This user has bureaucrat privileges on the English Wikipedia.
This user has administrator privileges on the English Wikipedia.
This user has Interface administrator privileges on the English Wikipedia.
This user is an importer.
This user is a member of the Bot Approvals Group.
This user is an edit filter manager on the English Wikipedia.
This user has administrator privileges on Meta-Wiki.
This user is a global abuse filter helper.
This user is registered on the Access to nonpublic information policy noticeboard.
This user has been editing Wikipedia for at least ten years.

User talk:xaosflux

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Feel free to leave a comment or greeting at the bottom of this page.

My Talk Archives:
Archive-01 ~ Archive-02 ~ Archive-03
Archive-04 ~ Archive-05 ~ Archive-06
Archive-07 ~ Archive-08 ~ Archive-09
Archive-10 ~ Archive-11 ~ Archive-12
Archive-13 ~ Archive-14 ~ Archive-15
Archive-16 ~ Archive-17 ~ Archive-18
Archive-19 ~ Archive-20 ~ Archive-21
Archive-22 ~ Archive-23 ~ Archive-24
Archive-25 ~ Archive-26 ~ Archive-27
Archive-28 ~ Archive-29 ~ Archive-30
Archive-31 ~ Archive-32 ~ Archive-33
Archive-34 ~ Archive-35 ~ Archive-36
Archive-37 ~ Archive-38 ~ Archive-39
Display all archives (very large)

A barnstar for you![edit]

Administrator Barnstar Hires.png The Admin's Barnstar
Thanks for fixing all those fully-protected double redirects relating to MedCom for me! SemiHypercube 02:29, 15 November 2018 (UTC)

Venue for WP-space scripts[edit]

Sorry, got hung up with RL things. Regarding this, was my guess right? I ask because, cascading issue aside, if we do want to deal with projectspace scripts en masse in advance of phab:T171563, VPT or AN might be a better venue than IANB. ~ Amory (utc) 15:00, 16 December 2018 (UTC)

@Amorymeltzer: Oh sure, I was just wondering about the list you wanted to unprotected, if they are currently be used we don't want to open any holes. Do you have a list of the ones you want to unprotect? — xaosflux Talk 15:19, 16 December 2018 (UTC)
Regarding cascading protection, sure. Having thought about it a bit more, I'm not sure what a good course is beyond nothing. There are a lot more WP-space scripts, nearly all ancient, with varying levels of protection (most full, some semi?) and not all cascaded. I had thought to remove cascading as pointless, but I suppose someone get a sysop to add a template and then they could insert a JS-y bit into the template? Not sure if that would load. Best thing might be to just delete the entire area, in advance of its deprecation, or lower everything to semi protection, since full protection is required for JS loading. The latter would flush out folks who relied on them. ~ Amory (utc) 15:56, 16 December 2018 (UTC)
@Amorymeltzer: as far as removing the cascade option goes, I don't see any issue after review. As far as how to deal with these, if they are going to break, they won't be a security concern - they could still be 'template' that people could fork to userspace I suppose? — xaosflux Talk 17:26, 16 December 2018 (UTC)
There's no timeline on the phab, so it's a quiet risk in that any sysop can use them to execute code as long as they're full protected. I'm leaning toward batch semi-protecting 'em, but will do some digging to see if any are used much. ~ Amory (utc) 17:40, 16 December 2018 (UTC)
@Amorymeltzer: I'm a bit lost - you want to change all the cascading full prot scripts to semi prot to increase security? — xaosflux Talk 18:10, 16 December 2018 (UTC)
Code in projectspace can only be imported if it's full-protected; meta:Tech/News/2018/40 is misworded, but the email in the first footnote is correct (compare this fully-protected page to this unprotected page or this semi-protected page). Removing full protection removes the ability to importScript the page, whereas until phab:T171563 is resolved any sysop may edit those scripts. Sorry for the confusion, hopefully that's a little clearer? Unrelated to that, I thought to remove cascading protection as pointless. ~ Amory (utc) 19:50, 16 December 2018 (UTC)
@Amorymeltzer: OK, gotcha and that was a bad technews statement for sure! Removing full protection will break these, so that's a bad idea to do without VPT/AN chat. Changing Full+Cascade to just Full seems fine, you should be able to just do it as housekeeping. — xaosflux Talk 20:45, 16 December 2018 (UTC)

Uh-oh, did I just break something already?[edit]

Why are there a bunch of en>'s here, but not in other imported pages? Was I supposed to check the "Assign edits to local users where the named user exists locally" box? Or should I just cut-and-paste (with attribution) when I need a template at testwiki? Suffusion of Yellow (talk) 00:18, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

@Suffusion of Yellow: it is actually best the way you did it. That is a newer feature (last year) and it helps to show that the page was actually imported. For testwiki, if it is going to be there for a while, use attribution for sure, if it is only going to be there for a shortish test, just note the summary and delete when done. — xaosflux Talk 01:21, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

Doubt related to bots[edit]

I have recently created a bot account named Adithyakbot. The account was created as a normal user. I am interested in getting the bot approved so that I can make changes to various checkwiki error present. I would like to know what I need to do inorder to get the bot flag. I am actually not developing a bot instead, I am interested in doing them only by using AWB without the use of any scripts.Adithyak1997 (talk) 15:46, 31 January 2019 (UTC)

Hello @Adithyak1997:, if you will be making repetitive minor corrections that shouldn't require checking by others, using a bot flagged account with AWB is a good idea (as it keeps the edits off of the normal watchlist and recent changes patrol feeds). To request bot status, please see WP:BRFA. — xaosflux Talk 15:50, 31 January 2019 (UTC)

Edittools request[edit]


Just wondering if you're waiting for feedback on the Edittools request. I can ask at WProject Linguistics if you are. — kwami (talk) 01:59, 1 February 2019 (UTC)

 Donexaosflux Talk 04:39, 3 February 2019 (UTC)

Re edit filter in Admin Inactivity Discussion (redux)[edit]

Hi Xaosflux -- I also found [1], [2], [3] in Feb 2019 and [4], [5] in Jan 2019. Those are all to Picture of the Day (POTD), but there's a similar daily-dated system for On this Day (OTD), Today's Featured Article (TFA), and Today's Featured List (TFL; currently weekly). They're linked off main-page talk in the Main Page toolbox. As far as my limited knowledge goes, they are fully protected ~24 hours before going live, then (I think) unprotected after they've run. Cheers, Espresso Addict (talk) 04:20, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

thank you for the note, looks like a bug in that the 'page_restrictions_edit' value is not getting populated when the protection type is inherited via cascade; I'll get a phab ticket open on it! — xaosflux Talk 12:53, 22 February 2019 (UTC)
Note to self, recent example: Talk 12:54, 22 February 2019 (UTC)
Ah, that makes sense; a lot of the main-page components do fall under inherited protection. Thanks for investigating! Cheers, Espresso Addict (talk) 13:22, 22 February 2019 (UTC)
@Espresso Addict: phab:T216827 opened on this, thanks for reporting! — xaosflux Talk 14:42, 22 February 2019 (UTC)


Hi Xaosflux. Regarding this, it's probably most efficient to just add the confirmed flag. I'm not sure I fully understand the user rights history, so I'll just leave it with you. It might also hopefully prevent it being constantly reported to UAA/BOT, but if not I'll whitelist it (you'll see it's already been blocked once). -- zzuuzz (talk) 21:56, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

@Zzuuzz: I updated 527 to avoid this false positive. — xaosflux Talk 22:05, 5 March 2019 (UTC)
Also added confirmed. — xaosflux Talk 22:07, 5 March 2019 (UTC)
Thanks. It also needed whitelisting for the UAA bot, which I've now done. -- zzuuzz (talk) 21:38, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

Event Coordinator StatusMcbrarian[edit]

Thanks for giving me event coordinator status! The event is now over. Just wanted to let you know in case you wanted to turn it off or just allow it to expire. Thanks again! Mcbrarian (talk) 13:03, 9 March 2019 (UTC)

Inactive bureaucrat[edit]

Hi. Looking back, I have a question about Wikipedia:Bureaucrats' noticeboard/Archive 40#Inactive bureaucrat removal, which you posted on March 1: why wasn't User:Pakaran, who last edited in February 2018 ([6]) included under provision 1? (Bureaucrat accounts that have been completely inactive for at least one calendar year (without any edits or other logged actions) may have their bureaucrat permissions removed.) Was this an oversight? Or did I miss something? Thanks, --DannyS712 (talk) 08:31, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

Special:Log/Pakaran: Logged action in Sept 2018. –xenotalk 10:09, 10 March 2019 (UTC)
@DannyS712: what xeno said. Just FYI, as crat critera 1 is the same as the admin criteria, we track them along with Wikipedia:Inactive_administrators. For the other criteria, we track under Wikipedia:Bureaucrat_activity. Best regards, — xaosflux Talk 14:28, 10 March 2019 (UTC)
Thanks --DannyS712 (talk) 17:42, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

How'd you do that?[edit]

(No, it's not a new TV series, but it could be). ??? Just to why there's no edit history for that section of the discussion, or am I looking in the wrong place by simply clicking on view history? Atsme 📣 📧 17:32, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

@Atsme: it was a copy-and-paste text move only, the original history and attributions for those edits are on the main page. — xaosflux Talk 18:42, 10 March 2019 (UTC)
Tournesol.png Thank you Atsme 📣 📧 19:06, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

Trigger fingers[edit]

Looks like we both were waiting to pull the trigger. Face-smile.svg ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 01:16, 13 March 2019 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

Vitruvian Barnstar Hires.png The Technical Barnstar
For implementing all of my edit requests at Template talk:Protected page text and elsewhere {{3x|p}}ery (talk) 02:44, 13 March 2019 (UTC)
@Pppery: certainly, I know it is a slow process sometimes - but we want to be very careful with some of the interface messages, keep up the good work. — xaosflux Talk 03:15, 13 March 2019 (UTC)


Hello, thank you for your work on wikipedia. I am a newer user. I got the message that you instituted the following: " (User rights log); 15:36 Xaosflux (talk | contribs) changed group membership for Novitchka2000 from confirmed user to (none) ‎(-confirmed, is now autoconfirmed) Tag: PHP7 " What does this mean? Also, I've had a question about a citation for a page I started (For Rita Gonzalez) Do you have any suggestions about where to get an answer on the citation related question? I posted my question on the Talk area of the page.[Question_about_Citation] Thank you Novitchka2000 (talk) 18:16, 13 March 2019 (UTC)

Hello @Novitchka2000:, that "rights log" is standard maintenance. It looks like you were an event attendee and someone set a temporary override to some of the restrictions that brand new users have. Since you are not "brand new" anymore (you are now 'autoconfirmed') the temporary override is not longer needed. Judging by this edit you made, I take it you got your answer about that citation. In any case, welcome to Wikipedia and happy editing, — xaosflux Talk 19:13, 13 March 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:1976 Tangshan earthquake[edit]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:1976 Tangshan earthquake. Legobot (talk) 04:47, 14 March 2019 (UTC)


This page is ridiculously large. If nothing else, think of users with mobile devices.

At 2019-03-14 02:19:55 you restored Wikipedia:Outreach Dashboard/Queen Mary, University of London/Research Methods Film but left the speedy delete tag in place. What did you want to happen to the page? — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 09:32, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

@RHaworth: archived a bunch, regarding those pages - thought someone else was working on them a bit quicker, but they should be csd tag declined for right now at least, there is a discussion at Wikipedia:Education_noticeboard#Speedy_Deletions_of_Outreach_Dashboard_pages. Best regards, — xaosflux Talk 12:01, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

My talk page[edit]

Thanks for helping with that. If the harassment continues, I may ask you to close my account. I feel I have contributed a lot to the project but I don't have time to spend playing whack-a-mole with Mark Bourrie's stalker(s) reverting all my edits and putting crap all over the encyclopedia. Spoonkymonkey (talk) 15:44, 16 March 2019 (UTC)

@Spoonkymonkey: sorry for the trouble, it happens from time to time. Please note there is no "close account" process, however you can always start a new account (see Wikipedia:Clean start for information on that). — xaosflux Talk 15:58, 16 March 2019 (UTC)
I hate to walk away from 11 years of edits. I look at my last 50 edits and it's all dealing with this garbage. I enjoy spending quiet time finding historical articles translated from European Wikipedia and improving them. I also have come across Canadians who have been targeted for BLP violations. That's why I have held on pretty hard to the Mike Duffy and Mark Bourrie pages. Duffy was the focus of a lot of bile during the Canadian Senate expense scandal. That's pretty much old news now. Bourrie is targeted by at least one Canadian. The page is as solid as a rock. I've sourced every fact from the spelling of his wife's name on down. I think it needs protection for a while, as it has been vandalized a lot these past few days. Spoonkymonkey (talk) 16:05, 16 March 2019 (UTC)
@Spoonkymonkey: If you see pages being disrupted, please post at WP:RFPP for page protection requests (this can be for your own page as well). — xaosflux Talk 16:13, 16 March 2019 (UTC)
And Duffy paid you to edit his page.[7]
Here's one now. Spoonkymonkey (talk) 16:53, 16 March 2019 (UTC)

Interaction ban violation[edit]

A couple days or so ago I read Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:The Ministry of Truth/Userboxes/Fascist and noticed the page had been speedily deleted. RHaworth was the deleting administrator. I left a few notes on their talk page (a higher level of concern was reached when I noticed the deletion was one of many by checking RHaworth's deletion log). I eventually opened up Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2019 March 15#User:The Ministry of Truth/Userboxes. I will also note that "[most of the pages in question were] deleted [by RHaworth] without anyone else's suggestion" (see here); as I am unable to view deleted page history, I can only see who deleted pages and not who placed speedy deletion requests.
This edit at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2019 March 15#User:The Ministry of Truth/Userboxes clearly violates the "neither may comment or edit in any way on or about XFD's started by the other, in any venue, other than in circumstances covered by Wikipedia:Banning_policy#Exceptions to limited bans" clause of the "Legacypac and Godsy" interaction ban logged at Wikipedia:Editing restrictions/Placed by the Wikipedia community.
There are many times where I have been involved with pages and have been prevented from participating in discussions started by the other party due to the interaction ban, e.g. Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Kissing Candice (band) (where I was pinged as was in this case for the other party; I was also the user who placed the {{promising draft}} tag on the page) and Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:A2soup/Don't use draftspace (see here). I also browse through WP:MFD daily, and it is not uncommon that the other party has started 25-50% or so of the discussions there. I rarely start XfD discussions, so this clause rarely effects the other party.
Also pinging Ivanvector and Lourdes, two administrators who were recently involved with a matter related to the interaction ban (i.e. User talk:Godsy/Archive/2019#February 2019).
— Godsy (TALKCONT) 17:14, 16 March 2019 (UTC)
@Godsy: what do you want done? For ban enforcement or clarification/adjustments, please post at WP:AN or WP:ANI. — xaosflux Talk 17:20, 16 March 2019 (UTC)
(edit conflict) It is a community restriction (as opposed to one from the arbitration committee) so I do not think those are the proper venues. User talk:Legacypac/Archive 14#Admin assistance requested recently resulted in me receiving a block (then eventually an unblock due to the retroactive an/i discussion) in relation to the i-ban. I chose this page because you closed the interaction ban thread; WP:BANEX seems to allow "asking an administrator to take action against a violation of an interaction ban by another user." I guess I think the other party should be issued a block (I am not sure for how long) and perhaps the comment at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2019 March 15#User:The Ministry of Truth/Userboxes should be struck. If you, Ivanvector, or Lourdes (or any other administrator watching this page) does not wish to take any action, I guess I am content with letting the matter rest.
On an aside, I find this interaction ban perpetually frustrating. Have to check who started a deletion discussion or edited a page last before editing to avoid an actual or seeming violation of the ban is a large, tiresome burden. — Godsy (TALKCONT) 17:44, 16 March 2019 (UTC)
Feel free to {{moved to}} this to my talk page if you do not want it here. Warm regards, — Godsy (TALKCONT) 17:47, 16 March 2019 (UTC)
@Godsy: I'm a bit swamped right now so don't have time to dive in to this matter right now, unless there is something that some process requires only me to act on (please let me know) - that's why I referred you to the noticeboards. — xaosflux Talk 18:41, 16 March 2019 (UTC)

5 years?[edit]

I was looking through all the policies and I could only see the 2 & 3 year one. Where is the 5 year? -- Amanda (aka DQ) 06:12, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

@DeltaQuad: (talk page stalker) see WP:ADMIN#Restoration of adminship and Special:Permalink/828580847#RFC: Slight tweak to lengthy inactivity policy. --DannyS712 (talk) 06:13, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
Damnit, I only had to read one line further. -- Amanda (aka DQ) 06:16, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

Tech News: 2019-12[edit]

19:44, 18 March 2019 (UTC)