User:Beetstra/sandbox

Record from list


 * diff See also and further reading both far fetched
 * diff article about the island, not the fort itself, linking the book that is talking about forts with a specific timeframe.

thoughts

 * 1) Changes in civility policy Without consulting the community first, and enforcing that through unilateral banning of an admin.  Zero, absolutely zero communication.
 * 2) Jimbo replying to me, that: let ArbCom solve it, and if they can't I am afraid it is either a WMF top-down approach or anarchy.
 * 3) VisualEditor was written to make editing Wikipedia easier, especially for new editors/to attract new editors.  (I agree that a side effect here is that also established editors may find it useful, but that is not the aim of why it was written; note, editing also gets easier for spammers, POV warriors).
 * 4) MediaViewer was written to make the visualization of the images more appealing to the world.  (I agree that it is for everyone, but it is aimed at the outside world and possibly new editors more than the established editors)
 * 5) Superprotect - we decide what you get!
 * 6) Flow - only few wikis use it, full of flaws, I am aware of a currently broken discussion through flow.  Written to make discussion easier for new editors.  Implemented while it was a piece of crap, ‘bad’ stuff could not even be deleted long after (it still breaks).
 * 7) Total negligence on maintaining the Spam-blacklist (my pet problem).  there is a suggestion from Jan 3, 2006 (!).  Nothing has been done.
 * 8) related: 03 February 2006, phab T6845, the CAPTCHA 'discriminates against blind people'.  It is also one of the mechanisms against spam.  Still not fixed.  Spambots have free reign.  Because a captcha ... makes life more difficult for new editors (.. and new spammers ... and sockpuppets ... and spambots).
 * 9) In my significantly !voted on suggestion to rewrite said Spam-blacklist I get a reply that even if I would get enough !votes it is 'unlikely that the Community Tech team would have the time and resources to create something similar to AbuseFilter. It may be possible, however, for the team to make some modest improvements to the existing bare-bones implementation'.  (You know how this reads ... but anyway, in less expletive language: ‘we don’t care what you want or need, what the community wants or needs is not our priority’).
 * 10) In the same overhaul-suggestion (which is based on cloning of the AbuseFilter and rewriting the clone) was stated that the AbuseFilter is itself archaic and needed a rewrite itself .. for which there is no time.  'Unfortunately, the AbuseFilter extension has been mostly unmaintained for years and would need to be overhauled ...'.  (I forgot about this, subject for another request in the Wishlist I guess).
 * 11) There is no MediaWiki driven effort to combat spam (I do detection myself separate from the software by one of my bots).  There is finally work going on regarding recording who added what, but that is still far away from an analyzed live feed upon which the anti spam effort can react.
 * 12) There is no MediaWiki driven effort to combat COI-editing (again, I do detection myself with a bot).
 * 13) There is no MediaWiki driven effort to combat sockpuppetry (We run behind them continuously, even with help from the edit filters).  You COULD have the checkuser extension do part of it - if an edit filter can match certain patterns, it is easy to have in the background also the IP check and browser info check (without showing the community).  Has the CheckUser extension been upgraded 'lately'?
 * 14) This survey is only in English (showing the disconnect ...)
 * 15) (Per user:NKohli (WMF) in m:Talk:IP_Editing:_Privacy_Enhancement_and_Abuse_Mitigation) The checkuser extension needs a serious upgrade.  That is not initiated because it needs a serious upgrade, but because it is in the way of the idea of hiding the IP addresses of anonymous editors.
 * 16) On commons new user upload patrol has been "removed for performance reasons" (per User:Jdforrester (WMF)).  See discussion on Commons.  Of course this was not discussed with the users whether this was in use, nor was there in the meanwhile a serious attempt to find other means of doing this.
 * 17) Community wishlist 2020:
 * 18) * Community_Wishlist_Survey_2020/Wikisource/UX_VisualEditor_on_Wikisource: "our small team is not capable of taking on a VE refresh for Wikisource" (user:MusikAnimal (WMF)), hence shoved under the rug instead of recognising there is a problem that needs to be solved now.
 * 19) * Community_Wishlist_Survey_2020/Wikisource/Increase_maximum_file_size: "our team wouldn't be able to work on this" (user:MaxSem (WMF)), hence shoved under the rug instead of recognising there is a problem that needs to be solved now.

bad lists

 * List_of_GIS_data_sources

Https://www.tinyurl.com