Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)/Archive AD

How does image show in bibliography when it is not there?
In Ghaggar-Hakra River there are two identical images of President Bush in the Bibliography. In looking at the bibliography, I don't understand how they got there nor how to remove them. Would you take a look? Thanks. Sincerely, Mattisse(talk) 23:40, 7 December 2006 (UTC)


 * They were added by this edit. --BostonMA talk 23:50, 7 December 2006 (UTC)


 * More correctly they were added by this edit. It has been fixed.  --BostonMA talk 23:55, 7 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Template:Please check ISBN was vandalized, I just reverted it. --Derlay 23:57, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks! Sincerely, Mattisse(talk) 00:14, 8 December 2006 (UTC)


 * You're welcome. By the way, if anyone is wondering about the edit summary I entered, well, I blame my oversensitive keyboard. I was typing "revert" but managed to hit two keys at once, so it read "refv"; then I reached for backspace but pressed enter as well, and this saved the page with summary "ref". Would it be possible to change the action to preview instead of save, or at least make it a user preference? --Derlay 15:03, 8 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Mistakes are allowed, and shall still occur whatever delay we put before saving. If you just want to correct the summary, do any minor edit and write again your summary. -- DLL  .. T 19:14, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Pagename function
Hi, I got a question about the functionality. I want to use this option to make external links (e.g. to search on Google). However, when having a Wiki page consisting of 2 words, only the first word is used in the seach functionality. Right now I'm using: You see that only the word "Village" is used in the Google search and the other words are repeated in the text on screen. What's the solution for this, so I can search on the whole title? Thanks in advance, Jalel 08:37, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
 * You could try :


 * However, this leaves underscores in the name. might also work:


 * The PAGENAMEU method of escaping is the one used by google, so PAGENAMEU is probably the way to go. --ais523 08:43, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Great, thank you for your quick reply! I'm working on an internal Wikipedia and the Template:PAGENAMEU is not installed here. I tried to copy the Template on this Wikipedia, but then it asks for Template:urlencode: . PagenameE works pretty OK, but for our search engines PagenamU would be better. Do you know if a certain specific software (MediaWiki-plugin or else?) is needed for the PAGENAMEU option? Cheers, Jalel 09:01, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
 * According to m:Help:Magic words, urlencode: requires MediaWiki version 1.7 or above. --ais523 14:44, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Article vandalized
I just recently checked the "Extrasolar Planet" article and I found a wealth of information that I had been reading just hours earlier had been replaced with "Wikipedia hearts butts." This must be corrected. I tried to see who made the alteration, but all I could see was an IP address. I know I'm not a Wikipedia member, but I still found the vandalism and needed to alert the community to it.

If anyone has any questions about who I am, the e-mail I tend to check most is 

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.116.154.176 (talk)


 * We've fixed it quite a while ago. The article remained in its vandalized state for a few seconds; I'll purge the cache just to make sur. Thanks! Tito xd (?!?) 02:32, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Inserttags function
Some of you may be aware of the extra editbuttons script (User:MarkS/extraeditbuttons.js). I have attempted to write some buttons of my own, to insert large amounts of pre-formatted template code (such as and ). MarkS's script is based on the function, which has three variables:  ,  , and. Saving too large a string to these variables breaks the button function.

I came up with a workaround (see User:Karl Dickman/airbuttons.js), which has a string of  commands. A rough sketch of the script: function infoBox { insertTags(,,'Line 1\n'); insertTags(,,'Line2\n'); insertTags(,,'Line3\n'); ... }

function aircraftButton { //Here I have a script that defines the location where the button is to be inserted var image1=document.createElement('img'); image1.onclick=function { infoBox; return false; } toolbar.appendChild(image1); } addOnloadHook(aircraftButton); Here's my problem: when I click the button in Firefox, it only inserts the odd-numbered lines. Curiously, the script works fine in IE. Does anyone have any thoughts on what the problem might be? Karl Dickman talk 02:14, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

I have developed a hack that works: if the browser is Firefox, it does the  function twice. It works, but it's not the kind of solution I'd prefer. Karl Dickman talk 05:03, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Downloading wiki software so I can make my own wiki
I know that usually people go to places like Wikia so they can make wikis that are publicly accessible, but I actually want to make a personal, non-public wiki on my computer. Is this possible? If so, what's the best (free) wiki software I can download, so that I can make my own wiki on my computer.Andrewdt85


 * MediaWiki. You could turn your computer into a server that only you can access, but the "how" behind that is best asked somewhere else (and I don't know the answer). EVula // talk // &#9775;  // 21:46, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
 * You can probably follow the instructions at the Streamlined Windows Install Guide (particularly the step-by-step instructions, and assuming you use Windows, of course), as I used them for installing my personal wiki for the same reasons. Tito xd (?!?) 21:50, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

I downloaded MediaWiki, but the application won't start
Why?
 * It isn't an application that you just run. You have to install it on a web server.


 * However, this isn't the place for MediaWiki tech support. I suggest you read the link(s) given above for more information. EVula // talk // &#9775;  // 22:53, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

You will need an apache server and PHP. I suggest wiki-on-a-stick as a quick wat to get going. Rich Farmbrough, 14:37 9 December 2006 (GMT).

View who watches an article
Is there any way to view which users have a given article in their watchlist? Eclectek  C   T  21:03, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
 * You can't. It goes against the Privacy policy. Tito xd (?!?) 21:08, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
 * I don't see any discussion of watchlists there, but m:Talk:Watchlist privacy does have some relevant discussion. --Interiot 21:59, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Some infoboxes show up out of place
I just recently noticed that some infoboxes on wikipedia seem to be showing up above the text instead of being aligned right. I'm currently using the latest version of firefox. This problem only seems to be happening with firefox, and only started happening recently. I get no problems with IE. What's even stranger is that only certain pages have this problem. For example, the Scientology and Dragonball Z infoboxes appear incorrectly, however, the infoboxes on cat and Judaism show up fine.

Here's an example of the diplay problem. Ziiv 20:57, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Uploading file: MIME type appears
When trying to upload a jpeg photo I got this:Wikichan.jpg‎ (7KB, MIME type: image/jpeg). Is this normal? How do I use this image while editing. Thanks.Ivygohnair 10:51, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
 * It would appear you've already figured this out (you're editing Chandran Nair, right?), but just for the record how to use images is explained at Picture tutorial. -- Rick Block (talk) 02:32, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Please vote for technical enhancements: syntax highlighting and WikiTeX
Would it not be nice to get our Wiki to highlight the different elements of computer program code? (See an example on another site running on MediaWiki with the highlighting extension). A request for extension of our wiki's software has already been lodged, but our technicians are renowned for procrastinating even the simplest of tasks. All we can do is register in Wikimedia's bug-reporting service and vote for the aforementioned request for improvement. Ramir 07:23, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
 * There is another great extension that has not yet been installed on Wikimedia's websites: WikiTeX. Again, please voice your opinion about the proposed enhancement. (Information on WikiTeX:, en:Wikipedia:WikiTeX, meta:WikiTeX). Ramir 07:23, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Where can I vote against? I accept there is a contingent among programmers that believes that you improve legibility by picking out syntax elements in strong primary colors, but I disagree. This has value in development tools, primarily by drawing attention to errors quickly. I don't consider it has value in an encyclopedia. (And I observe web sites presenting code very rarely do this). Notinasnaid 10:58, 7 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Ramir, our "technicians" are renown for having implemented and for maintaining and constantly improving one of shining stars of free software, largely as a volunteer effort. Mediawiki, in addition to driving all the Wikimedia Foundation sites, is used by hundreds of other sites. It also has a mechanism that allows others to build extensions for it, which is probably what's being used at the site you point to. However the fact that the extension is in use at that site does not automatically make the extension usable here, one of the web's busiest sites. Nor does it mean that it's desirable to use it here. (I agree with Notinaasnaid: it would be A Bad Idea). In any event, you might consider not insulting the people you're in the process of asking to do work for you. –RHolton ≡ – 12:54, 7 December 2006 (UTC)


 * I can't see much point in adding syntax highlighting, Wikipedia articles shouldn't contain enough code to make this useful. I would however support changing our logo to that of the example you linked to. Chunky bacon!! As for WikiTex, it appears the Wikimedia developers are well aware of it. the wub "?!"  14:12, 7 December 2006 (UTC)


 * "for maintaining and constantly improving one of shining stars of free software", you mean for firefighting issues caused by wikipedias huge growth on a codebase that is virtually impossible for anyone outside the dev team to follow (being written in a langaige that is really not designed for apps this complex doesn't help). Plugwash 14:28, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
 * MW code has some flaws, but it's not terribly written on the whole. PHP is pretty lousy, but that's rather a fait accompli at this point . . . anyway, that's kind of off-topic.  Something like WikiTeX will need to be scrutinized carefully before it's allowed to run on Wikipedia, because it has the potential for serious vulnerabilities.  The syntax highlighter is just a wrapper for GeSHi and so shouldn't be such a problem to review, but yeah, Tim and especially Brion tend to take all these jobs themselves and that does result in some slowness, unfortunately.  Maybe when we have more than two paid devs/sysadmins we can do this kind of thing more quickly. —Simetrical (talk • contribs) 05:03, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Quick question
Despite having been here this long, I've never figured out if there's a way to see all new articles created by a user. Is there one? (No, I don't mean Special:Newpages which only goes that far back.) – Chacor 04:55, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
 * No. There's a user who runs a query against the toolserver copy of the database on request, but the toolserver copy of the English Wikipedia has not been reliably updated recently.  If you want more details on this, please ask on my talk page. -- Rick Block (talk) 05:12, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Sorta guessed. I remember that someone was doing something like that on toolserver, but indeed since toolserver is that unreliable there isn't much use in me checking further. Thanks for the response. – Chacor 05:16, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
 * I was one who was running a query like that.  But yeah, the enwiki data is completely unavailable from the toolserver at this point.  --Interiot 07:07, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Changing link color
Is there a way (perhaps using CSS or something else) to make a link that is black all the time (visited and unvisited) and has no text decoration (underlines, etc.)? --MZMcBride 04:03, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Never mind. I think I figured it out: Test link  . --MZMcBride 04:07, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Why are you trying to do this? --TheParanoidOne 22:08, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Technically that will work, but in the interest of using valid (and compact) code, I'd suggest Test link   . Like the aptly named TheParanoidOne, though, I'm curious about your interest. EVula // talk //  &#9775;  // 22:18, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Wrong order for sections
Could someone explain why the sections at Wikipedia talk:Userboxes/New Userboxes are displayed out of order? They appear correct in the TOC, but aren't rendered that way. Please take notice of the section December 6, 2006. -Will Pittenger 01:05, 7 December 2006 (UTC)


 * A table wasn't closed in the section for December 1. Should be fixed now. Gimmetrow 04:19, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Confirmed. Thanks. Is there a way to make that page idiot proof? Tracking something like that down would not be fun. Will (Talk - contribs) 06:29, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Template problems
The Template:LGBTProject has in its code an apparent automatic assessment system if an article is a stub - however, no stub appears to have been rated without human assistance. How does this system work? Does it need to be kicked into action somehow, or is there something wrong with the code, or what? And would it be a good idea for a guide on this to be written? Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 20:43, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Strangely acting table
Good afternoon! I have just attempted to add a table to an article I'm currently working on (Samuel Foote). The table, unfortunately, though placed under a specific heading is now appearing at the end of the article. What do I need to do to correct this? The table should appear under the heading "Dramatic works". Thanks in advance! *Exeunt* Ganymead | Dialogue? 20:28, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

It's been fixed. Though why it needed an extra carriage return I don't know. Basically all I did was move the closing brace down a line.--Coro 21:56, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your help! *Exeunt* Ganymead | Dialogue? 21:59, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Adding a personal link to the "My..." section
It would be absolutely lovely if I could add a link to User:EVula/admin to the top of the page (in the area with a link to my user page, talk, preferences, etc.). Is there a file I can edit to make this happen? I haven't done any monobook mucking, but I'd be happy to start...

I realize I can just get there from my userpage or putting the name in the Search box, but I'm just seeing if I can remove an extra step in getting there (reference items there that I don't have memorized yet). EVula // talk // &#9775;  // 18:46, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
 * I've had a similar problem. My monobook.js is modded to give me a link to my edit count, but the extra link both does not have a tooltip and breaks if the link is changed (I want to change it). I asked about it on the user scripts page, but I didn't understand how to implement the answer, and haven't had time to ask further how to work it. Try searching for the user scripts WikiProject, and if you get it to work, would you please show me? Thanks, Nihiltres 18:57, 6 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Nih: Looks like I gave you the (slightly complex) answer, heh. Lemme know exaclty what you want and I can give it a try (will be a bit busy until this weekend).


 * EVula, try this in your monobook.js

addOnloadHook(ppersonal) function ppersonal { //example of adding a p-personal item. var tb = document.getElementById('p-personal').getElementsByTagName('ul')[0]; addlilink(tb, '/wiki/User:EVula/admin', 'admin', 'pt-admin'); ta['pt-admin'] = ['1', 'Admin']; akeytt; //refresh tooltip additions }

function addlilink(tabs, url, name, id) { var na = document.createElement('a'); na.href = url; na.id = id; na.appendChild(document.createTextNode(name)); var li = document.createElement('li'); li.appendChild(na); tabs.appendChild(li); return li; }
 * --Splarka (rant) 08:18, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Ahhh, sweet. Works like a charm, and even has an accesskey for it. Thanks! EVula // talk // &#9775;  // 21:09, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Blue or Red Username??
I am trying to participate in writing an article, I now am signed up with my own account, but I can't get my username switched over to blue, or find out how to communicate with other editors. I have gone to some help sections, but the info is overwhelming, and I end up lost.Richiar 18:17, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Your username is red because you do not have a userpage. You are allowed a personal page here. If you click on my name, Nihiltres, you go to my userpage. It is blue because it is a valid link. If you want to talk about a specific article, go to Talk:That article's title, and if you want to talk to a specific user, go to User talk:That user's name, for example, Talk:Cat or User talk:Nihiltres. Hope that helps... Nihiltres 18:36, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

I tried it, and it now works. Thanks :) Richiar 00:37, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Notes and references
I saw that you usually add " before the  which looks fine in FireFox. I checked it out in IE, and, aside from being square (which is to be expected since the corners is a mozilla only style), the right border side is just missing. I've tried a few fixes, but to no avail. Can someone who is more familiar with CSS (I just pretend) please help me out? I really just want the border fixed in IE. Thanks in advance for any help. See User:Mecu/SingleGameHeader. You are free to edit with it to try and get it to work if you need/want to. -- MECU ≈ talk 00:16, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Thank you Tra for fixing it. You had it right the first try, you just needed to purge the page to get the examples to work. Thanks. -- MECU ≈ talk 00:48, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Finding deleted edits
There's been a policy proposal for usurpation of user names, but it's gotten snagged on the fact that MediaWiki doesn't reattribute deleted edits correctly. Is there anyway to find out if an account that appears to not have any edits does, in fact, have edits to deleted pages?--Kchase T 21:42, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
 * There's some discussion above about a new version of Special:Contributions that can show deleted edits but is not working properly at the moment. Tra (Talk) 22:25, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks.--Kchase T 22:28, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Information on range blocks
Would it be possible to get a range block to block out all or some of the anon IPs listed here. They are a permabanned user who keeps vandalizing using a dynamic IP. I don't think a two week range block (hopefully he will have given up by that) would cause much collateral damage considering the user's location. I'm not asking anyone to implement one, I'm just asking if it's technically possible.--Euthymios 13:51, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Technically, yes. It may be possible depending on the range. What range is he vandalising from? --Deskana talk 13:53, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry, I had linked to the category but without the ':'. I've fixed it now.--Euthymios 13:54, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
 * If I'm reading those WHOIS results correctly, it's 85.72.0.0/14 and 87.202.0.0/15 - i.e. two really big ranges. Dynamic DSL connection IPs from the largest ISP in Greece. Probably too much for a range-block. Fut.Perf. ☼ 16:34, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Protected pages and watchlists
Hi, I have a question. I have noticed that when certain pages (userpages and user talkpages at least) are protected, they seem to disappear from my watchlist. Is it supposed to do that?--Euthymios 13:47, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
 * If you protect a page, that page protection (that shows up in the edit history as a null edit, actually) doesn't show up on Watchlists. This is why I prefer tagging the page with or whatever after I've protected it- that way it shows up clearly in the watchlist. --Deskana talk 13:54, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
 * It's a well-known issue to the developers, though. Tito xd (?!?) 19:32, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
 * It is also becoming rather frequently asked. Maybe it should be put into the top section. --Splarka (rant) 08:14, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

DB2 Technical Discussion
Hi All

This is the sample thread. Is it possible to reply this thread.


 * Yes, it is possible to reply. If you want to test how threaded comments work, try Wikipedia talk:Sandbox. Tra (Talk) 17:55, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Hey, can somebody fix the article on Lecithin? I have tried to edit it but its "hidden". I tried to reload the article as suggested and that't not working either. I don't want to e-mail the Wikipeople since they so adamantly request that we don't do so.


 * I can't see any problems with Lecithin. Tra (Talk) 17:55, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

BIG EVERYTHING on Wikipedia
Everything on the site looks really LARGE. The text, the links, the pictures, everything! It is not like this on other sites. Why? 70.104.161.104 02:31, 5 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Could you post a screenshot, please? Karl Dickman talk 03:02, 5 December 2006 (UTC)


 * This is probably due to your browser. Did you press ctrl+"=" or ctrl+scroll? It also might depend on the skin you're using and/or items in your skin.css GeorgeMoney  (talk) 03:06, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
 * The pictures look large as well? As I recall, Opera has a feature that expands everything, not just text; perhaps you accidently bumped it up? *shrug* EVula // talk // &#9775;  // 03:43, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

1. Don't know how to post screenshots. 2. Am not using skin (no idea what it is!) 3. Never heard of Opera. 4. My bad, it is on other sites. 5. HOW DO I FIX IT, GEORGE MONEY?? 6. Sorry for the CyberYell. 70.104.161.104 22:45, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Well, what browser are you using? EVula // talk // &#9775;  // 22:47, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
 * That can be readily inferred from the answer to question 3. (Okay, it could be a Mac user too.  *nix is also out due to 1–3.) —Simetrical (talk • contribs) 01:59, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Pretty much what I was thinking, but as a Mac user (who hates IE with a burning passion), asking that question was about the only thing I could contribute to the topic. :-) EVula // talk // &#9775;  // 02:11, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

I am using Internet Explorer. I am trying to do a very important project and this is getting annoying, seeing as this is only happening to text on the internet. 70.104.161.104 01:53, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Go to View → Text Size and make sure it's "Medium". —Simetrical (talk • contribs) 01:59, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Thank you, Simetrical!! *I am bowing to the computer wizard in front of me!* ;) Little brothers...

Changes to Special:Contributions?
Hmm... Special:Contributions looks different now, and it looks too crammed. What changed? Tito xd (?!?) 00:09, 5 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Also the options for "oldest" or "newest" are gone. Those were very handy. -Will Beback · † · 00:49, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Yeah, that sucks, do you think it was just a glitch? Cbrown1023 00:53, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
 * A new version of Special:Contributions was put in place which, unfortunately, wasn't as carefully tested as we thought. I've reverted back to the original version; the new one won't be back until we're satisfied with it. (One advantage of the new one, not yet finished, was a mode to show deleted edits.) --brion 01:17, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
 * On a seperate, yet related note, Interiot's Wannabe Kate tool is down... do you think they are connected? (after all, the tool gets its info from contributions and bases it all on them). Cbrown1023 00:54, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
 * That's unrelated; a power failure at our hosting center in Amsterdam has taken our European proxies, the bug tracker, and the toolserver offline for the time being. Hopefully they'll be back within a few hours, but we can't do much until things are online there. --brion 01:17, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Still some unresolved issues with this. The (diff) links are missing and/or completely f***ed up. --- RockMFR 01:25, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Yes. At least half of the (diff) links are gone, and only the (hist) links remain. Tito xd (?!?) 01:27, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Apparently now, the (diff) links only show on (top) edits. GeorgeMoney (talk) 01:29, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Which completely makes the page useless, as the vast majority of revisions are not the last edits to pages. Tito xd (?!?) 01:35, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Reload. --brion 01:37, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Yep, I saw. Working now. Thanks! Tito xd (?!?) 01:37, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks! --- RockMFR 01:54, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Before the new version goes back up, can it be changed to show N instead of (New) per the design of Special:Recentchanges? --- RockMFR 01:32, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

The original changes were my fault. Basically, what I tried to do was to shoehorn Special:Contributions into the same general framework (QueryPage) as used by, for example, Special:Newpages and Special:Listusers. Alas, it looks like the framework isn't quite flexible (and efficient) enough after all, and I'm afraid improving it in that regard may be beyond my abilities. In any case, I've been spending way too much time on this feature lately, when I really should've been studying.

If someone wants to continue work on the new code, the latest version is in SVN under /branches/vyznev/. There's also a version of the deleted contributions page that doesn't use QueryPage in the revision history, but the code is really ugly (just like the current Special:Contributions code in general). —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 11:03, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Unnecessary autoblocks?
Am I the only one wondering about how the autoblock feature works and why? Having just had a conversation with yet another blocked user who unnecessarily stumbled into one, I'm asking myself if the whole feature isn't too trigger-happy and whether it could be revised. In particular: In effect, what seems to be happening an awful lot is that users who get blocked for some reason accidentally stumble into these autoblocks without doing anything wrong - simply because they haven't yet noticed the block, or because they just want to try out what happens, for simple curiosity, or because they want to view a page source. Or am I getting something wrong here? In all these cases, the software gives them what they will see as an arbitrary block extension for no reason whatsoever, and without a warning. This can result in quite a feeling of aggravation, and of course it creates more work for the admins who have to lift them afterwards.
 * 1) Many users who get blocked apparently don't become aware of it until they actually try to edit - in which case they'll have earned an autoblock already, on top of their regular block, without doing anything wrong. How and when do blocked users actually receive a warning from the software?
 * 2) Is it true that an autoblock is triggered already when a blocked user merely opens an edit window, not when he actually tries to save the edit? If so, this strikes me as wrong, because even a blocked user might have a legitimate interest in viewing the source of some page.
 * 3) Why are autoblocks applied to the same account that got the original block anyway? An autoblock makes sense if a blocked user tries to edit from the same IP under a different username or anonymously; but why would we want it if he is still using the same account that got the original block anyway? As long as he does that, there's no need to prevent him from dodging, after all.
 * 4) Why are autoblocks always applied for a fixed period of 24h even if that extends beyond the length of the original block? Shouldn't they be restricted to expire together with the original block?

Do you guys think this feature could be changed, or has it been discussed anywhere? Fut.Perf. ☼ 22:29, 4 December 2006 (UTC)


 * 1) I've never been blocked, so I can't say.  ;)  Quite possibly they aren't blocked until they try to edit.
 * 2) Yes, it is.  It's triggered to ensure that the user doesn't try evading the ban, not as some kind of punishment.  It's triggered when a user tries to edit because that happens to conveniently tell us their IP address.  Logically it should probably be triggered on any other action as well, but the code is currently set up to only make an autoblock when it's checked whether the user is blocked or not, which is possibly only done when trying to do something like edit.
 * 3) The idea is that we should block his IP before he logs out, when we actually know the IP he's using right now.  If he tries to edit under another account or anonymously, we won't know it's him without doing a comparison to all the IPs in the recentchanges table, which we don't (whether or not we could is another question).
 * 4) Autoblocks should automatically expire when the main block expires, to my knowledge.  If this is incorrect, please file a feature request on Mediazilla. —Simetrical (talk • contribs) 07:37, 5 December 2006 (UTC)