RationalWiki:Technical support

From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search

This page is automatically archived by Archivist
Archives for this talk page: <1>, <2>, <3>, <4>, <5>, <6>, <7>, <8>, <9>, <10>, <11>, <12>, <13>


Autogenerated list of users with Tech rights: Special:ListUsers/tech.

Fix it! Fix it! Fix it! Fix it! Fix it! Fix it! Fix it! Fix it! Fix it! Fix it!

The people with root on the servers are Tmtoulouse and David Gerard.

If your IP is blocked from editing as an open proxy: you need to go to your provider about it. The lists we use are xbl.spamhaus.org, dnsbl.tornevall.org, all.s5h.net - if your IP is on one of these lists, then your provider has a serious problem they need to resolve.


[edit] Herein goeth anything regarding the technicalities of the wiki

FAQs & Problems:

  • Problems with accessing the wiki
  • Queries about extensions
  • Javascript Help
  • CSS Help
  • Wikitalk Help

If you've written, or are using, some extension or script that either might give others problems or is giving you a problem, then either describe it or link to it on this page.

If you've written some piece of code that you want help with, ask here with linkage.

If your browser acts up with some code,ask here.

In short, anything techy, ask, tell or link on this page.

If you think it is a server-type issue, feel free to email the goat at ttoulouse@gmail.com or touloutm@mcmaster.ca for best results.

[edit] Search function

The search function has broken down again, other than for exact title matches. Thanks. ΨΣΔξΣΓΩΙÐWeaselly.jpgMethinks it is a Weasel 20:43, 27 March 2016 (UTC)

This is what i get for not being around for a few days. Up now. I'll put some better gaffer tape in place - David Gerard (talk) 18:56, 30 March 2016 (UTC)
Cheers D. WẽãšẽĩõĩďWeaselly.jpgMethinks it is a Weasel 19:05, 30 March 2016 (UTC)
Now it literally checks every minute if lucene is running and if it isn't, starts it. (It should have been doing this, I don't know why upstart wasn't doing this job.) - David Gerard (talk) 19:09, 30 March 2016 (UTC)

[edit] Quote fail

On the Citizens for a Better Helena page, this quote does not work:

I realize that it's because of the "=" in the quote, but the supposed fix, inserting "1=" does not work either:

nor does this with the "name=" format since the attribution part doesn't show up:

This is why we (so few) have big mouths and have to TOLERATE the ABUSE by tho$e that say we are bigots, racists and haters. There is no excuse for this stupidity. For every 12-14 welfare recipients = 1 resettlement refugee. How is this sustainable? Would you let Charles Manson out of prison, give him a furnished house (next to you or anyone), cash stipends, food stamps, Obamacare,…and take a chance knowing that he is a pedophile, rapist, mass murderer,…? WTH?!! WAKE UP MONTANA?!! IF YOU DON'T STAND UP, YOU WILL BE A VICTIM!

So, how does this get fixed?

Have you tried the <nowiki></nowiki> tags?--JorisEnter (talk) 20:27, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
OK, that fixed it. Thanks! Bongolian (talk) 20:40, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

[edit] Preventing non-autoconfirmed/patrolled members from making massive edits?

So I'm thinking, should we have some sort of filter that prevents massive edits by non-autoconfirmed/patrolled members? That is, if a BoN adds in or removes more than 5000 characters to an article at once, the edit is prevented and the BoN is blocked for 5 minutes? Because usually when this happens, the BoN is adding in huge amounts of spam or is blanking pages. CorruptUser (talk) 16:57, 10 April 2016 (UTC)

This stuff is easy to spot in recent changes (which there are nearly always people looking at) & deal with promptly. Large additions/subtractions of text appear with the character count bolded, and page-blanking generates an automatic statement in the edit comment. I'd rather not have more restrictions added to new accounts/B0Ns than we already have. WěǎšěǐǒǐďWeaselly.jpgMethinks it is a Weasel 17:39, 10 April 2016 (UTC)
I don't think, that this is necessary. Such edits are bolded in the watchlist and the recent changes page anyway so that the regulars here take a look. Blatantly bullshit edits are normally spotted fast that way.--Kugelschreiber (talk) (mail) (block) 18:07, 10 April 2016 (UTC) 18:07, 10 April 2016 (UTC)
The above. Some BoNs genuinely make useful contributions (141.something is one that simply refuses to make an account, but there are lots and lots of others that just happen to be passing by). Besides, some significantly problematic issues (telephone numbers and other spam) are usually caught by the edit filter.--JorisEnter (talk) 18:17, 10 April 2016 (UTC)
141.something does have an account, a moderator account in fact. CorruptUser (talk) 00:43, 11 April 2016 (UTC)
The proposal is interesting, but it I think it will be ineffective. They could always add 4,000 characters of spam under your proposal. All you need is 1 rollback and the ability to block in order to prevent this problem.--Owlman (talk) (mail) 01:13, 11 April 2016 (UTC) 01:13, 11 April 2016 (UTC)
Preventing changes of over [X] bytes is easy. But it seems unnecessary -- it's tagged automatically by Filter 1 and is easily undone.
Moreover, the block length of the abusefilter cannot vary between different rules (at least, insofar as I know) and so all offenders for which "block" is enabled are blocked for 3.14 months. HairyFelineTuber Moderator (talk/stalk) 02:26, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

[edit] New redirect pages

Ok there is blatant harassment going on, but I can't use the rollback feature because the page isn't a content page. It's a redirect. Can we prevent nonautopatrolled users from making redirect pages? StickySock (talk) 17:53, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

That'd be a huge restriction on nonautopatrolled persons; redirecting isn't something that usually requries an account.
Moreover, you can certainly rollback on redirect pages.
Can you link to an example? FU22YC47P07470 Moderator (talk/stalk) 18:31, 11 April 2016 (UTC)
Not anymore now that Joris hid the changes made. I'll make a redirect for testing. Try to use the rollback. StickySock (talk) 18:34, 11 April 2016 (UTC)
You may have been looking for this one? That's not a redirect but it's the only form of harassment I could find (other than a username).--JorisEnter (talk) 18:38, 11 April 2016 (UTC)
Okay, Fuzzy tester is made. Use rollback on it; doesn't rollback; it's a new page so it has to be deleted. But since it's a redirect, it takes slightly longer to access it directly, which is annoying on a phone. And yes Joris, that guy was what I tried to rollback but it wouldn't let me. StickySock (talk) 18:42, 11 April 2016 (UTC)
You can't rollback that redirect because you're the only contributor. Rollback reverts a page to whatever it looked like before the last user that edited it came along. It doesn't allow for direct deletion of pages, however, so if the problematic redirect was created by the troll, you will have to manually delete the page. Also, the one I referred to was a normal page, right?--JorisEnter (talk) 18:48, 11 April 2016 (UTC)
That was the guy but a different edit. The one that was a redirect but I think is hidden now. And yes, you can't rollback pages with 1 editor since that's require deleting a page. Deletion isn't too hard since it takes time to create a page, countering the extra annoyance of clicking on a page and hitting vaporize. Problem is redirect pages take a bit longer to vaporize and it's harder on a phone. Minor issue, but should we have "rollbacks" for new pages? StickySock (talk) 18:56, 11 April 2016 (UTC)
Don't know if that is even possible. The occasional troll messing with redirects or a spammer creating lots of SPAM SPAM SPAMMITY SPAM should be relatively easy to deal with.--JorisEnter (talk) 18:59, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

[edit] Homepage fail

The random featured article isn't showing up right now. This appears instead: "Template:Cover abstract/Herbal supplement". Bongolian (talk) 03:34, 16 April 2016 (UTC)

If you follow the link you'll see User:JorisEnter moved it, leaving no redirect, without fixing {{coverstory}} - David Gerard (talk) 07:31, 16 April 2016 (UTC)

[edit] Brackets in URL for reference

There's a URL I'd like to put in a reference on the Colonic page. The URL contains a square brackets, so it does not appear correctly as a reference:
<ref>[http://www.jfponline.com/index.php?id=22143&tx_ttnews[tt_news]=176194 bla bla bla]</ref>

I tried using the nowiki tag, but that doesn't seem to work. Bongolian (talk) 19:00, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

The only way I can figure out is to URL-encode the [ and ] by replacing them with %5b and %5d:
[http://www.jfponline.com/index.php?id=22143&tx_ttnews%5btt_news%5d=176194 bla bla bla]
which produces:
bla bla bla
Carpetsmoker (talk) 19:54, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
Thanks, that worked! Bongolian (talk) 23:25, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

[edit] Adding to a talk page makes it think I'm spamming

I was putting a note on the talk page for The Troubles saying that it still needs a fair bit of work on the actual conflict itself rather than the background to it and the last time someone said so was five years ago, it said it was disallowed for being probable spam, harassment or dox. Not entirely sure why. SaintJimmy13 (talk) 15:58, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

Well, it probably has something to do with the abuse filter.--Owlman (talk) (mail) 16:06, 27 April 2016 (UTC) 16:06, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
Yeah, it did, the page told me to report it here. SaintJimmy13 (talk) 16:32, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
I had a look at your attempted edit and I can't find anything wrong with it. The filter is set to stop users that are not autoconfirmed from adding particular pieces of text (that are likely to be spam/harassment/dox), but as far as I can see yours contains none of that.--JorisEnter (talk) 16:40, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
So FuzzyCatPotato added what I was trying to say and said so on my talk page, I was just trying to reply to that saying "Cool, thanks, no worries" and I got the same error. I think the edit filter hates me. SaintJimmy13 (talk) 14:21, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

[edit] Discussion about Hastert flagged as conspiracy theory - WTF?

The edit filter was trigger when I attempted to start a discussion on Hastert being the biggest political scandal in history. I posted no links but was alleged to have posted conspiracy theory links by the bot. No foul words were used. Objective (talk) 23:14, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

Try again. 32℉uzzy; 0℃atPotato Moderator (talk/stalk) 23:50, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

[edit] Search is broken. Again.

Can we do the Carpetsmoker thing please FᴜᴢᴢʏCᴀᴛPᴏᴛᴀᴛᴏ, Esϙᴜɪʀᴇ Moderator (talk/stalk) 04:38, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

dammit, the cron job is running, why didn't it catch that ... - David Gerard (talk) 09:45, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

[edit] Missing conspiracy svg on home page

I just found that the conspiracy svg is missing on the home page, just wanted to let you guys know, i dont know if this is just me, or if it is everyone. Bubba41102The place where you can scream at me 18:23, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

Same problem here. I tried moving File:Icon conspiracy alt.svg to File:Icon conspiracy.svg a week or so ago (because the "alt" version is the only one that's being used, other then by {{rated}} which places ugly green icons on talk pages), but something went wrong. After moving some more things my edits seemed to have worked without fucking up too many icons, but apparently it's back.--JorisEnter (talk) 18:30, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

[edit] Rename page

Can someone with adequate permission rename the page Hans Hörbiger to be Hanns Hörbiger[wp]? Thanks. Bongolian (talk) 18:15, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

Done. Don't you have that permission yourself?--JorisEnter (talk) 18:19, 1 May 2016 (UTC)
Personal tools