Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/FA Template Protection Bot: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
MalnadachBot (talk | contribs) m Replaced obsolete font tags and reduced Lint errors. (Task 12) |
MalnadachBot (talk | contribs) m Fixed Lint errors. (Task 12) |
||
Line 47:
:Yes, it removes the old templates and adds the new ones --[[User talk:Chris G|<b><font style="color:Red;">Chris</font></b>]] 06:13, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
::I figured as much, so far, to me, this sounds good. [[User:SQL|<span style="font-size:7pt;color: #fff;background:#900;border:2px solid #999">SQL</span>]][[User talk:SQL|<sup style="font-size: 5pt;color:#999">Query me!</sup>]] 06:23, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
::Okay, sounds good.
I've updated the source so that it adds images as well --[[User talk:Chris G|<b><font style="color:Red;">Chris</font></b>]] 06:42, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
*It sounds pretty non-controversial to me. How difficult would it be to monitor new templates that get added to the main page subjects as the day goes on? This is another popular vandal vector; add a template that makes sense, and then vandalize it. –<font face="Verdana">[[User:Xenocidic|<font color="black">'''xeno'''</font>]] ([[User talk:Xenocidic|<font color="black">talk</font>]])</font> 07:18, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
Line 66:
::Well I thought of that too -= but presumably they can do that already, and while the vandalism will show either way, it is easier to track which edit caused it (as against adding a useful template and then vandalising - which is a bit more difficult) [[User:Viridae|Viridae]][[User talk:Viridae|<small><sup>Talk</sup></small>]] 22:58, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
:::To really deal with Xenocidic's concern it would have to constantly monitor recentchanges via IRC, even checking 5 minutes is more than enough time for someone to add a template and vandalize it. I don't think that feature will really be helpful, though that is a concern that should be dealt with, not sure how though. <font face="Broadway">[[User:Mr.Z-man|Mr.]][[User talk:Mr.Z-man|'''''Z-'''man'']]</font> 23:17, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
::::The sort of timed attack Iridescent describes is a major concern, and it's not just in the realm of [[Wikipedia:BEANS]], but one that's already been attempted at least twice to defeat my own FA protection adminbot. The number of possible attack vectors are increased here since we're dealing an almost unlimited number of templates that could be vandalized, or even new ones created for the purposes of mischief. Chris, you might be able to pick up the solution [http://toolserver.org/~east718?t here].
:::::That method isnt going to go away - it can happen already and it isnt going to be made worse by this bot. As it stands, vandalism to the FAOTD by this method (adding a template that is already vandalised) is easiyer to deal with than adding an innocuous template then vandalising it. Having the runs more often pretty much gets rid of the latter problem and nothing will top the former except protection/eyes on the page. [[User:Viridae|Viridae]][[User talk:Viridae|<small><sup>Talk</sup></small>]] 06:41, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
::::::OK, we're not thinking on the same plane here. I don't care if somebody adds a template to the article later and vandalizes it; that is expected. The real problem is that the robot might lock a template in a vandalized state if a vandal throws it onto the article just before a check cycle. The optimal solution (that's obvious to me at least) is to just ''not protect'' a template if it's been recently edited and to report it for human review somewhere. I happen to prefer throwing up the !admin flag in #wikipedia-en-admins, Chris may opt for something else. <small style="color:#999;white-space:nowrap">[[User:east718|<big style="color:#900">east718</big>]] // [[User talk:east718#top|<font color="#090">talk</font>]] // [[Special:emailuser/east718|<font color="#4682b4">email</font>]] // 01:44, 18 August 2008 (UTC)</small>
| |||