User talk:Daimona Eaytoy

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

Welcome to Meta![edit]

Afrikaans | العربية | অসমীয়া | asturianu | azərbaycanca | Boarisch | беларуская | беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | български | বাংলা | བོད་ཡིག | bosanski | català | کوردی | corsu | čeština | Cymraeg | dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | ދިވެހިބަސް | Ελληνικά | emiliàn e rumagnòl | English | Esperanto | español | eesti | euskara | فارسی | suomi | français | Nordfriisk | Frysk | galego | Alemannisch | ગુજરાતી | עברית | हिन्दी | Fiji Hindi | hrvatski | magyar | հայերեն | interlingua | Bahasa Indonesia | Ido | íslenska | italiano | 日本語 | ქართული | ភាសាខ្មែរ | 한국어 | kar | kurdî | Limburgs | lietuvių | Minangkabau | македонски | മലയാളം | молдовеняскэ | Bahasa Melayu | မြန်မာဘာသာ | مازِرونی | Napulitano | नेपाली | Nederlands | norsk nynorsk | norsk | occitan | Kapampangan | polski | português | português do Brasil | پښتو | Runa Simi | română | русский | संस्कृतम् | sicilianu | سنڌي | සිංහල | slovenčina | slovenščina | Soomaaliga | shqip | српски / srpski | svenska | ślůnski | தமிழ் | тоҷикӣ | ไทย | Türkmençe | Tagalog | Türkçe | татарча/tatarça | ⵜⴰⵎⴰⵣⵉⵖⵜ  | українська | اردو | oʻzbekcha/ўзбекча | vèneto | Tiếng Việt | 吴语 | 粵語 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/-

Hello, Daimona Eaytoy. Welcome to the Wikimedia Meta-Wiki! This website is for coordinating and discussing all Wikimedia projects. You may find it useful to read our policy page. If you are interested in doing translations, visit Meta:Babylon. You can also leave a note on Meta:Babel or Wikimedia Forum if you need help with something (please read the instructions at the top of the page before posting there). Happy editing!

TonyBallioni (talk) 21:07, 4 May 2018 (UTC)

Link to your itwiki talk page doesn’t work[edit]

Hi, I just happened to notice that the link to your itwiki talk page in the section ”Contact me” (on your user page here) goes to enwiki. Should work without w: or with w at the beginning of the link, as you know. –Ejs-80 00:34, 22 December 2018 (UTC)

@Ejs-80: Right you are, thanks :-) I just fixed the link. --Daimona Eaytoy (talk) 10:13, 22 December 2018 (UTC)

The Affiliate-selected Board seats process welcomes your support[edit]

Globe of letters.png

Hello. You are receiving this message because you are active in the field of translations <3 The movement needs you! The Nominations phase has started for the ongoing selection process of two Board members, and the timeline is quite tight.

A Translation Central is available to help translators figure out what's been covered and what's left to do. Over the course of the next few weeks, your attention on candidates' profiles is particularly welcome.

While there are four languages that are especially relevant for multiple affiliates (namely Arabic, French, Russian and Spanish), we are asking your help for Chinese, Ukrainian, Bengali, Czech, Hungarian, Romanian, Italian, Korean, Portuguese, Polish, Farsi, German, Cantonese, Finnish, Hindi, Thai, Dutch, and Greek, as these also matter to affiliates! If you can't help: please see if you know anyone in your circle who could, and spread the word :) Thank you! Elitre (WMF) and Facilitators of ASBS 2019, 21:35, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

Massblock script[edit]

Ciao. I've found a couple of issues with the massblock script. Do you keep a dedicated page where we can report those? Thanks! —MarcoAurelio (talk) 19:31, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

@MarcoAurelio: Hey! I don't have a dedicated page, so feel free to report anything you find here, or in the gadget talk on itwp, or wherever you prefer :-) Just please ping me so that I'll be able to see it. --Daimona Eaytoy (talk) 08:58, 20 July 2019 (UTC)
Thank you. I've found that the script always end blocking talk page access even if "Remove talk page access" is unchecked (cfr. b:es:Especial:Contribuciones/FloyHrw9569058). As a suggest I'd say that the protect options should be disabled by default as it is not very usual for most projects to use them -or- allow a local override. That's all for now :-) Thanks, —MarcoAurelio (talk) 17:19, 20 July 2019 (UTC)
Just tested it again. If I mark the checkbox, then TP access is not revoked, so we might want to reword that part of the script. Thanks, —MarcoAurelio (talk) 17:30, 20 July 2019 (UTC)
@MarcoAurelio: I developed the script with itwiki in mind, which curiously is the only wiki where blocks will always remove talk page access, so it's not surprising that the option isn't working. I'm going to fix it anyway. As for the protect options, it's almost the same :-) On itwp, the standard practice is to protect pages of indefinitely blocked users. But yes, it doesn't make sense as default, so I'm going to make it unchecked. Thanks for your suggestions, --Daimona Eaytoy (talk) 15:03, 21 July 2019 (UTC)


Questa volta ho bloccato per 7gg, tanto è lo stesso. —Wim b 10:24, 11 August 2019 (UTC)

@Wim b: Ottimo, grazie. Se passi in chat ora sono pronto per quel che ti avevo detto. --Daimona Eaytoy (talk) 11:32, 11 August 2019 (UTC)
non credo, forse stasera per una cosa velocissima. Casomai ci vedremo. —Wim b 13:53, 11 August 2019 (UTC)

AbuseFilter & exclude spam blacklist[edit]

Hi. Ages ago there was discussion in phabricator about being able to exclude the spam blacklist from an abuse filter, so we could lessen the hits on our filters where we had dealt with that type of spam. Has that, or will that, be progressing so we can have that advantage? Thanks.  — billinghurst sDrewth 23:59, 9 December 2019 (UTC)

@Billinghurst: Hey! No, there's been no progress about that (which would anyway be tracked at phab:T211680). Implementing a spam_blacklist variable turned out being more complicated than it seemed at first. OTOH, I don't think it would be possible to swap the order of AbuseFilter and SpamBlacklist. --Daimona Eaytoy (talk) 11:03, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
Road blocks, road blocks, road blocks for spam and spambot management. Cannot stop them getting in the front door; cannot easily see where they are managed and the pieces that we have in place cannot communicate intra or trans. Just ppl putting in the hard yards. Thanks anyway.  — billinghurst sDrewth 13:38, 11 December 2019 (UTC)

UTF characters into equivset[edit]

I just saw the phabricator ticket for the update of the equivset. One of our favourite PITA is stepping through charsets to create, ping and pester, and I have been adding mini regex to title blacklist (search for Fuerdai). Would you be so kind to see if all those characters sets are covered by this update so I can resolve this by better means, or whether we have more steps to undertake. Thanks for your help.  — billinghurst sDrewth 05:46, 22 December 2019 (UTC)

@Billinghurst: Hi, I've verified all characters used in the "fuerdai" lines, and I can confirm that they were all included in that update. The only exception are the characters in "uer|dai", but they were already part of the normalization set. In general, if you find some new "weird" characters, you can use this list and ctrl+f to see if they're already included. If not, please feel free to open a task on phabricator and I'll add the missing characters. As an aside, I don't think this is fuerdai-exclusive. Lately, more and more people have been coming up with these weird characters sets. I suspect there's some online tool or app that gives you these characters back. But anyway, antispoof (and, consequently, TitleBlacklist and AbuseFilter) can handle them now. --Daimona Eaytoy (talk) 14:20, 22 December 2019 (UTC)
There are such tools for mobile social media user names. I am guessing these are being utilised.

At that gerrit page the log says that the page is over a year old. Do I presume that this will update with the next wmf version update? If that is the case, I will try to remember to update the subsidiary page mw:Extension:AntiSpoof/Equivalence sets. As a question that page references the github page, would it be better referencing the gerrit page?  — billinghurst sDrewth 22:38, 22 December 2019 (UTC)

Yes, such tools are likely the cause here. As for that page, well, it is indeed one year old. The characters were added last year, but the new version was deployed on WMF wikis (and added to AntiSpoof) only a few weeks ago. That page is the master version, which means it's always up-to-date. As for the page on, yes, it should indeed be referencing gerrit, not github. Thanks! --Daimona Eaytoy (talk) 12:24, 23 December 2019 (UTC)

Thanked in AF?[edit]

Hi. HNY. Question. Is "thanked" available as an action in AF? It isn't mentioned in the MW: extension pages, and obviously it isn't showing in certain logs. One of our LTAs is using that as a means to lightly pursue xwiki. Thanks for the info.  — billinghurst sDrewth 21:08, 6 January 2020 (UTC)

@Billinghurst: Hey, HNY. No, right now it's not available, but a proposal exists at phab:T235873. This feature was requested various times during the years, but no progress has been made. This is mostly because "thanks" is very different from "edit", "move", etc. For instance, there's no clear way to show the warning/disallow/block message to the user. Also, Thanks makes several assumptions when sending thanks (e.g. that it will always succeed, while an AF rule could prevent that), so we'll also have to make some changes to the Thanks extension. Long story short, Danny is probably working on it, but it won't be easy at all. --Daimona Eaytoy (talk) 11:05, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

Talk:Requests for comment/Creating abusefilter-manager global group[edit]

Pinged, but not leaving it up to chance as it is easy to miss notifications. ~riley (talk) 02:26, 17 January 2020 (UTC)

Resolving status of the two new variables[edit]

I am seeing "wiki_name" and "wiki_language" in examining normal edits /examine/nnnnnn, though I don't see this in abusefilter log /examine/log/nnnnnn

At c:Special:AbuseFilter/examine/1331776142 it shows "wiki_name" and "wiki_language"

Database name of the wiki (wiki_name)	commonswiki
Language code of the wiki (wiki_language)	en

which I came across through a normal edit tested rather than through abusefilter log.

Is it that the phabricator ticket that I saw only partial for this ultimate task, or am I missing something that I need to be doing. Thanks.  — billinghurst sDrewth 04:56, 16 February 2020 (UTC)

@Billinghurst: This is kind of expected. When you examine a normal edit, all variables are computed on the fly, including wiki_* variables. However, when you examine an AbuseLog entry, it will just pull the variables that were computed at the time the edit was logged. wiki_* variables are not computed by default, so they'll only be available in /examine/log/XXX if any active filter computed them while checking the edit. HTH, --Daimona Eaytoy (talk) 14:56, 16 February 2020 (UTC)

A note[edit]

Hello Abuse Filter helper, we had recently have a new group Abuse filter maintainer which allows the same level of access with additional rights to edit the filters yourself among other things. If you are interested after reading the documentation, do apply at SRGP. Thanks.Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 08:52, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

  • Great work on seeing this through to creation, Daimona! ~riley (talk) 09:14, 4 April 2020 (UTC)
@Camouflaged Mirage and ~riley: Great, thanks! However, I think we shouldn't encourage applications that much. The use cases are very limited, and the right is temporary, so I don't think anyone would really need it right now... --Daimona Eaytoy (talk) 09:27, 4 April 2020 (UTC)
Yes, true. This is just a FYI send to all abuse filters helpers just in case they need the additional access (which we have the first application now). Yeah, my wording can be better though to make it more FYI-ish rather than encouraging. Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 09:30, 4 April 2020 (UTC)
Pre-conflict: Note, I probably didn't explain well. I didn't mean to discourage applicants, but just make it very clear that the right is probably less useful than one may expect at first.
Post-conflict: @Camouflaged Mirage: Don't worry, I think your message is good :) I was thinking that perhaps we should clearly point out this fact at the top of Abuse filter maintainer, to avoid any possible misunderstanding. --Daimona Eaytoy (talk) 09:34, 4 April 2020 (UTC)
Yeah, happy to add something to the effect, do you have any suggested wording? Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 09:37, 4 April 2020 (UTC)
@Camouflaged Mirage: Uhm, perhaps something along the lines of "This group is **only** allowed non-controversial filter edits dictated by upcoming software changes. Please read carefully below.", inside a template like Template:Note on Other use cases (like edits on community's request) can be mentioned later on, the note should just say "this might not be the group you're looking for". --Daimona Eaytoy (talk) 12:23, 5 April 2020 (UTC)
Thanks. @~riley: any objections, if no, I will add it. Thanks.Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 12:34, 5 April 2020 (UTC)
Sorry, but I cannot support adding "This group is **only** allowed non-controversial filter edits dictated by upcoming software changes. Please read carefully below." to the page. Besides the fact that it is now policy and changes of that nature need to be discussed on the talk page, that line is only one example of when using the right is appropriate (hence the page saying "such as") and significantly changes the scope of the right to "only allow" changes of that nature. ~riley (talk) 20:28, 5 April 2020 (UTC)
I think there isn't much applications (even after I send it to all AFHs) at this moment and yes, I sort of agree we should't be that restrictive in the usage of this right (per ~riley it is one of the acceptable). After thinking, I think it will be best to keep such policies clear, definitive but at the same time allow some room to allow us to grant the access to some unique situation. Hence, the status quo will be better. Thanks all for the inputs. Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 09:21, 6 April 2020 (UTC)