Wikipedia:Edit filter/False positives/Archive 15

Daulman

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Daulton Kvenvold


 * Description
 * Put information about me on wikipidia


 * Date and time
 * 19:53, 1 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * We are not a substitute for a social networking site. Even if the filters hadn't tripped your "autobiography" (such as it was) would have been deleted shortly after creation. — Jeremy  ( v^_^v Hyper Combo K.O.! ) 20:18, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Ultraexactzz

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * User talk:LMT1978


 * Description
 * I have an editor making what appears to be a routine request for unblocking - ignore the legal threat, if you could - and the edit (and a previous one) were both tagged as "Possible self promotion in userspace", indicating that they tripped Filter 354. Thanks.


 * Date and time
 * 19:15, 3 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Comments

It was caught because that user wrote "your website" in their reply (which contains "our website"). Unfortunately, this tag cannot be removed. I really wish filters like this were log-only so that false positives like this wouldn't stick out so much. I also wonder if the author of the filter meant to exclude "your". In any case, thank you for reporting this and I'm sorry if it caused any problems.  — Soap  —  00:25, 4 February 2011 (UTC)
 * No problem at all - just struck me as odd. Thanks. UltraExactZZ Said~ Did 03:16, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

65.30.177.85

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Description
 * Change at from the
 * Change at from the


 * Date and time
 * 06:13, 4 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * Requesting RFPP. There's no false-positive here.— Jeremy  ( v^_^v Hyper Combo K.O.! ) 06:31, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

75.4.194.121

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * [[user_talk:Agradman]]


 * Description
 * I often want to make large-scale deletions to my talk page (delete the weekly Signpost, etc.) without logging in, because I'm on a forced wikibreak using Wikibreak enforcer. But every time I attempt to do so, this filter bars the edit from being made.


 * I realize this isn't exactly a "false positive", since the whole purpose of this filter is to prevent edits like this, which are almost always vandalism. But it would be nice if there were a way to "opt-out" my talk page from this filter.  Since I've never ever been the subject of vandalism, I would be willing to take that risk into my own hands ...


 * Just a thought :)


 * Date and time
 * 06:48, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, sorry, it would be theoretically possible to have an exemptions list, but it would run on every edit, and if even just a few people wanted to be added it would slow down the whole edit filter process. A bot would perhaps be a better idea than a filter for this type of thing.  — Soap  —  16:54, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Comments

Beproude

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Girnar


 * Description
 * Consolidation and factual information editing.


 * Date and time
 * 23:20, 7 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * We are not a travel brochure. — Jeremy  ( v^_^v Hyper Combo K.O.! ) 23:34, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

82.7.40.7

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Marianne Ny


 * Description
 * Remove the restored article content someone had added to this deleted article, someone listed it for DRV and added the DRV tag (which isn't required so the whole page could be deleted). Edit filter thinks I'm blanking the article, though I'm leaving the delrev template.


 * Date and time
 * 07:12, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

I'm honestly not familiar with the practice of creating a page with just a single tag and no content. It doesn't seem very helpful to the readers to tease them like that. But, if that's what we're doing now, I can add delrev to the exemption list, which currently contains only a few speedy deletion templates. Thank you for reporting this.  — Soap  —  12:25, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Comments
 * Yes it's a bad practice and the person needn't (perhaps even shouldn't have done it), but since I can't then delete it... --82.7.40.7 (talk) 20:11, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

122.163.9.152

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Rajeev Karwal


 * Description
 * I was editing Rajeev Karwal's page. I attest all information is true & to the best of my knowledge.


 * Date and time
 * 07:19, 10 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * Your edit tripped a trigger by deleting existing information. This is fortunate, as your edits turned this into a rankly promotional advertisment fawning over the subject in a non-objective manner. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  22:14, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

81.155.9.73

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Adele (singer)


 * Description


 * Date and time
 * 01:45, 11 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Comments

A vandal.  — Soap  —  01:54, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

68.5.234.167

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Ridgecrest Intermediate School


 * Description
 * I accidentally deleted it. I am so sorry please forgive me. I was trying to include information about the quads because i go there.


 * Date and time
 * 02:03, 12 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * Well, all the text has been restored since you made the intended edit, so don't worry if you've removed it by accident. The filter only attempted to stop you because you removed all categories. Minima  c  ( talk ) 09:27, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

OlEnglish

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Benigno Aquino III‎


 * Description
 * Reporting on behalf of IP editor: 124.6.181.221. Received a "possible BLP issue or vandalism" tag upon adding a single initial to an article subject's name.


 * Date and time
 * 05:47, 12 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * Oh.. I wasn't aware that Filter 364 was actually "Changing the name in a BLP infobox", which is exactly what the IP editor did. But the output of the tag as seen in Recent Changes (and the article revision history) was "possible BLP issue or vandalism", and it wasn't vandalism nor a BLP issue, so that's why I reported it as a false positive. Shouldn't the RecentChanges text and the filter description text match? -- &oelig; &trade; 06:06, 12 February 2011 (UTC)
 * No, because some filters' descriptions are too detailed. Not only that, but there's a separate entry on the edit filter management page to tag any edits tripped by the filter with a description, and if left blank it will not provide a tag. — Jeremy  ( v^_^v Hyper Combo K.O.! ) 21:47, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

86.173.190.83

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Ohm's law


 * Description
 * mt friend thought it was funny to block my ip on wikipedia. he tried to delete the whole page. i am sorry


 * Date and time
 * 17:15, 12 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * There's a reason why the anti-blank filter is there: To stop IPs and new users from blanking pages without an explanation. Minima  c  ( talk ) 17:55, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

82.34.200.202

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * The Supersuckers


 * Description
 * The page reports that Supersuckers is in a hiatus and just touring with Thin Lizzy, I added more up to date information coming from Dan Bolton himself and available on video, stating that they're looking for a label and have material ready for a new album. I also added the name of the current guitar player who replaced Heathman and the interview page as a reference. Don't think there's anything wrong with that?


 * Date and time
 * 16:35, 29 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * The problem, as always with this filter and its false positives, is the "SUPERSUCKERS" in the url. (The filter is set up to trip on all new and unregistered users writing words in all-caps and can't distinguish between good and bad edits.) — Jeremy  ( v^_^v Hyper Combo K.O.! ) 19:37, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

76.250.189.117

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Anti-establishment


 * Description
 * trying to revert this crap


 * Date and time
 * 00:29, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, maybe it's time to consider ending this filter, even though it does stop a lot of vandalism, because much of the vandalism it stops would be caught by other filters anyway. I've reverted the edit.  — Soap  —  00:47, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Comments

Komponistenarchiv

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Enrico Mainardi


 * Description
 * Add link to German Composer's Archive


 * Date and time
 * 13:42, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

As above, the filter correctly detected the conflict of interest, and the user is blocked.  — Soap  —  16:33, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Comments

Ubcmedia

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Pick of the Pops


 * Description
 * I was trying to add a link to our website, Unique the Production Company. We produce this show for the BBC and would like to be credited.


 * Date and time
 * 12:42, 1 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * This is not a false positive, but the filter behaving precisely as it's supposed to. Please see External links and Conflict of interest. -- Rrburke (talk) 14:51, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Daulman

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Daulton Kvenvold


 * Description
 * Put information about me on wikipidia


 * Date and time
 * 19:53, 1 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * We are not a substitute for a social networking site. Even if the filters hadn't tripped your "autobiography" (such as it was) would have been deleted shortly after creation. — Jeremy  ( v^_^v Hyper Combo K.O.! ) 20:18, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Ultraexactzz

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * User talk:LMT1978


 * Description
 * I have an editor making what appears to be a routine request for unblocking - ignore the legal threat, if you could - and the edit (and a previous one) were both tagged as "Possible self promotion in userspace", indicating that they tripped Filter 354. Thanks.


 * Date and time
 * 19:15, 3 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Comments

It was caught because that user wrote "your website" in their reply (which contains "our website"). Unfortunately, this tag cannot be removed. I really wish filters like this were log-only so that false positives like this wouldn't stick out so much. I also wonder if the author of the filter meant to exclude "your". In any case, thank you for reporting this and I'm sorry if it caused any problems.  — Soap  —  00:25, 4 February 2011 (UTC)
 * No problem at all - just struck me as odd. Thanks. UltraExactZZ Said~ Did 03:16, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

65.30.177.85

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Description
 * Change at from the
 * Change at from the


 * Date and time
 * 06:13, 4 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * Requesting RFPP. There's no false-positive here.— Jeremy  ( v^_^v Hyper Combo K.O.! ) 06:31, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

75.4.194.121

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * [[user_talk:Agradman]]


 * Description
 * I often want to make large-scale deletions to my talk page (delete the weekly Signpost, etc.) without logging in, because I'm on a forced wikibreak using Wikibreak enforcer. But every time I attempt to do so, this filter bars the edit from being made.


 * I realize this isn't exactly a "false positive", since the whole purpose of this filter is to prevent edits like this, which are almost always vandalism. But it would be nice if there were a way to "opt-out" my talk page from this filter.  Since I've never ever been the subject of vandalism, I would be willing to take that risk into my own hands ...


 * Just a thought :)


 * Date and time
 * 06:48, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, sorry, it would be theoretically possible to have an exemptions list, but it would run on every edit, and if even just a few people wanted to be added it would slow down the whole edit filter process. A bot would perhaps be a better idea than a filter for this type of thing.  — Soap  —  16:54, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Comments

Beproude

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Girnar


 * Description
 * Consolidation and factual information editing.


 * Date and time
 * 23:20, 7 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * We are not a travel brochure. — Jeremy  ( v^_^v Hyper Combo K.O.! ) 23:34, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

82.7.40.7

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Marianne Ny


 * Description
 * Remove the restored article content someone had added to this deleted article, someone listed it for DRV and added the DRV tag (which isn't required so the whole page could be deleted). Edit filter thinks I'm blanking the article, though I'm leaving the delrev template.


 * Date and time
 * 07:12, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

I'm honestly not familiar with the practice of creating a page with just a single tag and no content. It doesn't seem very helpful to the readers to tease them like that. But, if that's what we're doing now, I can add delrev to the exemption list, which currently contains only a few speedy deletion templates. Thank you for reporting this.  — Soap  —  12:25, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Comments
 * Yes it's a bad practice and the person needn't (perhaps even shouldn't have done it), but since I can't then delete it... --82.7.40.7 (talk) 20:11, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

122.163.9.152

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Rajeev Karwal


 * Description
 * I was editing Rajeev Karwal's page. I attest all information is true & to the best of my knowledge.


 * Date and time
 * 07:19, 10 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * Your edit tripped a trigger by deleting existing information. This is fortunate, as your edits turned this into a rankly promotional advertisment fawning over the subject in a non-objective manner. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  22:14, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

81.155.9.73

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Adele (singer)


 * Description


 * Date and time
 * 01:45, 11 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Comments

A vandal.  — Soap  —  01:54, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

68.5.234.167

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Ridgecrest Intermediate School


 * Description
 * I accidentally deleted it. I am so sorry please forgive me. I was trying to include information about the quads because i go there.


 * Date and time
 * 02:03, 12 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * Well, all the text has been restored since you made the intended edit, so don't worry if you've removed it by accident. The filter only attempted to stop you because you removed all categories. Minima  c  ( talk ) 09:27, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

OlEnglish

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Benigno Aquino III‎


 * Description
 * Reporting on behalf of IP editor: 124.6.181.221. Received a "possible BLP issue or vandalism" tag upon adding a single initial to an article subject's name.


 * Date and time
 * 05:47, 12 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * Oh.. I wasn't aware that Filter 364 was actually "Changing the name in a BLP infobox", which is exactly what the IP editor did. But the output of the tag as seen in Recent Changes (and the article revision history) was "possible BLP issue or vandalism", and it wasn't vandalism nor a BLP issue, so that's why I reported it as a false positive. Shouldn't the RecentChanges text and the filter description text match? -- &oelig; &trade; 06:06, 12 February 2011 (UTC)
 * No, because some filters' descriptions are too detailed. Not only that, but there's a separate entry on the edit filter management page to tag any edits tripped by the filter with a description, and if left blank it will not provide a tag. — Jeremy  ( v^_^v Hyper Combo K.O.! ) 21:47, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

86.173.190.83

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Ohm's law


 * Description
 * mt friend thought it was funny to block my ip on wikipedia. he tried to delete the whole page. i am sorry


 * Date and time
 * 17:15, 12 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * There's a reason why the anti-blank filter is there: To stop IPs and new users from blanking pages without an explanation. Minima  c  ( talk ) 17:55, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

82.34.200.202

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * The Supersuckers


 * Description
 * The page reports that Supersuckers is in a hiatus and just touring with Thin Lizzy, I added more up to date information coming from Dan Bolton himself and available on video, stating that they're looking for a label and have material ready for a new album. I also added the name of the current guitar player who replaced Heathman and the interview page as a reference. Don't think there's anything wrong with that?


 * Date and time
 * 16:35, 29 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * The problem, as always with this filter and its false positives, is the "SUPERSUCKERS" in the url. (The filter is set up to trip on all new and unregistered users writing words in all-caps and can't distinguish between good and bad edits.) — Jeremy  ( v^_^v Hyper Combo K.O.! ) 19:37, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

76.250.189.117

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Anti-establishment


 * Description
 * trying to revert this crap


 * Date and time
 * 00:29, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, maybe it's time to consider ending this filter, even though it does stop a lot of vandalism, because much of the vandalism it stops would be caught by other filters anyway. I've reverted the edit.  — Soap  —  00:47, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Comments

Komponistenarchiv

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Enrico Mainardi


 * Description
 * Add link to German Composer's Archive


 * Date and time
 * 13:42, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

As above, the filter correctly detected the conflict of interest, and the user is blocked.  — Soap  —  16:33, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Comments

Ubcmedia

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Pick of the Pops


 * Description
 * I was trying to add a link to our website, Unique the Production Company. We produce this show for the BBC and would like to be credited.


 * Date and time
 * 12:42, 1 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * This is not a false positive, but the filter behaving precisely as it's supposed to. Please see External links and Conflict of interest. -- Rrburke (talk) 14:51, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Daulman

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Daulton Kvenvold


 * Description
 * Put information about me on wikipidia


 * Date and time
 * 19:53, 1 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * We are not a substitute for a social networking site. Even if the filters hadn't tripped your "autobiography" (such as it was) would have been deleted shortly after creation. — Jeremy  ( v^_^v Hyper Combo K.O.! ) 20:18, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Ultraexactzz

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * User talk:LMT1978


 * Description
 * I have an editor making what appears to be a routine request for unblocking - ignore the legal threat, if you could - and the edit (and a previous one) were both tagged as "Possible self promotion in userspace", indicating that they tripped Filter 354. Thanks.


 * Date and time
 * 19:15, 3 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Comments

It was caught because that user wrote "your website" in their reply (which contains "our website"). Unfortunately, this tag cannot be removed. I really wish filters like this were log-only so that false positives like this wouldn't stick out so much. I also wonder if the author of the filter meant to exclude "your". In any case, thank you for reporting this and I'm sorry if it caused any problems.  — Soap  —  00:25, 4 February 2011 (UTC)
 * No problem at all - just struck me as odd. Thanks. UltraExactZZ Said~ Did 03:16, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

65.30.177.85

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Description
 * Change at from the
 * Change at from the


 * Date and time
 * 06:13, 4 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * Requesting RFPP. There's no false-positive here.— Jeremy  ( v^_^v Hyper Combo K.O.! ) 06:31, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

75.4.194.121

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * [[user_talk:Agradman]]


 * Description
 * I often want to make large-scale deletions to my talk page (delete the weekly Signpost, etc.) without logging in, because I'm on a forced wikibreak using Wikibreak enforcer. But every time I attempt to do so, this filter bars the edit from being made.


 * I realize this isn't exactly a "false positive", since the whole purpose of this filter is to prevent edits like this, which are almost always vandalism. But it would be nice if there were a way to "opt-out" my talk page from this filter.  Since I've never ever been the subject of vandalism, I would be willing to take that risk into my own hands ...


 * Just a thought :)


 * Date and time
 * 06:48, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, sorry, it would be theoretically possible to have an exemptions list, but it would run on every edit, and if even just a few people wanted to be added it would slow down the whole edit filter process. A bot would perhaps be a better idea than a filter for this type of thing.  — Soap  —  16:54, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Comments

Beproude

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Girnar


 * Description
 * Consolidation and factual information editing.


 * Date and time
 * 23:20, 7 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * We are not a travel brochure. — Jeremy  ( v^_^v Hyper Combo K.O.! ) 23:34, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

82.7.40.7

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Marianne Ny


 * Description
 * Remove the restored article content someone had added to this deleted article, someone listed it for DRV and added the DRV tag (which isn't required so the whole page could be deleted). Edit filter thinks I'm blanking the article, though I'm leaving the delrev template.


 * Date and time
 * 07:12, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

I'm honestly not familiar with the practice of creating a page with just a single tag and no content. It doesn't seem very helpful to the readers to tease them like that. But, if that's what we're doing now, I can add delrev to the exemption list, which currently contains only a few speedy deletion templates. Thank you for reporting this.  — Soap  —  12:25, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Comments
 * Yes it's a bad practice and the person needn't (perhaps even shouldn't have done it), but since I can't then delete it... --82.7.40.7 (talk) 20:11, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

122.163.9.152

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Rajeev Karwal


 * Description
 * I was editing Rajeev Karwal's page. I attest all information is true & to the best of my knowledge.


 * Date and time
 * 07:19, 10 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * Your edit tripped a trigger by deleting existing information. This is fortunate, as your edits turned this into a rankly promotional advertisment fawning over the subject in a non-objective manner. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  22:14, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

81.155.9.73

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Adele (singer)


 * Description


 * Date and time
 * 01:45, 11 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Comments

A vandal.  — Soap  —  01:54, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

68.5.234.167

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Ridgecrest Intermediate School


 * Description
 * I accidentally deleted it. I am so sorry please forgive me. I was trying to include information about the quads because i go there.


 * Date and time
 * 02:03, 12 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * Well, all the text has been restored since you made the intended edit, so don't worry if you've removed it by accident. The filter only attempted to stop you because you removed all categories. Minima  c  ( talk ) 09:27, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

OlEnglish

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Benigno Aquino III‎


 * Description
 * Reporting on behalf of IP editor: 124.6.181.221. Received a "possible BLP issue or vandalism" tag upon adding a single initial to an article subject's name.


 * Date and time
 * 05:47, 12 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * Oh.. I wasn't aware that Filter 364 was actually "Changing the name in a BLP infobox", which is exactly what the IP editor did. But the output of the tag as seen in Recent Changes (and the article revision history) was "possible BLP issue or vandalism", and it wasn't vandalism nor a BLP issue, so that's why I reported it as a false positive. Shouldn't the RecentChanges text and the filter description text match? -- &oelig; &trade; 06:06, 12 February 2011 (UTC)
 * No, because some filters' descriptions are too detailed. Not only that, but there's a separate entry on the edit filter management page to tag any edits tripped by the filter with a description, and if left blank it will not provide a tag. — Jeremy  ( v^_^v Hyper Combo K.O.! ) 21:47, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

86.173.190.83

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Ohm's law


 * Description
 * mt friend thought it was funny to block my ip on wikipedia. he tried to delete the whole page. i am sorry


 * Date and time
 * 17:15, 12 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * There's a reason why the anti-blank filter is there: To stop IPs and new users from blanking pages without an explanation. Minima  c  ( talk ) 17:55, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

82.34.200.202

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * The Supersuckers


 * Description
 * The page reports that Supersuckers is in a hiatus and just touring with Thin Lizzy, I added more up to date information coming from Dan Bolton himself and available on video, stating that they're looking for a label and have material ready for a new album. I also added the name of the current guitar player who replaced Heathman and the interview page as a reference. Don't think there's anything wrong with that?


 * Date and time
 * 16:35, 29 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * The problem, as always with this filter and its false positives, is the "SUPERSUCKERS" in the url. (The filter is set up to trip on all new and unregistered users writing words in all-caps and can't distinguish between good and bad edits.) — Jeremy  ( v^_^v Hyper Combo K.O.! ) 19:37, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

76.250.189.117

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Anti-establishment


 * Description
 * trying to revert this crap


 * Date and time
 * 00:29, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, maybe it's time to consider ending this filter, even though it does stop a lot of vandalism, because much of the vandalism it stops would be caught by other filters anyway. I've reverted the edit.  — Soap  —  00:47, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Comments

Komponistenarchiv

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Enrico Mainardi


 * Description
 * Add link to German Composer's Archive


 * Date and time
 * 13:42, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

As above, the filter correctly detected the conflict of interest, and the user is blocked.  — Soap  —  16:33, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Comments

Ubcmedia

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Pick of the Pops


 * Description
 * I was trying to add a link to our website, Unique the Production Company. We produce this show for the BBC and would like to be credited.


 * Date and time
 * 12:42, 1 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * This is not a false positive, but the filter behaving precisely as it's supposed to. Please see External links and Conflict of interest. -- Rrburke (talk) 14:51, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Daulman

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Daulton Kvenvold


 * Description
 * Put information about me on wikipidia


 * Date and time
 * 19:53, 1 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * We are not a substitute for a social networking site. Even if the filters hadn't tripped your "autobiography" (such as it was) would have been deleted shortly after creation. — Jeremy  ( v^_^v Hyper Combo K.O.! ) 20:18, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Ultraexactzz

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * User talk:LMT1978


 * Description
 * I have an editor making what appears to be a routine request for unblocking - ignore the legal threat, if you could - and the edit (and a previous one) were both tagged as "Possible self promotion in userspace", indicating that they tripped Filter 354. Thanks.


 * Date and time
 * 19:15, 3 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Comments

It was caught because that user wrote "your website" in their reply (which contains "our website"). Unfortunately, this tag cannot be removed. I really wish filters like this were log-only so that false positives like this wouldn't stick out so much. I also wonder if the author of the filter meant to exclude "your". In any case, thank you for reporting this and I'm sorry if it caused any problems.  — Soap  —  00:25, 4 February 2011 (UTC)
 * No problem at all - just struck me as odd. Thanks. UltraExactZZ Said~ Did 03:16, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

65.30.177.85

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Description
 * Change at from the
 * Change at from the


 * Date and time
 * 06:13, 4 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * Requesting RFPP. There's no false-positive here.— Jeremy  ( v^_^v Hyper Combo K.O.! ) 06:31, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

75.4.194.121

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * [[user_talk:Agradman]]


 * Description
 * I often want to make large-scale deletions to my talk page (delete the weekly Signpost, etc.) without logging in, because I'm on a forced wikibreak using Wikibreak enforcer. But every time I attempt to do so, this filter bars the edit from being made.


 * I realize this isn't exactly a "false positive", since the whole purpose of this filter is to prevent edits like this, which are almost always vandalism. But it would be nice if there were a way to "opt-out" my talk page from this filter.  Since I've never ever been the subject of vandalism, I would be willing to take that risk into my own hands ...


 * Just a thought :)


 * Date and time
 * 06:48, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, sorry, it would be theoretically possible to have an exemptions list, but it would run on every edit, and if even just a few people wanted to be added it would slow down the whole edit filter process. A bot would perhaps be a better idea than a filter for this type of thing.  — Soap  —  16:54, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Comments

Beproude

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Girnar


 * Description
 * Consolidation and factual information editing.


 * Date and time
 * 23:20, 7 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * We are not a travel brochure. — Jeremy  ( v^_^v Hyper Combo K.O.! ) 23:34, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

82.7.40.7

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Marianne Ny


 * Description
 * Remove the restored article content someone had added to this deleted article, someone listed it for DRV and added the DRV tag (which isn't required so the whole page could be deleted). Edit filter thinks I'm blanking the article, though I'm leaving the delrev template.


 * Date and time
 * 07:12, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

I'm honestly not familiar with the practice of creating a page with just a single tag and no content. It doesn't seem very helpful to the readers to tease them like that. But, if that's what we're doing now, I can add delrev to the exemption list, which currently contains only a few speedy deletion templates. Thank you for reporting this.  — Soap  —  12:25, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Comments
 * Yes it's a bad practice and the person needn't (perhaps even shouldn't have done it), but since I can't then delete it... --82.7.40.7 (talk) 20:11, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

122.163.9.152

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Rajeev Karwal


 * Description
 * I was editing Rajeev Karwal's page. I attest all information is true & to the best of my knowledge.


 * Date and time
 * 07:19, 10 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * Your edit tripped a trigger by deleting existing information. This is fortunate, as your edits turned this into a rankly promotional advertisment fawning over the subject in a non-objective manner. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  22:14, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

81.155.9.73

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Adele (singer)


 * Description


 * Date and time
 * 01:45, 11 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Comments

A vandal.  — Soap  —  01:54, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

68.5.234.167

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Ridgecrest Intermediate School


 * Description
 * I accidentally deleted it. I am so sorry please forgive me. I was trying to include information about the quads because i go there.


 * Date and time
 * 02:03, 12 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * Well, all the text has been restored since you made the intended edit, so don't worry if you've removed it by accident. The filter only attempted to stop you because you removed all categories. Minima  c  ( talk ) 09:27, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

OlEnglish

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Benigno Aquino III‎


 * Description
 * Reporting on behalf of IP editor: 124.6.181.221. Received a "possible BLP issue or vandalism" tag upon adding a single initial to an article subject's name.


 * Date and time
 * 05:47, 12 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * Oh.. I wasn't aware that Filter 364 was actually "Changing the name in a BLP infobox", which is exactly what the IP editor did. But the output of the tag as seen in Recent Changes (and the article revision history) was "possible BLP issue or vandalism", and it wasn't vandalism nor a BLP issue, so that's why I reported it as a false positive. Shouldn't the RecentChanges text and the filter description text match? -- &oelig; &trade; 06:06, 12 February 2011 (UTC)
 * No, because some filters' descriptions are too detailed. Not only that, but there's a separate entry on the edit filter management page to tag any edits tripped by the filter with a description, and if left blank it will not provide a tag. — Jeremy  ( v^_^v Hyper Combo K.O.! ) 21:47, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

86.173.190.83

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Ohm's law


 * Description
 * mt friend thought it was funny to block my ip on wikipedia. he tried to delete the whole page. i am sorry


 * Date and time
 * 17:15, 12 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * There's a reason why the anti-blank filter is there: To stop IPs and new users from blanking pages without an explanation. Minima  c  ( talk ) 17:55, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

82.34.200.202

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * The Supersuckers


 * Description
 * The page reports that Supersuckers is in a hiatus and just touring with Thin Lizzy, I added more up to date information coming from Dan Bolton himself and available on video, stating that they're looking for a label and have material ready for a new album. I also added the name of the current guitar player who replaced Heathman and the interview page as a reference. Don't think there's anything wrong with that?


 * Date and time
 * 16:35, 29 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * The problem, as always with this filter and its false positives, is the "SUPERSUCKERS" in the url. (The filter is set up to trip on all new and unregistered users writing words in all-caps and can't distinguish between good and bad edits.) — Jeremy  ( v^_^v Hyper Combo K.O.! ) 19:37, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

76.250.189.117

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Anti-establishment


 * Description
 * trying to revert this crap


 * Date and time
 * 00:29, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, maybe it's time to consider ending this filter, even though it does stop a lot of vandalism, because much of the vandalism it stops would be caught by other filters anyway. I've reverted the edit.  — Soap  —  00:47, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Comments

Komponistenarchiv

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Enrico Mainardi


 * Description
 * Add link to German Composer's Archive


 * Date and time
 * 13:42, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

As above, the filter correctly detected the conflict of interest, and the user is blocked.  — Soap  —  16:33, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Comments

Ubcmedia

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Pick of the Pops


 * Description
 * I was trying to add a link to our website, Unique the Production Company. We produce this show for the BBC and would like to be credited.


 * Date and time
 * 12:42, 1 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * This is not a false positive, but the filter behaving precisely as it's supposed to. Please see External links and Conflict of interest. -- Rrburke (talk) 14:51, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Daulman

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Daulton Kvenvold


 * Description
 * Put information about me on wikipidia


 * Date and time
 * 19:53, 1 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * We are not a substitute for a social networking site. Even if the filters hadn't tripped your "autobiography" (such as it was) would have been deleted shortly after creation. — Jeremy  ( v^_^v Hyper Combo K.O.! ) 20:18, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Ultraexactzz

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * User talk:LMT1978


 * Description
 * I have an editor making what appears to be a routine request for unblocking - ignore the legal threat, if you could - and the edit (and a previous one) were both tagged as "Possible self promotion in userspace", indicating that they tripped Filter 354. Thanks.


 * Date and time
 * 19:15, 3 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Comments

It was caught because that user wrote "your website" in their reply (which contains "our website"). Unfortunately, this tag cannot be removed. I really wish filters like this were log-only so that false positives like this wouldn't stick out so much. I also wonder if the author of the filter meant to exclude "your". In any case, thank you for reporting this and I'm sorry if it caused any problems.  — Soap  —  00:25, 4 February 2011 (UTC)
 * No problem at all - just struck me as odd. Thanks. UltraExactZZ Said~ Did 03:16, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

65.30.177.85

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Description
 * Change at from the
 * Change at from the


 * Date and time
 * 06:13, 4 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * Requesting RFPP. There's no false-positive here.— Jeremy  ( v^_^v Hyper Combo K.O.! ) 06:31, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

75.4.194.121

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * [[user_talk:Agradman]]


 * Description
 * I often want to make large-scale deletions to my talk page (delete the weekly Signpost, etc.) without logging in, because I'm on a forced wikibreak using Wikibreak enforcer. But every time I attempt to do so, this filter bars the edit from being made.


 * I realize this isn't exactly a "false positive", since the whole purpose of this filter is to prevent edits like this, which are almost always vandalism. But it would be nice if there were a way to "opt-out" my talk page from this filter.  Since I've never ever been the subject of vandalism, I would be willing to take that risk into my own hands ...


 * Just a thought :)


 * Date and time
 * 06:48, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, sorry, it would be theoretically possible to have an exemptions list, but it would run on every edit, and if even just a few people wanted to be added it would slow down the whole edit filter process. A bot would perhaps be a better idea than a filter for this type of thing.  — Soap  —  16:54, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Comments

Beproude

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Girnar


 * Description
 * Consolidation and factual information editing.


 * Date and time
 * 23:20, 7 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * We are not a travel brochure. — Jeremy  ( v^_^v Hyper Combo K.O.! ) 23:34, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

82.7.40.7

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Marianne Ny


 * Description
 * Remove the restored article content someone had added to this deleted article, someone listed it for DRV and added the DRV tag (which isn't required so the whole page could be deleted). Edit filter thinks I'm blanking the article, though I'm leaving the delrev template.


 * Date and time
 * 07:12, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

I'm honestly not familiar with the practice of creating a page with just a single tag and no content. It doesn't seem very helpful to the readers to tease them like that. But, if that's what we're doing now, I can add delrev to the exemption list, which currently contains only a few speedy deletion templates. Thank you for reporting this.  — Soap  —  12:25, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Comments
 * Yes it's a bad practice and the person needn't (perhaps even shouldn't have done it), but since I can't then delete it... --82.7.40.7 (talk) 20:11, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

122.163.9.152

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Rajeev Karwal


 * Description
 * I was editing Rajeev Karwal's page. I attest all information is true & to the best of my knowledge.


 * Date and time
 * 07:19, 10 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * Your edit tripped a trigger by deleting existing information. This is fortunate, as your edits turned this into a rankly promotional advertisment fawning over the subject in a non-objective manner. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  22:14, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

81.155.9.73

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Adele (singer)


 * Description


 * Date and time
 * 01:45, 11 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Comments

A vandal.  — Soap  —  01:54, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

68.5.234.167

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Ridgecrest Intermediate School


 * Description
 * I accidentally deleted it. I am so sorry please forgive me. I was trying to include information about the quads because i go there.


 * Date and time
 * 02:03, 12 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * Well, all the text has been restored since you made the intended edit, so don't worry if you've removed it by accident. The filter only attempted to stop you because you removed all categories. Minima  c  ( talk ) 09:27, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

OlEnglish

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Benigno Aquino III‎


 * Description
 * Reporting on behalf of IP editor: 124.6.181.221. Received a "possible BLP issue or vandalism" tag upon adding a single initial to an article subject's name.


 * Date and time
 * 05:47, 12 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * Oh.. I wasn't aware that Filter 364 was actually "Changing the name in a BLP infobox", which is exactly what the IP editor did. But the output of the tag as seen in Recent Changes (and the article revision history) was "possible BLP issue or vandalism", and it wasn't vandalism nor a BLP issue, so that's why I reported it as a false positive. Shouldn't the RecentChanges text and the filter description text match? -- &oelig; &trade; 06:06, 12 February 2011 (UTC)
 * No, because some filters' descriptions are too detailed. Not only that, but there's a separate entry on the edit filter management page to tag any edits tripped by the filter with a description, and if left blank it will not provide a tag. — Jeremy  ( v^_^v Hyper Combo K.O.! ) 21:47, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

86.173.190.83

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Ohm's law


 * Description
 * mt friend thought it was funny to block my ip on wikipedia. he tried to delete the whole page. i am sorry


 * Date and time
 * 17:15, 12 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * There's a reason why the anti-blank filter is there: To stop IPs and new users from blanking pages without an explanation. Minima  c  ( talk ) 17:55, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

82.34.200.202

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * The Supersuckers


 * Description
 * The page reports that Supersuckers is in a hiatus and just touring with Thin Lizzy, I added more up to date information coming from Dan Bolton himself and available on video, stating that they're looking for a label and have material ready for a new album. I also added the name of the current guitar player who replaced Heathman and the interview page as a reference. Don't think there's anything wrong with that?


 * Date and time
 * 16:35, 29 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * The problem, as always with this filter and its false positives, is the "SUPERSUCKERS" in the url. (The filter is set up to trip on all new and unregistered users writing words in all-caps and can't distinguish between good and bad edits.) — Jeremy  ( v^_^v Hyper Combo K.O.! ) 19:37, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

76.250.189.117

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Anti-establishment


 * Description
 * trying to revert this crap


 * Date and time
 * 00:29, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, maybe it's time to consider ending this filter, even though it does stop a lot of vandalism, because much of the vandalism it stops would be caught by other filters anyway. I've reverted the edit.  — Soap  —  00:47, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Comments

Komponistenarchiv

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Enrico Mainardi


 * Description
 * Add link to German Composer's Archive


 * Date and time
 * 13:42, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

As above, the filter correctly detected the conflict of interest, and the user is blocked.  — Soap  —  16:33, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Comments

Ubcmedia

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Pick of the Pops


 * Description
 * I was trying to add a link to our website, Unique the Production Company. We produce this show for the BBC and would like to be credited.


 * Date and time
 * 12:42, 1 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * This is not a false positive, but the filter behaving precisely as it's supposed to. Please see External links and Conflict of interest. -- Rrburke (talk) 14:51, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Daulman

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Daulton Kvenvold


 * Description
 * Put information about me on wikipidia


 * Date and time
 * 19:53, 1 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * We are not a substitute for a social networking site. Even if the filters hadn't tripped your "autobiography" (such as it was) would have been deleted shortly after creation. — Jeremy  ( v^_^v Hyper Combo K.O.! ) 20:18, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Ultraexactzz

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * User talk:LMT1978


 * Description
 * I have an editor making what appears to be a routine request for unblocking - ignore the legal threat, if you could - and the edit (and a previous one) were both tagged as "Possible self promotion in userspace", indicating that they tripped Filter 354. Thanks.


 * Date and time
 * 19:15, 3 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Comments

It was caught because that user wrote "your website" in their reply (which contains "our website"). Unfortunately, this tag cannot be removed. I really wish filters like this were log-only so that false positives like this wouldn't stick out so much. I also wonder if the author of the filter meant to exclude "your". In any case, thank you for reporting this and I'm sorry if it caused any problems.  — Soap  —  00:25, 4 February 2011 (UTC)
 * No problem at all - just struck me as odd. Thanks. UltraExactZZ Said~ Did 03:16, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

65.30.177.85

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Description
 * Change at from the
 * Change at from the


 * Date and time
 * 06:13, 4 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * Requesting RFPP. There's no false-positive here.— Jeremy  ( v^_^v Hyper Combo K.O.! ) 06:31, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

75.4.194.121

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * [[user_talk:Agradman]]


 * Description
 * I often want to make large-scale deletions to my talk page (delete the weekly Signpost, etc.) without logging in, because I'm on a forced wikibreak using Wikibreak enforcer. But every time I attempt to do so, this filter bars the edit from being made.


 * I realize this isn't exactly a "false positive", since the whole purpose of this filter is to prevent edits like this, which are almost always vandalism. But it would be nice if there were a way to "opt-out" my talk page from this filter.  Since I've never ever been the subject of vandalism, I would be willing to take that risk into my own hands ...


 * Just a thought :)


 * Date and time
 * 06:48, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, sorry, it would be theoretically possible to have an exemptions list, but it would run on every edit, and if even just a few people wanted to be added it would slow down the whole edit filter process. A bot would perhaps be a better idea than a filter for this type of thing.  — Soap  —  16:54, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Comments

Beproude

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Girnar


 * Description
 * Consolidation and factual information editing.


 * Date and time
 * 23:20, 7 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * We are not a travel brochure. — Jeremy  ( v^_^v Hyper Combo K.O.! ) 23:34, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

82.7.40.7

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Marianne Ny


 * Description
 * Remove the restored article content someone had added to this deleted article, someone listed it for DRV and added the DRV tag (which isn't required so the whole page could be deleted). Edit filter thinks I'm blanking the article, though I'm leaving the delrev template.


 * Date and time
 * 07:12, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

I'm honestly not familiar with the practice of creating a page with just a single tag and no content. It doesn't seem very helpful to the readers to tease them like that. But, if that's what we're doing now, I can add delrev to the exemption list, which currently contains only a few speedy deletion templates. Thank you for reporting this.  — Soap  —  12:25, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Comments
 * Yes it's a bad practice and the person needn't (perhaps even shouldn't have done it), but since I can't then delete it... --82.7.40.7 (talk) 20:11, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

122.163.9.152

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Rajeev Karwal


 * Description
 * I was editing Rajeev Karwal's page. I attest all information is true & to the best of my knowledge.


 * Date and time
 * 07:19, 10 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * Your edit tripped a trigger by deleting existing information. This is fortunate, as your edits turned this into a rankly promotional advertisment fawning over the subject in a non-objective manner. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  22:14, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

81.155.9.73

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Adele (singer)


 * Description


 * Date and time
 * 01:45, 11 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Comments

A vandal.  — Soap  —  01:54, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

68.5.234.167

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Ridgecrest Intermediate School


 * Description
 * I accidentally deleted it. I am so sorry please forgive me. I was trying to include information about the quads because i go there.


 * Date and time
 * 02:03, 12 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * Well, all the text has been restored since you made the intended edit, so don't worry if you've removed it by accident. The filter only attempted to stop you because you removed all categories. Minima  c  ( talk ) 09:27, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

OlEnglish

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Benigno Aquino III‎


 * Description
 * Reporting on behalf of IP editor: 124.6.181.221. Received a "possible BLP issue or vandalism" tag upon adding a single initial to an article subject's name.


 * Date and time
 * 05:47, 12 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * Oh.. I wasn't aware that Filter 364 was actually "Changing the name in a BLP infobox", which is exactly what the IP editor did. But the output of the tag as seen in Recent Changes (and the article revision history) was "possible BLP issue or vandalism", and it wasn't vandalism nor a BLP issue, so that's why I reported it as a false positive. Shouldn't the RecentChanges text and the filter description text match? -- &oelig; &trade; 06:06, 12 February 2011 (UTC)
 * No, because some filters' descriptions are too detailed. Not only that, but there's a separate entry on the edit filter management page to tag any edits tripped by the filter with a description, and if left blank it will not provide a tag. — Jeremy  ( v^_^v Hyper Combo K.O.! ) 21:47, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

86.173.190.83

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Ohm's law


 * Description
 * mt friend thought it was funny to block my ip on wikipedia. he tried to delete the whole page. i am sorry


 * Date and time
 * 17:15, 12 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * There's a reason why the anti-blank filter is there: To stop IPs and new users from blanking pages without an explanation. Minima  c  ( talk ) 17:55, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

82.34.200.202

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * The Supersuckers


 * Description
 * The page reports that Supersuckers is in a hiatus and just touring with Thin Lizzy, I added more up to date information coming from Dan Bolton himself and available on video, stating that they're looking for a label and have material ready for a new album. I also added the name of the current guitar player who replaced Heathman and the interview page as a reference. Don't think there's anything wrong with that?


 * Date and time
 * 16:35, 29 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * The problem, as always with this filter and its false positives, is the "SUPERSUCKERS" in the url. (The filter is set up to trip on all new and unregistered users writing words in all-caps and can't distinguish between good and bad edits.) — Jeremy  ( v^_^v Hyper Combo K.O.! ) 19:37, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

76.250.189.117

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Anti-establishment


 * Description
 * trying to revert this crap


 * Date and time
 * 00:29, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, maybe it's time to consider ending this filter, even though it does stop a lot of vandalism, because much of the vandalism it stops would be caught by other filters anyway. I've reverted the edit.  — Soap  —  00:47, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Comments

Komponistenarchiv

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Enrico Mainardi


 * Description
 * Add link to German Composer's Archive


 * Date and time
 * 13:42, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

As above, the filter correctly detected the conflict of interest, and the user is blocked.  — Soap  —  16:33, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Comments

Ubcmedia

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Pick of the Pops


 * Description
 * I was trying to add a link to our website, Unique the Production Company. We produce this show for the BBC and would like to be credited.


 * Date and time
 * 12:42, 1 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * This is not a false positive, but the filter behaving precisely as it's supposed to. Please see External links and Conflict of interest. -- Rrburke (talk) 14:51, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Daulman

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Daulton Kvenvold


 * Description
 * Put information about me on wikipidia


 * Date and time
 * 19:53, 1 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * We are not a substitute for a social networking site. Even if the filters hadn't tripped your "autobiography" (such as it was) would have been deleted shortly after creation. — Jeremy  ( v^_^v Hyper Combo K.O.! ) 20:18, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Ultraexactzz

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * User talk:LMT1978


 * Description
 * I have an editor making what appears to be a routine request for unblocking - ignore the legal threat, if you could - and the edit (and a previous one) were both tagged as "Possible self promotion in userspace", indicating that they tripped Filter 354. Thanks.


 * Date and time
 * 19:15, 3 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Comments

It was caught because that user wrote "your website" in their reply (which contains "our website"). Unfortunately, this tag cannot be removed. I really wish filters like this were log-only so that false positives like this wouldn't stick out so much. I also wonder if the author of the filter meant to exclude "your". In any case, thank you for reporting this and I'm sorry if it caused any problems.  — Soap  —  00:25, 4 February 2011 (UTC)
 * No problem at all - just struck me as odd. Thanks. UltraExactZZ Said~ Did 03:16, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

65.30.177.85

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Description
 * Change at from the
 * Change at from the


 * Date and time
 * 06:13, 4 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * Requesting RFPP. There's no false-positive here.— Jeremy  ( v^_^v Hyper Combo K.O.! ) 06:31, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

75.4.194.121

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * [[user_talk:Agradman]]


 * Description
 * I often want to make large-scale deletions to my talk page (delete the weekly Signpost, etc.) without logging in, because I'm on a forced wikibreak using Wikibreak enforcer. But every time I attempt to do so, this filter bars the edit from being made.


 * I realize this isn't exactly a "false positive", since the whole purpose of this filter is to prevent edits like this, which are almost always vandalism. But it would be nice if there were a way to "opt-out" my talk page from this filter.  Since I've never ever been the subject of vandalism, I would be willing to take that risk into my own hands ...


 * Just a thought :)


 * Date and time
 * 06:48, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, sorry, it would be theoretically possible to have an exemptions list, but it would run on every edit, and if even just a few people wanted to be added it would slow down the whole edit filter process. A bot would perhaps be a better idea than a filter for this type of thing.  — Soap  —  16:54, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Comments

Beproude

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Girnar


 * Description
 * Consolidation and factual information editing.


 * Date and time
 * 23:20, 7 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * We are not a travel brochure. — Jeremy  ( v^_^v Hyper Combo K.O.! ) 23:34, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

82.7.40.7

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Marianne Ny


 * Description
 * Remove the restored article content someone had added to this deleted article, someone listed it for DRV and added the DRV tag (which isn't required so the whole page could be deleted). Edit filter thinks I'm blanking the article, though I'm leaving the delrev template.


 * Date and time
 * 07:12, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

I'm honestly not familiar with the practice of creating a page with just a single tag and no content. It doesn't seem very helpful to the readers to tease them like that. But, if that's what we're doing now, I can add delrev to the exemption list, which currently contains only a few speedy deletion templates. Thank you for reporting this.  — Soap  —  12:25, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Comments
 * Yes it's a bad practice and the person needn't (perhaps even shouldn't have done it), but since I can't then delete it... --82.7.40.7 (talk) 20:11, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

122.163.9.152

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Rajeev Karwal


 * Description
 * I was editing Rajeev Karwal's page. I attest all information is true & to the best of my knowledge.


 * Date and time
 * 07:19, 10 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * Your edit tripped a trigger by deleting existing information. This is fortunate, as your edits turned this into a rankly promotional advertisment fawning over the subject in a non-objective manner. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  22:14, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

81.155.9.73

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Adele (singer)


 * Description


 * Date and time
 * 01:45, 11 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Comments

A vandal.  — Soap  —  01:54, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

68.5.234.167

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Ridgecrest Intermediate School


 * Description
 * I accidentally deleted it. I am so sorry please forgive me. I was trying to include information about the quads because i go there.


 * Date and time
 * 02:03, 12 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * Well, all the text has been restored since you made the intended edit, so don't worry if you've removed it by accident. The filter only attempted to stop you because you removed all categories. Minima  c  ( talk ) 09:27, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

OlEnglish

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Benigno Aquino III‎


 * Description
 * Reporting on behalf of IP editor: 124.6.181.221. Received a "possible BLP issue or vandalism" tag upon adding a single initial to an article subject's name.


 * Date and time
 * 05:47, 12 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * Oh.. I wasn't aware that Filter 364 was actually "Changing the name in a BLP infobox", which is exactly what the IP editor did. But the output of the tag as seen in Recent Changes (and the article revision history) was "possible BLP issue or vandalism", and it wasn't vandalism nor a BLP issue, so that's why I reported it as a false positive. Shouldn't the RecentChanges text and the filter description text match? -- &oelig; &trade; 06:06, 12 February 2011 (UTC)
 * No, because some filters' descriptions are too detailed. Not only that, but there's a separate entry on the edit filter management page to tag any edits tripped by the filter with a description, and if left blank it will not provide a tag. — Jeremy  ( v^_^v Hyper Combo K.O.! ) 21:47, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

86.173.190.83

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Ohm's law


 * Description
 * mt friend thought it was funny to block my ip on wikipedia. he tried to delete the whole page. i am sorry


 * Date and time
 * 17:15, 12 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * There's a reason why the anti-blank filter is there: To stop IPs and new users from blanking pages without an explanation. Minima  c  ( talk ) 17:55, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

Easykobo

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Skye Bank


 * Description
 * I was trying to enter the following like "http://www.easykobo.com/Getquotes.aspx?s=SKYEBANK" to the "Skye Bank" page on wikipedia so that people could click it and view the stock quote for skye bank directly, my addition was not accepted and it said that the system thinks i am trying to spam wikipedia, this was not my intention. so please accept my link.

Dear Soap, can you please explain to me why you think i am spamming? i have submitted a genuine link and asked the it be approved. This is not called spamming. Thanks
 * Date and time
 * 11:19, 14 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Comments

It looks to me that you are spamming, but I'll wait for a second opinion.  ♥ Soap  ♥  12:39, 14 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Yeaaaaaah, user blocked for spamming and edits reverted. Syrthiss (talk) 13:09, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

82.34.200.202

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * The Supersuckers


 * Description
 * The page reports that Supersuckers is in a hiatus and just touring with Thin Lizzy, I added more up to date information coming from Dan Bolton himself and available on video, stating that they're looking for a label and have material ready for a new album. I also added the name of the current guitar player who replaced Heathman and the interview page as a reference. Don't think there's anything wrong with that?


 * Date and time
 * 16:35, 29 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * The problem, as always with this filter and its false positives, is the "SUPERSUCKERS" in the url. (The filter is set up to trip on all new and unregistered users writing words in all-caps and can't distinguish between good and bad edits.) — Jeremy  ( v^_^v Hyper Combo K.O.! ) 19:37, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

76.250.189.117

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Anti-establishment


 * Description
 * trying to revert this crap


 * Date and time
 * 00:29, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, maybe it's time to consider ending this filter, even though it does stop a lot of vandalism, because much of the vandalism it stops would be caught by other filters anyway. I've reverted the edit.  — Soap  —  00:47, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Comments

Komponistenarchiv

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Enrico Mainardi


 * Description
 * Add link to German Composer's Archive


 * Date and time
 * 13:42, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

As above, the filter correctly detected the conflict of interest, and the user is blocked.  — Soap  —  16:33, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Comments

Ubcmedia

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Pick of the Pops


 * Description
 * I was trying to add a link to our website, Unique the Production Company. We produce this show for the BBC and would like to be credited.


 * Date and time
 * 12:42, 1 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * This is not a false positive, but the filter behaving precisely as it's supposed to. Please see External links and Conflict of interest. -- Rrburke (talk) 14:51, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Daulman

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Daulton Kvenvold


 * Description
 * Put information about me on wikipidia


 * Date and time
 * 19:53, 1 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * We are not a substitute for a social networking site. Even if the filters hadn't tripped your "autobiography" (such as it was) would have been deleted shortly after creation. — Jeremy  ( v^_^v Hyper Combo K.O.! ) 20:18, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Ultraexactzz

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * User talk:LMT1978


 * Description
 * I have an editor making what appears to be a routine request for unblocking - ignore the legal threat, if you could - and the edit (and a previous one) were both tagged as "Possible self promotion in userspace", indicating that they tripped Filter 354. Thanks.


 * Date and time
 * 19:15, 3 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Comments

It was caught because that user wrote "your website" in their reply (which contains "our website"). Unfortunately, this tag cannot be removed. I really wish filters like this were log-only so that false positives like this wouldn't stick out so much. I also wonder if the author of the filter meant to exclude "your". In any case, thank you for reporting this and I'm sorry if it caused any problems.  — Soap  —  00:25, 4 February 2011 (UTC)
 * No problem at all - just struck me as odd. Thanks. UltraExactZZ Said~ Did 03:16, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

65.30.177.85

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Description
 * Change at from the
 * Change at from the


 * Date and time
 * 06:13, 4 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * Requesting RFPP. There's no false-positive here.— Jeremy  ( v^_^v Hyper Combo K.O.! ) 06:31, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

75.4.194.121

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * [[user_talk:Agradman]]


 * Description
 * I often want to make large-scale deletions to my talk page (delete the weekly Signpost, etc.) without logging in, because I'm on a forced wikibreak using Wikibreak enforcer. But every time I attempt to do so, this filter bars the edit from being made.


 * I realize this isn't exactly a "false positive", since the whole purpose of this filter is to prevent edits like this, which are almost always vandalism. But it would be nice if there were a way to "opt-out" my talk page from this filter.  Since I've never ever been the subject of vandalism, I would be willing to take that risk into my own hands ...


 * Just a thought :)


 * Date and time
 * 06:48, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, sorry, it would be theoretically possible to have an exemptions list, but it would run on every edit, and if even just a few people wanted to be added it would slow down the whole edit filter process. A bot would perhaps be a better idea than a filter for this type of thing.  — Soap  —  16:54, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Comments

Beproude

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Girnar


 * Description
 * Consolidation and factual information editing.


 * Date and time
 * 23:20, 7 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * We are not a travel brochure. — Jeremy  ( v^_^v Hyper Combo K.O.! ) 23:34, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

82.7.40.7

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Marianne Ny


 * Description
 * Remove the restored article content someone had added to this deleted article, someone listed it for DRV and added the DRV tag (which isn't required so the whole page could be deleted). Edit filter thinks I'm blanking the article, though I'm leaving the delrev template.


 * Date and time
 * 07:12, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

I'm honestly not familiar with the practice of creating a page with just a single tag and no content. It doesn't seem very helpful to the readers to tease them like that. But, if that's what we're doing now, I can add delrev to the exemption list, which currently contains only a few speedy deletion templates. Thank you for reporting this.  — Soap  —  12:25, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Comments
 * Yes it's a bad practice and the person needn't (perhaps even shouldn't have done it), but since I can't then delete it... --82.7.40.7 (talk) 20:11, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

122.163.9.152

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Rajeev Karwal


 * Description
 * I was editing Rajeev Karwal's page. I attest all information is true & to the best of my knowledge.


 * Date and time
 * 07:19, 10 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * Your edit tripped a trigger by deleting existing information. This is fortunate, as your edits turned this into a rankly promotional advertisment fawning over the subject in a non-objective manner. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  22:14, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

81.155.9.73

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Adele (singer)


 * Description


 * Date and time
 * 01:45, 11 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Comments

A vandal.  — Soap  —  01:54, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

68.5.234.167

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Ridgecrest Intermediate School


 * Description
 * I accidentally deleted it. I am so sorry please forgive me. I was trying to include information about the quads because i go there.


 * Date and time
 * 02:03, 12 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * Well, all the text has been restored since you made the intended edit, so don't worry if you've removed it by accident. The filter only attempted to stop you because you removed all categories. Minima  c  ( talk ) 09:27, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

OlEnglish

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Benigno Aquino III‎


 * Description
 * Reporting on behalf of IP editor: 124.6.181.221. Received a "possible BLP issue or vandalism" tag upon adding a single initial to an article subject's name.


 * Date and time
 * 05:47, 12 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * Oh.. I wasn't aware that Filter 364 was actually "Changing the name in a BLP infobox", which is exactly what the IP editor did. But the output of the tag as seen in Recent Changes (and the article revision history) was "possible BLP issue or vandalism", and it wasn't vandalism nor a BLP issue, so that's why I reported it as a false positive. Shouldn't the RecentChanges text and the filter description text match? -- &oelig; &trade; 06:06, 12 February 2011 (UTC)
 * No, because some filters' descriptions are too detailed. Not only that, but there's a separate entry on the edit filter management page to tag any edits tripped by the filter with a description, and if left blank it will not provide a tag. — Jeremy  ( v^_^v Hyper Combo K.O.! ) 21:47, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

86.173.190.83

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Ohm's law


 * Description
 * mt friend thought it was funny to block my ip on wikipedia. he tried to delete the whole page. i am sorry


 * Date and time
 * 17:15, 12 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * There's a reason why the anti-blank filter is there: To stop IPs and new users from blanking pages without an explanation. Minima  c  ( talk ) 17:55, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

Easykobo

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Skye Bank


 * Description
 * I was trying to enter the following like "http://www.easykobo.com/Getquotes.aspx?s=SKYEBANK" to the "Skye Bank" page on wikipedia so that people could click it and view the stock quote for skye bank directly, my addition was not accepted and it said that the system thinks i am trying to spam wikipedia, this was not my intention. so please accept my link.

Dear Soap, can you please explain to me why you think i am spamming? i have submitted a genuine link and asked the it be approved. This is not called spamming. Thanks
 * Date and time
 * 11:19, 14 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Comments

It looks to me that you are spamming, but I'll wait for a second opinion.  ♥ Soap  ♥  12:39, 14 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Yeaaaaaah, user blocked for spamming and edits reverted. Syrthiss (talk) 13:09, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

82.34.200.202

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * The Supersuckers


 * Description
 * The page reports that Supersuckers is in a hiatus and just touring with Thin Lizzy, I added more up to date information coming from Dan Bolton himself and available on video, stating that they're looking for a label and have material ready for a new album. I also added the name of the current guitar player who replaced Heathman and the interview page as a reference. Don't think there's anything wrong with that?


 * Date and time
 * 16:35, 29 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * The problem, as always with this filter and its false positives, is the "SUPERSUCKERS" in the url. (The filter is set up to trip on all new and unregistered users writing words in all-caps and can't distinguish between good and bad edits.) — Jeremy  ( v^_^v Hyper Combo K.O.! ) 19:37, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

76.250.189.117

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Anti-establishment


 * Description
 * trying to revert this crap


 * Date and time
 * 00:29, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, maybe it's time to consider ending this filter, even though it does stop a lot of vandalism, because much of the vandalism it stops would be caught by other filters anyway. I've reverted the edit.  — Soap  —  00:47, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Comments

Komponistenarchiv

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Enrico Mainardi


 * Description
 * Add link to German Composer's Archive


 * Date and time
 * 13:42, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

As above, the filter correctly detected the conflict of interest, and the user is blocked.  — Soap  —  16:33, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Comments

Ubcmedia

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Pick of the Pops


 * Description
 * I was trying to add a link to our website, Unique the Production Company. We produce this show for the BBC and would like to be credited.


 * Date and time
 * 12:42, 1 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * This is not a false positive, but the filter behaving precisely as it's supposed to. Please see External links and Conflict of interest. -- Rrburke (talk) 14:51, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Daulman

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Daulton Kvenvold


 * Description
 * Put information about me on wikipidia


 * Date and time
 * 19:53, 1 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * We are not a substitute for a social networking site. Even if the filters hadn't tripped your "autobiography" (such as it was) would have been deleted shortly after creation. — Jeremy  ( v^_^v Hyper Combo K.O.! ) 20:18, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Ultraexactzz

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * User talk:LMT1978


 * Description
 * I have an editor making what appears to be a routine request for unblocking - ignore the legal threat, if you could - and the edit (and a previous one) were both tagged as "Possible self promotion in userspace", indicating that they tripped Filter 354. Thanks.


 * Date and time
 * 19:15, 3 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Comments

It was caught because that user wrote "your website" in their reply (which contains "our website"). Unfortunately, this tag cannot be removed. I really wish filters like this were log-only so that false positives like this wouldn't stick out so much. I also wonder if the author of the filter meant to exclude "your". In any case, thank you for reporting this and I'm sorry if it caused any problems.  — Soap  —  00:25, 4 February 2011 (UTC)
 * No problem at all - just struck me as odd. Thanks. UltraExactZZ Said~ Did 03:16, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

65.30.177.85

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Description
 * Change at from the
 * Change at from the


 * Date and time
 * 06:13, 4 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * Requesting RFPP. There's no false-positive here.— Jeremy  ( v^_^v Hyper Combo K.O.! ) 06:31, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

75.4.194.121

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * [[user_talk:Agradman]]


 * Description
 * I often want to make large-scale deletions to my talk page (delete the weekly Signpost, etc.) without logging in, because I'm on a forced wikibreak using Wikibreak enforcer. But every time I attempt to do so, this filter bars the edit from being made.


 * I realize this isn't exactly a "false positive", since the whole purpose of this filter is to prevent edits like this, which are almost always vandalism. But it would be nice if there were a way to "opt-out" my talk page from this filter.  Since I've never ever been the subject of vandalism, I would be willing to take that risk into my own hands ...


 * Just a thought :)


 * Date and time
 * 06:48, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, sorry, it would be theoretically possible to have an exemptions list, but it would run on every edit, and if even just a few people wanted to be added it would slow down the whole edit filter process. A bot would perhaps be a better idea than a filter for this type of thing.  — Soap  —  16:54, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Comments

Beproude

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Girnar


 * Description
 * Consolidation and factual information editing.


 * Date and time
 * 23:20, 7 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * We are not a travel brochure. — Jeremy  ( v^_^v Hyper Combo K.O.! ) 23:34, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

82.7.40.7

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Marianne Ny


 * Description
 * Remove the restored article content someone had added to this deleted article, someone listed it for DRV and added the DRV tag (which isn't required so the whole page could be deleted). Edit filter thinks I'm blanking the article, though I'm leaving the delrev template.


 * Date and time
 * 07:12, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

I'm honestly not familiar with the practice of creating a page with just a single tag and no content. It doesn't seem very helpful to the readers to tease them like that. But, if that's what we're doing now, I can add delrev to the exemption list, which currently contains only a few speedy deletion templates. Thank you for reporting this.  — Soap  —  12:25, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Comments
 * Yes it's a bad practice and the person needn't (perhaps even shouldn't have done it), but since I can't then delete it... --82.7.40.7 (talk) 20:11, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

122.163.9.152

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Rajeev Karwal


 * Description
 * I was editing Rajeev Karwal's page. I attest all information is true & to the best of my knowledge.


 * Date and time
 * 07:19, 10 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * Your edit tripped a trigger by deleting existing information. This is fortunate, as your edits turned this into a rankly promotional advertisment fawning over the subject in a non-objective manner. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  22:14, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

81.155.9.73

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Adele (singer)


 * Description


 * Date and time
 * 01:45, 11 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Comments

A vandal.  — Soap  —  01:54, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

68.5.234.167

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Ridgecrest Intermediate School


 * Description
 * I accidentally deleted it. I am so sorry please forgive me. I was trying to include information about the quads because i go there.


 * Date and time
 * 02:03, 12 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * Well, all the text has been restored since you made the intended edit, so don't worry if you've removed it by accident. The filter only attempted to stop you because you removed all categories. Minima  c  ( talk ) 09:27, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

OlEnglish

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Benigno Aquino III‎


 * Description
 * Reporting on behalf of IP editor: 124.6.181.221. Received a "possible BLP issue or vandalism" tag upon adding a single initial to an article subject's name.


 * Date and time
 * 05:47, 12 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * Oh.. I wasn't aware that Filter 364 was actually "Changing the name in a BLP infobox", which is exactly what the IP editor did. But the output of the tag as seen in Recent Changes (and the article revision history) was "possible BLP issue or vandalism", and it wasn't vandalism nor a BLP issue, so that's why I reported it as a false positive. Shouldn't the RecentChanges text and the filter description text match? -- &oelig; &trade; 06:06, 12 February 2011 (UTC)
 * No, because some filters' descriptions are too detailed. Not only that, but there's a separate entry on the edit filter management page to tag any edits tripped by the filter with a description, and if left blank it will not provide a tag. — Jeremy  ( v^_^v Hyper Combo K.O.! ) 21:47, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

86.173.190.83

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Ohm's law


 * Description
 * mt friend thought it was funny to block my ip on wikipedia. he tried to delete the whole page. i am sorry


 * Date and time
 * 17:15, 12 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * There's a reason why the anti-blank filter is there: To stop IPs and new users from blanking pages without an explanation. Minima  c  ( talk ) 17:55, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

Easykobo

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Skye Bank


 * Description
 * I was trying to enter the following like "http://www.easykobo.com/Getquotes.aspx?s=SKYEBANK" to the "Skye Bank" page on wikipedia so that people could click it and view the stock quote for skye bank directly, my addition was not accepted and it said that the system thinks i am trying to spam wikipedia, this was not my intention. so please accept my link.

Dear Soap, can you please explain to me why you think i am spamming? i have submitted a genuine link and asked the it be approved. This is not called spamming. Thanks
 * Date and time
 * 11:19, 14 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Comments

It looks to me that you are spamming, but I'll wait for a second opinion.  ♥ Soap  ♥  12:39, 14 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Yeaaaaaah, user blocked for spamming and edits reverted. Syrthiss (talk) 13:09, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

82.34.200.202

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * The Supersuckers


 * Description
 * The page reports that Supersuckers is in a hiatus and just touring with Thin Lizzy, I added more up to date information coming from Dan Bolton himself and available on video, stating that they're looking for a label and have material ready for a new album. I also added the name of the current guitar player who replaced Heathman and the interview page as a reference. Don't think there's anything wrong with that?


 * Date and time
 * 16:35, 29 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * The problem, as always with this filter and its false positives, is the "SUPERSUCKERS" in the url. (The filter is set up to trip on all new and unregistered users writing words in all-caps and can't distinguish between good and bad edits.) — Jeremy  ( v^_^v Hyper Combo K.O.! ) 19:37, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

76.250.189.117

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Anti-establishment


 * Description
 * trying to revert this crap


 * Date and time
 * 00:29, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, maybe it's time to consider ending this filter, even though it does stop a lot of vandalism, because much of the vandalism it stops would be caught by other filters anyway. I've reverted the edit.  — Soap  —  00:47, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Comments

Komponistenarchiv

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Enrico Mainardi


 * Description
 * Add link to German Composer's Archive


 * Date and time
 * 13:42, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

As above, the filter correctly detected the conflict of interest, and the user is blocked.  — Soap  —  16:33, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Comments

Ubcmedia

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Pick of the Pops


 * Description
 * I was trying to add a link to our website, Unique the Production Company. We produce this show for the BBC and would like to be credited.


 * Date and time
 * 12:42, 1 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * This is not a false positive, but the filter behaving precisely as it's supposed to. Please see External links and Conflict of interest. -- Rrburke (talk) 14:51, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Daulman

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Daulton Kvenvold


 * Description
 * Put information about me on wikipidia


 * Date and time
 * 19:53, 1 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * We are not a substitute for a social networking site. Even if the filters hadn't tripped your "autobiography" (such as it was) would have been deleted shortly after creation. — Jeremy  ( v^_^v Hyper Combo K.O.! ) 20:18, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Ultraexactzz

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * User talk:LMT1978


 * Description
 * I have an editor making what appears to be a routine request for unblocking - ignore the legal threat, if you could - and the edit (and a previous one) were both tagged as "Possible self promotion in userspace", indicating that they tripped Filter 354. Thanks.


 * Date and time
 * 19:15, 3 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Comments

It was caught because that user wrote "your website" in their reply (which contains "our website"). Unfortunately, this tag cannot be removed. I really wish filters like this were log-only so that false positives like this wouldn't stick out so much. I also wonder if the author of the filter meant to exclude "your". In any case, thank you for reporting this and I'm sorry if it caused any problems.  — Soap  —  00:25, 4 February 2011 (UTC)
 * No problem at all - just struck me as odd. Thanks. UltraExactZZ Said~ Did 03:16, 4 February 2011 (UTC)