User talk:Cyberpower678: Difference between revisions

• Hello!! I am Cyberpower678. I am an administrator on Wikipedia. Despite that, I'm still your run of the mill user here on Wikipedia.
• I specialize in bot work and tools, but I lurk around RfPP, AfD, AIV, and AN/I, as well as RfA. If you have any questions in those areas, please feel free to ask. :-)
• For InternetArchiveBot matters specifically, please see meta:InternetArchiveBot/Problem for common issues or meta:User talk:InternetArchiveBot to leave a message
• I also serve as a mailing list moderator and account creator over at the Account Creation Center. If you have any questions regarding an account I created for you, or the process itself, feel free to email the WP:ACC team or me personally.
• At current I have helped to create accounts for 2512 different users and renamed 793 other users.
• Disputes or discussions that appear to have ended or is disputed will be archived.

All the best.—cyberpower

This banned editor is back again, posting his name on Picture frame (see this) Is the edit filter still working? Beyond My Ken (talk) 00:16, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Beyond My Ken, It was disabled by another user and merged into filter 1037 which is set to log only. —CYBERPOWER (Chat) 00:22, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Can it be set to block or separated out on its own again? Now that DCB knows he can get through, he will undoubtedly return to form and start adding his name in his other favorite articles. Beyond My Ken (talk) 00:30, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Beyond My Ken, I re-enabled the original filter. —CYBERPOWER (Chat) 00:48, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much. Beyond My Ken (talk) 00:51, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, thanks. Please have a word with the disable-and-merge-er. EEng 01:30, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Beyond My Ken and EEng: Disable-and-merge-er here. DCB seemed to be inactive, and we can't have a filter for everything. Every edit is tested against every filter, so ultimately we have to choose what's worth it. The purpose of 1037 (hist · log) is to catch LTAs who re-emerge whenever "their" filter is disabled, so someone can re-enable the filter as needed. It worked as intended, and I have no objection to 917 (hist · log) being set to disallow again. Suffusion of Yellow (talk) 03:25, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that explanation, I appreciate it. Beyond My Ken (talk) 04:08, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Understandable, but this is a special case. This guy has been at this since literally the beginning of the project. He never gives up. and reappears 2-3X / year. And he's one of those relatively rare LTAs that can be quite definitively and effectively blocked by a filter, with zero collateral damage.

BTW, I realize that filters are a performance issue, but I suppose someone's thought of a bot running downstream, on recent changes, to pick up what you might call second-tier threats (which this might qualify as). You could even set up such a bot so that, when it finds pattern X and reverts it, it then enables an associated edit filter for Y weeks or months so as to give quicker response temporarily. Kind of an immune system. EEng 05:13, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Actually wait, I'm confused. Assuming that performance is the issue here, how is this combined 1037 any better than having a separate filter for each threat? If that's true there's something seriously wrong with the implementation of filters. Or is the issue not performance, but something else? EEng 05:18, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Suffusion of Yellow: Thanks, I feared as much; after the strain of producing the masterpiece they call VE I guess there was no brainpower left over for something unimportant like optimizing our antivandalism defenses so that we don't have to choose which human-crafted filters to turn off since we can't afford to run them all. Assuming 95% of filters remain in force for at least a day it's a conceptually simple matter to compile them all into one big, efficient megafilter (or, morelikely, a handful of sub-megafilters built from related constituent filters). Note this doesn't mean none of the 95% can be turned off without recompiling, since the giant filter(s) are only as a preliminary check allowing you to skip running a second stage, consisting of the real filters, in most cases -- and second-stage filters can be turned on and off individually as normal.

I think it's long past time I took an interest in filters. Where's the manual, and where's the code? EEng 19:27, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@EEng:Manual (probably out of date, like all manuals), and code. FWIW, it looks like the WMF may be about to actually pay the person who has already been maintaining the extension for the past few years. Suffusion of Yellow (talk) 20:12, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oh god. What a mess. EEng 22:51, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Hi. Another edit by DCB just got through. [1] Beyond My Ken (talk) 00:01, 26 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  Cyberpower, see Wikipedia:Edit_filter_noticeboard#Requesting_Wikipedia:Edit_filter_helper_right. Maybe I should have asked for EFM after all. It appears someone's needed full time just to deal with this one LTA. EEng 00:50, 26 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  EEng, EFM is probably more what you are looking for. But I'm not familiar with your technical background. —CYBERPOWER (Chat) 14:11, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  Re technical background, I have a degree in computer science from [modesty forbids] and have written any number of parsers, compilers, and command interpreters. As noted in the rights discussion I figured EFH would be an easy first step but if that's unnecessarily conservative feel free to suggest (there) that I go straight to EFM. I wouldn't actually move on to changing anything without talking to you guys first. What I want first is the ability to see all the current code, and write my own code and test it against recent changes. Whatever lets me do that is fine. EEng 15:32, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  EEng, I've added EFM, since that more likely seems like what you need and per the linked thread with support. —CYBERPOWER (Chat) 18:01, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Beyond My Ken, the filter was not set to disallow for some reason. I've enabled the flag. —CYBERPOWER (Chat) 14:10, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Thanks. Sorry for the hassle. Beyond My Ken (talk) 14:56, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

So the unblock table task just took a 3 hour hiatus and now is missing User talk:Emaus and User talk:STAY AT HOME FOR THE NHS. Since this isn't the first time, I'll replace the table for the time being, and when things are fixed, feel free to restore the old one. -- Amanda (aka DQ) 02:06, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

DeltaQuad, Is it fixed? I've noticed it tends to sometimes just hiccup but recover. —CYBERPOWER (Chat) 14:09, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see any issues right now or in the past 24 hours for time lapsing, but I haven't checked that every talk page has been in there. I'll watch it a little more over the next day or two and see if any issues pop up. -- Amanda (aka DQ) 19:35, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have switched it back, but giving it an hour to edit the page before it considers itself out of date and switches to the backup. I will still monitor for the missing users in the table issue. -- Amanda (aka DQ) 10:02, 29 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! We talked about IABot earlier.

What do we need to do to get it started? I posted at da:Wikipedia:Anmodning_om_botstatus#InternetArchiveBot but per the bot policy the bot needs to do some test edits to move on. Perpahs you can run the bot and do 50 edits so we can see how it works?

Or tell us what to do to move forward. --MGA73 (talk) 13:38, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

MGA73, Sure. I just need to get the major changes I'm making to IABot done and tested first. @Harej: —CYBERPOWER (Chat) 14:13, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Awesome. Thank you! --MGA73 (talk) 15:48, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Poor EEng, you removed a bit too much haha (admin link) --TheSandDoctor ^Talk 18:15, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@EEng: I think I added everything back, please let me know if I missed anything. --TheSandDoctor ^Talk 18:16, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

TheSandDoctor, Oh oops. Not sure what happened there. Maybe if we pretend it didn't happen, EEng won't notice. :p —CYBERPOWER (Chat) 18:19, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Well I don't think it's worrisome. Everyone makes mistakes. It's not like Cyberpower's got special privileges like EFM or anything that he might screw things up with. EEng 18:39, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

EEng, well, ummm, remember when I blocked everyone from adding links anywhere on Wikipedia? —CYBERPOWER (Chat) 18:41, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I think that was the week I was comatose. I'd like to see that code, actually. EEng 18:55, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

EEng, Actually it wasn't links, it was the title blacklist. I managed to prevent the creation of any page by non-admins. diff —CYBERPOWER (Chat) 19:23, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, you managed to block creation of any page by users who aren't administrators, template editors, and page movers. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 01:52, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

OK, that's different then. EEng 00:19, 29 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Was that a thing at the time? I don't know about template editor, but I think page movers got the ability to override the title blacklist more recently than that. Natureium (talk) 00:30, 29 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I think this counts as wheel warring. I'll start the arbcom proceedings. Natureium (talk) 18:22, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Natureium, oh well. It was nice being an admin while it lasted. Better go and delete the main page, AfD, and block everyone. —CYBERPOWER (Chat) 18:25, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'll start writing the script to make sure wikipedia doesnt shut off without its cyber-power. da-dum-tsss, I'll show myself out --TheSandDoctor ^Talk 18:28, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Cyberpower, I see that you assigned EFM after Xaosflux assigned EFH. I don't see the requisite decision on WP:EFN as mentioned at Wikipedia:Edit_filter#User right. EFM is too sensitive of a right to be assigned on request without discussion. Galobtter (pingó mió) 20:57, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Galobtter, no comment on the assignment of the perm after Xaosflux as the perm was not assigned yet when I went in to change the permissions for EEng, but as I read it, I see general support 3 implicit, 1 explicit, that EEng would also be trusted with EFM. He is technically competent, and highly trusted on this project. I saw no issue with granting. —CYBERPOWER (Chat) 21:59, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Cyberpower678 I don't think your action was appropriate, EFM isn't supposed to be issued to non-admins "by request" as a discretionary admin action, the EFM page is pretty clear about it, including having a customary 7 day discussion which is normally more advertised then EFH discussions alone. — xaosflux ^Talk 01:37, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

As far what now - I request that you revert your change - if EEng wants to apply for special EFM access, they can follow the standard process and timeline. — xaosflux ^Talk 01:48, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Xaosflux, well, who am I to argue against consensus. I have reverted my action, and reinstated yours (which was unintentionally overriden btw). —CYBERPOWER (Around) 01:55, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I must say, my plan to reduce Cyberpower to a state of complete humiliation is going like clockwork. If it will help allay anxieties, I certainly won't be doing anything but looking until I've learned a lot more and talked to you guys again. EEng 01:54, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Cyberpower678: thank you. @EEng: please note I wasn't here with any specific objection to you, just that there wasn't enough time to ensure that discussion was well attended; you are certainly welcome to apply for EFM as a non-admin if you desire. — xaosflux ^Talk 02:00, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No offense taken, I assure you!

But would it make sense to reopen the existing discussion and let it run for the prescribed time, to avoid going over the same ground again in future? EEng 02:07, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The deal with EFM is that it is meant to be highly restricted for non-admins, and there should be time for people to attend - so it should be clear for the entire duration what the ask is. You can also avoid it by using the week at RFA. — xaosflux ^Talk 11:00, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Presumably you're joking about RfA.) I understand. I just thought that since several people suggested going straight to EFM anyway, by extending the existing discussion for the prescribed time we could avoid doing the whole thing again for EFM at a later date. EEng 21:08, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

EEng, Why not run an RfA? I think you would do fine. —CYBERPOWER (Chat) 21:30, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You really are losing your grip. Arbcom better enact a Level I-Omega Greased Lightening Desysop before you go completely berserk. EEng 00:19, 29 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Completely unrelated question, but does anyone know which admin passed with the longest block log? Natureium (talk) 22:10, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

User:ThisIsaTest for RfA? Galobtter (pingó mió) 22:12, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Natureium, I know I passed having been blocked for oversight related reasons in the past and require ArbCom to unblock me. —CYBERPOWER (Chat) 22:13, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oh my. Natureium (talk) 22:15, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, this is a notification that I have blocked User:InternetArchiveBot on Japanese Wikipedia because Job ID 5930 was run with fewer than 10 seconds per one edit (e.g. 8 edits in 02:53, 29 May 2020 (UTC)). The job also had much more edits than what was agreed in the bot flag request. I can unblock it once the issues are resolved. ネイ (talk) 05:37, 29 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

To add on, the Bot runpages shows jawiki is disabled. Why is the above job still run? ネイ (talk) 10:14, 29 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ネイ, the run appears to have been accidental. I’ll speak to GreenC about it.—CYBERPOWER (Around) 11:49, 29 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ネイ, regarding bot approval there, the entire process needs to be scratched and done fresh.—CYBERPOWER (Around) 11:55, 29 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, please let me know how the discussion with GreenC goes. Would like to know more about the cause (e.g. is it one off, is it possible to prevent future accidental runs) before making the decision of whether to unblock. If the account is unblocked eventually, please feel free to restart the bot flag approval process. ネイ (talk) 12:44, 29 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I was not editing jawiki specifically, but every wiki language that contains a set of Olympics related URLs and jawiki was on the list. I didn't expect the bot to run on a site that was disabled, it probably happened because of my admin bits, I was not aware the bot could do this. It will not happen again. ネイ, I apologize and hope you will consider an unblock! -- GreenC 14:02, 29 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

GreenC and ネイ, actually it's open to anyone to run. Job runs are generally not affected by the run pages because the job is invoked by the user and is usually believed that the user would have good reason to do so and is following local policy. Run pages are designed to stop fully automated, and continuous, processes like IABot's main process.—CYBERPOWER (Chat) 14:09, 29 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Per other discussion created Phab T254017. -- GreenC 14:48, 29 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Is it possible to remove the ability to run manual jobs in jawiki? Allowing these jobs basically means everyone has access to run the bot, instead of only cyberpower678 (and WMF). Since "everyone" includes LTAs with newly created sockpuppets, even an unblock only could be dangerous. ネイ (talk) 14:58, 29 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, and greetings! As part of a Starter kit project for smaller wikis, there is a work-in-progress guide around Bots & Tools here: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Small_wiki_toolkits/Starter_kit/Bots_and_Tools. I'm reaching out with a few questions, as there is a mention of the InternetArchiveBot & Cyberbot on this page in the list of useful bots section:

• Is it okay to have these bots listed in that section? Are there any concerns?
• Would you be okay with folks from smaller wikis reaching out to you for help, and would you be willing to list your preferred method of contact under "Bot owner contact"?
• Is there anything like a note or reminder related to these bots that you would like to add in the "description" column?

Additionally, if you have a suggestion for any other bots or tools currently on the list which should not be there and those that are not there and should be there, I would love to know about them—looking forward to your input! Srishti (talk) 07:42, 29 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

SSethi (WMF),

• Yes. No
• Yes, and this talk page is fine.
• I can’t think of anything right now.

Hope this helps. —CYBERPOWER (Around) 11:52, 29 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I've been looking at [[Uninterruptible power supplies for my new computer, and when I find things like the CyberPower 800VA / 480W UPS, it kinda reminds me of your username, lol. Graham87 13:37, 29 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

To be welcoming to editors of all genders, I propose that the title of this thread be changed to theytheythey. EEng 13:43, 29 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]