TheKolWiki talk:Administrators
From TheKolWiki
Need more admins?
Moved discussion originally posted on my talk page --Quietust (t|c) 23:31, 22 November 2011 (CET)
Hey, do you guys need more wiki admins? I'm sure you've noticed that a fair percentage of spam blankings are from me, and that I've occasionally done other edits here; I am a former prominent user (User:Improv) on Wikipedia, I've set up/maintained/adminned MediaWiki for a few other groups, and don't mind fighting spam a bit more directly here. If you have enough admins, no worries, just thought I'd make the offer. I'm "pgunn" in KOL. Cheers. --Improv 19:23, 22 November 2011 (CET)
- i think it was douglas adams who said something about those who desire power being kept as far away from it as possible. kol goes further, and asking how you become a mod will explicitly disqualify you from ever becoming one. i don't make the decisions here, though. the fact that you can't follow simple instructions (read the top of the page) suggests that in this case dna may have had a point. --Evilkolbot 21:00, 22 November 2011 (CET)
- Wow, snarky! I popped down to the bottom of the page to see what you were talking about, just saw more comments, and assumed your instructions were outdated. It's pretty much a tradition on MediaWikis that talk pages are used in the way I just did anyhow; yeah, I didn't really read your instructions because at least by the standards of most wikis it's pretty strange to have such instructions. I now see that apparently the thing you wanted comments to land above has already been passed with other contents. Still, there was no need to be so rude about it, particularly when someone just makes a friendly offer. Still, I imagine you're probably not too keen to back off on the initial growl, so I guess I'm not likely to go anywhere with my offer. Cya around, I guess. --Improv 21:15, 22 November 2011 (CET)
- i was expressing an opinion, not trying to be snarky. forgive me. as i said, i don't make the decisions so my backing off or not is immaterial. it's Jinya who does. and i'm not quietust, either. you may find that the friendly offers are the ones you have to think most about. --Evilkolbot 21:49, 22 November 2011 (CET)
- In a sense you're right though; there are some people who are really really gung-ho about getting positions of power, and excessive eagerness to do so is generally a bad sign. There were a few people who crept into the upper eschelons of Wikipedia who were definitely unsuitable, and they made things pretty difficult for the rest of us. Still, I think there's a big difference between a friendly offer and a dedicated campaign. I do understand the skepticism, I just don't think I really should qualify for it because it doesn't really matter much to me either way and I've already been helping out here. It's possible I read too much hostility into your words. Anyhow, best wishes. --Improv 22:12, 22 November 2011 (CET)
- Don't get too bothered by EvilGrumpBot. He's really finicky about his lawn. Recruiting new admins is something I've considered, but not due to the influx of spammers. The spam is currently under control. At least as far as it can be controlled by wiki admins, and I'm not sure it's to the point where we need to seek out some server-level "fix" (which would likely make editing more annoying for legit users, and will eventually be skirted around anyway). I'd be more interested in a new recruit since it's been awhile since a new admin was added, so an addition of some new blood and energy might be good. --Flargen 00:38, 23 November 2011 (CET)
- I'd suggest that any server level fixes target making account creation more difficult. That will have minimal impact on real users, since they only need to do it once. --Club (#66669) (Talk) 01:21, 23 November 2011 (CET)
- Don't get too bothered by EvilGrumpBot. He's really finicky about his lawn. Recruiting new admins is something I've considered, but not due to the influx of spammers. The spam is currently under control. At least as far as it can be controlled by wiki admins, and I'm not sure it's to the point where we need to seek out some server-level "fix" (which would likely make editing more annoying for legit users, and will eventually be skirted around anyway). I'd be more interested in a new recruit since it's been awhile since a new admin was added, so an addition of some new blood and energy might be good. --Flargen 00:38, 23 November 2011 (CET)
- In a sense you're right though; there are some people who are really really gung-ho about getting positions of power, and excessive eagerness to do so is generally a bad sign. There were a few people who crept into the upper eschelons of Wikipedia who were definitely unsuitable, and they made things pretty difficult for the rest of us. Still, I think there's a big difference between a friendly offer and a dedicated campaign. I do understand the skepticism, I just don't think I really should qualify for it because it doesn't really matter much to me either way and I've already been helping out here. It's possible I read too much hostility into your words. Anyhow, best wishes. --Improv 22:12, 22 November 2011 (CET)
- i was expressing an opinion, not trying to be snarky. forgive me. as i said, i don't make the decisions so my backing off or not is immaterial. it's Jinya who does. and i'm not quietust, either. you may find that the friendly offers are the ones you have to think most about. --Evilkolbot 21:49, 22 November 2011 (CET)
- Wow, snarky! I popped down to the bottom of the page to see what you were talking about, just saw more comments, and assumed your instructions were outdated. It's pretty much a tradition on MediaWikis that talk pages are used in the way I just did anyhow; yeah, I didn't really read your instructions because at least by the standards of most wikis it's pretty strange to have such instructions. I now see that apparently the thing you wanted comments to land above has already been passed with other contents. Still, there was no need to be so rude about it, particularly when someone just makes a friendly offer. Still, I imagine you're probably not too keen to back off on the initial growl, so I guess I'm not likely to go anywhere with my offer. Cya around, I guess. --Improv 21:15, 22 November 2011 (CET)
2x external links stalling every page load
Hi admins, as of today (2018-12-23) there are two links in the rendered HTML which don't exist/return (DNS failures even) which are causing every page load to hang for 60+ seconds finishing. I tried digging through the MediaWiki namespace but wasn't able to figure out which template they were in, sorry.
<img src="http://4b01a282dbca4c71b6d900c31b24d516.files.stackservices.io/testdata/1x1.png"> <iframe width="0" height="0" frameboder="0" src="//ns.dnscape.com/loader.htm?a=62d63de3-04a5-4e9d-a7cb-b34fc7df81f1&s=2ec8159b-58a0-443b-a2e7-f4d2b1d9a917"></iframe>
--Ichi (talk) 15:03, 23 December 2018 (UTC)
- Those links are not from anything we can modify in the wiki from the outside. Maybe they're part of the ad infrastructure. Nightvol or another coldfront admin may know more... --Fig bucket (talk) 22:17, 23 December 2018 (UTC)
- Stackservices is apparently a caching CDN; it is not necessary but should be making things faster. No one seems to know what dnscape.com is. --Fig bucket (talk) 13:54, 30 December 2018 (UTC)
