This user is an administrator, oversighter and checkuser.
This user has a bot (inactive)
Email this user.

User talk:Billinghurst

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

User language
en-N This user has a native understanding of English.
fr-1 Cet utilisateur dispose de connaissances de base en français.
Users by language
en-str This user can read and write fluently in Strine.
"Da mihi basium"

To leave me a message, click this link

User talk


Hello, can my account be unlocked now? Pardon and thanks!

COIBot xwiki review[edit]

Hi billinghurst, can you examine my action on User:COIBot/XWiki/ and other COIBot userspace edits (mostly clousures)? I'm newbie to antispam world (especially COIBot), so I want to get second opinion on it, and I saw you have done lots of effors in this area :) — revi 16:09, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Looks fine. I usually just place commentary to explain either to myself or to others what I sort of did. More explanation if I think that it needs more, or less if it is obvious.  — billinghurst sDrewth 09:18, 15 October 2014 (UTC)
Thanks, one question: Can COIBot configured to stalk a domain addtion on local wiki?(not xwiki) — revi 07:19, 16 October 2014 (UTC)
There are local reports Category:COIBot Local Reports‎, though generally it isn't designed to limit its focus, per wiki as COI and spam are just that, and it doesn't matter whether it is a local wiki or xwiki it is still spam, or CoI.  — billinghurst sDrewth 08:51, 16 October 2014 (UTC)
Then, how can I command to watch addition of some domain? — revi 09:57, 16 October 2014 (UTC)
Available commands at Small Wiki Monitoring Team/IRC  — billinghurst sDrewth 11:55, 16 October 2014 (UTC)
Template:Tps(Edit conflict.) - User:-revi, do you mean that you want a report for a specific domain? For that, on wiki, there is User:COIBot/Poke - you poke the domain in a LinkSummary template there, and COIBot should save a report for that domain 'shortly' (though it seems to have saving hickups at the moment, I hope to have time in the end of next month to look at those problems). --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 11:56, 16 October 2014 (UTC)
Billinghurst: Thanks, but seems the commands need some permissions, but I don't have it :(
Beetstra: Thanks, that's what I was looking for! — revi 12:02, 16 October 2014 (UTC)

New Mail[edit]

Eurodyne (talk) 04:19, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

I have no specific opinion about your block on species. My comment was more generic.  — billinghurst sDrewth 09:35, 19 October 2014 (UTC)


Re your question on IRC: What did you mean by aligning namespaces? I'm guessing it'll probably require filing a shell bug detailing what needs to be done? Legoktm (talk) 16:30, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

@Legoktm: Bugs exist. Talking about aligning/standardising NSs for the WSes, initially defining/declaring a standardised set(s) of NSs that the WSes will use, then working on migrating the WSes to the defined sets. Primary interest is declaring Index: and Page: so components can be set in the governing extension. All stuff that is discussive, such why a name, and managing expectations, so looking for a pointer of the direction (technical or community relationship within WMF)  — billinghurst sDrewth 23:09, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #129[edit]

Colton Cosmic[edit]

Although I appreciate your limiting Coltons block to a year rather than infinite I still think he should have been unblocked. I do not think their intention was to "spam" and it seems to me they simply misunderstood the purpose of this wiki. If someone would have simply asked him to stop sending messages I am sure they would have done that. However, no one did, Snowolf just blocked them indefinitly because she didn't want to hear about a user who is banned from the English WP. A common problem BTW of many editors including myself due to the devolving nature of that Wiki and why they are losing editors and admins faster than they can recruit new ones. Given that Colton had a lot of other good contributions to this Wiki outside the talk page message incident and an apparent misunderstanding of the use of this Wiki, I would encourage you to unblock or at least reduce the duration of his block. I see a potentially useful contributor that is blocked simply as a misunderstanding. That is not why we should be using blocks, especially lengthy duration ones. IMO the problem has been resolved and the user understands what they did wrong, they just do not agree with the block and frankly neither do I. Reguyla (talk) 14:54, 24 October 2014 (UTC)

Reguyla, I don't fully concur with your synopsis. I started a polite and helpful response, however, I have reflected on the user's approach on my talk page at enWP subsequent to my shortening the block. I have simply had enough of their overly righteous approach. This is a community, we are volunteers, so when someone is not listening, not evidently modifying behaviour, then becomes insulting, these are not components of misunderstanding. I am choosing not to have any further action, or interaction with this user.

To catch butterflies, one uses something sweet, if one puts down shit, one just get flies. Sometimes life's lessons reflect our own approach.  — billinghurst sDrewth 22:30, 24 October 2014 (UTC)

I have read their comments both here and on ENWP and as someone who was in a similar situation (and continue to be) on ENWP I can tell you that its frustrating when you get screwed and no one cares. I am not saying that I agree with everything Colton said or did, but being blocked indefinitely without having so much as a warning first seems extraordinarily stupid. As far as I can see, Colton stated they misunderstood the policy here and that they would not do it again and then others including yourself insisted that they beg forgiveness before they could return. It makes absolutely no sense why you all think that would make the user just go away and giveup. If anything, that sort of conduct and backing editors into corners turns them into vandals, sockmasters and the like. As far as I can tell Colton is simply the latest in a series of editors who were banned from ENWP who feel they were treated unfairly and want to participate but are given no avenue to due so. Reguyla (talk) 00:57, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
If you review my approach, I think that you will find that I am not an obdurate blocker of users of good faith, even those with whom I am in abject disagreement. That said, where a user is blocked, I am wanting to see some change in approach to undo a block of another. This is a community and we need to try to get along, and we all need to give a little. Anyway, as I said, with this case I am finished, and I have expressed why. I would suggest that the user email Teles (as Teles suggested) when they are willing to stop pinging people, and maybe the talk page can be reopened. Either way, a talk page to which I am not returning.

Re enWP, sure it is less than perfect, expectations of perfection are unrealistic as there are these contrary and variable beasts called people involved. The WM2014 talk by Raph Koster may be of interest to you. It is a bunfight to which I wander only a little these days. — billinghurst sDrewth 04:50, 25 October 2014 (UTC)

I really don't have a dog in this fight and I don't have any ties to Colton so its not that big of a deal to me, I have just been in the same dead end and frustrating situation and I understand where he is coming from. Further I see where he has already said he wouldn't do it anymore if unblocked and I have a problem with admins blocking, especially for long durations without a warning first and especially with editors who had done other goo edits first. That is what causes vandals and the like and that conduct is a poor reflection on admins as a whole. Anyway, I'm not going to keep fighting this because its clear that no one wants him to participate in this project and there clearly isn't anything I can do to change your mind. Reguyla (talk) 14:44, 25 October 2014 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #114[edit]

Renamers' mailing list[edit]

Hi, when you allocated me global renamer rights, you advised me to subscribe to the mailing list (I'm guessing this one). I did that a few days ago, but haven't received a response, possibly because I entered my full name which the list admin didn't recognize. Could you point me to someone who can resolve this? Thank you, — Yerpo Eh? 12:05, 26 October 2014 (UTC)

Yes, that one, and noting the email addresses at the bottom of the page. @Yerpo, Savh, Trijnstel: If you use IRC, also note that there is a invite channel too.  — billinghurst sDrewth 13:14, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
Dear Yerpo, that is indeed the mailing list. We have received various subscribtions, but to be able to confirm yours, please reply to the e-mail I just send you. Once that is received, I will approve it. Savhñ 21:14, 26 October 2014 (UTC)

Where can I ask for help against these spammers on French WS?[edit]

Hello Billinghurst,

Is there any thing we can do with this to-day's attack? Thanks very much! --Zyephyrus (talk) 02:40, 31 October 2014 (UTC)

@Zyephyrus: quickest is to write a filter that prevents IP addresses adding external urls. There is external url filters at enWS that you can copy, and to limit to IP addresses, utilise user_age = 0 (I think that it is user_age).  — billinghurst sDrewth 03:14, 31 October 2014 (UTC)
Thanks! But it doesn't seem to work. Have I made some error in the frws abuse filter? --Zyephyrus (talk) 18:56, 3 November 2014 (UTC)
@Zyephyrus: I have been and played, and it should be good now. There were posts around upon which to test it, which was successful. I am however, having issues there with the syntax checking button, which is weird as it only is problematic for me at frWS. <shrug>  — billinghurst sDrewth 04:47, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

Sockpuppetry on mediawikiwiki[edit]

As a note, in reply to Special:Diff/10376044, sockpuppetry is prohibited on mediawikiwiki per mw:Project:Sock puppetry. Jackmcbarn (talk) 20:54, 31 October 2014 (UTC)

@Jackmcbarn: mediawikiwiki needs to some work there to make their policies accessible.
  • No links to policies from sidebar or mainpage
  • Links to document from Project namespace [1], and ZERO from main ns.
  • Links to project policy [2]
No user could honestly be expected to find that.  — billinghurst sDrewth 23:51, 1 November 2014 (UTC)
And I have been bold and added a link to mw:Special:MyLanguage/Project:Policy from mw:Template:Welcome  — billinghurst sDrewth 23:54, 1 November 2014 (UTC)

Help request about template at mr-wikibooks[edit]

Hi, Seasons Greetings

At this page I am using template b:mr:Template:अविशिष्ट उपपान (equivalent to Template:Random Subpage) b:mr:Template:अविशिष्ट उपपान is imported from mr wikipedia works well on mr-wikipedia and en-wikibooks but is showing some how error at this page on mr-wikibooks. I do not know how comfortable you are with template technicalities. Amongst stuwards earlier I used to communicate with Quentinv57 but currently he seems to be in active so your name came to my mind for requesting the help.

Thank you and warm regards

Mahitgar (He who knows ,wants to know and and loves to keep others informed) (talk) 10:51, 1 November 2014 (UTC)

@Mahitgar:Hmm, I find it hard to tell, and the typography makes it hard for me to determine namespaces. This shows pages missing (expand "Templates used on this page:" section). All that said, I am not sure why, and there are so many nested templates there, it is butt ugly to diagnose. Can I ask why you are not trying something using mw:Extension:Random or seeing if that can be made useful for subpages, rather than this complexity? You also speak about a template equilavency, and I don't see that it looks like Template:Random subpage, so maybe you need to find which is the cleanest version.
As a general comment, always wrapping templates inside of <includeonly> means that they don't display well in that section and you miss important information. While it may make a template page display more nicely, you miss things, so I recommend that you don't wrap them to be pretty, unless there is a really good reason.  — billinghurst sDrewth 12:02, 1 November 2014 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #131[edit]

Ban at #wikimedia and #wikimedia-stewards[edit]

Hello, hope you're right person. Today I tried to login at the said channels and I saw that I've been banned. I wonder, why? I haven't been there for week. My nickname is registered so I suppose it hasn't been used by someone alse. Einsbor (talk) 13:54, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

No idea. Nothing that I have done, nor that I can see that you are banned. @Barras:?  — billinghurst sDrewth 23:04, 7 November 2014 (UTC)
We've fairly recently globally banned a trouble maker. It might be possible that you are being caught by that due to a similarity you share with the problem user. Please join #wikimedia-ops if you can't join a channel you want to join. Usually someone is around who can then help or fix the problem. Sorry for the inconvenience. -Barras talk 23:19, 7 November 2014 (UTC)
This was due to the recent gban on a specific client. I informed Einsbor about this yesterday on IRC and the problem was solved by using another client. --Glaisher (talk) 08:09, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #132[edit]


<redacted statement>

There is a process to which you have been directed, please utilise it.  — billinghurst sDrewth 12:05, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

Can you show me even 1 public example where the suggested process has worked? Why is the administrative "WP:OFFICE" process not available to coordinate between me and legal for such disputes ?
WMF Legal deals with legal issues to which you have been provided with their email address, not volunteers, not user talk pages.  — billinghurst sDrewth 12:26, 11 November 2014 (UTC)
Dear Billinghurst,
You are a highly experienced and well respected Wikipedian. There is no legal issue whatsover here.
Here are well respected newspapers publishing that the Bombay High Court has slammed / "rapped" the impersonators (aka "Team Anna") of "India Against Corruption" [3], [4], [5], [6]. The actual judgement was provided during mediation, but the editors claimed they could not understand it.
And still these same editors, who walked out of mediation on this issue, persist unchecked to portray the "Team Anna" impersonators as "India Against Corruption" despite actual knowledge of the numerous and clear press reports in India about the impersonation.
So where is the "legal" issue, when it is a simple "sourcing" issue and Indian editors are blocked by Wikipedia's racist cabals from editing about it ? Juhimukherjee (talk) 12:50, 11 November 2014 (UTC)
A highly experienced, respected and informed staff member has indicated that you should email legal at for this issue, and I am not one to second guess that staff member when the issue seems aligned with the ToU.  — billinghurst sDrewth 12:56, 11 November 2014 (UTC)
"ToU" .. thnx.. I'm out of here Juhimukherjee (talk) 13:07, 11 November 2014 (UTC)


Hello, could you unblock me on English Wikipedia. Admins that blocked me are not responding to my emails and they blocked my talk page editing, so I can't do anything now, except sockpuppeting, but will be blocked even more. Thanks in advance. --Munjanes (talk) 19:42, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

No, I won't be unblocking you, as I don't know why you are blocked, nor do I have the time to investigate. Please use the process at w:en:Wikipedia:Unblock Ticket Request System as that is specifically designed for second level resolution.

Blocked means blocked, so sockpuppet'ing is completely the wrong approach, and just digs a deeper hole for yourself. That you cannot do anything is the purpose behind the block, as what you were doing was considered problematic. Editing is not a right, it is an opportunity to contribute within the community guidelines, so you will need to follow the process, listen and change what has been considered problematic.  — billinghurst sDrewth 23:47, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

I will sumbit an appeal, but you could at least unblock me from editing MY OWN TALK PAGE. --Munjanes (talk) 08:03, 12 November 2014 (UTC)
I have actioned the request and commented on your talk page there, plus added notes to the request there.  — billinghurst sDrewth 09:25, 12 November 2014 (UTC)
Thank you. Actually this is my main account, not SuperNepoznat. I don't know by which criteria they assumed that one is Main. --Munjanes (talk) 14:13, 12 November 2014 (UTC)
Not my battle, and the least of the concerns.  — billinghurst sDrewth 02:31, 13 November 2014 (UTC)

Spam filter suggestion[edit]

Hello. Please consider either adding "<br><br>" to the list of strings in 101/103 or creating a new log/tag-only global filter to test this. Recently I've noticed a pattern of "<br><br>" in many spam pages. If an anonymous user creates a page containing the wikitext "<br><br>", it is probably spam. If you want to be as conservative as possible, require the title to have at least three capital (Latin alphabet) letters too. PiRSquared17 (talk) 03:36, 13 November 2014 (UTC)

@PiRSquared17:How about starting a new filter with something like that, and just monitor and tag at meta, and we can see the scope of the effect, and from there a steward can convert to global easily. I have been trying to keep spam filters more specific, and not have components of overlap so we stop the multi-hit effect on the logs, and contextualise the filters to be turned on and off as required.  — billinghurst sDrewth 03:58, 13 November 2014 (UTC)
Special:AbuseFilter/104. This pattern is hitting many wikis, not just Meta. PiRSquared17 (talk) 14:12, 16 November 2014 (UTC)
In a hectic week, and have a quick glances at it. I see that it is duplicating some of the existing filters, though not yet 1:1, so I have been using this as a means to update and refine global filters. If you can identify wikis where we have spam getting through (bar mediawikiwiki) then let me know, or add it to one of the reporting places and can have a look. From my review of where we are catching spam, we getting very good portions of the xwiki spam, though I know that could be skewed by what we are catching is leading my investigations.  — billinghurst sDrewth 05:14, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

request in archiv[edit]

Hi. I just noticed that my request was moved to the archiv but it ends on Nov. 22nd. Why was it moved? I am aware that I will fail, but just want to understand it. Greetings from over here. -- DerFussi 06:40, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

@Steinsplitter: your bot is archiving early. Would you please undo the erroneous moves, and give your bot a good talking to. Thanks.  — billinghurst sDrewth 11:55, 14 November 2014 (UTC)
Thanks. -- DerFussi 06:48, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #133[edit]

Turkish Wikipedia[edit]

Hi Billinghurst, these we're discussing. Introduction to some substance in the Turkish Wikipedia URLs are blocked out. It is believed that in Turkey, the government agency responsible for the internet makes. Protest purpose, we think you should block access for 24 hours. In this case, we need to tell Jimmy Wales. Or Do you need to make a vote in Meta. Good wikis. --Uğurkenttalk 16:45, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

If you believe that there are issues with Turkish Wikipedia being blocked in Turkey, and there is a wish to discuss a protest, then that conversation would ideally be held and decided on trWP, though if that is problematic, then a discussion at meta is a reasonable second choice. Such a discussion does not require a notification to Jimmy Wales, though I am sure that he has an interest in the subject. I would also think that WMF staff have an interest in that matter and I would think that we should @Philippe (WMF): as any such technical actions would require cooperation of WMF staff.  — billinghurst sDrewth 22:39, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

Abuse filter tags[edit]

By using several tags in the abuse filters you are undoubtedly aware that the tags are permanent, are added to the valid tags list and never leave the list so that if they are changed very often, the list becomes very long with dozens of redundant tags with 0 hits. --Pxos (talk) 03:38, 21 November 2014 (UTC)

Thanks forgot about their appearing on Special:tags, and had been more indicating the activity on RCs throughout the wikis, and from where the tags were emanating. I will review how I handle the beasts. :-)  — billinghurst sDrewth 05:55, 21 November 2014 (UTC)
Splendid! :) --Pxos (talk) 12:02, 21 November 2014 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #134[edit]