User talk:AmandaNP/Archives/2016/March-May

Odd bot error
See ; your bot made a UAA report for User:XXxXx 1v1MeSkrub xXxXx, a username of 22 characters, with a rationale of "Username exceeds 40 characters". Any idea what happened? Nyttend (talk) 02:48, 13 March 2016 (UTC)
 * I've got an idea, still running tests though. -- Amanda  (aka DQ) 00:53, 14 March 2016 (UTC)
 * So, what should have been posted with the bots signatures of course, not mine:


 * Matched: Used x instead of cks attempting to skip filter: 40chars. Violating string: cksckscksckscks 1v1meskrub cksckscksckscks -- Amanda  (aka DQ) 05:42, 14 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Username exceeds 40 characters. -- Amanda  (aka DQ) 05:42, 14 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Username exceeds 40 characters. -- Amanda  (aka DQ) 05:42, 14 March 2016 (UTC)


 * It was a bug that if the similiar list was checked, and thats what caused the flag, it would not notify you of that. I have now updated it to include the text above instead. I would recommend the NO_SIM_MATCH flag be added to the filter, as that filter is not looking for specific text. I'll be uploading the new code to the server momentarily. -- Amanda  (aka DQ) 05:42, 14 March 2016 (UTC)

Block On 2600:1006:B156:9CEA:CF13:D9DD:5698:F4E8
Hello. Someone at 2600:1006:B156:9CEA:CF13:D9DD:5698:F4E8 is asking why they were blocked. Can you handle this? When I looked under contributions I did not see where they had edited anything and nothing was mentioned as to the reason in the block logs that I could find. Thanks. H.dryad (talk) 18:36, 14 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Replied there. -- Amanda  (aka DQ) 09:32, 15 March 2016 (UTC)

A new sock account?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Log/Freedomlover60 Freedomlover60 I got a very strange e-mail from this account today. QuackGuru ( talk ) 23:08, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Can you please forward the message or a a screen shot of the message to my email please? -- Amanda  (aka DQ) 07:00, 18 March 2016 (UTC)
 * The socks have been blocked and I overreacted. QuackGuru  ( talk ) 16:04, 18 March 2016 (UTC)

IP comment
The IP 99 made this comment, but I was having a conversation with the editor Onthost. The IP previously removed the redirect from Mrfrobinson's talk page. I noticed this comment by the IP on a user's talk page. After a six year break Onthost made a few comments. The User:Renameduser024 and User:Onthost are the same person. QuackGuru ( talk ) 01:36, 1 April 2016 (UTC)

Username
I like your username. Kinda reminds me of Delta Squad from the game I played, Star Wars: Republic Commando. GoldenRainbow (talk) 00:30, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

User:Romanian-and-proud
See hate speech/insult on his talk. I see no reason to keep talk page access open, E-Mail should likely be blocked as well.--Denniss (talk) 08:30, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I've dealt with it. Never got the original ping. -- Amanda  (aka DQ) 14:47, 5 April 2016 (UTC)

UTRS
When my tools are restored at WP:BN, could you please set me back as a developer and tool administrator on UTRS? Thanks.--v/r - TP 22:04, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Dev = Tool admin, so gave you dev, add admin if you really want :P Labs, Github, and tool access restored. Welcome back :D -- Amanda  (aka DQ) 05:43, 6 April 2016 (UTC)

Woman to woman
Hi Amanda, this is Gerda, wondering what leads you to being undecided on the infoboxes amendment. I liked your answer here, - good observation! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:24, 17 April 2016 (UTC)

UTRSBot
If we write that bot we were discussing, then other functionality should include: 1) When ticket is placed in Proxy Check queue, it automatically posts a request to WP:OPP, 2) When placed in checkuser queue, needs to email the checkuser list, 3) We need a need "discussing with reviewing admin" button that places the ticket in the hold queue, and then automatically places a note on the blocking admin's talk page.--v/r - TP 19:50, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Two things: CU queue could add it to the quick CU requests page (either instead or in addition to the e-mail to CU list); secondly, the "discussing with blocking admin" shouldn't automatically post on the admin's talk page, I think the UTRS responder should leave a self-written message; there are multiple reasons for that, the biggest being that the "blocking admin" field is provided by the appellant and is often completely wrong, so we shouldn't automate any process based on that data until we can automatically pull the correct information from block logs. On the other hand, we have a long-standing GitHub ticket open about being able to directly assign a ticket to someone in particular and notify them, either by e-mail or with the proposed bot leaving a talk page message. With OAuth being deployed at some point we'll no longer have the issue of "does this admin have a UTRS account or not?". ☺ ·  Salvidrim!   ·  &#9993;  20:16, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
 * I'm getting on IRC right now if you're on.--v/r - TP 01:08, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
 * I'm on the highway, probably won't be home and available for at least another hour (if you're still there. Out for most of the day tomorrow but Sunday's free. ☺ ·  Salvidrim!   ·  &#9993;  02:44, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

You've got mail!
—Bagumba (talk) 11:20, 2 May 2016 (UTC)

You've got mail
 Sh eri  ff  |  ☎ 911  | 17:11, 4 May 2016 (UTC)