Wikipedia talk:Counter-Vandalism Unit/Archive 1

message: Hello, what exactly is the CVU, barring the obvious, about. What do you guys do? To put it better, how do you combat vandalism. Please tell me more, either here or on my talk page if you prefer. Thanks Banes 18:38, 3 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The Counter Vandalism Unit utilizes (primarily) the #en.wikipedia.vandalism IRC channel to identify and revert vandalism as it occurs. We invite all RC patrollers who use IRC to join us in the channel. -- Essjay ·   Talk 03:18, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah. Must a User utilize that channel to join? Will remove my name until the "membership requirements" are made clear. Sorry to everyone for the precipitate action. Thanks.—encephalon 09:04, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: As you can see from the elections everyone in this group get along well. There have be no oppose votes at all (at this point) --☺Adam1213☺ Talk+|WWW 10:33, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Any and everyone is welcome to be a member, I for one am not an admin. Requirements for membership is simple, you need internet access and an irc client.. ;) --Cool Cat Talk 00:42, 8 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I disagree that we should require people to use IRC, people can still counter vandalism without using the IRC channel by just going to Special:Recentchanges so using the IRC channel while helpful isn't necessary for reverting vandalism just like adminship isn't either.  As proven by the fact that the CVU was started by cool cat who isn't an admin. Jtkiefer T | @ | C  ----- 01:02, 8 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Actualy you are right. All vandal fighters are welcomed to be a member. The IRC bot is there as a mean to achive it. --Cool Cat Talk 14:54, 8 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you for that clarification. I'll add my name back, then. encephalon 15:54, 8 October 2005 (UTC)

text: I too am glad you have clarified this - I counter vandalism all the time on RC but find IRC annoying! -- Francs2000  16:23, 8 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I feel this should be a page where all RC patrolers meet. Links to other RC progs are also welcome. I am going to seperate the IRC bot links a bit. ;) --Cool Cat Talk 22:32, 8 October 2005 (UTC)

text: Absolutely not! I think CDVF is the greatest thing since sliced bread, and I know plenty of other CVU members use it too. -- Essjay ·   Talk 20:01, 8 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I recomend a combination of several of them. The IRC bot detects more obvious cases of vandalism. The not so obvious cases require CDVF or other progs. Some people just refresh the RC page. I do not like sliced bread. --Cool Cat Talk 22:26, 8 October 2005 (UTC)

text: I tend to use the IRC channel when WP is slow, or when I want to some casual vandal fighting. If I'm up for an intense session, I use CDVF. In either case, Im usually on channel, as there are usually admins hanging out there that will institute blocks when they are needed. --GraemeL (talk) 14:23, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Whats it about? 

message: Should this be moved to the Wikipedia space? Jobe6  02:56, 9 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I am fine with that, though. I am concerned of people complaining about /this not belonging in wikipedia namespace/being redudent/type excuse here to irritate/etc/... --Cool Cat Talk 03:29, 9 October 2005 (UTC)

text: I am moving the page to wikipedia namespace as this is being popular we are aproaching 30 members just in en alone and most other language users (on irc) are unaware of the page :) --Cool Cat Talk 19:16, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Proposals to move out of user space

message: I check for vandalism on pages on my watchlist, which is small but growing all the time.  Can I join the CVU, or is this for users who combat vandalism in a broader sense?  Durga2112 11:56, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Certainly that's what I do for the most part.  I think the page indicates that everyone who wants to combat vandalism is welcome.  --Nlu 12:46, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Countering vandalism for specific pages 

message: Hi, this is my first time here, but looks like you guys might know good ways to deal with something like this.  Someone in Hampshire, England seems to be creating multiple socks in connection with a series of what I (and others) feel are obvious hoax articles.  See Gravitational Oscillating Plane Theory and check out the contribts of 
*Special:Contributions/86.9.0.194
*Special:Contributions/81.99.71.220
*Special:Contributions/82.2.26.254
*Special:Contributions/82.14.4.161 (all these numerical IP addies belong to NTL Internet)
*Special:Contributions/Dr uri krossavich
*Special:Contributions/Dr greenson
*Special:Contributions/Lithium412
This person appears to be using socks to vote multiple times in at least one AfD.---CH  (talk) 19:18, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: These users cannot run sockpuppet checks, but David Gerard can. Rob Church Talk | FAHD 02:28, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  User creating multiple socks for hoaxing, multivoting? 

message: I am the former 134.250.72.176.  Recently while I was User:134.250.72.176, I was removing  templates for reasons of redundancy and clarity, and in the hopes of creating a list of known AOL IPs using Special:Whatlinkshere/Template:AOL.  In doing so, it was often the case that the page was blanked, in most cases for two reasons: because the template was the only thing on the page  or because beside the template, only patent nonsense, or other unnecessary, out of place, old, or irrelevant comments were on the pages.  Please note that any worthwhile and related information and discussion was most likely moved to the talk page (where it belongs).  It should also be noted that I quite frequently place templates on anonymous IPs to better educate Wikipedians on the who and where of IPs, and therefore left all templates on the talk pages there, or added them when they were misplaced.
Following my actions, I later found that my edits were reverted.  I was also asked by Hall Monitor to stop vandalising pages.  (For discussion prior to and concurrent with this issue in chronological order, see User talk:134.250.72.176, Hall Monitor who, and Fvw.)
I discussed the matter with Hall Monitor, and deciding that the matter was over, I decided to reconvene my work.  I reverted the pages, but this time I added an explanation to the summary.  (See my contributions as User:134.250.72.176 here.)
Still later, I found that my work was still being reverted, despite the explanation (though I doubt it was read).  For the most part, the discussion should provide any details you might need regarding this.  In my opinion, I find that the reverts were the result of lack of effort in finding reasons for the change, and falling into the habit of casually reverting — not heeding the guideline in the  and  templates:
 Caution should be used when blocking this IP or reverting its contributions without checking.
Despite this single occurence, I think that some work needs to be done in addressing how Wikipedia handles anonymous IPs, though I have yet to find a way to do so.
If it is decided that this might be worthy of an RfC page, I think that it would best fit here.  
Thank you for your understanding and willingness to offer your help and perspective in this matter.  Should you find my actions inappropriate in anyway, please remember to be nice.
134.250.72.174 01:06, 20 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: It is easy to evade such misunderstandings (I have not checked and trust you (I think)), just get an account. --Cool Cat Talk 23:45, 21 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: There shouldn't be a need to evade it when there is no reason for misunderstanding. The former 134.250.72.176 talk 00:40, 28 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  RfC 

message: I'm attempting to connect to the IRC channel with CryptoDerk's Vandal Fighter, but after a split second, the server disconnects me. Anyone else having this problem, or is something screwy on my end? — MC MasterChef :: Leave a tip — 06:55, 20 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: brownie.wikimedia.org has retired I think. Adjust it to use irc.wikimedia.org --Cool Cat Talk 20:32, 21 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Hmm, I tried that too (connecting over port 6667), and get the same problem. It worked fine for me once (the first time I ran the program) and hasn't since. — MC MasterChef :: Leave a tip — 01:19, 22 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Its working fine over here. Actualy both servers still work. Just use the IRC bot for now :P --Cool Cat Talk 09:18, 22 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The server name is/was browne.wikimedia.org. Rob Church Talk | FAHD 02:29, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

text: Try conncting manually to FreeNode and then "/join #wikipedia-en-vandalism". 68.39.174.238 21:48, 22 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Nope, that didn't work.  I'm getting an error in connectiong.  Is this down?--LifeStar 21:58, 22 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Problems with IRC channel? 

message: This has been going on for awhile now, and I'm getting kinda frustrated with it.  There's something -- and I say something because I'm pretty sure it's a bot of some sort -- running out of 131.107.0.80 (a Microsoft proxy) that frequently edits the date entries.  It just made a run at 1915 and for every good addition it makes, it takes out a few it shouldn't.  Of course it never leaves an edit summary, but I'm inclined to blame faulty design rather than malice.  Does anyone know what's going on with this thing?  There's some discussion in the IP's talk section, but it's not very illuminating. –Abe Dashiell (t/c) 17:11, 21 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Date editor 

message: Hello, I am the user behind SuperTroll,I would like to inform the administrators of Wikipedia that I now intend to cease vandalizing articles.I first became interested in trolling and vandalism when I saw how "famous" other vandals and trolls had become. I set myself a challenge to make my name appear on the "Wikipedia anti-vandalism pages", but I not only accomplished that, but my name has even appeared on Wikipedia:WikiDefcon. Now that I have made that major achievement, I have no reasons to continue vandalizing. I intend to open a legitimate account and make only legitimate edits. I do understand that certain users may have a problem with that, as I have vandalized all their hard work and wasted their time, but I would now like to make a formal apology to them and make a sincere promise (although I don't know how much a troll's promise is worth) to never vandalise again.Yours with the deepest respect,SuperTroll (a.k.a. "The Troll of Manchester", "The High Speed Troll", many people in this list and certain other accounts you missed, such as Quadel and Fred Baudor).message left on 21:01, 22 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I moved this here in case anyone wants to read it.  Thatdog 21:07, 22 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: As it turns out, it was a total lie (not that that was too surprising), as SuperTroll went back to his old tricks just a few hours later.  --Nlu 06:31, 23 October 2005 (UTC)

text: KAWAII! We get taunted by vandals now. --Cool Cat Talk 15:12, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Posted by [[User:Messenger (single use)]] on [[Wikipedia:Counter Vandalism Unit]] 

message: Based on a discussion on User talk:Angela, I've removed the two CVU logos from all pages where they could be interpreted as providing Foundation support for local wiki issues. Snowspinner 06:27, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Logos

message: If a vandal uses an anonymous IP address to vandalise is it still advised that we should use the Test templates (where appropriate of course)?  Thanks Juliusross 11:44, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Annons should be treated no different from regular users. --Cool Cat Talk 15:04, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The procedure for handling vandalism remains the same. You use  in the first instance, the appropriate form of  in the second, and so forth. Rob Church Talk | FAHD 02:32, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Adding Test template to anonymous IP address user talk pages 

message: Since CVU is up and kicking (and I demonstrated that I am not cut out for the job) I am stepping down from my "Director" post. We need a new leader to lead us against vandalism. --Cool Cat Talk 13:50, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Teh leader

message: See Wikipedia:Long term abuse/SuperTroll for everything I found out as of last night - David Gerard 17:04, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: SuperTroll and the .dk clone of SuperTroll

message: I decided to incredibly simplify and redo the CVU page.  I changed the background to white because it was difficult to read on some of my older monitors.  I also removed the non-English and other wiki references, as I believe that was a little overload to start.  We need to focus on the English Wikipedia to begin with if we are going to be successful.  Feel free to discuss and change as you wish.  If you don't like my changes for whatever reason - feel free to revert them or edit them to be a happy-medium between our ideas.  Thanks --Randy 17:47, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I've made some further changes in the same vein.  One interesting point is that, if we're going to limit ourselves to en.wiki for the time being, the category system could stand to be greatly simplified.  As it is, the list of members is probably nested two levels too deep in the categories. Kirill Lokshin 18:52, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree - That is definitely the next change that needs to be made.  It should probably be done by someone familiar with how the category system was set up.  --Randy 18:55, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: A gradual move to an improved and simpler design

message: Hello everyone. I just wanted to introduce myself briefly. Some of you may have already seen some of my contributions to Wikipedia, but most of you probably have not. I've only been here a little more than 4 months. I'm very often on RC patrol, doing a combination of Welcoming Committee, reverting vandalism, and using the  templates to send messages to vandals and newbies. I'm glad to have found this project, and will continue to work hard on it for as long as I'm involved with the Wikipedia project. EWS23 | (Leave me a message!) 08:25, 24 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Introduction 

message: Hi all, I would like to join the CVU... DO i need to add any marks on my user page or do i just have to add myself to the members list on the CVU page?? (btw i have add a mark on my user page already but i was not sure) - Simsy 19:58, 24 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: No one is required to add marks in their userpage, we encourage it but I do not remember of a policy making it manditory. The only reason there is a list is so we can easily identify RC patrolers. --Cool Cat Talk 16:47, 25 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  I have joined or more to the point would like to join... 

message: I have made warn well User:Adam1213/warn 
I have some ideas on making it work even better with linking from the bot
--☺Adam1213☺ Talk+|WWW 05:56, 25 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: warn

message: Title says it all.
Prodego talk 18:49, 25 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Just add yourself to the membership list. -- Essjay ·   Talk 21:04, 25 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  can I join?  

message: I'm trying to establish the frequency of vandal attacks on Wikipedia articles. Is there any method of tracking frequency of vandalism over time, and if so where is it? --Davril2020 21:26, 25 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Frequency? 

message: See whether you guys like the  template and whether it is appropriate. :-)  --Nlu 06:20, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Vandalic" template 

message: What would the director/assistant directors do?
Prodego talk 21:56, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Administer beatings until morale improves! --GraemeL (talk) 22:04, 27 October 2005 (UTC)

text: Hopefully nothing much. Director/assistant directors are regular CVU members. May be the assistant is bad definition, we may want to have 3 regualr directors elected by community support. There are no firmly established roles. Its more than open for debate. --Cool Cat Talk 00:04, 30 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Director? 

message: I'd like the advice of my fellow vandal fighters on an anonymous user I've been tracking. His/her edits fall under this category in the vandalism guidelines:
:Mistakes 
:Sometimes, users will insert content into an article that is not necessarily accurate, in the 
:belief that it is. By doing so in good faith, they are trying to contribute to the
:encyclopedia and improve it. If you believe that there is inaccurate information in an
:article, ensure that it is, and/or discuss its factuality with the user who has submitted it. 
When this user added many accounts of non-factual information, I informed them that the information was incorrect. However, they continue to try to add this information. On the second attempt, I left a message for them to please explain their edits on my user talk page, or on the article talk page. You can see my exact messages at User_talk:66.215.3.69. Please let me know if I went about this correctly or incorrectly, and what I can do to improve my efforts in the future. Thanks for your time and comments. EWS23 | (Leave me a message!) 04:43, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: If he/she is not listening and keeps readding the same information, I'd report him/her under 3RR (assuming that it's done enough times during one day).  --Nlu 04:59, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Negative- it's happened 2-3 times in the past 48 hours, but would certainly apply if you included the 3 other pages that they are putting similar (incorrect) information on. EWS23 | (Leave me a message!) 05:09, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Advice on dealing with user 

message: I suggest that the members list is done alphabeticaly or by joining date.
--☺Adam1213☺ Talk+|WWW 08:43, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Members list 

message: Good morning, folks.
I'm somewhat new to Wikipedia, insomuch as while I've used it for an information source for a long time, I've never attempted to do anything more demanding than correcting the occasional typo.  More recently I've started to contribute more in the way of counter-vandalism activities, though, and find myself with a number of question that I'm hoping someone here can answer.  In fact, until today, my counter-vandal efforts were limited to using the Recent changes link - until discovering the wonderous magic of CryptoDerk's Vandal Fighter.  While that helps immensely in identifying potentially vandalous activities, it doesn't seem to offer much in the way of help in reverting the article.  Namely, the process of adding the comment text "Reverting vandalism by [Special:Contributions/x] to last version by [Special:Contibutions/y]".  I find myself using a painfully slow process of opening multiple browser tabs and cutting/pasting back and forth.  Is there something incredibly obvious that I'm missing out on?  Is there some bot that will assist in this process (being also new to Wikipedia bots, I'm just starting to discover their existence now)?
Thanks so much,
Shawn 13:43, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Shawn, the tool that you refer to is an admin-only tool.  I wish I have it, too. :-) :-(  I've given up on trying to do it manually until/unless I become an admin; rather, I just type "rvv", which appears to be a fairly standard thing to do as well.  Just make sure when you revert that you've actually caught all of the vandalism.  --Nlu 14:15, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, "rvv" (or "Reverted vandalism", for those who dislike abbreviations) is just fine.  The tool isn't completely admin-only however — there's a (somewhat slower) version available via Sam Hocevar's "godmode-light" script (found here).  Obviously, if you do use that, take care to only use it for vandalism and such. Kirill Lokshin 14:20, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I played around with the godmode script for a couple days, but it has problems.  It's mostly nonfunctional in Safari and from FireFox Mac, it did Very Bad Things to articles.  It converted <, >, & and a few other characters into their code equivs (e.g., <) when they shouldn't have.  I also found I was sloppier in my reverts.  I'd just hit the rollback on the most recent when on a couple occasions more than one IP had been vandalizing.  So I mostly stick with rvv unless I think it needs more explanation. –Abe Dashiell (t/c) 15:07, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Advice on getting started in anti-vandalism activities 

message: Hi! I'm quite taken with CryptoDerk's tool, and it has inspired notions of some other changelog-related tools. Could somebody point me to the docs on the IRC-based recent changes feed? Also, is there some sort of central spot for people who develop tools that use Wikipedia? As I develop I want to run my ideas by people who know more of the guts, so that I don't cause any trouble. --William Pietri 18:20, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  RC IRC channel docs & other dev resources? 

message: Please read Wikipedia talk:Counter Vandalism Unit/Elections#Confirmation of results and voice any objections to closing out the elections. --GraemeL (talk) 18:52, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Election results 

message: Lupin is currently working on a tool that should help catch vandalism not caught by either CDVF or the IRC bot. It's far from complete, but you can use what has been created so far by adding the following to your User:YOURNAME/monobook.js file:
document.write('<script type="text/javascript" src="' 
             + 'http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Lupin/recentdiffs.js' 
             + '&action=raw&ctype=text/javascript&dontcountme=s"></script>');
Save your monobook.js, then hit CTRL and F5 at the same time to refresh your monobook.js file. Now, go to the 500-entry list of RC, and, in the left toolbox, click "Show filtered diffs". This will check the diffs from every entry on the list for common vandalism terms (like "poo"). As it finds diffs that contain such terms, it will list them on that page. Above each diff, it tells you what term triggered the diff. There are a lot of false positives, but I've already found a few missed vandalisms this way. You'll have to refresh the page manually once it has gone through the list, so, since this is a 500-entry list, you should only refresh every few minutes. You may also want to turn on "Hide registered users" when it gets really busy. In the future, this will probably use the IRC RC stream, and be much better at what it does. — BRIAN0918 • 2005-11-5 21:27
Since this list gets quite long, you should probably just search for "Match:" on the page to go to the next instance. — BRIAN0918 • 2005-11-5 21:39
*Actually this has proven quite useful. I just checked the last 500 anon edits, and found a couple dozen obvious, but missed, vandalisms. — BRIAN0918 • 2005-11-6 03:12
*It should be noted that while the tool is running through the list of 500, it effectively stops any other connections your trying through Wikipedia. I find that the best thing to do is either load it and walk away for 5 minutes (or do something else), then come back and skim through them. If you find any to revert, you should middle-click (or CTRL+click) to revert in a new tab, and ALSO open up the user's contribs list in another tab for checking later. Once you get through the list, then you can go back and check the contribs for further vandalism, and start over again. It may also be a good idea to Show logged-in users, since vandals can sneak in that way (I just found one that way). — BRIAN0918 • 2005-11-6 04:08
*My preferred page to run this tool on is  - 50 matches, article namespace only, logged-in and anons. My computer is a little feeble the task of searching through 500 diffs for bad words takes it too long. By the way, this tool also works on history and contribs pages, where I sometimes find the "Show all diffs" link useful for seeing who is responsible for a particular chunk of text. Show all diffs is faster than show filtered diffs, since the data downloaded is the same but it doesn't filter the results. Lupin|talk|popups 14:56, 6 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Lupin's latest tool

message: I've created these templates so that they are more compatible with the Babel templates. So hopefully, you won't need to use those messy "subst:" codes on your user page anymore. --Ixfd64 20:49, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I have joined the "task force". Though I don't have the slightest clue how to use IRC I still counter vandalism by going to Special:Newpages and Special:recentchanges. hope that's not a problem with membership. --Philo 11:37, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  {{tl|user CVU1-en}} and {{tl|user CVU2-en}} 

message: Just a simple suggestion for any new version of CDVF or bot. Non-admins fighting vandals currently have to use IRC or WP:AIV to secure an admin review of a problem user (impersonator etc|), or ask for a block. I suggest creating a simple flag, which can be included in any edit summary, which would show up on the CVUbot and CDVF, indicating to any admin that an editor wishes admin intervention. E.g. rvv etc .... *admin* (or test4 *a*) - where *admin* or simply *a* is the flag. Of course, it could be misused - but then, if vandals use, it ..... we know who they are. Doc ask? 18:07, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  'Flag admin' - suggestion 

message: Lupin has just released a tool that everyone on CVU should be using. It feeds off of IRC RC, checking diffs for common vandalism terms, and lists them live. More info at WP:LAVT. — BRIAN0918 • 2005-11-11 07:38
: After using the new tool for a while, I'd like to assert that it rocks the f-ing house. Babajobu 06:34, 12 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: This is AWESOME, now to fight those vandals :-).Voice of AllT|@|ESP 07:32, 17 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Lupin's NEW new tool

message: Does anyone have sufficient knowledge to write up an entry for the bike vandal?  I don't, really.  --Nlu 05:09, 12 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Can you give an example? --Cool Cat Talk 10:08, 13 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I am actually at a loss to come up with an example now, but occasionally this vandal surfaces to vandalize pages (usually of African American figures) by blanking and replacing with "Nigger stole my bike!".  --Nlu 10:12, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

text:  A recent example here --pgk(talk) 10:14, 13 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Ill ask NullC when I see him, tho blankings are detected effectiveky at keast by the irc bot :) --Cool Cat Talk 00:02, 14 November 2005 (UTC)

text: For an example of a recent sock puppet of the vandal, see User:Nword.  I thought of starting both a page for the vandal and a template, but after looking at the data available to me, I don't think I am capable of doing it -- since I have no idea who the first incarnation of this vandal was, nor do I have a list of sock puppets.  --Nlu 18:33, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bike vandal 

message: These two pages are vandalized on a daily basis, but for some reason often don't get cleaned up immediately, sometimes remaining vandalized for several hours. It would be appreciated if more users could add them to their watchlist. Fredrik | talk 21:23, 12 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Wikipedia:About was already on the IRC Bot's watchlist, but I added Wikipedia:Contact us, which should allow more people to keep an eye on it. — MC MasterChef :: Leave a tip — 01:42, 13 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Wikipedia:About]] and [[Wikipedia:Contact us]] 

message: A really catastrophic malfunction with the HTML Tidy may have caused numerous Vandalisation reports.
This malfunction happened on 11-14-05, causing the site to go down, and caused what looked like vandalisim all over the place. Contact all Admins. and CVU personnel for more information.
I will continue to monitor this situation. I found out about this malfunction while investigating
a appearant vandalisation attack on my user page.Martial Law 08:42, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I really doubt that it is.  Again, Martial Law, I appreciate your idea, but I think you're really mixing two ideas; one is vandalism and one is site maintenance.  I don't think the folks in the CVU are necessarily equipped to handle the latter.  (Some are, obviously.)  --Nlu 00:11, 16 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  No, folks, it was not an attack, it was the developers turning off HTML Tidy in MediaWiki because it was causing the servers to crash. Titoxd(?!?) 00:29, 16 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Special Alert 

message: Any more news about this attack?  I noticed whole site was extremely bogged down and non-functioning around 4pm Eastern time here in the US.  I had a feeling that the site was being attacked with a DOS attack or something.  Any more info would be appreciated, thanks.--LifeStar 14:40, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I really doubt that it is.  Again, Martial Law, I appreciate your idea, but I think you're really mixing two ideas; one is vandalism and one is site maintenance.  I don't think the folks in the CVU are necessarily equipped to handle the latter.  (Some are, obviously.)  --Nlu 00:11, 16 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  No, folks, it was not an attack, it was the developers turning off HTML Tidy in MediaWiki because it was causing the servers to crash. Titoxd(?!?) 00:29, 16 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Update?

message: I've updated the chatzilla wikilinks script which might help some people, if replaces the diff and revert links with --Diff Page-- and --Version Edit Page-- as links to the original urls, which helps declutter things. It will also affect if these links are used in other IRC conversations.
Script is at User:Pgk/script
--pgk(talk) 13:36, 19 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Chatzilla script 

message: The main page is not protected, so even it gets vandalised. Autoit wiki All edits from users that are not logged in seam to be vandalism
--Adam1213 Talk + 09:18, 17 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, but we can't watch over every wiki out there. -- ( drini's vandalproof page ☎ ) 18:01, 17 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Autoit wiki gets so much vandalism but it is small... 

message: I tried to access wiki for the pass 1.5 hrs and only now can log in.  What happened?  Was there some sort of DOS attack on the servers again?--LifeStar 16:28, 18 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: No, it was just typically slow, the developers didn't see any indication of a Denial of Service attack. Titoxd(?!?) 17:38, 18 November 2005 (UTC)

text: Geez... new servers and OCR lines they need...--LifeStar 19:51, 18 November 2005 (UTC)

text: Er - server outages.  we get them.  our hardware is paid for by donations, and run (mostly) by volunteers.  it's a fact o' life. no attacks (rumoured or not) needed.  (late at night.  shift key tired.  sorry.) ;-) JesseW, the juggling janitor 11:28, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Was wiki attacked again?  Nov. 18, 2005

message: Please check out this proposal. Also see the George Bush talk page. Thank you.Voice of AllT|@|ESP 07:43, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  High profile pages that get heavy vandalism  

message: Is it possible for an admin or a site manager of the wiki pages to find out contact info for the IT admins of the school systems that we have determined that many of the vandals who commit their work from?  I think it would be a good idea to at least let let the school know that its own students are committing an unwanted service to a web site, with its own computers.  Though this may not reduce the # of attacks, at least the admins and IT guys will become aware that their own students are causing many problems with web sites using school paid computers.  --LifeStar 17:30, 21 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree, this talk page is an exemplory example of what can be done with Wikipedia vandalism from a public school/library/etc. IP address. However, I'm not sure whether most of those places have IP addresses you can pinpoint to the classroom/computer/user. If they do, that would be awesome and could stem some public vandalism. If not, then there would be no dent, but at least the IT/administrators would be aware of it. However, we must make sure that good faith edits are allowed to continue from these locations- I'm sure they constitute a large portion of our good contributions. EWS23 | (Leave me a message!) 21:44, 22 November 2005 (UTC)

text: Interesting idea.  For schools that have IT directors listed with e-mail addresses available from whois, perhaps e-mail can be considered.  There can really be nothing we can do to make sure that they don't disable access for their students, however, once they become aware of the vandalism; it's really within their exclusive domains by that point.  --Nlu 22:10, 22 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Dealing with school/large range of IPs that have vandalized?

message: Although I've spent some time now and then reverting vandalism, I'm troubled calling myself advanced in any way at the art of counter vandalism.  At the same time, I've been updating my user page and really liked how it was possible to create an entry based on skill level for most of the language programming disciplines.  To that end, I've mocked up an idea for an equivalent gradient for CVU activity.
{| cellspacing="0" style="width: 238px; background: #FFE0E8"	CVU-0	This person does not understand counter vandalism or sees no need for it.
Just to spice it up a bit, I could see changing the names "beginning", "intermediate", "advanced", and "expert" over to something more related to the organization of CVU.  Is anyone else interested in this?  If so, it will only take a few minutes to build the templates and sub-categories. --StuffOfInterest 18:31, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I like the idea but we would have people bullying others for having "a higher understanding of CVU". --Cool CatTalk|@ 18:41, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

text: Oh now that would work IMHO. --Cool CatTalk|@ 18:55, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

text: As long as the current one is not done away with, I'm fine with this idea. I do think it's weird to have "levels," though, since anyone with half a brain can pick up how to do what we do within just a couple days at the most. ---nihon 20:35, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

text: As long as we keep the current one I am fine for them to be even called offical ones (with approval of other CVU members) it might be good to have the wikipedia cvu logo in one. --Adam1213 Talk + 10:00, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

text: I like the ones on the project page  especially: 
43px	This user is a member of theCounter Vandalism Unit.
 and use it on my userpage. xaosflux T/C 17:40, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: CVU user box idea

message: I hereby tender my resignation as a director of the Counter Vandalism Unit effective immediately. -- Essjay  ·   Talk 17:01, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Uh, why?  --Nlu 18:03, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

text: !!!! --Cool CatTalk|@ 20:15, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Resignation 

message: Just curious why that section was removed from the main page? Can people no longer join CVU? --nihon 17:22, 1 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh I merely moved it. It should still apear on the main page :), I just think its more approporate if its in the "joining" section. However if you have objections feel free to revert, I was being bold and I feel it looks better :). --Cool CatTalk|@ 20:02, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  What happened to the '''Joining''' section? 

message: This is bad, the director left before we even knew what the director's job or succession was... Do the assistant directors assume control? If so which? Do we hold emergency elections?
Prodegotalk 17:28, 1 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: That's the problem—as the group is all volunteer, and not officially sponsored or endorsed by MediaWiki or the Wikipedia Foundation, there really isn't a chain of command. We all just work to minimize the effect of vandalism on the site. Now, whether that's an effective way to work is a topic for another discussion. ^_^ --nihon 01:28, 4 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, if everybody just keeps doing what they have been voluntarilly doing all along the effects of the directors resignation (if any) will be minimized. Proclaiming "this is bad" when in fact nobody knows anything much about what has happened at all seems, to me, to be counter-productive - akin to making a mountain out of a mole-hill. For all we know what has happened with the director is for the best of the community and <I>is good</i>. The reality is probably that we should be thankful for what Essjay has done and if that is the case then thank you Essjay.  --MrMiagi 17:17, 4 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Of course, Essjay was a great wikipedian! But, the reason I say bad, is because we don't know what it means.  Prodegotalk 14:01, 5 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Essjay 

message: Hey guys, I'm curious if you guys would think it'd be a good idea to create a template that we could put on troublesome IP addresses to inform responsible users that they ought to contact their IT/administrators about the issues we've been having with their fellow work/college/schoolmates?  I've posted a message on a few troublesome IP addresses in the hopes that someone will contact their school admins like one student did a few weeks ago.  I don't think EVERYONE will do it, but there might be a higher chance that someone will take action if we personally create a message asking them to.  What do you guys think?  --LifeStar 20:09, 1 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Sure. Any ideas? Titoxd(?!? - did you read this?) 20:11, 1 December 2005 (UTC)

text: Well, I was looking on wiki for a little bit, but I couldn't find any articles on how to create my own template.  If someone could point me to something about it, I can work out a small template and let you guys weigh in on what you think.  --LifeStar 20:16, 1 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  It's just a regular page. Go to Template:Itnotify (or whatever you think the best name should be), click on the redlink, and make it just like a regular page. Titoxd(?!? - did you read this?) 20:22, 1 December 2005 (UTC)

text: Here's my Idea:
 ==Welcome!==
 Welcome! We are aware that your IP address is shared by a number users. There may be warning messages
 waiting for you, that may not be directed at you. If they are not, we encourage you to contact your
 ISP, or IT Admin. Abusive users, such as those sharing your IP address, may cause this IP to be
 banned from editing. If you know the person or persons causing this, please contact them, 
 ask them to stop, and remind them of the possible consequences.
Something along those lines.... mayhaps a touch less threatening ;] --негіднийлють (Reply|Spam Me!*|RfS) 03:51, 2 December 2005 (UTC)

text: Id support that however we may have a template of similar nature. --Cool CatTalk|@ 19:59, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Creating a template for notifying responsible users 

message: we should have a babel box sized version with the number just like the current babel but only the number and short comments.
--Adam1213 Talk + 07:35, 6 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Nice idea --Cool CatTalk|@ 15:02, 7 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  defcon 

message: http://edition.cnn.com/2005/TECH/internet/12/05/wikipedia.rules.ap/index.html
This really is an embarasment. I hereby start/continue discussion on how to deal with incidents like this. --Cool CatTalk|@ 17:48, 7 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Why is the "S" in "Summaries" capitalised? Izehar (talk) 19:37, 7 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Typo? :P, fixed. People feel free to edit the template. --Cool CatTalk|@ 15:06, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

text: I don't think a template's needed; it will make the article a target for more vandalism. Izehar (talk) 19:49, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

text: I would not like to see this on article pages.  We really don't need to advertise that we are getting vandalism on a particular page, we just need to clean it up quietly (I've even had doubts about the "vprotected" template - although at least that explains why an article is locked)  --  sannse (talk) 20:36, 7 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Why an aritcle is locked can be explained on the talk page for the benefit of the editors not the readers. Izehar (talk) 20:38, 7 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Such templates are a terribly bad idea.  Anything that acknowledges vandalism encourages it.  The proper response to vandalism is to revert it, quietly, and to deal with the offenders appropriately within the scope of blocking policy.  Kelly Martin (talk) 20:46, 7 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  I agree with sannse and Kelly. Mindspillage (spill yours?) 20:47, 7 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  The thing is this is in the talk page on articles that are already hammered by vandalism. The problem of being quiet is CNN reporters being unaware of our existance. Being brodcasted on national TV as an "uncredible source" and that "we aren't making an effort to prevent such incidents" is very very bad publicity for wikipedia. There is no reason to hide the fact that George W. Bush is getting hammered on a hourly (or much less) basis. --Cool CatTalk|@ 14:42, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

text:  It seems that Kelly and Kat beat me here to say this is a bad idea. Titoxd(?!? - did you read this?) 20:52, 7 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Not even a notice on the talk page of the blocked article? How will editors know why it is locked? Izehar (talk) 20:56, 7 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  I'm talking about the new template, not . Vprotect works fine as is. Titoxd(?!? - did you read this?) 21:11, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

text: I also agree, I can't see it would provide any deterrent and may just act as a magnet. --pgk(talk) 20:58, 7 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Well I propose we put this to the talk page to articles who are already vandal magnets. Vandals will vandalise anyways. WP:FAC is a vandal magnet if you think about it. It would advertise the CVU page (and give vandals the very CVU page to vandalise rather than actual articles). I do not think this template would make George W. Bush a greater target. The media and critics dont know about people like us because of our paranoia about "vandal magnets". Of course I am being blunt (as usual), no offense was intended. --Cool CatTalk|@ 14:42, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry Cool Cat, I just don't see it as useful.  It appears to be directed at casual editors, but they won't see it on the talk page.  And if it is on the article instead, then it will be seen by vandals, who will try to get us to add it.  The best way to deal with vandals and trolls is always to feed as little as possible.  And for readers.. the presence of a big template saying that an article is subject to vandalism will, in my opinion, be more embarrassing than the (usually) brief instances of vandalism -- sannse (talk) 19:32, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Perhaps but I really feel we need to tell poeple that there may be stiff on George W. Bush RC patrollers miss as RC patrol cannot win the war never ment to conclude. --Cool CatTalk|@ 21:48, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Just to point it out, User - User:LettuceSalad is vandalizing pages and placing John Seigenthaler Sr. as committing acts throughout history. I don't have the time to deal with the user right now. Avengerx 17:24, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: [[John Seigenthaler Sr.]]

message: This is something that I may have mention in the channel before, I can't remember.  One of the things that seems to be hard to do sometimes is to get an admin's attention to get an quick block.  One of the things that having this unit can do is enable quick and swift blocks of persistent vandals.  Is there a way to get some sort of universal, client-independent trigger that would play a noise or something that would alert admins that someone needs a block?  Or is that asking too much?
Also, as a separate question, what is the status of the #wikipedia-en-cvu channel that I was invited to the other day?  its that an official "Chat" channel, or are we still trying to find a way to chat around the bot? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mo0 (talk • contribs) 20:45, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not sure how to do it. I already watch the string adminAttn when I'm on the channel, but it is a ChatZilla-specific feature. However, I would do something similar to /msg *all users with voice* or something like that. Titoxd(?!? - did you read this?) 20:50, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

text: Interesting suggestion. However admins wouldnt be paying attention to it if not paying attention to channel. :) --Cool CatTalk|@ 21:46, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Titoxd, you *might* be able to /notice +#wikipedia-en-vandalism hey, is there an admin around?, depending on your chat software --негіднийлють (Reply|Spam Me!*|RfS) 03:55, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Admin trigger in the channel / separate chat channel 

message: I would like to add my name to the members list, but clicking on the appropriate edit section for the letter "M" gets me a completely blank page, and I don't want to mess anything up, so I've left it alone thus far.  Is that where I should put my name, or is there someplace else to do it? MSJapan 14:44, 10 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I've added you (it's a bizarre page, not sure what's going on there) Dan100 (Talk) 15:03, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

text: I've got the same problem – I want to add myself, but all I get is a blank page too, both clicking to edit the "M" section and the whole article. MJSkia1 23:07, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

text: OK, I've added MJSkia1 and also a means for people to add themselves. Dan100 (Talk) 08:40, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Fixed the issue, I did have to sacrifice the numeric list. May the numericness rest in peices. :o --Cool CatTalk|@ 18:29, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

text: Thanks a bunch! MJSkia1 04:04, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Adding one's name to the list.... 

message: I propose a cleanup campaign to clean histories from vandalism. Granted vandalism gets forgotten in history but why not clean up further than reverting vandalism. Granted this must be done carefuly and only by admins. --Cool CatTalk|@ 22:43, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: If only my Rfa were faring better...:) That sounds like a excellent idea, Cool Cat, and I think your reasoning and conjecture for that implentation is quite sound. Perhaps if I become an admin in the future, I would be estatic to help.-MegamanZero 22:53, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Recommend against doing this in quite strong terms; it increases load on the servers, and raises the potential for mistakes to occur. In addition, deleting and selectively-undeleting parts of our most vandalised articles can, and has been known to, render the article inaccessible for a period of time, usually requiring database administrator intervention to correct. 86.133.53.111 19:04, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Delete vandalism from history

message: I need help reverting a bunch of edits by Val42. As you can see from the contributions listing, Val42 was engaged in link spam on board game articles: alphabetically through the category starting with the first edit of December 12. Please help me in reverting this as it spans an entire category. WAvegetarian (talk)  (email)   (contribs) 06:50, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Specifically I'm referring to the addition of boardgamegeek.com links. WAvegetarian (talk)  (email)   (contribs) 06:51, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

text: That's definitely a lot of links - but should they be removed? Would it be any different from removing lots of IMDb links from movie articles? As far as I can tell, the linked pages don't seem to be commercial, and at least appear to be useful. Thoughts? --PeruvianLlama(spit) 07:30, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Hey there, my name's Mike Selinker. I find the current dispute between you guys and Val42 interesting, and I thought I'd give you my opinion as a game designer who has a number of games described on that site . Personally, I don't care whether game entries have the BGG link. But I don't think they're spam per se. BGG is the encyclopedic database for every board and card game ever created. Mostly it's used as a reference and review site. People do trade games on the board, so that does make it commercial; still, imdb also has an amazon link. WAvegetarian's way more experienced on here than I am, so I'd defer to Connor as to whether it's appropriate; what I guess I'm saying is that it might be useful. Your mileage may vary.--Mike Selinker 14:55, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

text: WAvegetarian I also feel this isnt exactly "spamming" or "vandalsim". I am more than likely to give links to AnimeNewsNetwork.com when writing articles on anime. While I would not care to post the site on every posible anime page, I do not think I would be spamming... --Cool CatTalk|@ 16:06, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

text: There are many sites out there that exist only to make money by collecting eyeballs at the ads, they provide some info to try to pose as valid.  I revert external links to sites like that all the time over on the dog project articles.  I thought this site was one of those and reverted about 20 or 30 of the links myself before real life called me away.    Maybe this site is actually the premier fan site for games - reading the External links guideline it could fit under that, so maybe it should stay.    It is too ad filled for my tastes, but I won't object to leaving the links. - Trysha (talk) 17:23, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

text: I first discovered this when I found that a link had been added to Super Scrabble, an article in my watchlist. When I followed the link, I came to a page that to me seemed to have three prominent features: a rather uninformative infobox that duplicated info found in the article; one banner and two large text link ads in the center of the page and "above the fold," i.e. able to be seen without scrolling; further down there was an extremely brief summary of the game, covering some of the information in the article and nothing new, which was in the same box as a Google AdSense ad; below that were site hosted marketplace statistics, some pictures with questionable copyright status and an open web forum with pretty much nothing going on in it. From this page, the site appeared to be an excuse to show ads to people. I checked on the editor's contributions and discovered what I mentioned in the first comment of mine. I checked one other link and found a similar situation. The other thing that seemed sketchy was that every link added included next to it an internal link to BoardGameGeek, making it seem like self-promotion. That this article is very short and has had only one editor also made me suspicious. That is why this appeared to be advertising to me. I trust Mike Selinker to know what he's talking about when it comes to games. The manner and volume of the edits triggered the vandal fighter in me, but if it is indeed "encyclopedic database for every board and card game ever created," than I don't have a problem with its inclusion on the articles. WAvegetarian (talk)  (email)   (contribs) 18:03, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Again, I'm not trying to suggest what is appropriate, but I can give a fuller description of what this site is. Check out the link for Settlers of Catan. On this page you have all the game's publishers, all the expansions, files that people have created for playing the game in different ways, pictures of the game in play (almost certainly of questionable copyright status, as you say), forums, reviews, and lists in which people have included the game (sort of like Wiki categories only with lots of personal commentary). The ads are indeed obnoxious, but that doesn't detract from the site's utility. There still might be a strong reason to not have it in links, but utility probably isn't it.--Mike Selinker 18:28, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  HELP! 

message: if the numbers were only removed to fix up the edit sections I would like them back once we have a way of not having the problem and the numbers. And I know just where we can get someone that can fix it Wikipedia:Village pump (technical) --Adam1213 Talk [/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Adam1213&action=edit§ion=new +] 12:53, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  numbers on the members list 

message: Anyone else think that the memberlist on the Project Page isn't very helpful?
A link to should suffice, with membership additions occuring by Users adding the category to themselves.  It worked well for Wikipedia:WikiProject_Stub_sorting#Participants and we only have 117 members over there. I think the same would improve our project page here. xaosflux Talk/CVU 16px 05:44, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Hmm? Yeah perhaps. however one prolem we are facing is people placing the template in a sub user page causing multiple entries. Aside from that it would work since we have over 200 memebers now the list is just... umm too long... I have to agree. What do you guys feel? --Cool CatTalk|@ 11:36, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Sounds like a decent enough idea. As for the sub user page problem, it can easily be resolved by placing  tags around the template code on the sub user page. While this means the template is no longer visible on the sub page, it still remains visible on the main user page and most of all it results in only one entry in the category per user. — Impi 16:22, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Yea, but the volume of the task is a bit scary :o --Cool CatTalk|@ 16:31, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: True, I guess it's not quite a perfect solution. — Impi 23:02, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok lets make it happen then :P if 4-5 people did this task isnt that bad --Cool CatTalk|@ 19:34, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

text: Regarding subpage duplicate counts, there are about 3 or 4 out there right now, but still sitting at abou 320 members for en: xaosflux Talk/CVU 06:45, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Memberlist 

message: Hey y'all, I wrote a new RC bot for meta. It's in #meta-vandalism. Works pretty much the same as cool cat's bot, but it runs on Linux using Eggdrop, TCL, and MySQL. It has one flaw so far, however. It runs on my laptop. Therefore, when I go to work, it goes with me. I'd host it on my colo box, but my ISP has broadly blocked IRC access, due to MASSIVE DDOS. Anyhow, enjoy it while it's there! --негіднийлють (Reply|Spam Me!*|RfS) 03:48, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Actualy there already is such a bot watching over meta. at #wikimedia-meta-vandalism I think. I'd have to check. :) --Cool CatTalk|@ 19:24, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  New RC bot! 

message: The George W. Bush (primary vandal target) is exposed again. Everyone added it to your watchlists? It would be terribly embarrassing if a journalist was google searching for Bush (he's always in the news) and they got WoW's genitalia filled article of GWB. Izehar (talk) 19:38, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Altough GWB is considered as a dick in many medians, I'd rather not see any evidence of dicks on that article. ^.^ --Cool CatTalk|@ 11:17, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[George W. Bush]] 

message: I came across the www.completewhois.com website and used it already for one repeat vandal.  I sent an email to the IT guy's email address which was listed in the data.  Do you guys think this would be another avenue we could explore to see if we can curb some vandals right at their own servers?  --LifeStar 16:13, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Why not use  it is what that website uses as well :) --Cool CatTalk|@ 18:54, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: In case anyone missed it, this gotten taken several steps further, and the RIR links are on the bottom of all anon's talk pages now, hope it helps! xaosflux Talk/CVU 03:37, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  How valid is www.completewhois.com for CVU use? 

message: I would like the below standardize message to show up at the bottom of a anon IP address, specifically User talk:207.63.63.204 because of a message left me on my talk page.  I don't think that   seem quite appropriate quite yet since there is not rampant vandalism coming from the IP, which is a high school.  I orginally saw the message at User talk:86.134.35.152.  Does it automatically appear with high enough level of warnings of anon IPs??  Thanks --Reflex Reaction (talk)• 18:33, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Copy paste? --Cool CatTalk|@ 18:45, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: That is a software embeded message.  It appears a little bit after the page gets created, depending on the server caches. When you put the first message on the page you create the page. xaosflux Talk/CVU 08:07, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Help - how do I get this warning to show up? 

message: I saw this invisible spam today. The spammer put the link inside a div with style="o.v.e.r.f.l.o.w:auto; height: 1px;" Tom Harrison (talk) 18:40, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Huh. So, (read: no technical knowledge) the purpose is to generate googlable (is that a word yet?) rating links?--Bookandcoffee(Leave msg.) 19:51, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes; The spammer hopes that it looks to Google as if Wikipedia has linked to his page, and that the spammer's page will be more prominently displayed in the search results. See Link farm. Tom Harrison (talk) 20:03, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  Yeah, the more accurate term for what he is doing is Googlebombing. He's a recurrent vandal, should be shot blocked on sight. Titoxd(?!? - help us) 22:16, 24 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Invisible spam, fyi 

message: I am sorry to say it, but one of Your members, Ksenon, is leading with me an editorial war in the article entitled Radio Maryja. He erases everything that I have written about antisemitism and xenophobia in this radio, and then says that I do not follow the neutral point of view in my edits that he usually reverts. Then he replaces it by his own accusations. 
This user is strongly politically biased, and he made the article a complete nonsense now. The two main features about radio Maryja are that this is a strongly antisemitic radio station, its listeners are informed about conspiracy theories, and that the radio is officially owned by the catohlic church. It all was erased. Your Counter Vandalism Unit is, I am afraid to say it, not free of some fauls.
Cheers,
Moa anbessa 11:24, 25 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: After reviewing the entire history of the article, I can say that I think Ksenon may have been a little over zealous by deleting rather than editing and modifying, especially with this edit. Outside of of that one edit, I don't think Ksenon is doing anything out of hand. On the other hand, I can see many instances where you (Moa anbessa) were addiing clearly POV information. As it currently stands, I think the article is doing quite well, though it still needs a bit of cleanup. --nihon 22:55, 25 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Gees POV articles are such a pain... --Cool CatTalk|@ 21:18, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree, especially when one of the people obviously has an agenda for or against the particular subject. --nihon 21:57, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Radio Maryja and the vandalism of one of the members of Counter Vandalism Unit  

message: Ok this is WAY OUT OF THE LINE. CVU members are allowed to place articles for deletion. There is no rule that prevents people from placing articles for deletion, this is not the page to discuss articles for deletion. Take it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sci.psychology.psychotherapy. Geez! I am moving this to the talk page of the VFD page. --Cool CatTalk|@ 16:57, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sci.psychology.psychotherapy and the vandalism of one of the members of Counter Vandalism Unit  

message: Yesterday, I saw an IP blanking someone's userpage. I thought to myself, shouldn't I revert this. So that's what I did. I was quite surprised to receive a thank you note on my talk page from the user. Surely, shouldn't we all look out for our fellow Wikipedians? And revert any vandalism to any page. Also, one final request - unlock your vandal counts so we can add the vandalism we've stopped. Your thoughts? Perhaps we should make a template saying Feel Free to Revert Me. ComputerJoe 20:27, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: My vandal counter isn't locked and I welcome anyone reverting vandalism on it although it is not a vandal pit-stop (should be after I said this), I generaly do not thank for reverts of vandalism. People who know anythng about me know I am greatfull and my thank you is the revert of vandalism on your userpage. :) --Cool CatTalk|@ 09:43, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

text: They're tempting targets, especially for persistent vandals, but attacking user pages is the Wiki equivalent of flying toward a bug zapper.  Frequently vandals go after them to retaliate against rollbacks and warning messages, which just proves they are aware that what they're doing isn't appreciated.  It's strong evidence they aren't making good faith edits, and just expedites a block.  I suspect most neophyte vandals assume that user pages aren't closely monitored, when, of course, it's exactly the opposite.  There are some gotchas when it comes to dealing with user page vandalism, though.  For various reasons, a lot of people edit their own pages when they're not logged in.  Other user pages are collaborations, with many editors contributing.  In either case, you may get chewed out for reverting when you just thought you were doing a good deed.  For the non-obvious cases I've taken to peering at page histories and user contributions, but sometimes I just wish people would make proper use of edit summaries, sub-pages, and talk pages. –Abe Dashiell (t/c) 20:49, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Also by spendin tome on userpages they aren't vandalising  wikipedia pages ^-^' --Cool CatTalk|@ 10:05, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Combatting vandalism on user pages 

message: Instead lets discuss vandalism on wikipedia (spesific repeating cases) and ways to counter them. After all that is what "Counter Vandalism Unit" is about, right? --Cool CatTalk|@ 12:24, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Please dont overly discuss "Counter Vandalism Unit" 

message: Is there a way to add the godmode script to Safari? It seems very useful. GabrielF 04:07, 30 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: What do you mean? The scripts are added to your monobook.js file, which is browser-independent. Titoxd(?!? - help us) 04:08, 30 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I never was able to get it to work.  Every time I tried to its rollback button, Safari would crash.  Until I got my mop, I used Firefox for Wikipedia (and pretty much only Wikipedia). –Abe Dashiell (t/c) 12:34, 30 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Godmode on Safari 

message: Please direct me to the right venure for this...
Tried to vandalize a page, and was really impressed with the response time, less than a minute.
I am interested in the process.  Not to promote vandalism, but just in general.  I've installed a copy of mediawiki at work and the company loves it. We use it for all kinds of stuff.
One of the issues in proper adoption at a corporate level is the issue of vandalism.  
I'm also keen to NLP studies, which I have a feeling you guys are interested in too. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.204.237.156 (talk • contribs) 09:20, December 30, 2005
:We keep track of the Recent Changes. Some people run bots that scan this list for specific criteria that they think makes an edit more likely to be vandalism. Each registered user also has a personal watch list, where they can track the most recent changes to pages they have added to their list. WAvegetarian (talk)  (email)   (contribs) 11:53, 30 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vandal wishing to convert 

message: Thanks to all who helped take care of the Richard O'Connor article while it was on the mainpage. The CV unit and RC Patrol truly ROCK most righteously, and I salute you! Once more, thanks --R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 06:09, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  You can help (and you did:) 

message: Can whoever runs an autoblocker bot PLEASE start countering this idiot? He's taken over half the bloody blocklist in a matter of a day. Hexagonal 17:05, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Crocodile Dundee Vandal 

message: I found this one amusing, so I thought I'd share.  User:OmegaStauf vandalized Wikipedia:Vandalism by adding :Image:Wmvu.png to it.  Cute.  I added it to my watchlist, since anything that links to that is suspect.  It'll work as a quasi-honeypot, perhaps. –Abe Dashiell (t/c) 22:34, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Vandalism Unit" 

message: Should there not be a code of conduct for (new) members of the CVU? Otherwise, the problem might arise that vandals or pov-warriors would use the CVU as a means to legitmize their actions (although this may also have advantages, one would find them easier). I'm asking this because  joined the CVU on December 15., 2005. Only four days before he was edit-warring and pov-warring in wikipedia articles (which included the blanking of text and references).   []     . These are only examples of December 11., 2005; many more can be found in his contributions (for example see )
--Kefalonia 16:32, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think a code of conduct is needed, being a member of the CVU does not afford any special benefits or privileges. CVU members are bound by the Wikipedia policies and guidelines just as much as any other contributor. If there is a particular user who is causing problems, take it to the dispute resolution process the same as would happen with any other Wikipedian. --GraemeL (talk) 16:45, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Code of Conduct 

message: What's up with the backslashes? Has anyone seen this before? Tom Harrison Talk 17:45, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Hmm...this is sounding like his browser is inserting escape characters. For instance, in Perl, you have to put the slash before any character you don't want interpreted. --nihon 23:27, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Backslashes?