User talk:AmiDaniel/VP/Discuss

VandalProof Forums Home • Register • Help
A new bugfix release has become available. Please download version 1.3.8 from AmiDaniel.com
Discussion post | watch To discuss the tool and seek help in using it.	Report a Bug post | watch To report bugs with the software. (Please consider using the new bug tracker)	Request a Feature post | watch To make suggestions to improve the tool.	AmiDaniel.com The AmiDaniel homepage (forums, BUGS, downloads etc.)	Report Abuse post | watch To notify moderators of abuse of this tool.

FAQ

Before reporting problems please check to see if the solution is already in this handy FAQ Thank You.

Archives

Latest comment: 19 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Please note I picked an arbitrary point to begin this archive. The cutoff point was approx. two-weeks in the past. If there are current disscussions archived by mistake, please just copy and paste them back on this page. Thanks!Eagle talk 01:42, 8 June 2006 (UTC)Reply

• May 2006 and before - Archive

I can't log in either

Latest comment: 19 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

Hi, thank you for approving me to use VandalProof.

I do have a problem: I see this error message when I try to log in. "You might have entered an incorrect username." I am using the MonoBook skin. I don't believe I editied the MonoBook.js or any other .js file that I rememeber. I logged out of Wikipeda before I tried logging into ValdalProof. Also I cannot log into Wikipeida using VandalProof. I have disabled my software proxy server.

I do see a message saying: "Welcome to VandalProof, Starionwolf!"

I am using a Linksys wifi-broadband router and Windows XP. If you need any more information, let me know.

Thanks. --Starionwolf 23:39, 21 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Nevermind - I accidently disabled cookies in Internet Explorer. After I enabled cookies, I can login now. Thanks for reading the message. Keep up the good work! --Starionwolf 23:46, 21 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Alright, glad you got it fixed. Feel free to post here if you have any further problems. AmiDaniel (talk) 00:59, 22 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Namespace change

Latest comment: 19 years ago4 comments4 people in discussion

Well 1.2 is out, and it fixed many of the bugs in 1.1. In fact, I think the program is stable enough to move into the Wikipedia namespace. I assume if this was done it would need to happen in 1.3, so the new pages loaded. What is your opinion? Prodego ^talk 00:44, 22 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

(edit conflict) Yes, I've actually been thinking about migrating it over there myself. One of my concerns is that having it in "my" userspace sort-of implies that "I am the owner of VandalProof MWUHAHAHAHA," which should not be the case at all--it really is a community project; I'm just doing the coding. Also with the new "NEWSECTIONLINK" feature, there's no real reason to keep the discuss, bugs, etc. pages in user talk space, and I think they may fit better in Projectspace. There's also this cross-namespace WP:VandalProof shortcut that I could see being deleted in the near future, which would certainly not be the case if VP is in projectspace. My only real concern would be that people have now grown accustomed to using these pages (myself included), and it might lead to confusion if they're suddenly moved over. I'm also not entirely sure of exact criteria as far as tools go, regarding what can be hosted in projectspace and what cannot. In any case, I certainly would not object to moving them to projectspace, but I'd prefer to perform the moves myself and only after there's been some discussion about the matter. AmiDaniel (talk) 00:58, 22 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

I suggest you keep it in userspace until you have the IE errors ironed out =P --mboverload@ 18:45, 24 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

The current layout is very sloppy, tools such as WP:AWB reside in the namespace, blah blah. Go for it. --Avillia ^{(Avillia me!)} 18:47, 24 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

AWB is still a work in progress and has WP status. Go for it! haz (user talk) 07:13, 10 June 2006

Run-time error 13

Latest comment: 19 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I realised there was a bug-report page, so I moved this. Sorry for not seeing that before now. Clq 17:45, 24 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

help

Latest comment: 19 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

How do you work the global whitelist/blacklist? ILovePlankton ^{( L)} 20:45, 23 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

User Tools -> Import/Export lists. Prodego ^talk 20:48, 23 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Password?

Latest comment: 19 years ago14 comments4 people in discussion

I downloaded the zip file but when I try to extract the file it says the file is password protected. Did I miss receiving a password? Thanks, --Alabamaboy 18:12, 24 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

That's odd, I have no problem extracting, which file did you download (link please). Prodego ^talk 18:24, 24 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Just download the exe silly! =) --mboverload@ 18:26, 24 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

In answer to Mboverload, you need both. Prodego ^talk 18:30, 24 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

? No you don't. --mboverload@ 18:43, 24 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Yes, unless you already have 1.1 it is my understanding you need the zip to install the files to the system32 folder. Prodego ^talk 18:45, 24 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Apologies on being slow to respond but life intruded. I downloaded the VandalProof 120.zip file. When I tried to unzip the download it said a password was needed. I should also note I did not have the earlier 1.1 files.--Alabamaboy 19:04, 24 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

It worked fine for me, I just renamed the file to .zip, right clicked, and selected extract all. Is this how you are unzipping it? If not try it that way. Prodego ^talk 19:08, 24 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Adding the .zip to the file name enabled me to extract it without the password request. Weird. Ah well. Many thanks.--Alabamaboy 19:17, 24 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

No problem, happy editing! Prodego ^talk 19:19, 24 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Er, in the interest of full disclosure, this problem resulted from user error. Basically, I download the files with Mozilla Firefox and it botched the files to heck and back. Once I downloaded with IE (gad, I hate that program but there are times when its useful) everything worked perfectly. Apologies for the trouble.--Alabamaboy 19:35, 24 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

I guess today's the day I bring a bit of pain into everyone's life. The program runs fine right up until the moment it tells me my log-in request failed b/c Alabamaboy is an incorrect user name. The program then shuts down. My user name is on the list and I'm typing it in exactly as I log-in here. Any thoughts on what to do? Thanks, --Alabamaboy 19:42, 24 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Continued on Alabamaboy's talk page. Prodego ^talk 19:44, 24 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Do you have cookies set?Eagle talk 15:54, 25 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Rolling back through multiple edits

Latest comment: 19 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion

Apologies if this has been discussed before, but it seems like when one rolls back edits by a user who's done more than one, it rolls back to that user's very first entry rather than the first in the most recent chain of edits.

So for example if you have:

1. (cur) (last) 19:07, 25 May 2006 66.56.147.120 (→Symbolism)
2. (cur) (last) 19:07, 25 May 2006 66.56.147.120 (→Silent Hill movie)
3. (cur) (last) 19:07, 25 May 2006 66.56.147.120 (→Physical appearance)
4. (cur) (last) 19:07, 25 May 2006 66.56.147.120 (→History)
5. (cur) (last) 19:01, 25 May 2006 InShaneee m (Added lots of useful info)
6. (cur) (last) 18:58, 25 May 2006 66.56.147.120 (→Symbolism)
7. (cur) (last) 10:21, 25 May 2006 203.129.39.248 (→Physical appearance)

It will try to roll back all the way to 7, rather than to 5, thus potentially erasing useful info. Is there any way to make it roll back only as far as 5?

Cheers — SteveRwanda 19:18, 25 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Hm, well, that should not be the case. When it reverts (currently, I've made some changes in the next release where it doesn't work this way), all it does is replace the current version with the version on the left side of the screen. When you right click on a rollback button, or when it prompts you to view all edits by the user, it then provides the diff between 1 and 5, and offers you the option to revert the change. If it's not working that way, then you have a rather serious bug. AmiDaniel (talk) 02:32, 26 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

I have a similar problem to this. Sometimes, when attempting to revert multiple vandalism edits by a single user, I'll click the "Yes" button to rollback all edits. It will then take me to what is supposedly that last good version. Sometimes, it takes me back farther than I want to go, and I sometimes revert good edits. Now, I simply do it manually by comparing the edits in the history log. - Zepheus 17:26, 6 June 2006 (UTC)Reply

Can't log on to Vandal Proof

Latest comment: 19 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

I had asked to be put on the list of users and got a message on my talk page that I was approved but I still can't get onto VandalProof. Can anyone help me on this? Thank you.--Jersey Devil 03:41, 26 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Looks like you got it figured out already. Let me know if you need anymore help. AmiDaniel (talk) 03:55, 26 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Well, the message "Your log-in request failed." still comes up and I can't load any of the lists on the left-screen side but other options I seem to be able to use.--Jersey Devil 10:39, 26 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Recording mistakes

Latest comment: 19 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

As good as I'd like to think I am at this, I've made a couple of mistakes but whenever I try to record it, it doesn't seem to go through. Any help with this please? Thanks. Beno1000 12:35, 26 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

You need to record them using the number of the revert. This can be found either on your vandalism log, or at the end of each warning that you leave (commented out before your sig). Once you find that number, you can just type it in in the prompt, it will ask you to confirm the article and user, and then it will record it. In order to make the mistakes visible to everyone else, you have to load "Update My Page", tab over to VandalismMistakes, and click Update. That will load your mistakes to User:Beno1000/VandalismMistakes. Let me know if you get it figured out. AmiDaniel (talk) 21:04, 26 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Thanks. I've figured it out now. Turns out I'd been entering the number given in "(Reverted edits by <user name> (talk) to version 56899975 by <user name> using VandalProof)" rather than the number in the vandalism log. Thanks again. Beno1000 22:59, 4 June 2006 (UTC)Reply

Serious bug?

Latest comment: 19 years ago11 comments6 people in discussion

If you haven't already, please discontinue use of vandalproof 1.2.0 and download VandalProof 1.2.1

Since it brought Vandalproof 1.2.0 use to a dead stop, I'm curious: What IS this very serious bug? PrometheusX303 19:58, 26 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

I concur what is it? ILovePlankton ^{( L)} 20:06, 26 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

DittoEagle talk 20:08, 26 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

I already asked on AmiDaniel's talk page, keep in mind that if this bug threatens the security of the program, Wikipedia, or the people who use the program, we may never know what it was. Prodego ^talk 20:11, 26 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Knowing amidaniel, he would at least say the bug was a major security hole. If that is the case, I would be shocked... Eagle talk 20:13, 26 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

That's fine. If it shouldn't be revealed, then it shouldn't be. If it can be, I'm still curous. PrometheusX303 20:16, 26 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

We don't know, so assumedly the other moderators don't either. I guess we'll have to wait for AmiD answer. Prodego ^talk 20:18, 26 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

I for one do not know, though I am mirroring the file. Computerjoe's talk 20:36, 26 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

In an attempt to avoid WP:BEANS, I'm not going to say specifically what the bug was, only that it was relatively simple to repair and that it could have been quite serious if it went unnoticed for much longer, but luckily I stumbled upon it last night. It was quite sad though when I was making great progress on some mind-dazzling new features for VP (RSS-feed, precached rollbacks, utilizing WikiAPI for greater speed, administrative quickblocks, etc.) and then had to go pull up the v1.2.0 source code to repair this bug. But in any case, it should be fixed now, and I do strongly apologize for having to so rudely disable the program and force you all to download the next release; I would have avoided it if I could. As usual, please let me know about any further bugs you find or any ideas you have. AmiDaniel (talk) 21:02, 26 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

What I thought from the sound of that...(security hole) Shutting up and trying to be not too shocked Eagle talk 21:06, 26 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

You apologize too much. What were you supposed to do, wait until somebody found out that by running Vandalproof v1.2.0 and typing "foorpladnav" twenty times on the white list while jamming a butter knife in your computer's USB port and singing "God Bless America" in Yiddish, you are granted the status of "Supreme Overlord of Wikipedia" and the ability to turn vandals into gooey paste with the power of your mind? Puh-lease...
PrometheusX303 12:41, 27 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Rollback edit summary

Latest comment: 19 years ago6 comments4 people in discussion

I came across an edit summary reading "Reverted edits by Foo (talk) to version 54882798 by Bar using VandalProof", which I presume was generated automatically by this program. Now I know this is useful to promote the program, but it could be a violation of WP:BITE when used to revert newbie tests (as it was in this case). Perhaps the "using VandalProof" should be removed, or replaced with something else. the wub "?!" 00:41, 27 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Hm.. That's a good point that I never thought of before. Note as well that it leaves edit summaries such as "Welcoming user using VandalProof," not just for reverts, and the program also shouldn't be used to revert anything but obvious vandalism, in which case I think an indication that the edit was vandalism is appropriate. (Note that some tools leave a summary to the extent of "Reverted vandalism by Foobar. Do not compromise the integrity of pages.") The "using VandalProof" isn't just for promotional reasons, but rather to ensure that any abuse of the tool gets reverted here immediately so that it can be dealt with--without the tag-line there's no way of knowing who's using it to do what. So removing it altogether is not an option. With my other tools, I simply add "Semiautomated" to the front, with Semiautomated then linked to the project page, so this may be an option. Or I could just trim down the title to VP. Thoughts, anyone? AmiDaniel (talk) 01:32, 27 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Trim it down to VP or just link to the tool in the message. ILovePlankton ^{( L)} 02:31, 27 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

"Reverted edits by Foo (talk) to version 54882798 using VP" sounds good to me - note the pagename used in the link. That way, anyone who needs to can recognise fairly quickly it was done with VandalProof, but newbies are unlikely to see the diff/history and click on the link. --james °o 11:06, 27 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Okay, the change has been implemented to replace "using VandalProof" with "using VP" [1]. Does this look alright to everyone? My one concern with this is that WP:VP takes you to the Village Pump, not here. I'm almost thinking we may need a shortcut like WP:VPRF or WP:VPR, and the edit summary could then become "using VPR VPRF". Thoughts, anyone? AmiDaniel (talk) 01:26, 29 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Strike VPR as it also leads to the Village Pump, and it appears that someone has already made the VPRF shortcut. AmiDaniel (talk) 01:29, 29 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Edit summary when welcoming new users

Latest comment: 19 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

I noticed that the edit summary when welcoming a user (as in this welcome) says, "Welcoming user using VandalProof". I'm not sure that "welcome" and "vandal" belong in the same sentence -- someone who reads their user page history might be put off by it. On the other hand, there's probably a good reason to cite the name of the program being used. I'm just throwing this out there as something to think about; maybe users of VandalProof can come up with arguments for or against it. --Elkman 18:26, 28 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

See the section immediately above this one ;-). AmiDaniel (talk) 18:29, 28 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Oops, I guess I wasn't reading carefully enough. That's what happens when I try to do two things at once. --Elkman 18:47, 28 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Your log-in request failed.

Latest comment: 19 years ago5 comments3 people in discussion

Was approved earlier today, thought the issue might be the first character of my username being upper/lower case... tried every way but no go. Have cookies enabled in IE and cleared my Monobook.js of everything... still unable to login. I get the Welcome To VandalProof screen and after the retrieveing user list, I get the above error. Help! --Jamott 23:27, 28 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Try it again now. VP has problems with redlinked userpages that I haven't fixed yet. It's not a common problem so I haven't really had much initiative. I've now created your userpage as a redirect to your talk page; feel free to tag it with db-owner if you'd rather it remain a redlink, though you then won't be able to use VandalProof for the time being. AmiDaniel (talk) 23:39, 28 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Working now. Thanks for the quick fix and great program!--Jamott 23:48, 28 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

The same thing still happens to me. Before the system was changed I would get that but would at least be able to have tags come up when I would go to talk pages but now nothing seems to work. The tags don't come up, can't view recent changes, I press rollback and nothing happens. I really don't know what it is I am doing that is wrong.

Your log-in request failed.

You might have entered an incorrect username. Currently, your username is set to Jersey Devil. You can change this at anytime from "Set Username" under the File menu.

You might not be correctly logged into Wikipedia with that username. Try logging into Wikipedia within the current browser.

You might not be on the list of authorized users. Please post a request for permission to use VandalProof on the VandalProof talk page. If you have received a message stating that you have already been added to the list, please contact the user who posted that message.--Jersey Devil 03:20, 30 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Sorry for taking so long to respond here--I've been playing around with using my new admin tools and haven't put much thought into VandalProof. Okay, let's try some of the more broad problems people have had and see if we can wittle it down. 1) Confirm that you're using the monobook skin. 2) Click the "try logging into Wikipedia" link, log in as you usually would within VP's browser, and be sure to check "Remember Me." 3) If that fails, check your IE cookie settings and see if there's anything strange. You may want to open up a stand-alone instance of IE and make sure you can log into Wikipedia and stay logged in while you edit. AmiDaniel (talk) 01:57, 1 June 2006 (UTC)Reply

Vandalproof to broad based?

Latest comment: 19 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion

Is the current edition of vandal proof too broad based? it removed a legitimate warning from a page i edited about a user link on the page. i think the scope of vandalproof should be used more limitedly and used more cautiously and sparingly. Vandalproof is putting of people from expressing gueniune but controversial peices of evidence for fear of it being classed as vandalism. Lucy-marie 15:15, 30 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

You shouldn't be editing another users userpage. If Cobaltbluetony wanted to warn people about it he would have put it there (Most likely he didn't because it is a joke, it is meant to trick people). ILovePlankton ^{( L)} 16:44, 30 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

This comment is in reference to this [2].I can understand the concern of seeing Vandal Proof, but if one follows the link they can see it's a program. Yanksox 15:46, 30 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Trouble installing

Latest comment: 19 years ago5 comments3 people in discussion

Hi there, whenever I try to install Vandal Proof (I have just been added to approved users), it comes up with the message Component TABCTL32.OCX or one of its dependencies not correctly registered: a file is missing or invalid. Help, please? LBM 19:01, 30 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Install the zip file as well, for some reason it was not on the download page... Prodego ^talk 19:21, 30 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

It says at the start of the page that the above version has a bug on it - should I proceed? LBM 19:25, 30 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Now you need to download the 1.2.1 exe and put it into that folder. ILovePlankton ^{( L)} 20:05, 30 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Thanks! LBM 20:08, 30 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Running under wine

Latest comment: 19 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

i want to state just for the record that vandalproof runs beutifully on linux using wine and the foss toolset winetools [3]. my platform is centos 4.2 with wine 0.9.2. frymaster 15:52, 1 June 2006 (UTC)Reply

Wow, this is surprising but certainly not unwelcome news. Perhaps you could post a full, from scratch tutorial in your userspace if you have the time? Lots of us would probably make use of it. Thanks. --Xyrael ^T 16:35, 1 June 2006 (UTC)Reply

i have a short rundown on my talk page frymaster 17:14, 8 June 2006 (UTC)Reply

new account.

Latest comment: 19 years ago9 comments4 people in discussion

I was wondering if it's possible for me to start a new account and to use that account in VandalProof. I want to help out, but now I'm getting personally attacked on my userpage, which is a total pain. Also, I might like to keep all of my anti-vandalism contributions separate from my other contributions. - Zepheus 18:32, 1 June 2006 (UTC)Reply

You certainly can. Just create it, post here, and if you're already approved from here and can prove so by editing that new user's userpage, I'll be happy to let you in on both. Thanks. --Xyrael ^T 19:26, 1 June 2006 (UTC)Reply

I created my "sockpuppet" account. It's under Dr. Zaret (a name I got off of a bowling ball). You say I should simply edit the user page for that? Okay. Should I also list myself on the Awaiting Approval list? - Zepheus 20:55, 1 June 2006 (UTC)Reply

Alternately I could just semi-protect your userpage for you. Prodego ^talk 23:08, 1 June 2006 (UTC)Reply

I think I would rather have the second account (if that's okay), so that I can keep my long list of vandalism reversions separate from my other edits. - Zepheus 23:34, 1 June 2006 (UTC)Reply

Ok. Prodego ^talk 23:35, 1 June 2006 (UTC)Reply

If you want to prove that somebody is your sockpuppet, when you create it, go here and create it while still logged on and link to the user-creation log like I did for my sockpuppet, User:GeorgeMoney VandalProof --GeorgeMoney ^T·C 00:03, 2 June 2006 (UTC)Reply

I have already been approved with my new name. If there is a problem with this, I can delete my secondary account and re-create per your means. I apologize for not knowing procedure (but that's why I asked), and attempted to do things as I was told. - Zepheus 00:16, 2 June 2006 (UTC)Reply

Wow, cool method GM! --Xyrael ^T 16:54, 2 June 2006 (UTC)Reply

Another assistance request

Latest comment: 19 years ago8 comments3 people in discussion

Well, I'm back. I've downloaded the 1.21 version of VandalProof to a computer where I have admin rights. My IE browser is set to accept all cookies. Despite all this, when I try to login in with VandalProof is throws out a yellow box stating "Your log-in request failed." The funny thing is that under this yellow box it says, "Welcome to VandalProof, Alabamaboy!" Any tips on what the problem might be here? Thanks,--Alabamaboy 00:34, 5 June 2006 (UTC)Reply

I should add that I'm using the monobook skin, as requested. I've also tried clicking "logging into Wikipedia" from within VandalProof (even though I was already logged in with IE) and the browser is set to remember my username and password.--Alabamaboy 00:40, 5 June 2006 (UTC)Reply

Ok, let me think a minute. Prodego ^talk 00:41, 5 June 2006 (UTC)Reply

Is your username spelled correctly? Try reseting it by opening VandalProof, selecting File -> Set username, and typing your username. Then log in through VandalProof. Prodego ^talk 00:45, 5 June 2006 (UTC)Reply

I'm good. I restarted my computer and then tried the login and it worked. Not sure what the problem was but that solved it. Thanks, --Alabamaboy 00:49, 5 June 2006 (UTC)Reply

Works for me! Prodego ^talk 00:50, 5 June 2006 (UTC)Reply

Now that I'm actually using the program, I have to say it kicks butt. Great work putting this program together. Best, --Alabamaboy 01:08, 5 June 2006 (UTC)Reply

Well of course its great. Best. Program. Evah. ILovePlankton 01:45, 5 June 2006 (UTC)Reply

Edit

Latest comment: 19 years ago4 comments4 people in discussion

I don't know what section to put this in, but I saw a weird edit summary, "Thanking user for voting in my RFA using VandalProof". How do you do that? --GeorgeMoney ^T·C 03:29, 5 June 2006 (UTC)Reply

Wow, vandalproof is now being used as a spam notification tool. Don't have a clue... sorry!Eagle talk 03:27, 6 June 2006 (UTC)Reply

You probably shouldn't use it for this (although I have myself!), but it's pretty easy. Just load up the page, and then click "Notify All Contributors." Pretty self explanatory. I would, however, like to note that the feature was developed for notifying 1-5 editors, and it doesn't conform to the bot policy when used to notify much more than that and could result in your being blocked. When I use it for mass notification, I tweak the timer to post every 30-60 seconds so as to avoid being blocked myself. AmiDaniel (talk) 03:35, 6 June 2006 (UTC)Reply

I think he was wondering how to change the edit summary that it provides, and yes I was warned for using it in that way. ILovePlankton 04:02, 6 June 2006 (UTC)Reply

can't use VandalProof

Latest comment: 19 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

I have been told that I am now authorized to use VandalProof, but when I try to use it, I get an error message saying that I am not logged in. Is there something I'm doing wrong?

Thanks. --Ixfd64 20:30, 7 June 2006 (UTC)Reply

Try these suggestions.

• Make sure that your version of IE is 4.0 or higher.
• Make sure that you have cookies enabled in IE.
• Make sure that you have your user name in VP matching EXACTLY to your username in Wikipedia.
• If these don't work, tell us your operating system and more detials on the error that you are getting.

Good LuckEagle talk 01:32, 8 June 2006 (UTC)Reply

I've tried these things, and it still doesn't work. I've installed VandalProof on another computer, and it doesn't work either. :( --Ixfd64 00:34, 13 June 2006 (UTC)Reply

Vandal Proof struck dooonnnn

Latest comment: 19 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion

Well, this is my first ever bizzarre event w/ VP. Everytime I load VP up, it will load me up but once I get the "Welcome to VP, Yanksox..." message, VP will just crash. I don't know if its a windows issue or a VP issue. Blah. Thanks for listening. Yanksox 22:21, 8 June 2006 (UTC)Reply

nvm, it works. Yanksox 23:56, 8 June 2006 (UTC)Reply

Installation question

Latest comment: 19 years ago4 comments4 people in discussion

If I should choose to regester, and download the software, would the installation edit my PC's registry files or not? --GW_Simulations_{|User Page | Talk | Contribs | E-mail} 20:09, 9 June 2006 (UTC)Reply

Yes it would have to other wise your computer would not know what to do with the files. ILovePlankton 20:17, 9 June 2006 (UTC)Reply

Just don't install it. Download the exe; that's all that's needed. --mboverload@ 20:03, 11 June 2006 (UTC)Reply

The only modifications made to the registry are initializing the few dll's and ocx's you need--if these are already installed, then the setup will essentially do nothing except copy the exe to the specified destination. The exe itself makes absolutely no modifications to the registry; all data and everyting is stored in ASCII text files in the program's parent directory. I'm really paranoid about anything that modifies registry, so no need to worry. AmiDaniel (talk) 02:09, 13 June 2006 (UTC)Reply

Monobook.js

Latest comment: 19 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion

Why when I look at my monobook.js via clicking on it in history does it look okay, but when I click on the user page tab it looks like something is wrong with it? Does this need fixed or is it fine the way it is? Earlier today I added script for Interiot's counter tool to it, but neither that tool nor VP seem to like having both scripts in one file, so I removed the Interiot script from the file and that's when I noticed this problem. How should I set up the two different scripts? Rlevse 02:19, 13 June 2006 (UTC)Reply

Nevermind, the problem was that I'd copied the "pre" tags when I dropped in the monobook code. Rlevse 21:06, 13 June 2006 (UTC)Reply