. --[[User:Raphfrk\|Raphfrk]] 20:05, 3 November 2009 (UTC)	+
-	:::::Strange, I remember reading it somewhere, but not where. The wiki page on [[regent]] says "''A Regent Warlord is a warlord who rather than being a military commander, has special administrative bonuses when managing a city.''" Well, City Manager works, Regent works, it all works. ;P [[User:Miment\|Miment]] 21:01, 3 November 2009 (UTC)	+
-	::::::That page doesn't have any links either (and is marked as speculation). I have posted a question on the author of that page's [[User_talk:Commander_I._Heartly_Noah\|talk page]]. --[[User:Raphfrk\|Raphfrk]] 21:21, 3 November 2009 (UTC)	+
-	:::::::Ok, received a response, the reference is from [[First_Intermission_13]], it says that "The city had a regent warlord named Al Frappacino". It is 100%, but seems reasonable that the title is for warlords who are in charge of cities.--[[User:Raphfrk\|Raphfrk]] 23:39, 21 November 2009 (UTC)	+
-	~~::::::::Alrighty then, I'm gonna go ahead and change back the template. Oh wait, nevermind. I see it's been done already. [[User:Miment\|Miment]] 03:06, 22 November 2009 (UTC)~~	+
-		+
-	~~==Edit links on the front page==~~	+
-		+
-	~~I commented on this on the [[Talk:Main_Page\|main page talk page]] --[[User:Raphfrk\|Raphfrk]] 20:05, 3 November 2009 (UTC)~~	+
-		+
-	~~==SPAM==~~	+
-		+
-	The bastards are relentless. Are you considering adding in some more [http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Manual:Combating_spam anti-spam] measures? I know there's the calculation check, but maybe you need an image instead or in addition. --[[User:Charles\|Charles]] 04:26, 27 January 2011 (UTC)	+
-		+
-	This is nuts! Harknell hasn't logged into the forum since the 8th of January, but hopefully Rob will see our posts and inform him or something. --[[User:Charles\|Charles]] 04:26, 27 January 2011 (UTC)	+
-		+
-	Already PMed him just asking him to let Harknell know. CCed yourself and Harknell in on it. Great work you've been doing to clear the spam out by the way. --[[User:Charles\|Charles]] 04:36, 27 January 2011 (UTC)	+
-	~~{{FortuneCookie~~	+
-	~~\|msg=I bow before the master wielder of the [[Banhammer]]~~	+
-	~~\|from=Charles~~	+
-	~~\|luckynumbers=~~	+
-	}}	+
-	Good work, the banning on links to external sites is a good call as well. We don't link the direct comic all that often. Some of the Real World References, sure but we can survive without that until something is installed. --[[User:Charles\|Charles]] 00:13, 28 January 2011 (UTC)	+
-		+
-		+
-	Just a query, but does it make it easier for you if I put the user into the spammer category through their main page or through their talk/discussion page? I'm just noticing that you're generally putting them in the "Banned" Category on their talk/discussion page. --[[User:Charles\|Charles]] 01:19, 28 January 2011 (UTC)	+
-		+
-	OK, I'll start putting the Spammer category in their talk page. I think we have a heap of users with a talk page linked into the "Banned" category and a main page still linking to the Spammer page, so its difficult to distinguish who you've already banned from the list sorry. Would you like me to clear the pages of users you've already banned or let you delete them? --[[User:Charles\|Charles]] 01:25, 28 January 2011 (UTC)	+
-		+
-	Would it be possible to get a temporary promotion to admin, just to help with wielding the banhammer? Or am I more useful helping out with tagging the spammers and their pages for deletion? -- [[User:No one in particular\|No one in particular]] 04:27, 31 January 2011 (UTC)	+
-		+
-	I reckon we need more Bureaucrats and I'd put Miment down as the first in line for position as one. Beyond that, there should be another group created which can delete pages and give, at least, temporary banishments to Ip addresses and regular users. Maybe even edit protected pages. But the special thing would be that Admins can promote regular users to the group. You don't just need Bureaucrats --[[User:Charles\|Charles]] 04:43, 4 February 2011 (UTC)	+
-		+
-	*This is getting ridiculous. Any word on the image recognition filters yet? --[[User:No one in particular\|No one in particular]] 07:55, 9 February 2011 (UTC)	+
-		+
-	~~So, um, not that I'm complaining, but when did I earn the privelege of deleting spam? Happy to do so, but if it's an error... [[User:Jorgath\|Jorgath]] 15:29, 9 February 2011 (UTC)~~	+
-		+
-	Man, I took a peek at the Recent Changes, and it is all spam fighting. I was pulling my hair out on my own wiki with that, so I can totally empathize. Just dropping you a note to say thanks for your hard work grappling with the bad guys -- it is much appreciated! --[[User:Cayzle\|Cayzle]] 12 March 2011	+
-		+
-	: What Cayzle said, our compliments. How hard is it to stop new accounts from creating pages, for 5 days and/or 20 edits or something? That's what they do on Wikipedia, and it would clearly be a big help here. --[[User:GRuban\|GRuban]] 12:53, 23 March 2011 (UTC)	+
-	~~:: Wow, this is~~ really ~~bad. You're doing an impressive job. It must be really tempting to just block all user accounts as soon as they're made. :-) --[[User:GRuban\|GRuban]] 15:04, 25 March 2011 (UTC)~~	+
-		+
-	~~Ooh! Nice tag-team hit![[User:Commander I. Heartly Noah\|CIHN]]~~	+
-		+
-		+
-	I noticed they're all 8 character user names, starting with a capital letter, then 7 lower case letters. Is there some kind of automated filter you can put in so you don't wear out your ban hammer? --[[User:GRuban\|GRuban]] 20:54, 13 April 2011 (UTC)	+
-		+
-		+
-	~~I agree with Gruben that You have done a Yeoman's effort in fighting spam. On behalf of this wiki-ian thank you greatly. [[Special:Contributions/152.131.9.69\|152.131.9.69]] 17:40, 29 April 2011 (UTC)~~	+
-	~~== Page deletion request ==~~	+
-		+
-	~~In making panel descriptions I somehow inadvertently popped [[LIAB 56:12\/Description]]~~. ~~Mind disbanding it? --[[User:GRuban\|GRuban]] 13:10, 23 March 2011 (UTC)~~	+
-	~~: Thank you! --[[User:GRuban\|GRuban]] 15:37, 23 March 2011 (UTC)~~	+