User talk:Furricane

Add topic
From TestWiki
Latest comment: 1 year ago by Kiko4564 in topic My apologises


Hello, Furricane!
Welcome to Public Test Wiki! Thank you for your contributions! I hope that you get the most out of The Test Wiki! If you have any questions you can ask at the Community Portal. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by typing four tildes "~~~~"; this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you so desire, feel free to request sysop rights, taking care to read the information page on how to do so. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Happy editing!

Rots61 (talk) 19:55, 7 February 2020 (UTC)Reply

Blocking Users[edit source]


Please be very careful when blocking based on the abuse filters. Many filters are tests and no indication of wrongdoing. You must ensure you are careful when doing non-test admim actions as incorrectly blocking users may be grounds for desysop if it continues. RhinosF1 (talk) 20:01, 8 February 2020 (UTC)Reply

Inactive Rights Removal - 21 May 2020[edit source]


In accordance with TestWiki:Inactivity, I am writing to inform you that your user rights will be removed on or after 28 May 2020 if you do not return to activity.

Please inform me if you would like to retain your rights and/or be made exempt from inactivity rules.

In the event you wish to return to TestWiki after the above date, you may re-request rights via TestWiki:Request permissions.


MediaWiki message delivery (talk) for RhinosF1
For the Consul Team
21:02, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

Inactivity[edit source]

Per TestWiki:Inactivity, I have removed the user rights that you held from your account. If at any time you wish to re-gain these permissions, you may request for them at TestWiki:Request permissions or my talk page. Thanks, RhinosF1 (talk). 12:00, 28 May 2020 (UTC)Reply

Creation protection of titles[edit source]

Hi TFFfan,

I appreciate your wanting to creation protect certain titles like Penis and Testicles from apparent potential vandalism, but neither title has been created to date. Creation protection is really only needed when a title has been recreated more than three times. Otherwise, we'd have a huge list of creation protected titles for vulgar words. A better strategy would be an abuse filter, if required. In this case, I don't think it's necessary. If you want to creation protect them for a short term for testing purposes (say 30 days or less), that would be fine.

Dmehus (talk) 01:08, 7 July 2020 (UTC)Reply

Dmehus, Thanks! I will maybe work on an abuse filter. Also, I have a permission request for bureaucrat. I hope you can consider it. Thanks! --TFFfan (talk) 01:22, 7 July 2020 (UTC)Reply
@TFFfan: That sounds good. When you're finished the abuse filter, maybe run it by a Consul, like RhinosF1, so they can check it and make sure there's no false positives or anything like that. I have added bureaucrat to your user profile. When you get a chance, maybe remove or reduce the creation protection on those two titles please. Thanks. Dmehus (talk) 01:32, 7 July 2020 (UTC)Reply

Test blocks[edit source]

Hi again TFFfan,

I have hidden the edit summary for your test block of BrodieVail88 in which you wrote "spamming external links" out of respect for BrodieVail88, who has yet to contribute to this wiki by editing or log actions. I haven't checked the abuse filter logs, but I suspect what you may have seen is that the user triggered an abuse filter. Please be very careful when blocking editors for triggering an abuse filter. Generally, editors who trigger an abuse filter do not need to be blocked; if it's severe enough, there's even a system user, User:Abuse filter, which will progressively warn and block users as required. So, in nearly every case, an editor does not need to be blocked.

Although our policies do say you can test blocks on other users, generally speaking, I just don't. If I need to test a block, I just test on User:Example, as it is a globally locked account that can still be blocked and unblocked at will. You can also create alternate accounts for testing blocking functionality, but it's highly recommended it that you disclose any alternate accounts you create on your user page.

Hope that helps,
Dmehus (talk) 01:46, 7 July 2020 (UTC)Reply

I got it[edit source]

Dmehus I got an abuse filter to warn vandals from adding curse words into the wiki, and tagging the attempts. I also want some feedback on it. I also will work on a filter to prevent a user name to not contain any of that string. You earlier suggested that I run for consul. I was wondering if I should do that yet. Thanks! --TFFfan (talk) 12:57, 7 July 2020 (UTC)Reply

@TFFfan: Thanks for the {{ping}}. Two things:
  1. I never suggested that you run for Consul; I suggested that you run your code for any abuse filters you create by a Consul so they can peer review it to ensure it will not generate any false positives. As for whether I think you should run, I think it's terribly early, to be honest. I'd probably give it at least six months to a year of being active here.
  2. Abuse filter 34 is currently malfunctioning. It seems to be setup in main namespace only, but is active in project namespace. I may have misread that and it is active everywhere, which is fine. However, it is currently malfunctioning. It was triggered by, and has tagged, my edits and Pine's edits incorrectly. As such, I have disabled it for now. However, when I tried to remove the tags from Pine's edit diff, it said that the tags could not be manually removed. I could not find what setting needs to be changed in order to let me manually remove those tags. Please let me know what is controlling the ability to manually edit or remove the tags set by that abuse filter, as that ability should be provided to any bureaucrat (or administrator) to manually change on a case-by-case basis.
--Dmehus (talk) 13:16, 7 July 2020 (UTC)Reply

Dmehus Thanks for letting me know, and sorry. I mis-read the consul part. That is my fault. And I have no Idea about how the tags cannot be removed. I will try to remove them myself, and I will figure out the filter. Thanks again. --TFFfan (talk) 13:27, 7 July 2020 (UTC)Reply

I have deleted the filter. It is not needed and clearly not working. RhinosF1 (talk) 13:31, 7 July 2020 (UTC)Reply

Topic Ban[edit source]


After reviewing your recent activity, I am imposing a 14 day topic ban from making non-test actions affecting other users without prior discussion. All tests must also be undone at the first opportunity. Thanks, RhinosF1 (talk) 13:38, 7 July 2020 (UTC)Reply

RhinosF1 Okay. I was trying to help. I will do that, and I will self-block from certain things. Thanks. --TFFfan (talk) 13:47, 7 July 2020 (UTC)Reply
@TFFfan: I appreciate, very much, that you were trying to help and you've got more experience with coding abuse filters than me. Unfortunately, it just wasn't coded correctly, and, as a result, produced highly undesirable results. This is why I strongly encouraged you to run your code by a Consul first, because it's helpful to have someone experienced with abuse filters peer review your code. As we can see, the abuse filter system isn't well designed when cleanup has to be performed (i.e., removing tags from false positives). So, the mantra with abuse filters really needs to be test, re-test, and test some more before going live. It is fine to partially block yourself to enforce your topic ban, though your block log annotation could've been clearer as it suggests the block was at @RhinosF1:'s request. It was a self-requested block, to help you enforce your topic ban (which is totally fine). One thing that might be helpful for abuse filter testing would be to test the abuse filter on a private wiki. Do you have your own wiki? That way, you could work on it there, fine-tune it, and then have RhinosF1 or another Consul join you there to peer review it and fine-tune it with a second set of eyes. Dmehus (talk) 14:01, 7 July 2020 (UTC)Reply
@TFFfan: I've also undone several of your good-faith revision deletions. I see why you wanted to revision delete a couple of the entries, to hide your IP address from when you were testing. That is a good reason to revision delete, but revision deletions are still accessible to anyone below Oversight, so I've requested @Void: suppress two of the revisions so only Oversight will have access to them. I have also unhidden your TFFfan username from the other revision(s) that you deleted because, in most cases, it's generally not necessary to hide the username (the exceptions being when the editor edited while logged out or if another user had a grossly offensive username violation and was now globally locked or blocked). Dmehus (talk) 14:09, 7 July 2020 (UTC)Reply

User:Artix Kreiger block[edit source]

TFFfan, what's going on here? I've removed this block (log #1 and log #2) that was clearly in error. This wasn't a test block, so appears to be clearly in violation of your editing restriction here. I've referred the matter to @RhinosF1:, who will make any further decisions here. Dmehus (talk) 23:33, 13 July 2020 (UTC)Reply

Dmehus This user was engaged in a wheel war back in April and was never blocked. I think they should have been blocked. However, I will not reblock at this time and see what RhinosF1 says. I will probably loose rights over this, but they should have been blocked. --TFFfan (talk) 23:36, 13 July 2020 (UTC)Reply
That may well be, but it was back in April. Nevertheless, we (being administrators and bureaucrats) generally do not block users for non-test blocks as we leave that for the consul to decide, except in exceptional circumstances (i.e., to prevent a user who is imminently harming the wiki). I appreciate your restraint in not reblocking, as that would be wheel-warring, but nevertheless, it wasn't appropriate. Dmehus (talk) 23:39, 13 July 2020 (UTC)Reply
Dmehus Okay, I see what I have done wrong here. I want to be helpful, and be like RhinosF1, but I seem to be causing more harm than good. So you can remove my rights if you feel it is necessary. --TFFfan (talk) 23:42, 13 July 2020 (UTC)Reply
TFFfan No, I will not do that as you are (a) not posing imminent harm to the wiki and (b) have, in good-faith, acknowledged your error. It would be inappropriate for me to remove any rights here in this case, as it's not my place. Nevertheless, you do still have a consul-imposed editing restriction, which has been breached. RhinosF1 will ultimately decide what needs to happen, and I don't want to prejudge what that may, or may not, be. As for the supposed wheel-warring, I have no knowledge of that, as it predates me. It may well have been the case, and it went unnoticed. In such events, it's best to approach a consul. Dmehus (talk) 23:49, 13 July 2020 (UTC)Reply
Seriously? What is wrong with you? the "alleged" wheel warring was over Rhino removing the autopatrol and rollback and other rights superceded by admin rights and I re-added it back. And now this guy comes to hand harsh block of 1 year for this? That in my opinion is worthy of demotion. Artix Kreiger (talk) 00:47, 14 July 2020 (UTC)Reply
I will step down from my rights, and hard block myself for a little while. --TFFfan (talk) 00:51, 14 July 2020 (UTC)Reply
dmehus Can you block me until the end of July? --TFFfan (talk) 00:56, 14 July 2020 (UTC)Reply
@TFFfan: Normally, I would honour self-requested blocks, but in this case, I'm not going to do that, as I don't feel it's appropriate here until a consul has had a chance to look through the events of today and make a determination on what, if anything, needs to happen. I don't want to prejudge anything here. You're welcome to block yourself, to self-enforce your existing topic ban; however, note that @RhinosF1: will still need to assess today's events and the recidivism of your topic ban breach. Thus, if you do block yourself, I strongly recommend leaving talk page access, so that you are available to respond to RhinosF1 when he is by to assess the situation and make any additional commentary. Bear in mind, RhinosF1 is in the UK, and is likely sleeping as it's ~3 am there or so. You will probably have to wait until morning to hear from him. Dmehus (talk) 01:03, 14 July 2020 (UTC)Reply

Given you've removed your rights and requested a self block, I'm going to hard block you until that point. When your block expires, you should wait at least 1 month before requesting sysop back and a further 14 days for crat. RhinosF1 (talk) 05:38, 14 July 2020 (UTC)Reply

TestWiki:RecentChanges protection level[edit source]

Hi TFFfan,

Not sure if you saw in the log or not, but I reverted your good-faith change to sysop-level protection of TestWiki:RecentChanges as I really don't think it's required. I questioned even the need to protect it as semi-protected yesterday, but given both the transclusions and that it's included within the Special:RecentChanges special page, thought minimal proactive protection would be required. If we start to see evidence of non-administrators making a mess of it, which will show up as unpatrolled edits for administrators to patrol, we can re-evaluate the protection level. I'm just a big fan of minimizing page protection, especially indefinite, unless there's a demonstrated need. :)

Hoping you don't mind,
Dmehus (talk) 16:06, 8 July 2020 (UTC)Reply

I've just seen this and both of you are commuting desysopable offences here. We've got one of you breaching a topic ban and one of you wheel warring. Please behave. RhinosF1 (talk) 16:13, 8 July 2020 (UTC)Reply
Per my discussion on Discord, I'm just confirming my acknowledgement of my error here, apologizing for the wheel-warring (i.e., I should've discussed the protection level change with TFFfan first, as TFFfan may have also wanted to self-revert their change to the protection level), and confirming it won't happen again. Dmehus (talk) 17:12, 8 July 2020 (UTC)Reply

My apologises[edit source]

I didn't realise that restoring your userpage would have the undesired side effect of changing the content of your entire userpage to something you didn't want. I have therefore deleted it in order to correct my own error, citing the reason as a "technical deletion". Sorry. Kiko4564 (talk) 00:20, 30 August 2022 (UTC)Reply