Difference between revisions of "User talk:MindlessXD"

From Lyriki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
m (New section: new song template)
Line 72: Line 72:
 
I'd like to make the point for banning anonymous edits. As you already know, a vandal bot has been targeting the site for quite a few weeks now. Unfortunately, we're not exactly abundant on the man power needed to cope with and I definitely don't like the prospect of having to continue chasing this moron indefinitely.<br/>You could say I'm biased since I always thought people who care enough to contribute can also be bothered with registering to the site... nevertheless I'd rather not to piss on anybody's right to post "anonymously" if they feel that gives them some kind of privacy (though if their are concerned with privacy, having their IP logged and publicly displayed is as bad as it gets... but that's another issue). Regardless, the fact is that currently most of our legit contributions are from registered users, and that the vandal bot "contributions" outnumber by a large margin those from good willed anonymous contributors. Considering this, I think the best would be to ban anonymous contributions temporarily, until the vandal bot quits trashing the site. What do you think about it? --[[User:Attendant|Attendant]] 18:48, 29 October 2007 (PDT)
 
I'd like to make the point for banning anonymous edits. As you already know, a vandal bot has been targeting the site for quite a few weeks now. Unfortunately, we're not exactly abundant on the man power needed to cope with and I definitely don't like the prospect of having to continue chasing this moron indefinitely.<br/>You could say I'm biased since I always thought people who care enough to contribute can also be bothered with registering to the site... nevertheless I'd rather not to piss on anybody's right to post "anonymously" if they feel that gives them some kind of privacy (though if their are concerned with privacy, having their IP logged and publicly displayed is as bad as it gets... but that's another issue). Regardless, the fact is that currently most of our legit contributions are from registered users, and that the vandal bot "contributions" outnumber by a large margin those from good willed anonymous contributors. Considering this, I think the best would be to ban anonymous contributions temporarily, until the vandal bot quits trashing the site. What do you think about it? --[[User:Attendant|Attendant]] 18:48, 29 October 2007 (PDT)
 
:I agree, it's becoming more than irritating. I'll poke [[User:Evelyn|Evelyn]] about it. --[[User:MindlessXD|MindlessXD]] 19:07, 29 October 2007 (PDT)
 
:I agree, it's becoming more than irritating. I'll poke [[User:Evelyn|Evelyn]] about it. --[[User:MindlessXD|MindlessXD]] 19:07, 29 October 2007 (PDT)
 +
 +
== new song template ==
 +
 +
Hey, I noticed the template change, and it messed up this page, which contains a "Featured artist" - [[No Doubt:Underneath It All]].  Any ideas?  Maybe the Lady Saw could just be removed, I don't know hehe.  I know MusicBrainz references the featured artist(s) within the song title.  --[[User:Ahoier|ahoier]] 07:34, 24 December 2007 (PST)

Revision as of 07:34, 24 December 2007

The previous contents of this page have been archived.

talk page spam

Hello, any chance of locking the Bad Religion - Drunk Sincerity talk page? Lots of spam being posted there lately. --ahoier 07:50, 27 November 2006 (PST)

Unless it gets extremely bad, we'll probably just keep banning IPs. --MindlessXD 15:14, 27 November 2006 (PST)
Alright sounds good. --ahoier 17:58, 27 November 2006 (PST)
some more here that you can ban :) Talk:Blackalicious:A to G --ahoier 07:26, 15 April 2007 (PDT)

"Die Ärzte:Ab 18"

Why did you delete the information I wrote at the beginning of the page? Just so I know it for my later contributions.

Sorry about that, it's back. I commentted it out mainly because it doesn't quite make sense grammatically. --MindlessXD 15:41, 16 January 2007 (PST)
Sorry, I'm from Germany. That should explain it. ;)

Main Page

Why did you reverted my changes to the main page?
The current layout wastes a lot of horizontal space which is what I really wanted to fix in the first place :(
--Attendant 19:02, 18 January 2007 (PST)

The majority of your changes were kept: basically everything except parts of the layout changes -- those were reverted because that layout was broken in Konqueror. From the edit summary I assumed that browser compatibility was what you were trying to fix. I agree the whitespace is a waste, but perhaps it could be filled with something instead of pushing the sidebar into the main content. In any case, unless you're at 800x600, the current whitespace is more than bareable. --MindlessXD 20:09, 18 January 2007 (PST)
Please, take a look at Main Page/Sandbox. I've tested it in Firefox (Windows and Linux), IE (6.0 and 7.0) and Konqueror and it's looking ok. If there's anything else you want to change, go ahead and do it. The current layout looks bad and there's not reason to bear with it (unless we disagree on that). --Attendant 19:38, 21 January 2007 (PST)
A quick poll on the IRC channel shows that the masses like your layout better, so go for it. --MindlessXD 20:20, 21 January 2007 (PST)

Search feature and encoding issues...

I've been playing around with the search function and I've verified that the search is not case sensitive as I used to think (if only I had realized this before...) This is a really good thing since it means we don't need to use redirects the way we are using it right now (which is also being enforced by the script). However, not everything is good. I'm pretty sure there's an encoding related problem with the server configuration. I've seen an encoding error many times when trying to check the blocked IPs page (though I haven't seen that error in awhile) and I also verified now that searching for terms which contain non ASCII characters yields no results (look at the page titles matches). For the time being I can search also through the page text matches but that is less reliable and just a workaround. In any case, it's lame (the LyricWiki guys can performs full Unicode searches and we are are stuck with 7 bit ASCII!) and we should fix it ASAP. I don't have access to the server nor know what to fix or where to look (though I could try to do some research) to fix this, so if you can take a look at this, please do it. If you can't (don't have the access or whatever) and can contact any of the other administrators (they haven't appeared here in a long time...) then, please do that. --Attendant 23:49, 22 January 2007 (PST)

I actually know what the cause of this is. I should be able to fix it, it'll just take some time and may require bringing the site down temporarily to fix it. Basically the cause of this is the fact that when Lyriki was started, the version of MediaWiki we were using used latin1 as its character set. In order to switch to Unicode support I'm going to have to convert the text data type on all the fields in the database, which could possibly take a while (I'm not sure). This is actually why some of the pages gave errors: one of the updates we've made since our initial installation updated some of the page title fields, but not all of them. I've since updated all the title fields, but the amount of data stored in them is much smaller. I'll try to get this fixed soon. --Evelyn 14:25, 23 January 2007 (PST)
Not sure if this problem is supposed to be fixed now (the site has already been down for a while today) but, just in case you think so, it's not fixed yet. --Attendant 17:34, 23 January 2007 (PST)
Just tried submitting a song in simplified Chinese (since I've added support for Chinese and Indian sites to WL)... it won't work. I assume it's related to this since uploading to LyricWiki went fine. --Attendant 23:02, 26 January 2007 (PST)
Shall we drop the redirect policy? --MindlessXD 17:13, 23 January 2007 (PST)
Yes we should, since they don't really help us in the search area and that policy doesn't improves any other aspect of the site. Redirects usefulness but is mostly limited to the cases where articles can arguably addressed by different names (cases where the search won't help much) such as POD, P.O.D. or Payable on Death, etc. --Attendant 17:34, 23 January 2007 (PST)

Recent Changes

Hey, been awhile since I was on here.

On the recent changes page, theres this new number thing in the list.


(diff) (hist) . . N Prodigy:Ruff in the Jungle Bizness‎; 14:50 . . (+742) . . Groo (Talk | contribs) (autogen. song page (WLv0.10))


Mind filling me in what it is? --Sidewinded 15:39, 2 April 2007 (PDT)

That's the number of characters that were added in that revision. The number is negative if there have been more characters removed than added. (And thus can be 0 if the same number were added as were removed.) Mainly it's for watching for vandals who remove large amounts of text or spammers who added a lot of spam links. ;) --MindlessXD 17:00, 2 April 2007 (PDT)
AWESOME. Thats a great idea. Kudos! --Sidewinded 19:39, 2 April 2007 (PDT)

Hi

Hi, I'm new to this Wiki and I'm sorry if this is the wrong place to write this. I have a couple of questions:

1. I've been taking a look through the bot-generated lyrics and I have a couple of questions regarding that: a. Is there any way to make it easier to navigate? Instead of it just "Next 200", "Previous 200" etc. can it be made to be a page dedicated to "A" and another to "B". Yes, it's probably a little bit of wasted space (because there may not be many "A") but it would make navigation so much easier. b. When I verify the lyrics, I've removed the warning, like it said. The song is removed from the list automatically, correct?

2. The blatantly obvious duplicates of songs - can they be deleted & how do you delete them? Advocatus 10:04, 16 July 2007 (PDT)

1. a. you'd have to ask Attendant about that
1. b. yes
2. yes, put {{deletion}} at the top and an administrator will come along and delete it --MindlessXD 21:34, 19 July 2007 (PDT)

Anonymous Edits

I'd like to make the point for banning anonymous edits. As you already know, a vandal bot has been targeting the site for quite a few weeks now. Unfortunately, we're not exactly abundant on the man power needed to cope with and I definitely don't like the prospect of having to continue chasing this moron indefinitely.
You could say I'm biased since I always thought people who care enough to contribute can also be bothered with registering to the site... nevertheless I'd rather not to piss on anybody's right to post "anonymously" if they feel that gives them some kind of privacy (though if their are concerned with privacy, having their IP logged and publicly displayed is as bad as it gets... but that's another issue). Regardless, the fact is that currently most of our legit contributions are from registered users, and that the vandal bot "contributions" outnumber by a large margin those from good willed anonymous contributors. Considering this, I think the best would be to ban anonymous contributions temporarily, until the vandal bot quits trashing the site. What do you think about it? --Attendant 18:48, 29 October 2007 (PDT)

I agree, it's becoming more than irritating. I'll poke Evelyn about it. --MindlessXD 19:07, 29 October 2007 (PDT)

new song template

Hey, I noticed the template change, and it messed up this page, which contains a "Featured artist" - No Doubt:Underneath It All. Any ideas? Maybe the Lady Saw could just be removed, I don't know hehe. I know MusicBrainz references the featured artist(s) within the song title. --ahoier 07:34, 24 December 2007 (PST)