GuildWiki

GuildWiki has been locked down: anonymous editing and account creation are disabled. Current registered users are unaffected. Leave any comments on the Community Portal.

READ MORE

GuildWiki
Register
Advertisement
Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archives

 1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9  10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22
This talk page should be used for discussions regarding GuildWiki in general. For anything directly relevant to the Main Page or the edit copy, please use Talk:Main Page/editcopy. If you have any questions that aren't relevant to a specific talk page, head over to GuildWiki:Request assistance and add it.

CATcha

(Reset indent) I have changesets prepared to update ConfirmEdit (replace ReCaptcha with Asirra and modify the triggers) and to install AbuseFilter (no sense ignoring a tool that could be useful). I will push them to the repository as soon as we agree that there is consensus for these changes.

Also, @Giga: Have you begun to pursue the direct access with Donovan? —Dr Ishmael Diablo the chicken 21:30, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

If we get AbuseFilter, I'm not sure we'll need to update the CATcha triggers. --JonTheMon 13:46, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
They serve different purposes. ConfirmEdit is preventive, while AbuseFilter is reactive. You can't define filters in advance for every single attack that will happen in the future, but if the bots can't save any edits in the first place, you'll have fewer successful attacks that require a response. —Dr Ishmael Diablo the chicken 14:37, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
Fair enough. I can live with that. --JonTheMon 14:48, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
I have every confidence in you (plural you) and fully support your decisions. A F K sig 2 A F K When Needed 15:38, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
I'm going to request that the AbuseFilter extension be installed today. We are using it on the Terraria Wiki quite successfully against these types of gibberbots that started attacking early yesterday. Jon created the filter, and overnight it disallowed 99 gibber edits. You can choose to use it or not, but if you wish to see anon edits re enabled, it's probably the fastest solution. While it's not perfect, it's a relatively easy. -- Wynthyst User Wynthyst sig icon talk 13:18, 13 June 2011 (UTC)
Great, thanks! I'm also pushing the ConfirmEdit change to Asirra (or CATcha as Jon likes to say :P ), but without the new trigger settings - it will still only trigger if a new external link is added, when creating an account, and after 3 failed login attempts. —Dr Ishmael Diablo the chicken 15:23, 13 June 2011 (UTC)
CATcha is live. —Dr Ishmael Diablo the chicken 16:25, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
No, it's not. --31.150.9.250 21:09, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
Try with a link to an extremely unlikely page to have been linked before, say, here (random link to random amazon). "it will still only trigger if a new external link is added, when creating an account, and after 3 failed login attempts." ∵Scythe∵ 23:48, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
That's a nice sofa. If it only blocks new external links, we could just add links to the spamlist as they come up. Eventually we'll run out of old ones. Felix Omni Signature 01:30, 18 June 2011 (UTC)
That's no sofa! (it's a slipcover, they're made to prevent your cushions from becoming threadbare.) ∵Scythe∵ 02:13, 18 June 2011 (UTC)
Sofa is the last word in the product title, therefore it's a sofa. Felix Omni Signature 04:13, 18 June 2011 (UTC)
You're all idiots, for different reasons.
@Mr. IP: You added those links on the Sandbox within an HTML comment. That's not actually adding a link to the page, because it isn't displayed.
@Scythe: "a new external link" means a new link on that article, not new to the wiki overall. That's just dumb.
I know it was enabled because I tested it - I logged out, then added a link to an article that wasn't on the article before and was not hidden in a comment. Asirra was triggered. —Dr Ishmael Diablo the chicken 04:50, 18 June 2011 (UTC)
Asirra was installed on GuildWiki and another Curse wiki yesterday, but after testing it was discovered that it was blocking new user registrations for some reason. It's been removed and ReCaptcha has been installed until they can figure out what the problem is with Asirra (or another alternative). -- Wynthyst User Wynthyst sig icon talk 05:09, 18 June 2011 (UTC)
"You're all idiots" seems like a bit of a harsh critique... :'( ∵Scythe∵ 13:47, 18 June 2011 (UTC)
Goobers? —Dr Ishmael Diablo the chicken 14:04, 18 June 2011 (UTC)
That may be a personal attack depending on whether you mean nostril mucus or the delicious candy. Felix Omni Signature 15:01, 18 June 2011 (UTC)
Goober = peanut (and the chocolate-coated peanut candy), booger = snot. I've never heard of "goober" referring to the other. —Dr Ishmael Diablo the chicken 15:29, 18 June 2011 (UTC)
I guess I've confused anagrams with synonyms again. Felix Omni Signature 16:40, 18 June 2011 (UTC)
You're all idiots, that wasn't a srs omfgwtfbbq he called me an idiot. ∵Scythe∵ 22:58, 18 June 2011 (UTC)
A village is calling, they want their idiots back. ;-) Ariyen 03:36, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Downtime

Working on the assumption that the downtime will become a topic of conversation, I provide a link to Curse's explanation for the downtime. Nwash User-Nwash-Eyes 12:00, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

Curse changed our footer

Curse made a number of changes to our base code today, one of which was to add an additional copyright notice to the Curse footer.

"GuildWiki content and materials are trademarks and copyrights of ArenaNet or its licensors. All rights reserved."

This is incorrect. GuildWiki content is not copyrighted at all, it is free content under the Creative Commons. The only content that is copyrighted by ArenaNet is images that are screenshots, concept art, or other game assets, and this is clearly specified by the {{screenshot}} template on each image's page.

This needs to be communicated to Curse, and it should probably come from a bureaucrat (**coughFelixcough**). —Dr Ishmael Diablo the chicken 14:42, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

I'm reading this!! --Bumbletalk 14:48, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
Ah, alrighty then. It's hard to tell when anyone from Curse is actually paying attention to our discussions here. —Dr Ishmael Diablo the chicken 16:08, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
I just noticed something else. They updated our license from CC 2.0 to CC 3.0. I don't think that's allowed? Not without consent of the majority of the editors, anyway. —Dr Ishmael Diablo the chicken 16:33, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
Ugh, another bad change:
$wgGroupPermissions['user']['suppressredirect'] = true;
We do NOT want normal users to be able to suppress redirects. This was something we corrected right after moving to Curse. —Dr Ishmael Diablo the chicken 16:40, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
I pushed a new version of LocalSettings.php to correct these issues. Please install it ASAP. —Dr Ishmael Diablo the chicken 17:08, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
Also, I'm just 'wtf?' at these changes.
$wgGroupPermissions['*']['edit'] = false;

$wgAutoConfirmAge = 345600; 
$wgAutoConfirmCount = 5; 

$wgGroupPermissions['*']['createpage'] = false; 
$wgGroupPermissions['user']['createpage'] = false; 
$wgGroupPermissions['autoconfirmed']['createpage'] = true; 
$wgGroupPermissions['sysop']['createpage'] = true; 
You've completely disabled anonymous editing again, and you're preventing anonymous and non-autoconfirmed users from creating pages. You've also instituted requirements for a user to be autoconfirmed: 4 days and 5 edits. Why? —Dr Ishmael Diablo the chicken 16:45, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
I'm hoping this is just a mistake. Felix Omni Signature 20:31, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
If it weren't for the GuildWiki-specific changes to LocalSettings, I would almost think that they somehow forked our repo with another wiki. —Dr Ishmael Diablo the chicken 20:35, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

(Reset indent) Anonymous editing has been re-enabled, the license change has been reverted, and the Curse footer now says "GuildWars content and materials..." No explanation yet for the autoconfirmed time/edit requirements or the createpage restrictions. —Dr Ishmael Diablo the chicken 14:37, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

Curse changed our extensions

Curse made a number of changes to our extensions this morning. Since I'm the only one with repository access anymore, I'll summarize the changes here. Also, since Bumble already has her eyes on this page, maybe she can provide an explanation for some of these changes. (I'm not going to bother signing the individual sections, I think y'all are smart enough to figure it out.)Dr Ishmael Diablo the chicken 16:28, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

New extensions

AntiBot

This isn't doing anything right now because it runs off of modules, and WikiMedia isn't releasing the source code for their modules (so the botters can't adapt to them). Curse would have to write their own modules, or somehow finagle them out of WM people, for this to do anything.

Cite

Might be useful, but going forward we would develop an inconsistency between old and new articles, unless we could get people to volunteer for going through and updating old pages (where we've adapted a strategy of in-line linking for the most part). If we'd had this from the beginning, that would've been great. Now, though, it's a "too little too late" scenario.

EmbedVideo

Everything EmbedVideo does we can already do with widgets. Granted, it combines all video sites into a single function, whereas we have to create a new widget for each site, but I don't recall anyone complaining that we don't have a widget for DailyMotion or Revver. Also, we can easily customize the widgets in-wiki versus having to update the extension code.

Nuke

I assume they installed this as a reaction to the recent bot attack; unfortunately, it would have been useless during that attack, for two reasons. 1) It's only useful against page-creation spam, and the attack was primarily edits to existing pages. 2) It's only useful if all the spam is from a single user/ip, and our attacker was using a botnet and/or rolling proxies. I guess there's no harm in having it around, though, unless one of our admins goes feral and starts abusing it (not likely).

Modified extensions

ConfirmEdit

It looks like they dropped the ReCaptcha version of the extension and installed the base version instead. The problem is that, without an additional configuration option, they have replaced ReCaptcha with... wait for it... SimpleCaptcha. All this does is present a simple math problem, in plain-text. ReCaptcha may have been compromised, but this is even worse.

InputBox

They removed the code that allows the use of 'type=create'. Not sure why they did that, but it doesn't really affect us. The same functionality is available in CreateBox, which we also have installed, so I guess it was redundant in any case.

SpamBlacklist

They removed the link threshold check, where it only allows 5 external links to be added to a page in a single edit. I don't know why they did this, since link-spam is a common form of vandalism. SimpleCaptcha certainly isn't going to stop it.

New users

New users seem to be getting this while trying to create their accounts:

A database query syntax error has occurred. This may indicate a bug in the software. The last attempted database query was:
 
(SQL query hidden)
 
from within function "SpoofUser::getConflicts". Database returned error "1146: Table 'guildwiki.spoofuser' doesn't exist
(10.0.0.55:5002)".

Made worse by the fact that they can't make anonymous edits to complain about being unable to create accounts. Yamagawa 19:29, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

Huh. I wonder if that wasn't what was blocking account creation before, and not Asirra. If only I had direct access I could change things around and run some tests right now, but alas... —Dr Ishmael Diablo the chicken 20:20, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
New user creation works now. Kaelten created the missing table. —Dr Ishmael Diablo the chicken 14:35, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

New skill box format

I have a proposal for a revamp of {{Skill box}} that I've been stewing over for nearly a year. I've implemented the changes at {{Skill box draft}} and {{Progression draft}}, as well as setting a couple new CSS rules in MediaWiki:Common.css, and you can view it in use on Unbalancing Soul Explosion.

The new CSS rules apply green and gray colors to bold and italic text, respectively, that appears within any element with class="skill_description". This enhancement could easily be added to the existing skill box (independent of any other changes) by simply wrapping the descriptions with a span tag.

The idea came to me when I first started extracting skill descriptions from Gw.dat. The raw descriptions allow for the insertion of the "green number" variables by using placeholder parameters that look like %str1%. Each string can use up to 3 of these parameters. (Because the % symbol is used to identify the parameters, when an actual % symbol is desired, it is given as %%.) There is also a mechanism for plural forms - the word that follows a parameter can be appended with a value in square brackets that is used if the parameter is not 1. The most common usage is for durations, e.g. %str3% second[s]. More complex plurals (anything besides adding an 's') use the format %str1% hex[pl:"hexes"].

I figured this format could translate well to the wiki, but it took me a while to actually start working on it, and then even longer to get it to a point that seemed good enough to use.

In the new template, the description and progression parameters are completely changed. description and concise_description have been replaced with raw_description and raw_concise. All of the progression_[blah_blah] parameters are replaced by str*_min, str*_max, and str*_desc (* = 1, 2, 3), where _min and _max are the values at the "anchor" attribute ranks of 0 and 15 (these are the values that are set explicitly in the game engine, everything in between (and above 15) is calculated). The _min and _max values are used to build "range" variables that then replace the str* parameters in the raw description; currently, I have it designed to calculate the 12 value and display a 3-value range of 0...12...15.

There are a number of advantages:

  • Simplification. It only requires the green number values to be entered once, in the _min/_max parameters, instead of 3+ times like the current implementation (in the normal description, in the concise, in the progression_* parms, and in any QR notes the skill may have). I haven't modified the QR boxes yet to handle the parameter substitution, but it can be done. It also eliminates the confusion of having to provide both 0...12 ranges (in the descriptions) and 0...15 ranges (for progression).
  • Easy to change for skill updates. The numbers only have to be changed in one place. I can copy the descriptions directly from Gw.dat without the bother of inserting and formatting the numbers manually.

There are also a few drawbacks:

  • Descriptions have to be copied from Gw.dat. This isn't really necessary when a skill receives a simple text update (typo correction etc.), but when a skill gets a major revamp, the only way to be sure which parms are used where is by pulling it out of Gw.dat. (Of course, as long as they are internally consistent in the skill template, they wouldn't have to exactly match the game's raw version.) Luckily, I already have a Perl script that I've been using to parse out the text files from Gw.dat, and I could extend it to grab the skill descriptions from those files and post them to the wiki if they've changed.
  • Plurals. I don't know how to handle the plural format with wikicode. There are a number of ways we could handle it, but I'll leave that open to discussion.
  • Links. If I do write a script to automatically post new descriptions to the wiki, it wouldn't be able to make any links in them. Well, it could, but it would have to be based on a list of all the different words that need to be linked (and would have to relate various word forms to the article that it needs to point to, e.g. resurrect -> Resurrect (action), knocked down -> knockdown).

Anyway, I need to stop typing and post this so I can go eat lunch. —Dr Ishmael Diablo the chicken 17:15, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

Tonight's attack

Sorry guys, I was busy delivering pizza tonight (or rather, I was busy standing around the store waiting for people to make orders so I *could* deliver some pizza... unusually slow for a Saturday). It looks like we actually blocked a significant number of potential edits with AbuseFilters 3 and 4, but they weren't quite good enough to catch everything.

So I tweaked them a bit, and they now match every vandal edit that got through tonight (as well as the ones that have been blocked by filter 1 since it was enabled), without any false positives. I also marked them as Private, so the botters can't adapt to the new conditions. I haven't disabled filter 1 yet, because I'm going to bed, and I'd rather someone were on hand to monitor things before we open the floodgates again. —Dr Ishmael Diablo the chicken 04:26, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

Seems you guys are still dealing with it - great job on keeping up with them, and keep up the good work everyone. I'm still positive it's the work of 1 PC, due to the IP address spoofing (hello, 127.0.0.1?? - that's the web server GuildWiki runs on haha). If only we could track it back to it's source and bitch slap 'em :P Aloha, Mauirixxx 18:05, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

Facebook Extension?

Any chance we could get the option to login via Facebook via this extension? I know it was an option when we were on Wikia (I even used it) - I'm just curious as to why we don't use it now? If anything, it may encourage some anonymous editors to login/create an account .... no? THoughts? Aloha, Mauirixxx 20:20, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

Errrrhhhh, Facebook? You crazy, bro? Arnout aka The Emperors Angel 08:47, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
No, and my mommy had me tested too. Just curious as to why the hate towards the facebook connector? Aloha, Mauirixxx 22:50, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
Facebook is for the faceless masses, and we're all rugged individualists here. Felix Omni Signature 22:51, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
But if they create an account here ... they wont be faceless anymore ... no? Aloha, Mauirixxx 22:57, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
Probably because it reminds us of Wikia, and most of us "veterans" felt it was just another useless "social" thing that Wikia was forcing on us. So basically, bad vibes. —Dr Ishmael Diablo the chicken 23:19, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
Well that makes sense ... thanks Ish. Aloha, Mauirixxx 23:22, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
If I may offer a less-subjective reason, as a privacy nut: Putting up "like" buttons and GA scripts is essentially like placing cameras you don't control on your fence, facing towards your yard. Any time a web asset loads in your browser (such as that ubiquitous thumbs-up button), the originating server logs information about the request (including the page it was viewed from), which in turn can be further processed by a script to create a profiling database, suitable for marketing or selling to marketing agencies. While in theory, this can be done by any web server, google and facebook are networks well-known for using the tactic even when acting as a third party. So by putting up one of those confounded buttons/stat scripts, you're essentially giving them free data mining access. And that's why facebook extensions get my "don't like". This concludes this episode of Tin Foil Hat Theatre. — ızǝℲ 01:38, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
Hmmm... I remember somewhere that it was rumored the Facebook extension made the entire site run slow, but that's all I remember. Anyways yeah a post on facebook about liking a page, a post that you made an edit? Ehhh, no thank you.–User Balistic Pve sigalistic 05:29, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

Abuse filters + PvX

Do the guildwiki admins mind if we copy/adapt your filters for our wiki? I'm not very good with creating these filters, and the bots seem to be stepping up attacks on our wiki. Also, you should probably set the two that are publicly viewable to private. Toraen talk 16:34, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

I don't see why not. I forget, do we have anyone (active) who's an admin on both wikis? If not, I can email you the conditions for the private filters. —Dr Ishmael Diablo the chicken 18:25, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
We currently share zero admins, so an email will do. Toraen talk 19:26, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
Sent. —Dr Ishmael Diablo the chicken 19:46, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
Thank you! They've already blocked quite a few edits. Toraen talk 21:24, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
If you'd like for one of us to help you maintain the filters, e.g. propagating changes when we modify or add filters here, we'd be happy to. Just make either me or Jon an admin there so we can edit your filters. —Dr Ishmael Diablo the chicken 02:57, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
Advertisement