Wikipedia:Edit filter/False positives/Archive 5

76.127.217.214

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Talk:Diet soda


 * Description
 * All I tried to do was add a comment to this talk page about a discussion that's going on, and it wouldn't let me. 76.127.217.214 (talk) 20:16, 20 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Date and time
 * 20:16, 20 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * Sorry about that. The filter has been adjusted and you should be able to post now. It wasn't actually your comment that was causing the problem, but some older content. Thanks for reporting this. -- Sh i r ik ( Questions or Comments? ) 20:22, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

Obersachse

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Template:Location map-


 * Description
 * I was trying to create this template. Obersachse (talk) 17:26, 20 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Date and time
 * 17:26, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

This filter is proving to be one of the most annoying ones we have, so I apologize that it got in your way. it is really not possible for us to disable it though because vandals use this position:absolute trick to cover a whole page including even the links that could be used to undo the edit. In this particular case, since it's a new page, it could be circumvented by creating the template in your userspace and then moving it to project space, though that won't work for the general case. I will create a temporary work-around for this so that your template can be created if you'd like, but if you think that you might need to change the code a few times to make sure it behaves the way you want, it would be best to work in your userspace until it's ready. Also, are you sure that is the title you want? It might be confused with Location map.  — Soap  —  17:31, 20 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments
 * It's an extension for Location map and uses some code of that template. No danger! I know what I do since I'm familiar with the location map stuff. --Obersachse (talk) 17:40, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

Fetchcomms

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Undercover Boss


 * Description
 * Adding in reference info with Reflinks.  fetch  comms  ☛ 23:48, 19 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Date and time
 * 23:48, 19 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * One of the references does in fact have an email address in it (one of the authors'). Is that appropriate for the article? -- Sh i r ik ( Questions or Comments? ) 23:49, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
 * No, I'm removing it. It was a result of the tool, I guess. No clue why I missed seeing it :P  fetch  comms  ☛ 23:52, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
 * No problem, thanks for reporting this though! Better to have false false positives than missed ones. -- Sh i r ik ( Questions or Comments? ) 23:54, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Elkesh

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Gen Art


 * Description
 * I was attempting to update the Gen Art page with relevant information about past Film Festival showings. The filter, for some reason, prevented me from saving the changes. I not only changed the format of existing information but also added quite a bit of new material. I do not see why I was hampered in posting. Any assistance would be greatly appreciated.


 * Date and time
 * 23:00, 19 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * Thanks for reporting this. The reason for the hit was due to section 2007's capitalized "BITCH". Is this the correct capitalization of this title? If so, I can force the edit through, but if that's not how it's written officially then it should probably be corrected. -- Sh i r ik ( Questions or Comments? ) 23:04, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Hi Shirik, thanks for the Quick response. That is its official spelling. If you could force through the edit it'd be great. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Elkesh (talk • contribs) 20:43, 19 February 2010
 * ✅ and thanks for your contributions, and welcome! Please note that this is a (hopefully) rare occurrence, and the page you edited should now be exempt. Normally I would alter the filter, but I see nothing I can change in this situation. Happy editing, and thanks for the report! -- Sh i r ik ( Questions or Comments? ) 01:48, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

198.69.71.201

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * A-10 Thunderbolt II


 * Description
 * What you were doing 198.69.71.201 (talk) 19:01, 19 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Date and time
 * 19:01, 19 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * I'm sorry, but edits like this and

this are simply not constructive to building an encyclopedia. This hit was appropriate. Thanks, Sh i r ik  ( Questions or Comments? ) 19:09, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Cleaning up old data from years ago, placed by a bot
Helps to conserve server space, and speeds up bandwidth by removing outdated messages to users from years ago. Removal of automated messages from years ago in talk pages. 68.116.43.139 (talk) 08:23, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Please do not blank other users' talk pages. The information there is often needed for record of past events and the messages you are removing are not all bot messages. Furthermore, don't worry about performance. Removing content does not save space on the servers (it actually takes up more space because the servers need to retain all history). Thanks, Sh i r ik  ( Questions or Comments? ) 08:25, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

86.17.165.140

 * Username

Got a false positive when I removed the words "fuck you" that someone had inserted into a link eg justice league (tv seriefuck yous), probably because I put "I removed "fuck you" from a link" in the change log or words to that effect and it auto detected the bad language
 * Description
 * Comments
 * It's common practice to just use "reverting vandalism" or an abbreviation like "rv" for an edit summary when you're doing something l;ike that. If anyone's curious about what it was they can view the edit to find out.   —  Soap  —  23:14, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Ruevian

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Heather Morris (actress)


 * Description
 * Moving Heather Morris to Heather Morris (Silent Hill Actress) and also moving Heather Morris (actress) to Heather Morris (Glee Actress) so I can create a disambig page at Heather Morris. Ruevian (talk) 22:54, 18 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Date and time
 * 22:54, 18 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments

Borgarleikhus

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Reykjavik City Theatre


 * Description
 * update information


 * Date and time
 * 11:37, 18 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * You were trying to add contact information into the article. This information is not encyclopedic, so please leave it out. Additionally, based on the contact information, you may wish to review the conflict of interest guideline and be careful with editing this article. Thanks, Sh i r ik  ( Questions or Comments? ) 11:43, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

202.103.135.100

 * Username


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


 * Description
 * Attempting to commit to my identity by creating a unique cryptographic hash function, but could not access my Special: userpage in order to establish/edit my user page. I believe that my page is being blocked by a government installed firewall scheme.202.103.135.100 (talk) 05:09, 18 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Date and time
 * 05:09, 18 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * You were trying to edit User:Example user. You should be trying to edit User:202.103.135.100. Try that. Thanks! -- Sh i r ik ( Questions or Comments? ) 05:10, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

64.105.163.210

 * Username


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


 * Description
 * I added a line of garbage to WP:SANDBOX. Sandbox edits should not be filtered like this.  64.105.163.210 (talk) 23:58, 17 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Date and time
 * 23:58, 17 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * I'm undecided on this. The filter is correct in detecting this post, but it's also arguable the sandbox should be (relatively) free reign. The problem really is that checking for the sandbox would require the use of an additional condition, something of which we don't really have any spares. I would be interested in a discussion regarding whether or not we should add this exception at the cost of performance (and then the potential for more false negatives). Right now I'm leaning towards "no" on correcting this because performance is critical right now and there's no real net gain from opening up the sandbox any more. Yes, it's unfortunate that the sandbox is being trapped, but it's also not really harming the encyclopedia. I think this is a valid approximation. -- Sh i r ik ( Questions or Comments? ) 01:43, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Heritage Preservation

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Heritage Preservation


 * Description
 * we are not trying to advertise. Heritage Preservation (talk) 19:51, 17 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Date and time
 * 19:51, 17 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments

The contact information is not encyclopedic material and should be removed. Furthermore, you likely have a conflict of interest here, and should read that guideline for advice. Regardless, it should be possible for you to submit the article, but you need to click the save button twice without changing anything to get through the warning, otherwise you will just continue to get the warning. This is not a false positive; this filter is designed to tag edits which have potential conflicts of interest for further review, and to let you know of this conflict of interest. Thanks -- Sh i r ik ( Questions or Comments? ) 19:55, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Editor blocked as a blatant spamusername. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  21:01, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

99.150.255.75

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * User talk:99.150.255.75


 * Description
 * I was trying to get add a happy box - I can't demonstrate because I get the unconstructive message 99.150.255.75 (talk) 03:51, 15 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Date and time
 * 05:37, 15 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments

It lets me put the happy box 125px|left But it does not let me put the other stuff: See - how come I can't make my own scrolling happy face?

99.150.255.75 (talk) 03:51, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

Also - the directions above say: "and paste it just below the == Reports == header line." but the directions below say:

Sorry if this is incomprehensible to you - but the template suggested was incomprehensible to me.

One of them should be changed.

Complaints: 1) Template is incomprehensible 2) Directions confusing: - Does text go immediately under Reports line, or does text go under the "place text below this line" comment 3) I could not post here the text that was giving the error because the Edit filter was rejecting it. 99.150.255.75 (talk) 03:59, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Reply
 * Try again now ... I;ve changed it to (I hope) allow people to decorate their talkpages as well as their userpages.  —  Soap  —  04:08, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks - but no go. It does let me put the template  and that works, but if
 * I copy the contents at User:Mixwell/scrolling to my talk page and try to save I get the Edit filter rejecting it ::although it does work for preview. I want to copy the contents so I can experiment and change size and position.


 * I can save the image portion, but not the part in the  block.


 * Thanks,
 * 99.150.255.75 (talk) 04:13, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Would you be willing to register an account? That's the only thing I can think of ... "user name" might not work when applied to IP's.  But it does work for users, even with low edit counts, as I've shown here where I used an alternate account with 35 edits and was able to add the code without being tagged.  —  Soap  —  04:21, 15 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the help - I'll look into maybe registering to add the text. 99.150.255.75 (talk) 04:27, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

lanigerum

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * none


 * Description
 * Trying to create an account


 * Date and time
 * 19:19, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

I agree, that filter needs to be pared down. Fixed.  — Soap  —  19:55, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

124.185.224.59

 * Username


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


 * Description
 * hello I am trying to write about my country, is telling that I cant... 124.185.224.59 (talk) 22:29, 12 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Date and time
 * 22:29, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

Your edits did not appear to be constructive and were thus denied. Please do not blank the article and replace it with content unrelated to the article. Thanks, Sh i r ik  ( Questions or Comments? ) 01:55, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

Gayindy

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * List of LGBT community centers


 * Description
 * Adding the site www.gayindy.com Indianapolis does not have a physical center, this site features local resources and national resources including support, religion,news,politics,advice. Gayindy (talk) 16:13, 12 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Date and time
 * 16:13, 12 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * Hi there. The warning was caused by a potential conflict of interest you may have because your name matches the link you were adding. Please also note that our username policy states that your username should represent you as an individual, not an organization. The filter did not block your edit and it has no way of knowing which edits are inappropriate and which aren't, the filter exists primarily to let you know of policies which may impact you and to tag the edit for further review. You may wish to change your username to make it represent you instead of the organization. Regards, Sh i r ik  ( Questions or Comments? ) 18:09, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

194.95.184.90

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Neck ring


 * Description
 * Removing german interwiki, as it refers to horses. This autoblock-"feature" sucks. 194.95.184.90 (talk) 11:09, 12 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Date and time
 * 11:09, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

This (279) is one of the most annoying filters, and I apologize that you got caught in it. Since this is one of the most effective filters at detecting true vandalism that is not caught by other filters, I dont really believe it should be disabled and would not disable it without agreement by other people who are familiar with the inner workings of the edit filter. If it were possible, I would modify it so that it can distinguish between "nearly certain" vandalism and ones like what you were doing which are false-positive 95%+ of the time and never set to 'disallow' even in the other 5% of cases. Your edit would actually have gone through if you'd saved it the first time, when the message was only a very mild 'warning' type. However because you tried to re-submit several times, the filter believed that you were tryign to work around it and stepped up the action to 'disallow'. Note that you can still make the edit now; the disallow condition only lasts for a short time. As for the validity of the interwiki link, I'm really agnostic about it ... it's true that it's about horses, but it's still literally translated the same. (Note for example that there is an article at sv:Halsring as well.) However, to save you the trouble, I'll go remove both links now (both sides of the ocnnection have to be removed, or else a bot will come and "repair" it). --  — Soap  —  12:53, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

For reference, here is the message:

EvilFaerieNon

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Jillys Rockworld


 * Description
 * Trying to create a page for Jillys Rockworld but got an error saying the page is not constructive but I cannot see why

Never mind, got it to publish now EvilFaerieNon (talk) 19:58, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Date and time
 * 19:58, 11 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments

daverac11

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * The New Deal (band)


 * Description
 * Adding a legitimate link to a site that promotes the band Daverac11 (talk) 17:51, 11 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Date and time
 * 17:51, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

You can call it a false positive, but this filter is behaving as it should. Not everyone who adds many links to a site is a spammer, but some are. Please dont feel you're being judged on the basis of the edit filter alone; this is just an indication that your edits may need to be reviewed by others. -- Soap Talk/Contributions 18:28, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

WiJG?

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Template:Japan football clubs map 2010


 * Description
 * Creating the template with a map of Japanese professional football clubs, similar to the templates in this category. The filter prohibits the placement of marks on the image —WiJG? 20:08, 10 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Date and time
 * 20:08, 10 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * This filter intentionally inhibits any use of the "position:absolute" CSS style. Even if it's what you really wanted to do, it's probably incorrect because it is extremely unlikely that this will be consistent across browsers. Is there a particular reason you're trying to do this? There may be a better way to do it. -- Sh i r ik ( Questions or Comments? ) 03:12, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
 * This is really strange, because during last half-year or so I have created a lot of templates that use absolute positioning — see the category I have pointed at, or the A-League 2010- map, or almost every labelled map because the widely used Location map marker template is also based on "position:absolute" style, it was actually the source where I learned how to label maps. Honestly, I am really surprised to hear it may cause any trouble because this template was created way back in 2006 and I may only wonder the number of articles it is used in. BTW, I have seen my J. League templates in Safari, Chrome, FF, Opera, IE 7 and IE 8 and no problem has ever appeared. —WiJG? 06:22, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
 * The filter was recently changed to handle "position:absolute"; previously it had only handled "position:fixed", but was always meant to handle both. That's probably why it worked before. Anyway, I have forced through this particular change. I'm worried about relaxing this filter because the damage it prevents is actually quite severe and difficult to undo. Will this be a recurring need? If so I can discuss it with the other filter managers to see what can be done; I can't see any good ideas off the top of my head. However, for the time being, you can use editprotected on the talk page to ask an administrator to post it (filter managers and sysops are exempt from this filter, so they should be able to post it). -- Sh i r ik ( Questions or Comments? ) 12:22, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I was thinking about the solution for my football map templates — what if I ask you to create a template with a following code:

so when I'll use it in on the map, the edit itself won't contain "position:absolute" and it will pass the filter. If I have got it correctly, that's how the Location map marker template works. —WiJG? 10:43, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

Onore Baka Sama

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * U.S. Route 50 in Maryland


 * Description
 * Adding a picture, "2006 01 06 - US50@US13.JPG". The picture should be renamed; I'm sure it was triggered because of the at-sign in the name.


 * Date and time
 * 17:54, 10 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * I thought I had already added an exception for this. One moment while I verify it. Thanks for reporting this! -- Sh i r ik ( Questions or Comments? ) 18:07, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I added an exception for all JPG files. The reason the exception was not catching before this was because of the space in front of the name. Unfortunately, I do not see a way to improve this exception's negative lookbehind because PHP does not allow for the use of negative lookbehind with variable lengths. So, instead, I added an exception for all JPG files. Thanks for reporting this! -- Sh i r ik ( Questions or Comments? ) 18:16, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

dmarms

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * shocker (hand gesture)


 * Description
 * I was editing the page to include relevant information.


 * Date and time
 * 03:04, 10 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * Such negative information without a provided reliable source violates our policy on disparaging comments about living people. I can add an exception for this comment, but could you please provide a source first? Thanks. -- Sh i r ik ( Questions or Comments? ) 03:37, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

76.102.12.35

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * User talk:Jacobf4417


 * Description
 * What you were doing 76.102.12.35 (talk) 09:38, 9 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Date and time
 * 09:38, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

User talk:Jacobf4417
 * Comments
 * The filter triggered because you replaced the talk page with a warning instead of just adding it. It looks like you got through after doing it by adding so I'll assume this is resolved. -- Soap Talk/Contributions 11:42, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

92.30.30.244



 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Michael Fuller


 * Description
 * What you were doing 92.30.30.244 (talk) 23:45, 7 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Date and time
 * 23:45, 7 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments

You should never delete a whole article; nevertheless, as below, this filter is set to "warn" mode, which means it will not actually prevent you from deleting text, only make sure that it is tagged for further attention. -- Soap Talk/Contributions 23:57, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Mrgoogfan

 * mrgoogfan


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * anolis, Polychrotidae, Carolina anole, Brown Anole, Knight Anole


 * Description
 * I was re-adding the anole care links. People have, may, and still do use them to learn more about anoles and many have contacted me asking for further help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by mrgoogfan (talk • contribs)


 * Date and time
 * 23:45, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Posting a link that contains your username often indicates a conflict of interest or non-professional source. it's not always a bad thing ... I've posted links with my username in it too... but do be aware that the reliability of your links may be questioned and the links removed by other editors. -- Soap Talk/Contributions 14:58, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

Doppler Effect5000

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Hector Plasm


 * Description
 * Adding a quote about origin of comic character


 * Date and time
 * 20:46, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

I dont really have a strong opinion on whether these kind of edits are good for the article or not, but as far as the Edit Filter cares you should be OK now. -- Soap Talk/Contributions 00:04, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

24.16.96.51

 * Username
 * {{user| 24.16.96.51 }


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Flip Skateboards


 * Description
 * removing vandalism 24.16.96.51 (talk) 18:18, 7 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Date and time
 * 18:18, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Large deletions will probably always trigger at least a warning of some sort. This filter is not set to disallow, so if you find yourself in a situation like this one where you're sure the edit you're making is good, I would go ahead and complete the edit. In this case, someone else got there shortly after you and removed the vandalism. Thanks for your attention and willingness to help. -- Soap Talk/Contributions 18:57, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

99.88.78.94

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Disturbia (film)


 * Description
 * I'm trying to edit Disturbia (film) but it's not letting because it's unconstructive. I'm just putting extra info that took place in the movie.


 * Date and time
 * 04:57, 7 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * If you drop the word "poop" from the your text, the edit will pass through the filter. Ruslik Zero  19:14, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Katimpe

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Queen's peace


 * Description
 * I was removing an interlanguage link to German de:Königsfrieden, which deals with a completely different subject (and correctly links to its English version Peace of Antalcidas). Possibly the filter was activated because it was the only interlanguage link in the article. Katimpe (talk) 00:30, 7 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Date and time
 * 00:30, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for reporting that; I'll keep watching the article to make sure it doesn't get added back (interwiki bots can be quirky sometimes). -- Soap Talk/Contributions 00:34, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

Cloud Dino

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Paper townsite


 * Description
 * The article was a mess grammatically and it wasn't cited properly. I redid the article to make it more useful, and credited the appropriate sources.


 * Date and time
 * 23:23, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Well strictly speaking, it isn't a false positive, because it correctly detected that you'd removed the references at the bottom of the page and removed the categories the article was in, even though you replaced them with some others. I agree your version of the article is better than what it was before, but it still could be improved a lot and I would recommend at least adding Category:Town back in. Categories help people find articles that have few other articles linking to them. -- Soap Talk/Contributions 23:36, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

Aubziez

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Grand Canyon


 * Description
 * I was writing about what i believe and what people should know about our world today


 * Date and time
 * 22:30, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

I dont see any hits on the edit filter for this article, but so far all of your mainspace edits have been vandalism, so I suggest you stop before you get blocked. -- <B>Soap</B> Talk/Contributions 22:35, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

67.101.5.246

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * List of Super Bowl halftime shows


 * Description
 * Rewrote an unref'ed intro to simply summarise trends in half-time productions as listed; add two columns to table (making it sortable by several criteria), move referenced details to a new section. The lovely filter system was worried about the 6K loss in article size  67.101.5.246 (talk) 08:07, 6 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Date and time
 * 08:07, 6 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * Check out the diff. BTW, rejecting cookies was the reason for the multiple false positives...by the time I re-enabled them it considered me a menace.... 67.101.5.246 (talk) 08:10, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry it turned out this way, really, and please don't think its detection of your "repeated vandalism attempts" is against you directly. The first half, as you probably guessed, was because you removed a significant amount of content. There is no way for the filter to determine if a removal of content is appropriate or not, so it was detecting that and tagging it for review. However, because it took you 4 tries to actually post the content (which, I believe, you claimed was due to a cookie problem), another filter started picking you up which is designed to detect problematic users (I can't say more than that to protect the purpose of that filter, sorry). Suffice to say, by the time you read this, the problem will probably have calmed down and you should be able to post. I will contact the creator of that second filter to see if there isn't anything we can do to relax its restrictions, and I'm really sorry it hit you and stopped you from posting. Thanks for reporting this problem, and I hope you don't have too much trouble in the future. Regards, -- Sh i r ik ( Questions or Comments? ) 08:39, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Leaving cookies enabled (as opposed to repeatedly submitting the changes with them disabled) meant I only got the Special:AbuseFilter/30 warning this time. Hopefully someone will take a look at the super-secret Special:AbuseFilter/279 and check to see if it had been excessively concerned in this sort of scenario. I continue to think that Special:AbuseFilter/30 is not subtle enough in its assessment.  Smaller articles can be improvements in cases where (for example) unreferenced details are removed.  67.100.127.131 (talk) 22:16, 7 February 2010 (UTC).

elmodude5

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * How Jake R Stole Christmas!


 * Description
 * I created a page for the How Jake R Stole Christmas! book series when it was triggered as abuse. There are ISBNs if they need checking and everything else should be in order. Elmodude5 (talk) 06:37, 6 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Date and time
 * 06:37, 6 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * Hi there, and welcome. The problem was caused by the content "Everybody Poops... but Jake" which is one of the books in your added content. The filter incorrectly believed this was what we call "poop vandalism". I have added an exemption for this content; you should be able to perform your edit now. Thanks for reporting this error! -- Sh i r ik ( Questions or Comments? ) 06:44, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
 * This appears to be a hoax ... he went on to create the article and then it was deleted as G3. -- <B>Soap</B> Talk/Contributions 17:55, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Removed the exemption as above. -- Sh i r ik ( Questions or Comments? ) 20:10, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

zzrbiker

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * New South Wales C36 class locomotive


 * Description
 * I moved an existing link to an image that has the name 3630@WellingtonStation.jpg, which seemed to trigger the email alert. - Zzrbiker (talk) 04:20, 6 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Date and time
 * 04:20, 6 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * Hi there, and welcome. The image name you used resembled an email address and that is why your edit was tagged. I see, however, that the post went through after the warning so you have nothing to worry about. Thanks for reporting this error, though; I will see what I can do to get the filter to ignore images. Thanks again, -- Sh i r ik ( Questions or Comments? ) 06:08, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes, I could immediately see the way that the something at something dot something structure of that filename would pass most tests for email address formatting. The only thing I'd suggest is that perhaps Wikipedia should reject attempts to upload files with @ signs in the filename for this reason. - Zzrbiker (talk) 08:27, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Technical note: It looks like there was an attempt to resolve this in the past. There was a negative lookbehind that was supposed to check for namespacing, but it was improperly designed. I have added negative lookbehind to handle links to files and images, which should present this from occurring again. -- Sh i r ik ( Questions or Comments? ) 20:03, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Plaganegra

 * Username


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


 * Description
 * I was saving a new page and it said it was Unconstructive, I don't understand why. This was in the web page for the Stephen King compilation HEARTS IN ATLANTIS.


 * Date and time
 * 10:18, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Note: this report was added by 68.226.29.225. To answer: the trigger was the capitalized "FUCK JOHNSON" and the filter could be prevented by re-wording or leaving this part out. -- <B>Soap</B> Talk/Contributions 17:41, 4 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

Droll

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Template:Infobox protected area/superimpose


 * Description
 * This was to be a sub template for code I'm working on at Template:Infobox protected area/sandbox The code is tailored for this template and Template:Superimpose will not work although the functionality is similar.


 * Date and time
 * 16:47, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

This is the second time this has happened today and I'm not happy about being entered in an abuse log. – droll  &#91;chat&#93;  16:47, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments


 * I see the offense was "Fixed position vandalism". In this template using a fixed position is necessary. See Template:Superimpose for similar code. Also, see here for the proposed code. – droll  &#91;chat&#93;  16:58, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I've dropped the protection down a notch so you can work on it, but in doing so, I'm thinking that the possibilities for the type of expolits that 'fixed-position' has been used for in the past might require the filter to be increased even to a stricter level than it was before. -- <B>Soap</B> Talk/Contributions 18:08, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
 * So its done. Thanks. I don't think I'll have to create another template like that but if I do I know where to come first. – droll  &#91;chat&#93;  19:51, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I significantly simplified this filter. Ruslik Zero  13:28, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Thewomenandthegenerals

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * 30 September Movement


 * Description
 * trying to link up to our page with historic info Thewomenandthegenerals (talk) 14:16, 3 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Date and time
 * 14:16, 3 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments

Adding a link containing your username will usually set off this filter; I recommend changing your username if you want to post links to the website of this film (though I'll tell you beforehand that since it's a commercial film those links may well be removed no matter what your username is; see BFAQ.) -- <B>Soap</B> Talk/Contributions 15:26, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

Plaganegra

 * Username


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


 * Description
 * I was saving a new page and it said it was Unconstructive, I don't understand why


 * Date and time
 * 16:10, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

If you de-capitalize the album names you shouldn't have such trouble. Writing obscenities isn't forbidden, but writing them in capitals often is. -- <B>Soap</B> Talk/Contributions 21:11, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

70.29.210.242

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Durissy, Haiti


 * Description
 * fixing references - changed a ref to a ref+group tag, since it wasn't a ref, it was a note 70.29.210.242 (talk) 12:56, 2 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Date and time
 * 12:56, 2 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * I added an exception to the filter for replacements of with <ref group . Ruslik  Zero  13:27, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

70.29.210.242

 * Username


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


 * Description
 * adding a hatnote 70.29.210.242 (talk) 12:52, 2 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Date and time
 * 12:52, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

Hmm, well it seems "porn" is a watch word, surprisingly enough. My first thought is that that is a bit hyperactive, but then it seems that this filter is tag only, and catches a lot of other things which are also not likely to be vandal edits, but may be libelous. So, I would say that you shouldn't feel that you're being classified as a vandal or a problem editor, because a lot of constructive editors will get tagged with things like this from time to time. The tag system just makes it easier for other people to find the edits that are problematic. -- <B>Soap</B> Talk/Contributions 21:17, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

Soul Therapy

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Soul Therapy


 * Description
 * Wow, how many times do I have to click 'save again' and report error???


 * Date and time
 * 21:00, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

This filter is currently set to disallow, which means clicking "save again" isn't going to let it get through. I a pologize for that, but the warning notice isnt something I personally can change, so I will talk to someone who can. As for the problem itself, replacing a page with a completely different page, like this, will always be disallowed; if you want to create a new article you should use a different page title, such as Soul therapy (with a lowercase 't'). Please note that the edit filter is completely ambivalent about policies such as verifiability and conflict of interest, which all new articles must satisfy in order to stay on the wiki. -- <B>Soap</B> Talk/Contributions 21:35, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

Soul Therapy

 * Username


 * Page you were editing
 * Soul Therapy


 * Description
 * Soul Therapy is a registered trademark. I removed the business using this page illegally, and replaced the info with the 2 legal owners and businesses called Soul Therapy (registered in The USA and the EU)


 * Date and time
 * 20:55, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

It's also the name of an album; as far as I know there is no type of trademark which someone in an entirely different industry can use to prevent a music artist from using a phrase as the title of album cover. I could be wrong about that, but as I stated above, the edit filter is agnostic about issues like that; if you believe there is a trademark infringement you should email Open Ticket Response Team. -- <B>Soap</B> Talk/Contributions 21:41, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

adi5500

 * Username


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


 * Description
 * I was putting a link for reference on COREX Process Adi5500 (talk) 16:43, 1 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Date and time
 * 16:43, 1 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * The warning was triggered because you posted a link which contained your username. There is no way for the filter to detect what is and is not a conflict of interest, so don't take this personally. It implies no wrongdoing on your part, it just is meant to trigger a more prompt, second, human review. -- Sh i r ik ( Questions or Comments? ) 17:01, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

panacea123

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Bed of nails


 * Description
 * Please replace this with a description of the edit you were trying to make.


 * Date and time
 * 16:08, 1 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * The warning was triggered because you removed interwiki links and categories. They were restored, so everything's ok, but take a second or two and make sure you're not mistakingly deleting content from pages when adding content. Other than that, everything looks stable, so thanks for taking the time to report this and happy editing. -- Sh i r ik ( Questions or Comments? ) 16:57, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

24.91.232.177
I was editing prahlad friedman (whose birthday is web cited as both 1978 and 1979 btw.... I added: "Friedman is a legend in online poker, often credited for inspiring many online players to adopt a more creative, more loose aggressive style. Playing under the screen names "Spirit Rock" on Full Tilt Poker, "Mahatma" on Ultimate Bet, "Zweig" on Prima Network, and "Poopers" on PokerStars, he is known for overbetting the river (the last card) with bluffs and with the best hand possible."

This is a big reason why he is famous... the other stuff written here cam later. Perhaps the word "poopers" is causing the flag?
 * I've added a cut down version of what you were trying to write; it has the "poopers" in it, but not the claims about him being an online legend because I dont know anything about online poker and couldnt find any RS for that. You should be able to edit the article now, but I suggest creating an account so you wont have to worry about this particular filter.  -- <B>Soap</B> Talk/Contributions 13:36, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

Kartik Subbarao

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Sankethi people


 * Description
 * I updated a URL pointing to the Sankethi Family Tree Charter Kartik Subbarao (talk) 01:39, 1 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Date and time
 * 01:39, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

it was because you added a link containing your username, which is often (though not always) the sign of an account dedicated solely to advertising a product. In this case, the page is not very heavily trafficked, so I took a look at your edits to the page, and I don't see any sign that it is a promotional link in even the most distant way. However, that page needs a lot of work. -- <B>Soap</B> Talk/Contributions 13:09, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

Egg
i want to remove the german interwiki link because it is wrong set.
 * Would you think it would be better to change it to Egg ? -- <B>Soap</B> Talk/Contributions 23:04, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

72.149.226.104

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * User talk:112.110.201.147


 * Description
 * What you were doing 72.149.226.104 (talk) 11:59, 31 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Date and time
 * 11:59, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

The name of the filter set off was "blanking someone else's talk page". If you've written something that no longer applies, it's best to just say so rather than removing the content you wrote, as the other person will likely want to read it anyway, and can rmeove it themselves. -- <B>Soap</B> Talk/Contributions 12:56, 31 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

69.203.119.66

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Adriano Espaillat


 * Description
 * I provided additional source material, for a point that was already the subject of an in-line reference


 * Date and time
 * 09:48, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

Well, okay. I've added "poopcity" to the exceptions, but I still don't think it's a reliable resource, and you also shouldn't be using a Google cache link for a reference, since the content of it will likely change. -- <B>Soap</B> Talk/Contributions 12:51, 31 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

69.203.119.66

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Adriano Espaillat


 * Description
 * Providing in-line references to a news update in the Adriano Espaillat page. These references provide sources, including the searchable public database of the New York City Campaign Finance Board


 * Date and time
 * 22:02, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

Well it looks like you got through but the problem was ... believe it or not ... "poop" vandalism, because of the fact that one of the references you were using was a blog called Poop City. A blog cannot really qualify as a reliable source, regardless of its name, and I can't find the info youre looking for on the other source either, but that's not an issue for the Edit Filter so I will move to the article talk page. -- <B>Soap</B> Talk/Contributions 00:44, 31 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

119.152.48.188

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Amnesty International


 * Description
 * What you were doing 119.152.48.188 (talk) 20:54, 30 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Date and time
 * 20:54, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

Well, the filter went off because you replaced the article with an email. Who are you writing to? Whoever you're speaking to, I don't think the main page of an article is a good place to contact them. -- <B>Soap</B> Talk/Contributions 20:58, 30 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

Chocoe

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Abner Benaim


 * Description
 * Iwas trying to make a new page Chocoe (talk) 14:18, 30 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Date and time
 * 14:18, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

Writing in ALL CAPS (even for section titles) is discouraged ... in fact, generally not allowed ... by the Wikipedia Manual of Style. Do you have the page text saved? If you were to create the same page without the all-caps writing it should have no problem. -- <B>Soap</B> Talk/Contributions 14:21, 30 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

Jaisinghpur

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Himachal Pradesh


 * Description
 * I was trying to edit the table in the page under the heading State Profile but not allowed. Jaisinghpur (talk) 13:12, 30 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Date and time
 * 13:12, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

I appreciate your attempt to clean up the bad formatting on that article, but it looks to me that the text itself is plagiarized from http://www.himachalpr.gov.in/hpglance.asp and cannot be used on Wikipedia for that reason. -- <B>Soap</B> Talk/Contributions 13:35, 30 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

Bongolier

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Mazda Bongo


 * Description
 * I was trying to remove links to external commercial sites. Bongolier (talk) 11:50, 29 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Date and time
 * 11:50, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

I appreciate that, but you also removed all the links to the Wikipedia articles in other languages, and the categories such as Category:1970s automobiles. if you leave those links in, you won't have a problem removing the others. -- <B>Soap</B> Talk/Contributions 13:04, 29 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

visavixen

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * USNS American Explorer (T-AOT-165)


 * Description
 * I was removing the information that was inaccurate in the article. This is the same garbarge that Blue Norway posted up following Hurricanes Gustav and Ike in 2008.  It is a malicious campaign directed toward the company indicated in the article.  I also edited the caption.  That Florida Avenue bridge was not damaged or hit by any of the vessels or barges that were ripped from their moorings by the Hurricane Gustav surge which happened while Gustav was over New Orleans. Visavixen (talk) 18:13, 28 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Date and time
 * 18:13, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

This looks like a content dispute, and I advise you to bring up a discussion on the talk page before making major changes to the article. However, the talk page of that article does not look very active so if you want to go ahead and remove the content, you are free to do so, as the edit filter only triggered because you were not logged into your account at the time. However, if your edit is reverted, please be aware of Wikipedia's policies regarding content disputes. -- <B>Soap</B> Talk/Contributions 20:50, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

Apcor

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Quercus suber


 * Description
 * I was trying to add a link in to the references section of the page and was not allowed to.


 * Date and time
 * 16:23, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

The filter was set off because you added a link containing your username, which is often a sign of an account adding links to commercial websites, which is forbidden. However this filter is currently set to "warn only", and will probably always be, which means it will not prevent you from making an edit like this. There is no way for this filter to be able to distinguish between legitimate edits and promotional activity, so I'm afraid it can't be run without picking up many false positives like this. Don't feel that you're being classified as a problem account, however; many of our best editors have false-positive tagged edits like this. However, you may wish to change your username if you feel you will often be linking to this website, as usernames representing organizations are generally discouraged in and of themselves. -- <B>Soap</B> Talk/Contributions 16:33, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

74.133.218.61

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Driven to Kill


 * Description
 * I was editing the plot on the page when I got a message that said "An automated filter has identified this edit as potentially unconstructive. Please be aware that vandalism may result in revocation of your editing privileges. If this edit is constructive, please click 'Save page' again, and report this error." It was a constructive edit, so I don't know why I got that message. 74.133.218.61 (talk) 15:59, 28 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Date and time
 * 15:59, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

Well, it was because of the word "prick" in the edit. Is this a quote? Wikipedia isn't censored, so if this is a direct quote it would be allowed in the article; if not, it's recommend to find another way to express the statement. (I would recommend rewording it in either case, though.) I don't really see a way to rewrite this filter such that it would allow edits like yours while still catching vandalism. -- <B>Soap</B> Talk/Contributions 16:28, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

Svick

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Sabrina, the Teenage Witch (TV series)


 * Description
 * I was adding link to a newsgroup message, whose identifier looks like an e-mail address. Svick (talk) 13:53, 28 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Date and time
 * 13:53, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

I really don't see a way to make this filter catch emails without also catching things like this. Sure, we could add an exception for "posting.google.com" but there are probably other newsgroup URL's out there and adding too many exceptions would slow down the performance of the filter. -- <B>Soap</B> Talk/Contributions 20:29, 29 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

Verveundertoe

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Fran Kranz


 * Description
 * Wanted to add more information to a stub on actor Fran Krantz. The Filmography took but the Television section did not.


 * Date and time
 * 10:45, 27 January 2010 (EST)
 * The title "Who Pooped the Bed?" set off the filter. I'll add it now. -- <B>Soap</B> Talk/Contributions 16:20, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

thank you

Spixeez

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Contagious Diseases Acts


 * Description
 * Was trying to upload a completly new article that i had written for the contagious diseases act, stopped me because i was removing all previous content already featured about the article.


 * Date and time
 * 01:44, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

The filters were triggered because you removed categories and interwiki links, which are important tools to help people find other articles. If you make the edit again and leave everything from "See Also" to the bottom of the page the way it is now, there should be no problem. Do you still have the text saved? -- <B>Soap</B> Talk/Contributions 01:49, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

ok will try that thanks for the tip, yes I do I'll try to upload it again now. Thanks for your help!

Blueshifting

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Three phase traffic theory


 * Description
 * Tried to replace old version with english translation of german wikipedia article (http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drei-Phasen-Verkehrstheorie) which in my opinion is more detailed and comprehensive.


 * Date and time
 * 10:55, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Well, the filters that were set off were because you removed the link to the German article itself, and removed the category Category:Transportation engineering that the article was in. With such a large edit, I can't be sure that there might not be some other things that might trip the filters, but since it seems like you've gone on to make edits to the article even so, I'll assume the problem is resolved unless you reply back here. -- <B>Soap</B> Talk/Contributions 16:32, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

Corinthiali

 * Username


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


 * Description
 * I am doing right by changing wrong.. Those who are responsible for wrong are wrong and should not be... Implement (think, act, ...) right... Think about it..


 * Date and time
 * 08:21, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

It seems that you were trying to replace the Theotokos article with content that was mostly copy-pasted from Islamic view of Mary. Could you explain why you want to do this? -- <B>Soap</B> Talk/Contributions 16:30, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

Fetchcomms

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Assamese Miniature Painting


 * Description
 * Removing a copyvio from an AfC submission  fetch  comms  ☛ 18:41, 24 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Date and time
 * 18:41, 24 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * The name of the website copied from contained the word "Assamese", and the filter thought it was an obscenity.  fetch  comms  ☛ 18:43, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
 * This filter has been set to Disallow for a long time with only minimal code changes, but just in the last week has triggered three major false positive reports. I wonder if for some reason people just were less likely to report false positives earlier, or if there's some other change in the filter I'm not seeing for some reason that prevented it from denying legitimate edits in the past.  -- <B>Soap</B> Talk/Contributions 17:11, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Actually the problem was triggered by the word "Manuscript". I agree with Soap here that there seems to be a bigger problem than is reported, and the filter needs a serious revisiting. I almost adjusted the filter to correct for fetchcomms's report, but realized the problem is bigger than that. I have an idea on how to fix it, but I'd like to run it over with someone (in private, though, since it's a private filter). -- Sh i r ik ( Questions or Comments? ) 09:56, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
 * I just made a severe change to filter 12 to address this issue. Currently log-only, but it tested fine on testwiki so I anticipate no problems. -- Sh i r ik ( Questions or Comments? ) 03:32, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

87.48.0.130

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Hate Crew Deathroll


 * Description
 * I have translated two sections from daWiki, but the edit filter will don't let me insert these sections.


 * Date and time
 * 13:51, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

"nowiki" tags on URLs are often used to bypass spam filters, since the spam filters will not see them as links and thus not pick them up. If you remove the "nowiki" tag your edit should go through. -- <B>Soap</B> Talk/Contributions 13:55, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments
 * Thank you very much! --87.48.0.130 (talk) 14:00, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

CBM

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Skyscraper articles by quality statistics

This edit 1.0_Editorial_Team/Skyscraper_articles_by_quality_statistics&diff=339569446&oldid=339146270 trips the obscenity filter.
 * Description
 * Date and time
 * 18:17, 23 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * The filter was a bit over-aggressive in its checks. It appears Soap has already addressed the issue so you shouldn't have a problem anymore. Thanks for reporting this! -- Sh i r ik ( Questions or Comments? ) 18:44, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

98.248.41.72

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Gabrielle-Suzanne Barbot de Villeneuve


 * Description
 * removing large bit of inappropriate text 98.248.41.72 (talk) 21:52, 22 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Date and time
 * 21:52, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for fixing that. The edit was denied because it a was a large removal; there is currently no way for this filter to be able to tell the difference between legitimate removals and vandalism, and users who wish to vandalize often use anonymous IP addresses (which are easy to change) or many throwaway accounts. You may want to consider creating an account so that you can make edits like this in the future without having to worry about edit filters such as this one. -- <B>Soap</B> Talk/Contributions 22:07, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments


 * So the working theory is that IPs are guilty until proven innocent, which can't be done in any case? There are times when I think the entire philosophy of Wikipedia is hopelessly flawed; this is one of them. 98.248.41.72 (talk) 22:27, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Clutterpad

 * Username


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


 * Description
 * I was trying to add a link as an external link to http://blog.clutterpad.com/featured/essential-things-to-know-before-starting-a-new-business-119/ - it is for Essential things to know before starting a new business Clutterpad (talk) 19:58, 22 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Date and time
 * 19:58, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

I will talk to the creator of the filter about this, because while it wasn't a real false positive (it correctly detected the link containing your username each time you added it), it isn't proper to apply vandalism filters to such a situation. You should be able to make the edit now because time has elapsed, but I realize this is not the ideal solution when a link being added is in fact legitimate. If youre interested to know why adding a link with your username in it is disallowed, it is because it is often done by users linking to commercial websites. In your case, I don't really think the link is appropriate, but it isn't a Conflict of Interest either. -- <B>Soap</B> Talk/Contributions 20:42, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments
 * clutterpad.com + = spamusernameblock. --Hu12 (talk) 06:25, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

johnjofe

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * [[Osogbo]]


 * Description
 * Removing exhaustive information that makes the article untidy, unreferenced and unattractive. The additional history of Osogbo is a repetition of some facts at Osun and the list of compounds seems a practice of censorship by some individuals, groups and/or organizations that use the names or some of the names listed to promote themselves. No town or city in Nigeria and most especially in Yoruba Land on Wiki includes so long and unprofessional lists of compound like these. The provider of these list fails to cite any quotation and/or references to show if these compounds truly are in Osogbo or if their names have not been changed in the Osun State Capital City - one of the most rapidly developed cities, a newly created capital.


 * Date and time
 * 05:04, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Well, you signed this report as "johnjofe" but it looks like you were editing while logged out as 78.149.125.145. Because the edit you were trying to make consisted of a large deletion of text, even though it was a valid one, it triggered a filter warning. There is currently no way for the filter to be able to distinguish by itself between legitimate edits and vandalism, so things like this are unfortunately necessary. It looks like you went on to make the same edit as Johnjofe and did not have any problems there. Thanks for reporting this. -- <B>Soap</B> Talk/Contributions 11:48, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

hsxeric

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * user talk:hsxeric


 * Description
 * I was trying to purge old posts from MY talk page that was becoming cluttered.


 * Date and time
 * 07:33, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

It's the CRAP at the top that's doing it ... no surprise I'm sure ... though not directly. I changed the filter to allow you to edit your own userspace (including talk pages) -- a minimal change that still preserves the intended function of the filter. -- <B>Soap</B> Talk/Contributions 15:54, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

86.139.173.121

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Richard Wilson (Scottish actor)


 * Description
 * I was merely tidying up some of the internal Wikipedia links plus making more consistent use of italics and inverted commas. Absolutely nothing outrageous (or even external to Wikipedia, as far as I'm aware.


 * Date and time
 * 01:11, 21 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * It's a filter for an obscure prolific vandal, and I'd be interested to hear other suggestions for working around it. For now, if you don't edit the 'Stage acting' section, or edit it seperately, then you should be OK. -- zzuuzz (talk) 01:16, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
 * There seem to be more false positives than just that, so this is a bigger problem than just this report. Reference . Unfortunately, this filter was created a while ago and I'm having a bit of trouble identifying exactly what it's trying to pick out in order to correct the issue. I don't know enough about it to make the change myself, but I'll try to keep deciphering it. Of course, anyone else with more experience, feel free to butt in. -- Sh i r ik  ( Questions or Comments? ) 04:14, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

Larafio

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Roberto Calasso


 * Description
 * Any additional info


 * Date and time
 * 13:50, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

This is just one of those one-in-a-million hits that is impossible to predict and unfortunately therefore impossible to prevent without disabling the filter. I apologize for the inconvenience. I'm afraid I don't feel comfortable disabling the filter, because as I said, this looks like something that will never happen again, and the filter is needed to keep track of a particular disruptive vandal who's been playing his game for several years. As for the content of your edit itself, I see nothing wrong with your intentions, but I do have to ask, are you sure that these books and essays do contain verifications of the information presented in the article? While not disallowed, Wikipedia discourages EB-style reference sections where everything is placed at the bottom of the page with no footnotes to clarify which source connects to which statement in the article. This makes it easier for readers to verify the statements in the article and to find further information about related subjects. Would it be possible for you to take this additional step? I will contact you on your talk page since I think it may be more convenient than having to come back to this page as it may lead to a long threaded discussion. -- <B>Soap</B> Talk/Contributions 14:32, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

TwoThongs

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * [database]


 * Description
 * I was attempting to add an external link to an article on Bitemporal Databases. The article was written by myself as an author for Microsoft patterns & practices and I therefore included my name in the link. I clicked add article a few times as I didn't know why it was failing. I didn't realise your name wasn't allowed - sorry!


 * Date and time
 * 03:59, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

Oh, it's definitely allowed; don't worry. This edit filter is just a convenient way for people to find editors who may be posting links to commercial websites that they run or are affiliated with. As below, it's also sometimes the case that the person's username itself is promotional. But your website doesn't seem to be a commercial website, so I don't see any reason to revert it. Someone with a better understanding of the subject matter may choose to do so — this is a wiki after all — but it wouldn't be because your username is in the link. -- <B>Soap</B> Talk/Contributions 04:28, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments
 * It appears that your last edit was trapped by Filter 279 even though the others went through; I can explain why if you're interested but because that filter seems to be a rather crucial private filter, I'd rather do that over email than here on the page. -- <B>Soap</B> Talk/Contributions 04:37, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
 * This not a false positive. The editor has admitted a WP:COI, which the filter had properly identified. --Ronz (talk) 18:44, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

unicard

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wiki link)
 * Integrated Transport Smart card Organization


 * Description
 * we are members just like the others in the list and I was adding our company detailsUnicard (talk) 15:22, 19 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Date and time
 * 15:22, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

I see you've gone ahead to make the edit after all. Well, it isn't a false positive because it's correctly detecting that you're adding a link containing your user name, which is often a conflict of interest. Editors are discouraged from editing for the purposes of promoting a company they run or work for. However, I agree with you that it would be hypocrisy to deny your edit but leave the article as is with all the links to other companies intact. While I can't promise your link will always stay on the page, I can promise that you'll be treated the same as all the others. Personally, I would be in favor of deleting all of the links, since they're presumably available offsite in the link given at the bottom of the page, but I'll have to first look at the history of the article (which seems to go back to 2005) to see how it got into the state that it is today. Thank you for reporting this; if you have any further questions feel free to contact me on my talk page or, even better, the talk page of the article, since more people will see it there. -- <B>Soap</B> Talk/Contributions 15:49, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

originpc

 * User name


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * originpc page


 * Description
 * Trying to create an originpc pageOriginPC (talk) 21:43, 18 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Date and time
 * 21:43, 18 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments

First off, I'd advise reviewing the conflict of interest guidelines and username policy. The reason you were receiving warnings is because you are creating a page with the same name as your username, which tends to imply a conflict of interest exists. If this is a company, as it seems to be, then your username also seems to represent that company, which is against the username policy. Your username should represent you as an individual, not a group or organization. To change your username, you can make a request at WP:CHU, though it may be easier for you just to re-register under a new name and abandon this account. Anyway, if you still want to create this page, I would recommend creating it in userspace first, to allow others the chance to review it. The article wizard can help you do that. Regards. -- Sh i r ik ( Questions or Comments? ) 23:12, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

Cloverts

 * User name


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


 * Description
 * Correcting and adding information Cloverts (talk) 17:53, 18 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Date and time
 * 17:53, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

It was disallowed because of the "zomo poop" near the end, but even if it had not been, it would still be plagiarism of this page and thus cannot stay on the page. Sorry. -- <B>Soap</B> Talk/Contributions 18:14, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

CCM-RADIO

 * Username

Contemporary Christian music
 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Description
 * This was my contribution to the definition to the CCM acronym with regard to Contemporary Christian Music. A reference to magazines and other written media. I merely added an audio reference where the Artists are directly describing their point of view and purpose for their music.


 * Date and time
 * 10:10, 18 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * But as your name indicates you are affiliated with that organization, which is frowned upon in Wikipedia. Ruslik Zero  14:05, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

Paulchen-Weimar

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * W49


 * Description
 * I removed the de:W49 link, because the German W49 is neither an astronomical region nor a nuclear weapon, it's just a Telephone Paulchen-Weimar (talk) 16:18, 17 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Date and time
 * 16:18, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for fixing that. There's no real way for this filter to be able to tell the difference between legitimate removals and vandalism ... I would suspect, even, that the majority of the hits on this filter are in fact legitimate removals but that most people choose not to report them here. However, this is a common type of vandalism, and so for now I think people want to let the filter stay on. (Thank you also for removing the links on the de. side too, as if you hadn't, the bots would likely add them back on this side.) -- <B>Soap</B> Talk/Contributions 16:33, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

Corneldidit

 * Username


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


 * Description
 * Any additional info


 * Date and time
 * 14:59, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

The bureaucrat will move your userpage once your rename is approved. Until then, it's better to leave your page where it is. -- <B>Soap</B> Talk/Contributions 16:09, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

68.116.146.12

 * Username


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


 * Description
 * adding a relevant external link about the subject


 * Date and time
 * 22:37, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

Done; thanks for reporting that. -- <B>Soap</B> Talk/Contributions 22:53, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

MrRandomPerson

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Talk:Shahidul Islam


 * Description
 * Reverting vandalism. also had been checking recent changes and reverting vandalism when i saw it.


 * Date and time
 * 18:37, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

Don't be alarmed; this is just a tag that gets placed on all brand new users whose edits are mostly reversions of other people's edits. There's nothing wrong with this, and it will appear regardless of whether you're reverting good edits or bad. Here is a list of other people who have also got this same tag. Again, it doesn't mean that we're watching you to see if you're a vandal, it just means that some of the people on that list might be. If the tag bothers you, you can avoid having it appear by always manually entering an edit summary that doesn't include "revert" or "undo" or "rv", as these are the words that are used by various automatic methods of reverting edits. -- <B>Soap</B> Talk/Contributions 19:22, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments
 * Until a newly registered user makes an edit whose summary would mention the theme from Fullmetal Alchemist ("Undo" by Cool Joke), or perhaps Chaundoon, original home of Glomer from It's Punky Brewster. At least the filter needs spaces on the side so it doesn't hit summaries like (this CPU has modified Harvard architecture) or (removed perverted vandalism) (thanks Mr.Z-man), but it might miss an initial "rv ". --Damian Yerrick (talk | stalk) 15:57, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
 * A more correct solution would be to use a regex with word boundaries (\b). For example, the existing " rv " should probably be replaced with "\brvv?\b" as a regex. -- Sh i r ik ( Questions or Comments? ) 08:05, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

THeyer

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Care-Providing Robot FRIEND


 * Description
 * Adding a new article about care-providing robot FRIEND


 * Date and time
 * 10:45, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

It's being triggered by the  near the top of the page. You could get the page to go through if you left it out, but I think this page needs a bit of work before it's ready to go live; would you consider putting it in your userspace instead (perhaps as a subpage like User:Theyer/FRIEND? That would give you an opportunity to find images to use and to change the formatting to be more in line with Wikipedia's other articles (e.g. we don't generally use "span" the way you're doing it). -- <B>Soap</B> Talk/Contributions 11:57, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments
 * I see that you've gone on to create the article. My advice still stands. -- <B>Soap</B> Talk/Contributions 11:58, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

Tamara Blackburn

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Gariece McPherson


 * Description
 * Writing a first articleTamara Blackburn (talk) 20:34, 13 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Date and time
 * 20:34, 13 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments

Please try posting your page again, but without the Nowiki tags.  Triplestop  x3  21:53, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

198.175.205.251

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Spanish Language


 * Description
 * editing it to improve the quality and add informtion


 * Date and time
 * 20:05, 13 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * Doing 'poop' vandalism is not an improvement. -- zzuuzz (talk) 20:22, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

proteomesoftware

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Proteome Software


 * Description
 * Save Changes


 * Date and time
 * 18:09, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, usernames may not contain references to a company or organization. Please note that Wikipedia is not a vehicle for advertising.  Triplestop  x3  18:39, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

68.146.81.123

 * Username


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


 * Description
 * Legitimate edit to correct a factual mistake regarding the current O'Brien/Leno situation and to reorganize information regarding same 68.146.81.123 (talk) 16:03, 13 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Date and time
 * 16:03, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

While this is indeed a false positive, it just so happens that there is a vandal or group of vandals who uses edit summaries similar to yours while vandalizing various articles. There is no way for the filter to be able to tell the difference between legitimate edits and vandalism, so these types of hits will occur from time to time. Please don't feel youre being classified as suspicious; even our best editors (and administrators) get edits tagged from time to time. -- <B>Soap</B> Talk/Contributions 17:42, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments
 * Except my edit summary reads "revised wording - O'Brien never said he'd leave the network". I can't see how that fits into a template because it's no different from the many other edit summaries out there. I'm concerned that if the filter is too strict it might dissuade users - anonymous IPs and registered - not to bother leaving edit summaries because as I interpret your comment, it is impossible to predict what will be flagged. 68.146.81.123 (talk) 18:09, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
 * It was because of "the network" which I removed as too general. Ruslik Zero  19:23, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

EKITOA

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Fagasa, American Samoa


 * Description
 * Editing Information EKITOA (talk) 10:58, 13 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Date and time
 * 13:35, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

It seems to have been caused by typing the name of the city FAGASA in capitals; if you were to write it in lowercase it should go through. -- <B>Soap</B> Talk/Contributions 13:35, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

149.254.218.2

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * User talk:149.254.219.23


 * Description
 * adding isp|T-Mobile UK header to IP address I had on previous connection 149.254.218.2 (talk)


 * Date and time
 * 19:46, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

It's because you're not just adding a header, you're also removing the content underneath it. If you add the header and leave the rest of the page intact, there shouldn't be any problems. -- <B>Soap</B> Talk/Contributions 20:53, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

dctraining

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Nawlin's talk page


 * Description
 * I was trying to explain details of a site she/he deleted, but the autofilter kept on telling me my post was unconstructive. I tried to reword it but with no luck. Could you advise me on how to reword it please to get it through. The post was as follows.Hi Nawlin - I do a lot of weight lifting and had heard about this technique which is increasing in popularity in bodybuilding circles, so started doing so research into it. I found various bits of information around the web, but in no one place was there a simple, single summary of it, so for the benefit of others I thought I would put one together using all the information I had collected. DC training is not a branded training routine of any kind that someone would benefit from commercially, it is simply a form of bodybuilding training routine that has become very popular over recent years. I do hope you will reconsider its listing to save other people in my situation from having to do all the same research that I've had to do over the last few days. If you won't reinstate it for me, would you mind allowing me to get a copy of what I wrote, since I didn't keep a copy for myself, and I would just find it useful for my own weights routines going forward. Dctraining (talk) 16:25, 12 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Date and time
 * 16:25, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
 * I've reported this talk:NawlinWiki#Filter 233 here; you should be able to post on his talk page now. -- <B>Soap</B> Talk/Contributions 16:33, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

Hylacon

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Richard Hammond


 * Description
 * Adding "Richard Hammond's Invisible World" to the list of TV Shows section. Intriguingly the log seems to think I deleted everything else but this section, and removed "[to] present" from the "Top Gear" line


 * Date and time
 * 13:32, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

The filter appears to be correct, at least about you deleting everything else from the article. The edit filter doesn't keep an easy-to-read copy of the article the way it would look if your edit had been saved, but you can look at the log here and see that the "new size" is much smaller than the old size. Is it possible you just made a mistake? Anyway I don't see anything wrong with your edit other than that, so if you were to try again you should have no problem. -- <B>Soap</B> Talk/Contributions 14:33, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

Afcountryboy

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Boy Scouts of America membership controversies


 * Description
 * I was attempting to edit the "Position on Homosexuals" section to add an example of a gay youth member controversy alongside an existing example of an gay adult employee/volunteer controversy. My two sentences were cited. and read as: "In 2000, a gay, 14-year-old Scout was dismissed from his troop in Winston-Salem, North Carolina. After protests, the local council's executive stood by the national policy banning gays and the youth did not have his membership reinstated." The citation was formatted correctly using two addresses. One of the available text of the article and one of an archived abstract of the same article. Afcountryboy (talk) 13:20, 12 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Date and time
 * 13:19, 12 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * The filter was triggered by 'GAY' in all caps in the link to a search. In addition, citing searches is not generally a good idea. Ruslik Zero  14:13, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

Caitsith2

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Akihiko Mori


 * Description
 * From research on google, I found out that there was more than one Akihiko Mori, and as a result, I needed to create a redirection, to handle the multiple instances. I have accordingly moved the page, to reflect the specific instance being targeted.  There is a music composer. There is also a Mixed martial artist, (MMA).  I haven't created the MMA version page, but info for that version can be easily found on google, with Akihiko Mori MMA.


 * Date and time
 * 12:09, 10 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments

Hello, a warning was displayed due to your large deletion from the article, which included all categories. You do not need to worry about this.  Triplestop  x3  16:06, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Part of the problem was caused because of a copy-paste move. If you had done a true move, a redirect would have been created when you could then turn into a disambiguation page. Instead, you copy-pasted the text from one location to another, which loses the history of that article. In the future, please try to use the "move" operation, or, as in your case where you don't have that right yet, Requested moves. In any case, I will go ahead and clean up the move. -- Sh i r ik ( Questions or Comments? ) 16:42, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

Sheilalabarre

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Sheila LaBarre


 * Description
 * We were trying to create this page and its giving us an error that says its unconstructive. The page has not been created yet.


 * Date and time
 * 01:47, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

Because of the controversial nature of the page you're creating, I want to first clarify the issue of your username. Per the username policy, you should not edit under the name of a real-life person unless you can show that you are that person; instructions for doing so are given on that page. If not, you can change your username and then go on to create the article. -- <B>Soap</B> Talk/Contributions 02:36, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

Jesse Viviano

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Circuit City


 * Description
 * I was just being curious to see if I ever tripped an edit filter and found out that the date filter, filter 218, caught something that definitely was not a date. This links to the filter log entry. I was just changing a link to point to a page instead of a redirect to that page. Jesse Viviano (talk) 02:11, 9 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Date and time
 * 20:10, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

I can't figure out what happened here. Sometimes, a seemingly impossible hit will turn out to be due to a filter having been changed from something completley different in the past, but keeping the same number; but that doesn't appear to be the case here: this filter was always meant for the single task of catching people posting dates. It also don't seem to be due to the MediaWiki bug that causes edits in the middle of a line to be seen as the deletion of the whole line and insertion of a different line. I hope somebody else here can answer this question. In any case, though, this filter has been inactive since November. -- <B>Soap</B> Talk/Contributions 02:50, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments
 * The filter appears to be missing escapes. I can't be sure without checking out the edit filter extension's source code, but taking a guess, the regular expression is likely wrapped in forward slashes (/). The only other option is wrapped in % in PHP, and that's less often used. If it's true that the extension uses /, then it's also possible that an unescaped / could break the filter. This is purely speculative at this point but is worth investigation. -- Sh i r ik ( Questions or Comments? ) 05:59, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: The regular expression  (the filter's expression with the forward slashes removed) does in fact match the contents of added_lines, so it seems likely this analysis is accurate. -- Sh i r ik  ( Questions or Comments? ) 06:16, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Soundedit38

 * Username


 * Page you were editing
 * Maryam Babangida

I edited an article about the wife of a former military dictator who recently died. The article (as previously written) was heavily biased and included gushing praise of a woman whose family was linked to corruption and other crimes during her husband's tenure as military ruler of Nigeria (Sources: BBC News, Time Magazine, etc.). I created a truncated version of the article that acknowledged some of her accomplishments as well as her controversies, in line with Wikipedia's policy of impartiality. I returned to the page this evening to find that it had reverted to the biased edition, and when I tried to return the article to my version, I received a message warning me of "vandalizing" the page. I don't think it is vandalism to submit an edited, impartial article to Wikipedia. Please compare my edition with the version submitted by Aymatth2, and advise. Soundedit38 (talk)
 * Description
 * This is going to sound strange, but the filter triggered because you used the word gushing in your edit summary. I believe this is a sign of a particular vandal or group of vandals who have been around a lot lately, but due to the fact that it is often used innocently I have disabled that particular catch word for now.  The content of your edit was okay and not the reason for the trapping of the edit.  Since it looks like you made a similar edit shortly afterward I am going to assume you got what you wanted; is this correct? -- <B>Soap</B> Talk/Contributions 05:06, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Ian Youngs

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Enormous (band)


 * Description
 * I have tried to create a page but I cannot get it to save because it flashes up a filter warning and then I tried to save the page once again, but the next error message told me if I was trying to create a page and not vandalise a page I was to report it here under false positives. Ian Youngs (talk) 04:09, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Further info: Thanks for the advice. I thought it might be the other naughty song title word i.e. "a**hole", but Wikipedia already has a page with that word on it so I thought it weird why it wasn't saving properly. So I have gone back to the wizard, and have found that the code line which is causing me problems on saving, even in my own space, is this line: "Infobox musical artist ". I wanted to have that neat table showing up in the top right hand part of the page to show all the artist's band members details etc. If I remove that line it will save but with messy coding showing up. If I completely delete the whole box, it also saves properly. So, I guess it's something to do with the coding.

Further info: All seems to be OK now. It saves without any warnings on my own space. Artist table also shows up properly too. Thanks for your assistance.


 * Date and time
 * 04:09, 7 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * The problem is caused by the line "Sharon, you're a shit" which Filter 9 assumed was a personal attack, but is actually a song's name. As a workaround, try making the article in your userspace at User:Ian Youngs/Enormous (band) and then ask someone to move it to the appropriate location. The filter should ignore content you put in your own space. Of course, before you do that, double-check that the article meets WP:BAND. Thanks for reporting this! -- Sh i r ik ( Questions or Comments? ) 05:12, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

125.25.8.148

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Cambodian singers after the Khmer Rouge


 * Description
 * Merge to Cambodian singers 125.25.8.148 (talk) 06:55, 6 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Date and time
 * 06:55, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

There is a filter currently set to disallow too many redirects within a short time period, and you made several of them in a minute, so at first the move was disallowed, but you were able to do it within the next minute. I apologize that it has to be this way, but currently there is no way for the filter to be able to distinguish by itself between legitimate edits and vandalism. In this case I agree your edits were good but I have not had a chance to look at them more closely, and I will do that when I get a chance. Thank you for reporting this false positive. -- <B>Soap</B> Talk/Contributions 16:51, 6 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments
 * Note that it was not the fact that the initial page you were trying to redirect to was a red link that stopped you; it was because you had done three of them in one minute. Though redirecting to a red link is rarely a good idea, it is not currently disallowed. -- <B>Soap</B> Talk/Contributions 16:53, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

2020BrainTrust

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Pete Wagner


 * Description
 * What you were doing 2020BrainTrust (talk) 05:22, 6 January 2010 (UTC) adding external links. NOT commercial or advertising sites, strictly artistic creations by the subject of the article. If anything, these will result in his getting LESS business!


 * Date and time
 * 05:22, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

There is no way for the filter to be able to distinguish by itself between legtimate edits and conflict of interest. This is just a way for us to better keep track of edits that might be problematic; please don't feel you're being classified as a problem, as some of our best editors have made edits that trigger filters like these. -- <B>Soap</B> Talk/Contributions 16:48, 6 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

User:173.183.70.15
Attempting to shorten section of fraternities and sororities in good faith and in line with comments by several users in the discussion page. Mostly removed lists and repetition and tried to keep what looked like core information. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.183.70.15 (talk • contribs)
 * I think there may be a problem in this filter, though it's still hard to tell what triggered it. In general, editing a line means that everything after the part you edited is treated as "new" text, so if something in the original text was such that it would trigger a filter, it will still trigger even if you are only editing the line.  This means that you won't be able to edit this page even after I add your edit for you, so I recommend that you sign up for a named account so that you won't have to worry about filters like this in the future (on this article or any other one).  I will look into the problem with the filter. -- <B>Soap</B> Talk/Contributions 01:40, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

User:Tylerrowsell

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Corner Brook Regional High


 * Description
 * User added an apparently valid image and a case correction--filter is too aggressive


 * Date and time
 * 01:46, 5 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * report added by David spector (talk) 01:47, 5 January 2010 (UTC) - please undo filter's deletion!

This is not a false positive; the user was trying to add an external image, which is impossible, and the filter tagged it correctly. The edit was not denied, just tagged, and the editor removed the link shortly afterward. -- <B>Soap</B> Talk/Contributions 02:24, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Vadac

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Austria–Hungary


 * Description
 * I was trying to rename this article to the Austro-Hungarian Empire to align it with the titles of the Austrian Empire and German Empire which were simular in administration and government structure. I believe the reason for the blocking of my request was because two different people had made move requests to this article before and they were both examples of vandalism.


 * Date and time
 * 00:45, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

I think it was denied for a totally unrelated reason, and i've alerted the person who last edited it. However, I think that even aside from that, there is a problem because Austro-Hungarian Empire already exists, and only an administrator can move a page to a title that already exists (technically speaking, they have to delete the page and then move it.) I think you may want to open a discussion on Talk:Austria-Hungary about the changing of the name; it's an issue that really goes beyond the technical aspects of who can do what. Nevertheless, thank you for posting here because I think this edit filter has the potential for catching more false positives in the future. -- <B>Soap</B> Talk/Contributions 00:56, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

Max Legroom

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Downtown Burj Dubai


 * Description
 * Tried to move it to Downtown Burj Khalifa, which is the new name according to . Max Legroom (talk) 22:32, 4 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Date and time
 * 22:32, 4 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * Works. Many thanks. Max Legroom (talk) 22:44, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Yeah, sorry ... I've been noticing quite a few false positives in this filter lately, and am trying to think of a way to get rid of them without destroying the purpose the filter was made for (which is, of course, totally different than the type of edits you're making). -- <B>Soap</B> Talk/Contributions 22:54, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

utomaut

 * Username


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


 * Description
 * The article did not take my diagrams and maps


 * Date and time
 * 14:53, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

I think it would be best to help you on your talk page, since it might take a while to figure out exactly what caused the problem (the longer the page, the harder it is to figure out), so I've pasted the content onto your userpage. -- <B>Soap</B> Talk/Contributions 15:08, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments
 * This user does not appear to have edited the page in question. (s)he edited only the user page. Ruslik Zero  17:14, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

Meaniehead

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Bimbos Forever


 * Description
 * Finished typing it up, clicked save this page and it told me that my edit was considered vandalism.


 * Date and time
 * 00:25, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

While not vandalism, the article was promotion and personal recollections on an apparently non-notable website, and would probably be speedily deleted on three different criteria.  Acroterion  (talk)  00:35, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments
 * I agree with Acroterion. However, I've gone on and pasted the content into User:Meaniehead/BimbosForever so that you can work on it some more if you want to and at least not have to start from scratch. -- <B>Soap</B> Talk/Contributions 00:38, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

Szymon Żywicki

 * Username


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


 * Description
 * Polish Government changed name of this village. I've already moved page Żabinki to Żabinka (wieś) on pl.wiki

Szymon Żywicki (talk) 20:43, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Date and time
 * 20:43, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

This filter has recently been made more strict, and is catching a lot of false positives. It would appear that there is no warning message set to display when this filter is triggered, and having a warning might be a good idea. I'll bring it up with an administrator as I'm not capable of creating new warning messages myself. Thanks for reporting the problem. -- <B>Soap</B> Talk/Contributions 21:02, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

markcoulter50

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Sophie Wilson


 * Description
 * Title of the webpage I included in the title of a reference contained '@' this was picked up when I went to save the article as an email when it wasn't.


 * Date and time
 * 18:53, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

Yes, that's the way this filter behaves. It may or may not be possible to get it to be more intelligent without letting actual email addresses go untagged ... but that's all it is, a tag, so for the time being I think it should be left as is unless there are so many false positives that it's actually tagging things that should have been tagged with other things as well (an edit can only have one tag, I believe). -- <B>Soap</B> Talk/Contributions 20:58, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

RealGhostbuster

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Return of the Ghostbusters (film)


 * Description
 * Writing the page so that it explains why Return of the Ghostbusters is worthy of a Wikipedia article


 * Date and time
 * 05:33, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

It was because of the capitalized ASS, which it looks like you've fixed. Please see the notice on your talkpage if you're not already aware of the deletion of a previous article about this film. -- <B>Soap</B> Talk/Contributions 06:05, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

Devyfan

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Nothing Is Keeping You Here


 * Description
 * creating redirects for song titles Devyfan (talk) 05:38, 30 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Date and time
 * 05:38, 30 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * That's wierd; the filter that caught you is supposed to ignore redirects. Someguy1221 (talk) 07:13, 30 December 2009 (UTC)
 * 'article_text' refers to the title, not to the wikitext! I changed it to 'added_lines'. Ruslik Zero  09:51, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

Helfwisner

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Yakuza 4


 * Description
 * Trying to move it to the proper Ryū ga Gotoku 4 page Helfwisner (talk) 04:04, 29 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Date and time
 * 04:04, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for reporting this; I've fixed it for you. This particular filter is hidden because it traps a lot of vandalistic edits, so if you want to know exactly what caused the problem, you can email me by clicking the email link on my talk page. -- <B>Soap</B> Talk/Contributions 04:22, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Comments

Paradoctor

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Amarante, Portugal


 * Description
 * This edit triggered a warning about trying to insert an email address. I think this was caused by the filename of the image. Paradoctor (talk) 15:59, 28 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Date and time
 * 15:59, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for reporting that. I think it is best that we leave this filter turned on, even though it does seem to produce a lot of false positives; it's useful for tracking purposes. Please don't feel as if you're being classified as a problem editor; tags are just a convenient way for us to alert ourselves to various actions that could require greater attention and/or removal. -- <B>Soap</B> Talk/Contributions 20:20, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Comments


 * NP, COIBot already has it in for me, one more won't make a difference. ;) I think you could save some work, though, if you filter out working links. Regards, Paradoctor (talk) 21:00, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

78.147.149.250

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * SAM Learning


 * Description
 * What you were doing 78.147.149.250 (talk) 19:51, 27 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Date and time
 * 19:51, 27 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Comments

It looks like you removed the entire article except for the last paragraph. Did you mean to do this? If so, could you explain why? -- <B>Soap</B> Talk/Contributions 19:59, 27 December 2009 (UTC)

Cammo86

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Swift Impulse


 * Description
 * updating links, old links are dead Cammo86 (talk) 03:49, 26 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Date and time
 * 03:49, 26 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * The edit filter correctly noted tagged the edit as adding an external link that is similar to your username. You were still permitted to make the edit. Someguy1221 (talk) 03:56, 26 December 2009 (UTC)
 * But XLinkBot immediately reverted him. I think that's what he's complaining about (though it isn't directly related to the edit filter, it's a reasonable mistake for someone to make).  -- <B>Soap</B> Talk/Contributions 04:04, 26 December 2009 (UTC)

220.101.28.25

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * User talk220.101.28.25


 * Description
 * Adding Christmas banner to my talk page, Using BIG,BIG,BIG,BIG,BIG, Text


 * Date and time
 * 12:17, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, sorry, it's the same problem as at Edit filter/False positives. I suppose it might be possible to use a function to detect whether the page is your own rather than someone else's, though; I'll look at that. -- <B>Soap</B> Talk/Contributions 14:06, 25 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Comments

UltimateStarThunder

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * List of Fanboy and Chum Chum episodes


 * Description
 * Putting on two new episodes and editing descriptions to make sure people knew


 * Date and time
 * 19:38, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

This is a fairly common false positive. Actually, the filter wouldn't have triggered if you'd been logged in to your account, but it seems you got logged out and tried to edit it as an IP address. -- <B>Soap</B> Talk/Contributions 21:43, 24 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Comments

drecohen

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Amorphous Selenium Flat Panel Detectors


 * Description
 * Trying to remove a leading slash from the page name, which was inserted by accident Drecohen (talk) 13:26, 24 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Date and time
 * 13:26, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

Fixed, for now. It does seem to be triggering quite a few false positives lately (due to recent changes in the code), so I will try to work to improve this. Thank you for reporting this. -- <B>Soap</B> Talk/Contributions 15:11, 24 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Comments

98.113.187.11

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Camden, New Jersey


 * Description
 * this is the SECOND time this filter has triggered over simple "tidy" edits (e.g., putting quotation marks around titles of articles cited; initial capping cited article titles; putting source (newspaper, etc.) in italic and wikilink; populating author (and other missing data in naked(ish) citations). in general, doing "janitorial" work to an article very much in need of a clean up (to meet wikipedia standards).


 * the triggered filter is clearly set "too high" or just malformed. the article may as well be under "semi-protection" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Semi-protect#Semi-protection).


 * (n.b. before anyone suggests, yet again, that i create an account — registration is not an option.  regards.--98.113.187.11 (talk) 03:20, 24 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Date and time
 * 03:20, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

While this filter may deny a number of legitimate edits, protecting the article (as it has been in the past) would deny all of them. We are interested in preventing false positives, but for an IP editor, there will always be problems like this. I can see that your edit is good, and it is possible for the filter to be re-coded, but I am very hesitant to change this filter because it has been changed a lot in the past few days, quite drastically in fact, and those changes to the filter appear to have been made in response to something very specific. However I am not familiar with the patterns of the editor(s) whom it was designed to track, and so I will leave it up to NawlinWiki or anyone else who sees this edit to make the decision about what to do about the code of this particular filter. -- <B>Soap</B> Talk/Contributions 05:17, 24 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Comments
 * I've made this edit which I believe accomplishes the same changes as what you were trying to do. -- <B>Soap</B> Talk/Contributions 05:23, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

98.113.187.11

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Camden, New Jersey


 * Description
 * general copyedit/tidy (conform date style in citations; alpha unordered lists; fix redirects, remove overlinks, etc. (article is quite in need of "cleanup"--98.113.187.11 (talk) 09:37, 23 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Date and time
 * 09:37, 23 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * This is because there's a filter specifically protecting Camden, New Jersey and some other specific articles against a long-term pattern of nasty, racist abuse by anonymous IPs.  I've gone ahead and made your changes.  As at least one other person has commented on your talk page, you could avoid this issue by creating an account.  NawlinWiki (talk) 13:34, 23 December 2009 (UTC)
 * thanks for the response and making the edits.  i fail to see why edits such as conforming date styles in footnotes; eliminating unneeded redirects, removing overlinks, etc. should trigger any filters against racist abuse.  sounds as if the filter is not very well designed.


 * as stated on my talk page, creating an account is not an option for me.--98.113.187.11 (talk) 18:28, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

Bidou

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Ubisoft Quebec


 * Description
 * I removed language links since Ubisoft Quebec isn't Ubisoft Montreal. We need to create new language pages for Ubisoft Quebec, not redirect it to other Ubisoft Montreal language pages. Simon Tremblay 05:45, 23 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Date and time
 * 05:45, 23 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * It was just a warning. So, keep editing. Ruslik Zero  10:11, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

Sonicrox14
I wanted to make Gallows Carradine a redirect for Wild Arms 3, but it said it was an "unconstructive edit". Why so? -- Sonicrox14  04:44, 23 December 2009 (UTC)
 * I think you can create it now. Ruslik Zero  10:09, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

Ericpenniston

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Not applicable


 * Description
 * I am trying to create my account ?? maitri.sublime@yahoo.com 206.55.188.203 (talk) 01:33, 23 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Date and time
 * 01:33, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

This is a tricky one. Are you Ericpenniston? There may be a bug in the filter (Special:AbuseFilter/102), because "pennis" should be allowed. -- <B>Soap</B> Talk/Contributions 01:41, 23 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Comments
 * It looks like this filter has recently been changed such that names including the string "pennis" are no longer allowed. I will add an exception for your name. -- <B>Soap</B> Talk/Contributions 01:43, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

78.53.124.233

 * Username


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


 * Description
 * Removed link to German (de) "Politeia", because that links to Platon's "The Republic", known in German under it's original Greek title (i.e. Politeia), not the general concept. 78.53.124.233 (talk) 20:16, 21 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Date and time
 * 20:16, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for reporting that. Apparently, there is a persistent group of vandals who remove legitimate links to articles, and so we've set up a filter to keep track of them. This does not mean that you're being seen as "suspicious", so please don't worry about it. This filter runs in tag-only mode and will never actually prevent any edit from going through, because of the many false positives it brings. -- <B>Soap</B> Talk/Contributions 20:34, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Comments

Hollies

 * Username


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


 * Description
 * Adding external link to Official Myspace site about the band


 * Date and time
 * 12:09, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

This is kind of a sideways mechanism of detecting account role accounts. While there is nothing wrong with the edit you made, you should not have named yourself "Hollies" to do it, as that implies that you represent the band itself. (And even if you do, see Username policy ... using the band name itself is still against the username policy since it implies the existence of more than one person using the account). -- <B>Soap</B> Talk/Contributions 16:56, 20 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Comments

96.240.167.180

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * User talk:96.240.167.180


 * Description
 * This particular IP address refers to a router, behind which are multiple computers. As the comments on the talk page are no longer necessary, and they were temporary in nature, placed by one of the users behind the router, they have been replaced by a single line. 96.240.181.29 (talk) 09:53, 20 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Date and time
 * 09:53, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

It wouldn't let you do it because at the time, your IP address was different than the one on the page. I would recommend letting the writing on the page stay as is; however, you (regardless of your IP) can add a header at the top of the page saying that it's a dynamic and shared IP. -- <B>Soap</B> Talk/Contributions 16:48, 20 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Comments

Nutster

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Nathan Divinsky


 * Description
 * I was changing the name of the television program he appeared on from @ Discovery Canada to @discovery.ca (the actual name of the show) and received the notice that this looked like an email address. There are no valid user name characters in front of the @ sign, so I feel this should not have triggered an email filter. Nutster (talk) 08:08, 20 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Date and time
 * 08:08, 20 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * I added an exception for the quotation marks. Ruslik Zero  09:54, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

216.227.67.37

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * The Marvelous Misadventures of Flapjack: The Video Game


 * Description
 * Adding a "characters" section 216.227.67.37 (talk) 19:40, 19 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Date and time
 * 19:40, 19 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * I added an exception. Ruslik Zero  09:58, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

83.242.88.168

 * Username


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


 * Description
 * Same as previous, plus user LUCPOL is still adding infos not related to Katowice and not writing his argumentation in english but in polish. What can I do about it?


 * Date and time
 * 18:56, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

It's because of the image in the page, which the software thinks is a "red link" because most images technically are empty at least of text. I wouldn't want to disable that because a lot of people do use images to vandalize a page. I could disable the filter altogether, temporarily, but I'm really reluctant to do so because it catches a lot of actual vandalism. Would you consider registering an account? It would get you free of the restrictions of this filter and many other filters fairly quickly. -- <B>Soap</B> Talk/Contributions 19:10, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Comments

83.242.88.168

 * Username


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


 * Description
 * I tried to revert edition made by user LUCPOL, who put into article infos not related to Katowice, which should stay in other articles.


 * Date and time
 * 17:16, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

I think I see the problem, and I'll let the people who created that filter know about it; it looks like a weakness in an otherwise clever filter. I'm glad to see that your edit got through after you made one little change to get around the filter. Thanks for reporting the problem. -- <B>Soap</B> Talk/Contributions 18:09, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Comments

thechildrenshospital

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Children's Hospital (Aurora, Colorado)


 * Description
 * updating the page for this noprofit childrens hospital to include current location information and more details about what services this organization provides


 * Date and time
 * 21:26, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

There are a few different filters being triggered here. One is because the username you've chosen is contained in the name of the article you're editing. The others can be explained primarily by the fact that you're copying content from a website, which is in general not allowed (if you're the author of the website, it's different, but still discouraged because it is more difficult to verify the information contained within than it is with outside sources). -- <B>Soap</B> Talk/Contributions 00:30, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Comments

Hadleymd

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Union Pacific (film)


 * Description
 * I attempted to add content enlarging on the wiki generated by my students as a final project; nothing deleted, we just wanted to make the wiki more robust!


 * Date and time
 * 18:37, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for reporting this; this is exactly the kind of false positive this page was made for. It was tagged by three little things which by themselves wouldnt have stopped you but together were enough to trip the filter: 1) the name "dick"; 2) the fact that the edit was >5000 bytes in size; and 3) that you havent made very many edits before. The second one, in particular, seems like an odd condition to tag in, so I'm going to look at it some more.  As for the actual edit, I should be able to handle this on your talk page.  -- <B>Soap</B> Talk/Contributions 19:08, 17 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Comments
 * I've gone ahead and made the edit; the only concern I have is that it is a lot of plot summary for such a short article; that is not related to the edit filter though, so I just wanted to go ahead and get it past the filter, and we can worry about unreferenced plot summaries separately. -- <B>Soap</B> Talk/Contributions 19:24, 17 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Struck part of my comment because someone else got there ahead of me. -- <B>Soap</B> Talk/Contributions 00:31, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

ve3bdb

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Wireless Set No. 19


 * Description
 * I included a link to a page included at a website already footnoted on that page, namely http://www.qsl.net/ve3bdb.html. There is no commercial or any nefarious reason for doing so. The intent is to provide contact info for those who may wish to further explore use and history of The Wireless Set No. 19.  I apologize profusely if this violates rules.


 * Date and time
 * 15:32, 17 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * It is not a false positive. The filter correctly warned you that adding links similar to your user name may imply a conflict of interest. I advise you to change your user name to something more human than 've3bdb'. Ruslik Zero  20:11, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

BulgePudgy

 * BulgePudgy
 * BulgePudgy


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Tenaga Nasional


 * Description
 * I created a heading "Popular Culture" and added a description of a video incredibly popular among Malaysian youtubers. But apparently it was found to be unconstructive. The video in question is by Namewee entitled Namewee F*ck TNB Malaysia.


 * Date and time
 * 08:25, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

Comments If you make the same edit with 'fuck' in lowercase, I believe it will go through. I don't believe the edit will stand very long though because it seems like trivia and doesn't really educate readers about the company. Perhaps I'm wrong, though. -- <B>Soap</B> Talk/Contributions 14:07, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

90.178.236.106

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Redistribution (economics)


 * Description
 * I deleted one of the two German links. the link to "Wohltätigkeit" was not correct, as Wohltätigkeit means charity and not redistribution — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.178.236.106 (talk • contribs)


 * Date and time
 * 09:39, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

Fixed for now, though it's possible a bot will revert the edit so I'll keep a watch on it. Thanks for reporting the problem. -- <B>Soap</B> Talk/Contributions 13:37, 17 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Comments

65.96.80.21

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Pedophile Movement


 * Description
 * Reverting the edit (the erasure and redirect) of the Pro-Pedophilia Activism article by Jack-A-Roe for which there was no consensus nor a vote for its erasure or redirect (to the age of consent page). Seems to have been a unilateral action on the part of Jack-A-Row, possible civil-POV push.


 * Date and time
 * 06:51, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

IP addresses will find it difficult to edit articles about pedophilia because there's often no clear way for the filter to be able to distinguish legitimate edits from vandalism. If you register an account, you're granted a little more leeway, although I believe this particular edit would still be denied, albeit for a different reason (because it's such a large expansion). However, even without the filter, I imagine your edit would likely be reverted. I'm not familiar with the disputes that led to this change and have no opinion on it, but since it has been here for more than 6 months I would recommend trying to argue your case on the talk page of the new article before taking action. If you do want to simply restore the article, however, you should register an account and wait 4 days and make 10 edits in that time so that you can be autoconfirmed. -- <B>Soap</B> Talk/Contributions 14:05, 17 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Comments

Davidhartley510

 * Username


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


 * Description
 * removed some drug company propaganda Davidhartley510 (talk) 03:30, 17 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Date and time
 * 03:30, 17 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * Your edit was promptly removed as vandalism. Not only was it vandalism, it violated BLP, NPA (at least one of the named persons is an editor here, and your descriptions of them are libelous), NPOV (which requires that properly documented criticisms be included), removal of references and proper text, addition of a blacklisted URL, adding your own delusional ideas and conspiracy theories, misusing the article as a battleground, adding obvious lies ("The effectiveness of homeopathy has never been in dispute since its inception."), engaging in advocacy of fringe theories, etc.. I'm amazed that you even reported yourself here. I suspect you really shouldn't be here at Wikipedia at all with that attitude. You've been here for a long time, but made few edits. I suggest you study our policies and start following them. I'll place a welcome template on your talk page for you to study. -- Brangifer (talk) 05:47, 17 December 2009 (UTC)


 * I just noticed another violation. You marked both your entry here and the massive vandalism at homeopathy as "minor". They were anything but minor! -- Brangifer (talk) 14:54, 17 December 2009 (UTC)
 * The edit summary at homeopathy ("minor correction") is also somewhat misleading. Brunton (talk) 15:13, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

76.253.140.190

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Mercedes-Benz OM601 engine


 * Description
 * I was trying to undo the most recent edit using the "undo" link; edit was a bad copy+paste job.


 * Date and time
 * 11:39, 15 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * It's because removal of large amounts of text plus addition of redlinks is usually vandalism. I've adjusted the filter in question.  NawlinWiki (talk) 12:36, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

KoastalBenefitPromo

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * User:KoastalBenefitPromo/Novus Dae


 * Description
 * I tried to create this page and it is giving me a message stating that I couldn't do it and that it was unconstructive, please help me get this page created. This is a great independently signed band and they do not have a wikipedia page, so I wanted to be the first to create it. Thank You for your help guys and gals!


 * Date and time
 * 09:39, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

It seems that this has already been handled by someone else, and the resulting article deleted (though not for any reason related to the edit filters). -- <B>Soap</B> Talk/Contributions 02:22, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Comments

elephantcreative

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Anthony Hammond


 * Description
 * I'm trying to create a new article here but in truth I've found it a bit beyond me. It said I couldn't do it and it was unconstructive. I'd welcome some help!


 * Date and time
 * 22:53, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

It's because your edit contained the acronym SFAGO, which contains FAG. I changed the filter such that it should go through now. Do you have the text of the article saved? If you don't have it saved you can copy it from here, though you'll have to do each line individually because of the way the software renders it. -- <B>Soap</B> Talk/Contributions 00:23, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Comments

59.183.188.169

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Plummer block


 * Description
 * Changed re-direction to pillow-block and instead defined what a plummer-block exactly is. Plummer-block and pillow-blocks can be used interchangeably in USA but a plummer-block is very much a defined product in Asian & other markets where it is considered to be different than a pillow-block.


 * Date and time
 * 06:51, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

It's because your edit contained the acronym FAG. Would you be able to try the same edit again but with the acronyms spelled out? If you don't have it saved you can copy it from here, though you'll have to do each line individually because of the way the software renders it. -- <B>Soap</B> Talk/Contributions 02:09, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Comments

CM Garrison

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * The Duchess of Malfi


 * Description
 * Trying to add a scene by scene breakdown, brief author bio, additional character background and historical staging.


 * Date and time
 * 03:49, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

I can't actually figure this one out. I'm sure there's a word somewhere in your edit that triggered the filter, and that it's a typical false positive. However, it looks like you got your edit through in the end, perhaps because all you had to do was make 10 edits total so you could become autoconfirmed. So hopefully everything is OK. -- <B>Soap</B> Talk/Contributions 16:19, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Comments
 * It is because of Duchess is a whore. Ruslik Zero  17:24, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

Anonymous

 * Page you were editing
 * Avant Garde


 * Description
 * Trying to add some more information about the subject


 * Date and Time
 * 10:33, 12 December 2009 (GMT) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.218.242.87 (talk • contribs)

I'm not sure as to why it stopped me. I think it's because a quote I used included some vulgar language. But it could be anything. I dunno
 * Comments
 * This is a pretty clear case of the edit filter working just as it should, and not a false positive. Please do not make edits like this in the future as you can in some cases be blocked even if the edits do not get through. -- <B>Soap</B> Talk/Contributions 17:51, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

vpope77

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * HMS Zephyr


 * Description
 * adding service history and list of commanding officers from navy archives.


 * Date and time
 * 16:07, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

My best guess is that the word SUCK in your page triggered the filter. Do you have the article saved somewhere? You could paste it into your userspace and copy it from there when the page is ready to go (it's difficult to read the wiki code in the log, so I can't say for sure if this page would meet our normal article creation guidelines). -- <B>Soap</B> Talk/Contributions 16:14, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Comments
 * I have pasted the article onto this page for review

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Vpope77vpope77

Peracles

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Road Safety Authority


 * Description
 * Replacing content which made allegations of sexism, was biased and far from neutral. I placed factual unbiased information in its place


 * Date and time
 * 14:18, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

I appreciate that you're trying to improve the article, but the edit you were making is exactly the type that these edit filters were designed to catch. Had it gone through, it would likely have been reverted quickly. It seems that you were attempting to remove most of the article and replace it with information you had written yourself from scratch. Which in itself is not necessarily wrong, but in doing so you were removing referenced content and replacing it with unreferenced content which for the most part does not provide the reader the same information as what had been there before and reads like a brochure. Moreover, you also added an email address at the bottom of the page, which makes the article look as if it were written by one person, and you also removed the categories at the bottom of the page which are used to aid navigation between pages. If you would like to see the paragraphs about sexism removed, please start a discussion on the article's talk page so that other people can see your side of the argument. -- <B>Soap</B> Talk/Contributions 14:39, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Comments

Proofreader77

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Roman Polanski


 * Description
 * This may not be a false positive but rather an inadvertent error: I used the xx/xx/xxxx date format in a cite template not knowing not to do that.


 * Date and time
 * 00:09, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

See below; if someone writes 04/03/2009 it could either be March 4th or April 3. -- <B>Soap</B> Talk/Contributions 03:32, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Comments
 * Do you mean everyone isn't American? :-) Many thanks. Proofreader77 (talk) 04:47, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Proofreader77

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * User:Proofreader77/SarahPalinTalk54


 * Description
 * I copied an article talk discussion  to a subpage of my user space to analyze. There was apparently a comment mentioning "Michael Jackson" in a neutral way: re his staying power as an artist.


 * Date and time
 * 00:00, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, there's really no way for the filter to be able to tell legitimate edits from libel, so we have it set up to tag everything and leave the task of sorting the good from the bad to those people who sort the Recent Changes by tags. Hopefully the Michael Jackson vandalism is starting to tail off now and maybe the filter will be disabled soon. -- <B>Soap</B> Talk/Contributions 03:30, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Comments
 * I guess my only surprise is that the filter is paying attention to User space. (Hadn't thought that would matter ... but surely no one should do anything inappropriate in their own space either.:) Cheers, and happy holidays. Proofreader77 (talk) 04:49, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Unknown User
I have forgotten my username (I believe it was along the lines of Temarilover something like that). I tried to add some basic info on the live performance of Hitchin' a Ride by Green Day when I tried to save and the change was ruled unconstructive and dissallowed. The change is in fact true and rather constructive.
 * Well, it was because your edit included "FUCK" in all capitals. I think (can't be sure) that it would go through if it had been lowercase, but I can't really guarantee that other editors would like that (even if it is true).  The profanity manual of style recommends descriptive language rather than direct quotes for things like this, although it is not a binding policy either.  -- <B>Soap</B> Talk/Contributions 15:38, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
 * (Note: the above edit was added by 99.141.4.16. -- <B>Soap</B> Talk/Contributions 15:40, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

gudemadp

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Metastasis suppressor


 * Description
 * I was attempting to extend off of the current stub, but when I went to cite my refferences it kept kicking to this false positive thing I don't know what that means. I am not a frequent wikipedia user I have to do this for a class project it needs to be turned in asap how to I fix this? Gudemadp (talk) 23:55, 6 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Date and time
 * 23:55, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

Your edit looks great; just make sure you don't remove the ==References== and reflist lines from the original. That's what you were doing, and that's what was causing the filter to trigger. As an aside, the references you were attempting to add weren't formatted correctly either (you used one big [ref] ... [/ref] sequence when they're supposed to be individual, and you put them all at the end when (ideally at least) they should be tacked on as footnotes after each statement they refer to), but that can be fixed once you make the edit. -- <B>Soap</B> Talk/Contributions 00:38, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Comments

Hamac

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Hamac (Adeyeye Muyiwa)


 * Description
 * What you were doing Hamac (talk) 04:20, 6 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Date and time
 * 04:20, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

You can put that content on your userpage if you want to, but as an article, I don't think it would stand up to the notability and verifiability requirements for autobiographies. The reason your edit was disallowed was because "mainspace" articles are watched for things like this; however, userspace is much more free. -- <B>Soap</B> Talk/Contributions 04:24, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Comments

Exernial

 * Username


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


 * Description
 * On my userpage??? My userpage???! I was adding some about me stuff, no offensive material at all or anything, unless I've made some mistakes I didn't realize?


 * Date and time
 * 19:35, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

I'm afraid [big][big][big] has been disallowed because too many people use it to vandalize (even on (other people's) userpages). As soon as you get autoconfirmed (4 days and ten edits) you'll be considered "trusted enough" to be able to use that particular HTML tag. Also, the BIG tag doesn't always render properly on some browsers; you might want to consider using [span style="font-size: 40px;"] or something similar since you can be sure everyone will see it properly. Or type [big][big][b][/b][big] ; it will work more or less the same. (Note: all [ ] brackets in the above should be replaced with < >.)-- <B>Soap</B> Talk/Contributions 19:47, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Comments
 * (Note: this filter is a private filter, but I felt it was OK to explain exactly what triggered it because what you wrote was exactly the same as one of the things it was designed to catch, so no new "secret" information has been let out.) -- <B>Soap</B> Talk/Contributions 20:10, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
 * I excluded User namespace from this filter. Ruslik Zero  20:39, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

96.251.85.72

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Talk:John Forbes Nash, Jr.


 * Description
 * Adding a comment to the Talk page to raise some (hopefully constructive) questions about the associated article. Certainly I was not engaged in vandalism-- note that I did not attempt to edit the article itself, but instead left it to those more involved with Wikipedia to decide. 96.251.85.72 (talk) 17:37, 2 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Date and time
 * 17:37, 2 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * It is because of "Fuck You Buddy" in the edit summary. If you do not use such an edit summary, you will not receive a warning the next time. Ruslik Zero  19:33, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

98.248.61.157

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Storm Chasers (TV series)


 * Description
 * I wanted the episodes separate from the main article, so I've created the article List of Storm Chasers episodes 98.248.61.157 (talk) 04:59, 2 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Date and time
 * 04:59, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

There is no way for the filter to be able to tell the difference between legitimate removals and vandalism. Please don't feel as if you're being classified as a vandal; tags are just a convenient way for us to alert ourselves to various actions that could be acts of vandalism. You can go ahead and make the edit if you like; however, your edit may be reversed if the current state of the article is one that has been decided on by previous editors; if so I recommend going to the talk page and explaining what you want to do and why. -- <B>Soap</B> Talk/Contributions 14:09, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Comments

Buggie111

 * Username


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


 * Description
 * Killed off red category link


 * Date and time
 * 20:26, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

There is no way for the filter to be able to tell the difference between legitimate removals and vandalism. Please don't feel as if you're being classified as a vandal; tags are just a convenient way for us to alert ourselves to various actions that could be acts of vandalism. Your edit was reverted, though for a different reason than the tag would suggest: the category you removed was misspelled, and that's why it appeared that it didn't exist. -- <B>Soap</B> Talk/Contributions 02:23, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Comments