Template talk:Vandalism information/Archive 1

message: Could we semi-protect this Template? I think that anonymous editors shouldn't change the level on Wikipedia's gauge of vandalism.
Lee S. Svoboda tɑk 21:56, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  semi-protect 

message: Well, does it really have to show all digits at all times? How about something like this:
Pros:
#Smaller, won't attract vandals (at least not that many).
#Looks like a userbox (actually it's derived from one) - can be hidden among others on a user page.
Cons:
#Looks like a userbox. ;-)
I could design the other ones as well if you like it. Anyway, now waiting for your comments... *ducks for cover* Misza13 (Talk) 10:49, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Kinda cool... 68.39.174.238 22:45, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

text: Conditional Support. Remove the comment and add a title and I'll be happy. Davidpk212 20:09, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

text: Comment. I made a no-comment version (proposal 5) +Hexagon1 contrib talk  11:35, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Proposal 1

message: Overwhelming level of vandalism or extremely dangerous incitement. Drastic action recommended.
Awww, f?ck! We're doomed!--Misza13 (Talk) 10:49, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Proposal 2

message: Similar in size to Misza13's, the main difference is it uses a graphic, and the generic description of the DefCon level is omitted (you probably know basically what each level represents, and anyway there's a one-word summary in the graphic). This is good to go and I'll place it on the template page. Herostratus 06:34, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Oppose. The graphic looks a bit rubbish. If the colours were static and matched... Davidpk212 20:07, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Proposal 3

message: Why does it have to feature an image, or be a userbox, or whatever? So, straight from the Usability Department...
Not ready to go entirely, but will be ready by the end of today, wiki time. Inspired by the pH meter on this page. Includes comments on how to set the WikiDefcon. -- Davidpk212 17:07, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Now ready to roll! Use } to insert on a page. Davidpk212 17:37, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

text: I link this probably the best of all (Not by much, but still, gotta love simple stuff)... 68.39.174.238 00:21, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposal 4 

message: This is identical to Misza13's, except it removes the comment. You can use it through this syntax:   +Hexagon1 contrib talk  11:03, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Support. Being so unbiased and all... +Hexagon1 contrib talk  11:03, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposal 5 

message: Apologies to Misza13 for the rollback.  I was in automatic revert mode for everything with a Squidward edit summary and unfortunately Misza13's was right in the middle of a block of them on RC.  Sorry again, BanyanTree 17:27, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's ok. People seem too alergic to "SQUIDWARD" in the edit summary though - relax, people. While horrific at first sight, this vandal seems pretty easy to deal with and clean up after... BTW, Banyan, it was not so automatic since I (not deliberately) made a typo in both the summary and the edit:  --Misza13 T C 17:52, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  sorry for the rollback 

message: Anyone know why the template isn't showing up right now? T K E 18:07, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Uhm 

message: Some of the defcon level discriptions are poorly written. I tried to figure out how to change them, but was unable to. How can I do this? - Conrad Devonshire 04:31, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It is the section under the part at the top where the custom message is entered. However, I would not edit them without first seeking out community consensus on this page. --ZsinjTalk 07:17, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I tried editing them from there, but even after I changed the messages, they were the same as before on the Defcon meter. The changes that I wanted to make were just slight grammatical corrections and rewording. - Conrad Devonshire 00:10, 9 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Never mind. I was able to take care of it. - Conrad Devonshire 07:43, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Poorly written defcon level discriptions 

message: Or is it just me? - Glen T C 01:49, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Seems to be....—GH 02:12, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gone? 

message: This page has been speedily restored. This action was noted on WP:DRV. — xaosflux Talk 02:25, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This template was only deleted once then restored.  It is very heavily used though, and the cache servers may not have cuaght up with the restoral. — xaosflux Talk 04:53, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Restored 

message: Gangsta-Easter-Bunny 01:09, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No offence, but that looks awful. (BTW, I made it a bit smaller so it doesn't screw up the page as much) And making it userpage worthy is no easy task, I don't know how you plan to add the comment to a picture. +Hexagon1 (talk)   08:00, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Didn't make it.--Gangsta-Easter-Bunny 16:59, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Defcon 

message: It should link to Sock puppet (Internet) but it links to Sockpuppet instead. --Ssj4android 04:38, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why doesn't Sockpuppets link to the Internet version? 

message: DefCon X: Building housing the servers is under concentrated mortar or artillery fire from very determined vandals. Herostratus 18:42, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Probably won't ever be needed (I hope!) 

message: When I was here a bit ago, this template was showing a speedy deletion tag.  Now it's gone, & I don't see it in the history.  Have I finally gone insane from editing too long?  :-)  --Ssbohio 02:16, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Probably so, I just had a quick browse of the history and didn't see any speedy tag. Seek medical advice. :) +Hexagon1 (t) 03:27, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It is a complex template with various transclusions.  The speedy delete was an attempt to clean out one of the transcluded templates, which then appeared on the main template page.  And per the vandals reading these messages too, I'm not about to go into detail on how this template works.  You don't need medical advice, for now.  The vandals may cause certain psycological conditions such as annoyance, however. Kevin_b_er 07:41, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Speedy? 

message: Why does level 1 once again recommend a database lock? - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 07:25, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Because of what just happened? -Spring Rubber 04:30, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: They locked the DB because of the sudden server overload, not the vandalism. Locking the db doesn't stop vandalism; it just locks the current version of every single article in place. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 04:32, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Although it would probably help in an all-out vandalism fest. -Spring Rubber 04:50, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm fairly sure the recommendations made on a userpage template are disregarded when it comes to db locks. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 04:54, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  SILLY-O-METER ALERT LEVEL 1 - DATABASE LOCK RECOMMENDED 

message: Just to give everyone a heads up the template was blanked.  I restored it and will be watching it for furture blanking.  I have also warned the User blanked it. Aeon Insane Ward 21:56, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Maybe we should semi-protect this template? --Shane (talk/contrib) 22:27, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Blanked 

message: Just incase you still don't know whats going on. Steven Colbert made a (sarcastic) request on his show tongiht, The Colbert Report for users to edit wikipedia to show a tripleing in the elephant population over last six months. The word on his show was wikiality, essentially truth is more about shared opinion instead of fact. YouTube Link []
--mitrebox 04:36, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reason for sudden spike. 

message: I made these for Severe weather terminology (United States), but y'know, they could be adapted for this template as a less military-style version... although the shapes might be awkward... anyway, somebody above (I forget who, sorry) did some magic with the templates and I'm not sure now how to make new template versions anymore... Herostratus 08:19, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ahoy, matey! 

message: I think that either the levels of vandalism are slightly elevated, or other patrollers are less active. Do you know how I can tell? I, a slowpoke, have been able to sucessfully perform many reversions today. --Gray Porpoise 21:33, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Defcon Level 

message: Quited? Shouldn't it be quieted? Whispering(talk/c) 16:38, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Things have quieted down. 

message: User_talk:Yanksox/Wdefcon → Template:Wdefcon – It's not a userbox. People who turned the template into userboxes have such template code to make it into a userbox already in the userspace. Its not a userbox, it should never have been GUS'd.  Even the 'main' one is technically in User:Zsinj's userspace. Its a metatemplate, and should've remained in the template space, as its not a userbox.  Furthurmore, the move to userspace flew in the face of a somewhat recent TfD in may. Kevin_b_er 15:45, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Why is it only appropriate for userboxes? --Doc 17:50, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The middle word of GUS is "userbox" afterall.  Userfication aside from userboxes getting sent to user space en masse.  Kevin_b_er 19:18, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That reasoning is totaly circular. I know 'u' = usebox. But I am asking why the same principle as the one we apply to userboxes shouldn't be applied to other non-encyclopedic templates? --Doc 19:36, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Because that's not what GUS is. Propose a new policy that incorperates GUS and non-encyclopedic templates under the same umbrella of userfication and have it achieve consensus. Then you can make that argument. --ZsinjTalk 17:21, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Propose a new policy? GUS isn't a policy. You just do it. It is a compromise between myspace tendancies that want every type of crap in template space, and those who wanted to delete it all. That's a good principle, and you've given no good reason why we shouldn't apply it here. Why isn't that a good idea? Do we really need to have another userbox style war before people are willing to compromise? I trust not. Stop lawyering and start discussing. Is this a valuable tool which we should keep in the main template space? Convince me. Is there a consensus that it is useful? If not, let's either delete it altogether - or work out a middle way (just like we did with userboxes). --Doc 17:33, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, I find it useful in that I usually drop what I'm doing and go patrol Recent Changes, New Page, New Account, and New User Contributions when the DefCon goes to 4, and sometimes when it goes to 3. So yeah the DefCon definitely provides useful information to me. And you can't really just paste it into each user's page (which is what GUS does if I understand it correctly), obviously, because of its structure and the need for a change to propagate immediatly into every location where it appears. But whatever. I don't like doing anti-vandalism patrol, and if the No Fun Brigade feels it's not worthwhile I'd be just as glad to stop doing it. Herostratus 07:55, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I agree with Hero.  I start patroling when it hits three and will drop what I'm doing if it is at two. Æon Insanity Now!EA! 06:24, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 

message: Add "* Template:" or "* User:" followed by an optional one-sentence explanation, then sign your opinion with ~~~~
* Template: - yes, this isn't a userbox in itself. —Xyrael / 15:49, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Survey

message: Add any additional comments
*Comment I don't care, I'm just adopting this thing as it appeared to have been hit by GUS. After seeing what happening to CVU, it would seem like a good idea to userfy stuff to avoid controversy. Yanksox 15:52, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Why is it only appropriate for userboxes? --Doc 17:50, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The middle word of GUS is "userbox" afterall.  Userfication aside from userboxes getting sent to user space en masse.  Kevin_b_er 19:18, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That reasoning is totaly circular. I know 'u' = usebox. But I am asking why the same principle as the one we apply to userboxes shouldn't be applied to other non-encyclopedic templates? --Doc 19:36, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Because that's not what GUS is. Propose a new policy that incorperates GUS and non-encyclopedic templates under the same umbrella of userfication and have it achieve consensus. Then you can make that argument. --ZsinjTalk 17:21, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Propose a new policy? GUS isn't a policy. You just do it. It is a compromise between myspace tendancies that want every type of crap in template space, and those who wanted to delete it all. That's a good principle, and you've given no good reason why we shouldn't apply it here. Why isn't that a good idea? Do we really need to have another userbox style war before people are willing to compromise? I trust not. Stop lawyering and start discussing. Is this a valuable tool which we should keep in the main template space? Convince me. Is there a consensus that it is useful? If not, let's either delete it altogether - or work out a middle way (just like we did with userboxes). --Doc 17:33, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, I find it useful in that I usually drop what I'm doing and go patrol Recent Changes, New Page, New Account, and New User Contributions when the DefCon goes to 4, and sometimes when it goes to 3. So yeah the DefCon definitely provides useful information to me. And you can't really just paste it into each user's page (which is what GUS does if I understand it correctly), obviously, because of its structure and the need for a change to propagate immediatly into every location where it appears. But whatever. I don't like doing anti-vandalism patrol, and if the No Fun Brigade feels it's not worthwhile I'd be just as glad to stop doing it. Herostratus 07:55, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I agree with Hero.  I start patroling when it hits three and will drop what I'm doing if it is at two. Æon Insanity Now!EA! 06:24, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Discussion

message: on the principle of not glorifying vandalism/trying to avoid making vandalism 'fun' for the vandals, maybe we should make a toned-down defcon?
my reasoning is that, for a vandal, it might be fun to try to up the defcon level -- hey look, defcon 4. i wonder if i can bump it up to defcon 3? -- and also that it makes vandalism 'game-like'.
i was thinking of something along the lines of replacing 'wiki defcon' with something nutral like 'vandalism', dropping the numbers, and just keeping the descriptions.
thoughts? --DakAD 05:48, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I like this idea.  Though the numbers may be neccessary on a template level as we need to feed parameters to produce the descriptions, though we don't need to show them.  Do you have any designs?  We can put your design into the proper subpage of your userspace so others can use it, and by that the main example (currently it shows Zsinj's version on the template page). Kevin_b_er 07:28, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  The problem is that some users (me included) don't read the descriptions when opening their user page, they just see a color or a number, and if it is high enough, then they read the description and they hop onto IRC or start Vandal Fighter or something similar. Removing the numbers would make the template less effective, IMO. Titoxd(?!?) 07:37, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Right, me also. But anyway I think it's highly dubious that vandals vandalize to because of the DefCon, although it's not possible to prove either way. Herostratus 08:02, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: good point. would keeping the colour be enough? and, i'm not suggesting that the defcon itself encourages vandolism as such, rather it's a combination of things (the defcon being one) that makes vandalism more 'fun' --DakAD 07:42, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

text: I highly doubt that removing the numbers from the template will lower vandalism levels: Strong oppose. - Kookykman|(t)e 22:48, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

text: I'm with Kookykman on this one. This seems like an instance of taking WP:DENY a little too far. -- Omicronpersei8 (talk) 22:49, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  'do not glamorise vandalism' 

message: Has anyone else noticed it's almost always "significant levels of vandalism"? ReverendG 03:58, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Is Not!  → p00rleno (lvl 77) ←ROCKSCRS 8:11 am et 15 november 2006
Nope. It's level 4 right now. --Wizardman 15:44, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Level 3 

message: see User:AzaToth/Wdefcon, for example:  →AzaToth 01:48, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Interesting. Very compact and unobtrusive (compared to the default one). Миша13 10:45, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  New style 

message: Have added the parameter style that will override the parameter prefix, and will make the template to point to wdefcon/styles/ →AzaToth 03:15, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  new way to specify styles 

message: How come the "main" wdefcon is on level 5, recommending a database lockdown, and the rest are on 1, saying everything is quiet and fine? Are they reveresed? Which one do I trust? | AndonicO Talk | Sign Here 13:50, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: See here. Nwwaew (Talk Page) (Contribs) (E-mail me) 13:58, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok, thanks. | AndonicO Talk | Sign Here 14:57, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Question 

message: I liked Azatoth's, but the black didn't quite fit with my plain talk page. This one is modified to match the infobox class. -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 14:39, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Another new style 

message: I've made a style based on DakAD's more neutral version, but where the "Vandalism" header changes to reflect the Defcon level. Gandoman 19:48, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Even more styles 

message: Has the Wikidefcon ever gone up to 1? I know the US Military's Defcon never has. — DominiquePonchardier 21:23, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It's happened 4 times in 6 months, all 4 reverted in under 5 minutes. As you can see here, it's never 1.--Wizardman 21:36, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wikidefcon 

message: I know this seems really drastic but I think we should consider turning the WikiDefcon to level one as Vandalism is at an extremely high level. Almost every IP address edit on Vandal Proof has been vandalism and I think extreme measures need to be taken. Any comments? Tellyaddict 16:47, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That alone isn't enough. Yes, there is a small backlog at WP:AIV, but I don't see anything that justifies your suggestion. Addhoc 16:58, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

text: There is a lot of vandalism, yes, but still not enough to warrant the database being locked IMO. RC patrol will keep up with it, so let's keep it at 2. 193.217.243.135 14:47, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've reverted at least 25 offensive edits in the last 20 mins and thats on IP's alone, and as well as taking a break to type on wp:aiv.Tellyaddict 17:00, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Very simply- no you haven't. You have reverted 13 article edits in the last half hour, this is good work, but not exceptional. Addhoc 17:05, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Consider moving to 1 

message: How does one edit the individual templates?  It appears that some backend code has been changed, and several of the styles are not showing all of the information (usually the signature).  — BrotherFlounder 04:54, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Minor issue 

message: Ok, frankly - I wish I knew enough about conditionals and other stuff to do this, but I don't (in fact i know nothing) - so I have to ask someone else to. Can we get a horizontal version of the original? Thanks either way, --Daniel()Folsom T|C|U 05:09, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Design 

message: like this? 
--Flyingidiot 20:52, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Looks pretty cool, I would suggest adding images on the levels 2, 4, and 5 also ;).Oh and I think it would look nicer if it was smaller so it wouldn't look so pixily. Arjun 21:06, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

text: Oh that's great - but I do have a question, is there anyway to get it to be the same level as what the actual defcon is?--Daniel()Folsom T|C|U 20:51, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Horizontal 

message: Hi, Vandalism is at huge amounts at the minute. If the vandalism continues for the next 15 mins at the same level or higher  I think we should consider moving to level 1. Any thoughts???
Tellyaddict 19:06, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: From looking at recent changes, it seems to me it's not even a 2. --TeckWizParlate Contribs@ 19:10, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Alert! I agree! Vandalism = Super High! RyGuy  Sign Here! My Journal 17:58, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Tellyaddict and TeckWiz posted those messages two days ago Ry. :-) It's not too bad right now (WP:AIV is average length). · AndonicO Talk · Sign Here 18:08, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hmm... It looked pretty bad 2 seconds ago... hmm.... well, whatever you say :-) RyGuy  Sign Here! My Journal 18:18, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Consider moving to 1 

message: Hi, I'm an experienced editor but I was just wondering, is there a page or something where you can tell if the wikipedia servers are coping well; as a couple of weeks ago when Wizardman moved it to 1, he said in his edit summary the servers are almost crashing, as-well as this... is there are a more detailed description on how and when to move levels up some they will be correct?TellyaddictEditor review! 19:49, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Increases to level 1 are extremely rare, in fact that was probably a one-time thing because of the Colbert vandalism. It came in huge drones that all the pages were going very slowly. I don't think there's any page where you an tell how the servers are doing, just that if you notice a geat amount of lag while editing solely due to vandalism, that can give you a hint.--Wizardman 20:14, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Question 

message: I think we need to go to Defcon 2. The amount of vandalism over the past day, especially the past hour is on the extreme rise. I have reverted countless pages and been seconds late to revert countless more. What does the community think? --Zrulli 03:50, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Immediate Recomendation 

message: If vandalism keeps up in the next 15 minutes, it may be appropraite to change it. ---CWY2190TC 00:16, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm surprised it was moved to 2 so lightly. From what I see in the move log, the mass page move vandalism it described was mainly just the one account (that is - Special:Contributions/Wheels_for_life) :/ - either way, good to see it back on 4. Michael Billington (talk • contribs) 02:11, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It calmed down after I put this up.  Coincidence?  I think not. :} --CWY2190TC 03:16, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  DefCon 1? 

message: Just a heads up: vandalism may spike because Wikipedia is being featured in a GameFAQs poll. — Deckiller 15:51, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yep, and here are the poll results. There is no "I vandalize there regularly" option, though... not like that's what I would have picked :) GracenotesT § 16:15, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  GameFAQs 

message: Heres an interesting article from the LA times about editors and vandalism patrolers who helped protect and update the Anna Nicole Smith page: 
http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/la-ca-webscout25feb25,1,4914275.story
Check out the last paragraph. I was interviewed by the reporter, since he saw me in the ANS page edit history. He asked me how a found out that the page was 'Under Assault'. At first I was reluctant to tell him, but eventually I told him about WikiDefcon, and mentioned that it was a *slightly* constroversial feature, and that it probably wouldn't be a good idea to mention. It looks like he changed the name slightly, to "Wikidefcom" to avoid any un-needed attention to this page. Additionally, since it is semi-protected, I guess we don't have much to worry about. Still, I thought people might find this interesting. 
Also, I thought I told him to use my real name, and am unsure why he used my wiki name. Danski14 21:54, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Interesting article... 

message: I see comments about backlogs at AIV mentioned a lot in the defcon comments. Should we make a secondary scale here (or at a new template) that lets admins know the severity of the AIV backlog? It seems that might be more informative than the "AIV backlog forming" comments. If I have time, I'll make an example of what I mean. What do you think? timrem 01:52, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I for one think it's a good idea as an add-on to this template, ... a separate template is unnecessary.  Something as simple as a field called AIV backlog:number , with a link to WP:AIV would be simple enough. However, because the template is not updated that often, probably the best thing would be to have an automated system (dedicated bot, similar to the AIV helper bots) to update the count periodically. Anyone else think such additions would be useful? Danski14 22:16, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

text: Also, I just realized that time backlogged is probably a lot more useful then number backlogged. It is when it hasn't been checked in a while (even as little as 5-10 mins) that we want to alert admins to check it. Danski14 22:25, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

text: I also found out that User:HBC AIV helperbot already posts alerts when WP:AIV gets backlogged. I don't think it would be hard for the operator of the bot to change it to post alerts on wikidefcon as well. Danski14 22:30, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've made an example of a template which could work, all it requires is a new AIV backlog parameter here. Feel free to improve it. timrem 22:57, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[WP:AIV]] 

message: Can anybody edit the vandalism levels or only administrators? --- Hdt83 | Talk/Chat 01:55, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No, anyone can edit it... except vandals, of course :).. ( I think they're not even supposed to know about this). Just check out the descriptions for a general guideline.  Danski14 02:04, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

text: Actually, I think we need more people to update it. It helps the non-IRC people stay up to date on the condition, and alert them when help is needed. Danski14 02:12, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Who can edit WikiDefcon? 

message: I don't know why but why are Defcon meters "stuck" on a certain number. Like if somebody changes the number the main template changes but the others are stuck on the previous number? I tried clearing the cache but it still does not work. I have to edit my page and "resave" the defcon so it updates. My browser is Firefox 2. --- Hdt83 | Talk/Chat 22:00, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You might need to purge the page, though I'm not sure why. For your userpage, http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Hdt83&action=purge should purge it. timrem 22:05, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Another question 

message: One question :]
Has the wikidefcon ever reached 1?
Partapdua1 03:04, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: See this enrtry. Also if you read through the previous posts then you'll find out. :) -- Hdt83 | Talk 03:08, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I have also seen the defcon at 1, twice. However, question: what do 0 and 6 mean? They apparenly exist. This doesn't need to be answered, I just wanted to bring it up that it seems to work and exist. (May be just the way it was redefined.) -- Andy W. (talk/contrb.) 20:37, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  defcon 

message: I just changed the levels to 3 but now some bot just comes in and replaces my message. Are bots allowed to do this? 
-- Hdt83 | Talk 23:54, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, on behaf of Wikipedia editors who issue it a command from IRC. ffm ✎t 01:19, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is Defcon automated now? 

message: Hdt83: Are you using the defcon template to spread your name?? 84.44.169.208 00:07, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Nope, what makes you think that? Although I sometimes wish that Google wouldn't post every instance of my username on WIkipedia. -- Hdt83  Chat 01:59, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  google bombing via defcon template?? 

message: I've had a read through the archives and still ain't sure :) :-
1. How is the DefCon level changed?
2. Is it automated (from number of AIV queries, etc.) or manual?
Thanks someone. MojoTas 03:47, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Can be changed one of two ways, via WP:IRC or manually by clicking the "edit" button. Real96 03:55, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dumb User requesting information 

message: AIV gets backlogged dozens of times a day and each time it's resolved in less than 15 minutes. Putting it in the Wdefcon is silly when you consider the amount of time it takes the job queue to get to all those recursions. Please stop adding notices about AIV to your Wdefcon descriptions. ZsinjTalk 00:04, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  AIV backlogs 

message: This template has been deleted by Thebainer. · AndonicO Talk 15:04, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Can we get this back? ASAP. Felixboy 15:06, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

text: What the hell? There were four AFDs that resulted in keeps, and this was just deleted out of the blue? Kuroji 15:07, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I was just about to add that there's a horrid backlog at AIV, but it's been deleted, without consensus as far as I know. Don't know why it was deleted... · AndonicO Talk 15:08, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Well if we can't get any good reason for deletion can we get an admin to revert it? Felixboy 15:13, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've already asked at WP:AN, and at User talk:Thebainer. I guess we'll have to wait a while. · AndonicO Talk 15:14, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  YAY! its back, thanks whoever did that. Felixboy 15:20, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: EVula did it. · AndonicO Talk 15:25, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Happy to help, but I have caught a fair amount of shit for doing so (some of it rightly deserved, to be fair). The lesson here is not to be bold at work, as I'm trying to do invoicing and explain my actions at the same time. :D EVula // talk // ☯ // 15:49, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry about that then. :-) · AndonicO Talk 15:55, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  DELETED 

message: As you can probably see, I've renamed this template to . I've simply replaced instances of "Wdefcon" or "defcon" inside the template with "vandalism information" instead. As such, the functionality is not affected and it can carry on informing users of current vandalism issues just as it has done previously. Yet at the same time the militaristic connotations are reduced. Those attitudes are not conducive to a civil and collegial environment and have no place in the template namespace. --bainer (talk) 04:07, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I have no problem with the template namespace version being the toned down version, as the userspace-hosted versions are still the same. I think that works well to address the concerns (baseless as they may seem to me, I still think it's a good thing that they're addressed :D). EVula // talk // ☯ // 04:52, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If you're going to edit the template in my userspace, edit the template in all other userspaces. Otherwise, you're singling out my specific version as all versions of the style of this template are in userspace. Also, I think you, bainer, were a bit rash is deleting the template without any notice whatsoever. While I support de-militarizing this template, a graphical representation would still be useful and I do not understand why you would remove it. Thanks. ZsinjTalk 06:13, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

text: Excuse me, but why would you take it upon yourself to rename this template without asking anyone?  — BrotherFlounder 14:51, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

text: No functionality is impaired by renaming the template. I concur with thebainer on this renaming (note that I disagreed strongly with the speedy deletion earlier this week). This is a pretty good compromise. -- nae'blis 16:40, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Doing something doesn't make it right or its motives valuable... GracenotesT § 20:54, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

text: Someone restored the image on the default template, which seems fine to me considering the lack of consensus. I've moved Thebainer's demilitarized one to , and propped it to second-from-the-top on the template doc. -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 21:24, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

text: Perhaps you misunderstand the template.  All designs are in the user space.  Zsinj just happens to be hosting the one seen at .  --Kevin_b_er 00:48, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Errr, that's what I mean. The one that's pointed to when you use , or when you look at its page. That can, without any effort or pain, be swapped over to the tame one, and it might be more appropriate to do so. 04:37, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You're talking about a style template that's in my userspace. The functionality of the content template (template namespace) is very open to users' own designs. As far as "taming" it down, it has yet to be explained how removing the image satisfies this.ZsinjTalk 16:52, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No. I'm talking about the default value for the prefix/style, not the template in your userspace. And IMHO, removing the image takes a good chunk of the 'game' out of it, along with the military connotations. -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 18:42, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

text: I support the renaming. · AndonicO Talk 15:37, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Renaming 

message: There is a huge gap right now between Defcon 3 and Defcon 2. One involves heavy IP vandalism, while the other involves sockpuppet and vandalbot vandalism, respectively. However, could there be another level involving IP vandalism? I mean, sure, we almost always have heavy IP vandalism, but sockpuppet vandalism isn't a really big problem; I can't remember when we last jumped the gap between 3 and 2. However, if IP vandalism were to suddenly hit a huge spike, we couldn't update the template appropriately. So, is there a way we can add another level to deal with incredibly heavy IP vandalism? Diez2 15:11, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes. Just get rid of level 1 – which is never used, ever, and RC patrol wouldn't be any help if it was – and move level 2 up to level 1, and insert a new level between 2 and 3. In other words, do nothing at all, just change the definition of the levels (and then watch as people completely ignore the definitions) – Gurch 00:23, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I agree with Gurch – it's not necessary to add more levels. Just rename them, moving them all down a level. The defcon is just a quick reference anyway, with no hard and fast standards to meet (unless I've missed something). KrakatoaKatie 02:22, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Wdefcon 1 is a ceiling which is never to be reached. It is the goal and mission of the RC patrol to prevent Wdefcon 1 from happening. Reworking the description of Wdefcon 2 sounds like it would be a plausible solution versus renumbering the entire scheme. Also, didn't we just recently decide that the normal level is '4' with '5' being especially low? Moving everything down a level would make 5 useless and make 1 more used. This would effectively be making the argument that vandals will fight to get it to 1 and actually succeed at times. ZsinjTalk 14:43, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: What they mean is move 2 to 1 and create a level for 2. The fact that vandals will more often reach WikiDef 1 doesn't mean anything, because the meaning of WikiDef 1 would've changed. Anyway, I agree. If WikiDef 1 were reached, it would be pointless to warn Wikipedians, because by this time, too many pages would've been blanked or vandalized. No one has the patience to go and blank as many pages as possible! So what's the point of WikiDef 1? It would take a coordinated effort too large to hold plausible, or an equaly large number of vandals. As I said before, no one has that kind of patience. --Defender 911 10:22, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Adding a new level to the template 

message: I'm no coder and can't figure out how to get User:Herostratus/Nautical/Wdefcon and User:Herostratus/Wdefcon to show the user's sig. Also someone said that the Change links were broken although it seems OK to me. If anyone would be kind enough to take a look at these I'd greatly appreciate it! Herostratus 11:47, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Done --ROASTYTOAST 03:29, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Herostratus 15:05, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Help 

message: I redid the Template. You can see it in my workshop. The new definitions are at workshop page 2, the main template is at workshop page 1, and the default template (style) is at the template workshop. Tel me if you like the changes. (Also, Level 1 is basically redefined as the end of the world. :) ) —Andrew Hampe Talk 00:19, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rewrote Template 

message: Not all is vandalism. Couldn't this say "increasing vandalism and experimentation..."? 86.134.162.149 00:14, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Experimentation on articles does the same damage as vandalism. Experimentation should be done at the sandbox. --Boricuaeddie 00:50, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hear hear. Jmlk17 04:50, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vandalism 

message: Have Wikipedia ever reached level one or two on Wdefcon? Just curious. Janus8463 01:39, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I saw DefCon 2 a yesterday, and apparently it was at DefCon 1 a few hours ago. J-stan TalkContribs 14:10, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Happens every so often...not enough to truly be rare though :). Jmlk17 22:16, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

text: Yup, it was definitely Level 1 earlier. I ran right over to Newpages with my vandal-whacking stick. GlassCobra (talk • contribs) 08:41, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Always fun eh?  :-P Jmlk17 08:45, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, I won't deny that I did a total double take. Sort of like a "ehh--WHA?" or something close. GlassCobra (talk • contribs) 08:59, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Defcon one 

message: So who updates the vandalism info?  I've seen the meter on several pages and I'm not sure I understand.  Is there a tool that's gaging the level at a current moment?  How often does it update?  J Crow 23:43, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The levels are manually updated. Any editor can change the level to what he/she feels appropriate. The meter is usually on userpages to notify others what the current level is and whether they should assist in checking for vandalism. --Hdt83    Chat 23:46, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Info 

message: What is the vandal tool for is it to protect your user page and talk page, i was thinking of placing it my my user page but not until i know what it is used for..... SKYNET X1000 (talk) 09:15, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This isn't really the right place to ask, but here goes...I'll assume you're talking about Lupin's anti-vandal tool. It will only assist you in reverting vandlaism. Only admins can protect pages - however, you can request a page be protected at WP:RFPP. NF24(radio me!) 11:38, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Interesting? 

message: For some reason this thing's protected, but there's no entry in the protection log for it! 68.39.174.238 (talk) 09:43, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Lol, a bit odd now eh? :) Jmlk17 09:50, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  A scruvy trick! 

message: I know this probably won't be supported, but I was wondering if decimal levels are possible. Styrofoam1994talkContribs☭☺☻ 21:45, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Nope, they aren't supported. Your best bet would be to round up or down. --Dadude3320 21:48, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Decimal levels 

message: I see a lot of level-changing simply based upon how many reports are at AIV.  Am I missing something, or is that the main reasoning for many changes in the levels? Jmlk17 02:02, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It's not the only reason. It's based on what RC patrollers see in the recent changes. Sometimes a user will make note of a backlog at AIV, which usually indicates increased vandalism, especially from schools during those hours. Justin(c)(u) 02:06, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  AIV 

message: Instead of reverting, I just kept going through the edits huggle gave to me. Out of 50 edits, 49 were vandalism. J.delanoygabsadds 17:42, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I thought huggle only showed edits that looked like vandalism? 49 vandalism edits out of 50 shown simply shows that huggle was very accurate. Calvin 1998 (t-c) 03:14, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, normally around 50-75% are vandalisms, but that day was just ridiculous. J.delanoygabsadds 18:02, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why I raised it to defcon 1 

message: Would be more telling if it wasn't. Zlllll (talk) 02:50, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why is it protected? 

message: This doesn't have anything to do with the template, but I was wondering how this happened. Someone the Person (talk) 01:07, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: That's odd. I don't see it now, and I don't remember what I saw specifically... Someone the Person (talk) 21:08, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hey, why is is all faded down here at the bottom of the talk page? 

message: Can we make another variation of this template that is based on a thermometer? Alexius08 is welcome to talk about his contributions. 02:06, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Another variation?! 

message: Is it me or is there less vandalism than there used to be? I remember more vandalism a year ago than today.--Birdsusing nnn (talk) 02:47, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: How long's Cluey been around for? Cluebot is amazing, and saves us from doing a LOT of warnings and reversions of vandalised pages. Mebbe that's part of it. --Alinnisawest, Dalek Emperor (extermination requests here) 03:42, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The Cluebot has been online for about a year, but before that there was the Tawkerbot. It started reverting vandalism in the spring of 2006. Then the AntiVandalBot came around that summer.--Birdsusing nnn (talk) 04:42, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Well, we now have User:VoABot II, User:ClueBot, WP:Huggle, WP:Twinkle, and a lot more things. Overall vandalism is likely actually higher, it's just more of it gets reverted in a shorter amount of time. Calvin 1998 (t·c) 20:33, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I think this is actually a good thing. CVU has been here to counter the vandals, and we are acheiving this goal. Good job everyone! (and bots)  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Leujohn (talk • contribs) 10:43, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vandalism down? 

message: Why is there a webcomics wikidefcon? Does it change? Can I remove it? --frogger3140 (talk) 21:03, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Eh? Can you link to what you're talking about? I've never heard of anything like that... EVula // talk // ☯ // 21:12, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Just up this page a bit. Template talk:Vandalism_information#Webcomics_version --Alinnisawest,Dalek Empress (extermination requests here) 22:20, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

text: Removed it. --frogger3140 (talk) 21:46, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Question about webcomics wikidefcon 

message: I'm pretty sure that any established user has permission to use the Vandalism Template if they know what they're doing. The vandalism is decreasing as it's time to go to sleep :D, at least in America. Ellomate (talk) 07:07, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Anyone can change the level as they see fit. There are users who watch this page, so any unrealistic change (e.g. pretty much any change to 1, which is for vandal-bot attacks) will be reverted. Xenon54 11:18, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Sounds fair, didn't change it too much because the vandalism was still there. Ellomate (talk) 19:38, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Editing. 

message: If Huggle still works for some of us, can we base our meter adjustment from the shown reverts/min? I propose that the meter would be adjusted when it reaches a certain amount of reverts.
Reverts/min 	Level
20 and above	1
15-19       	2
10-14       	3
5-9         	4
4 and below 	5
Alexius08 (talk) 11:16, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The only problem I see with this is that not all people running huggle at the same moment will have the same reading -> people who have been on longer will have more accurate results, etc. Additionally, is there really a point in basing the meter solely off the huggle revert/minute reading? There's better ways of gauging how much vandalism there is... Calvin 1998 (t·c) 14:43, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Care to clarify on those 'better ways', Cal? At first glance it seems t'be a nice plan, considering the hordes of 'edians that utilise Huggle, but I've never found much fault in the system that's standing now. IceUnshattered [ t ] 19:53, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Well,a wiki isn't really a good place to be having a meter, similar to why we don't have a StatusBot anymore (basically, it's a big waste of revisions). Second, by "there are better ways", I mean that the reverts/minute reading, by itself, isn't a good indication of how much vandalism there is. I've seen a lot of vandalism when the reverts/minute reading read eight or nine. Remember, it's reverts/minute, not vandalisms/minute. As a matter of fact, a high reverts/minute reading is actually good (more or less, it means a lot of people are already out on recent-changes patrol). The only way to really tell how much vandalism there is is to go out and actually revert some. Calvin 1998 (t·c) 01:53, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

text: Oops, didn't read Calvin's comment above. Oh well, the point still stands: this process doesn't need to be automated, it's a judgement thing. --Closedmouth (talk) 14:44, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

text: I already wrote code to do this, like a year ago, but nobody wanted it -- Gurch (talk) 14:45, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

text: That's why it tells you the number of edits as well as the number of reverts. You can work out one from the other -- Gurch (talk) 01:03, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Scaled adjustment? 

message: Please ignore my recent edits, I was just testing how this worked but did not realise I was editing the actual template! Shane91c (talk) 13:15, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recent Edits 

message: Does my changing the level on my user page change this on anybody else's page? Also, am I accidentally changing the template? -Netalarm- 18:12, 12 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Changes 

message: I apologise for my recent string of update edits dated 20 January 2009. My internet connection was slow, so my edits were saved before the browser loaded properly, giving me the impression that my edits were not saved. Please ignore them, and thank you. Optakeover(Talk) 11:57, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Forget it, it's fine. --Closedmouth (talk) 12:10, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Apology regarding my string of updates 

message: Should we be keeping a record of what goes on with this? Kevin Rutherford (talk) 01:08, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: What do you mean by "what goes on with this"? Perhaps the history? Xenon54 (talk) 02:27, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Records 

message: I am currently writing a bot to automate this. It will count the number of edit summaries per minute which match the default Huggle, Twinkle (vandal) and plain rollback edit summaries. How many reverts per minute should equal each level? It will count to number of lines per minute to #cvn-wp-en@irc.freenode.net. The table houses my original thoughts
Reverts per minute	DEFCON
15 and below      	5
16-20             	4
21-25             	3
26-30             	2
31 and above      	1
 Fahadsadah (talk) 17:10, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Could you please either not or consider using a different page? I believe there was a discussion here earlier about automation of this that you should read. Calvin 1998 (t·c) 03:42, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  Addendum: here would be the referenced earlier discussion. Calvin 1998 (t·c) 03:44, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Automation 

message: I've updated the template to use the new magic word , as well as 
 is not yet active on the english wikipedia (or any wikimedia wiki), but will be soon. Fahadsadah (talk) 16:39, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, that didn't work. --Closedmouth (talk) 05:36, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

text: Edit reinstated.  now active here. fahadsadah (talk,contribs) 12:34, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  |sign 

message: Watch out for IP edits, and It will go back up to 2 or 1, as it is not april 1st in the states. JMS Old Al (talk) 01:07, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  A plan 

message: *30 - 40+ rpm = very high level of vandalism, 
*20 - 30 rpm = high level of vandalism
*10 - 20 rpm = moderate to high level of vandalism
*5 - 10 rpm = moderate to low level of vandalism
*0 - 05 rpm = very low level of vandalism
--Michael  (Talk) 01:09, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: No. As discussed many times before, the rpm count is not a reading of how much vandalism there is, rather, it is how many reverts there are. That is not an accurate reading of how much vandalism is going on. Please do not use automatic or semi-automatic methods such as this to set the meter. Calvin 1998 (t·c) 03:19, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Your right.... huggle rpm dose change every sec.--Michael  (Talk) 06:12, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: If the consensus standard is actually "Any editor is invited to put his/her best guess into the template", then why isn't that documented on the page?  WhatamIdoing (talk) 18:47, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: So, its ok to use my Vandalism Levels. For my own personal use--Michael  (Talk) 17:48, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I can see an important reason why a rpm count doesn't accurately show the amount of vandalism. An examaple was a day that the rpm showed 8 rpm yet almost 2 of 3 edits were coming up as IP and new account vandals. This low rpm was because there were few editors patroling the IRC at the time accounting for the low rpm, The templete was move to 2 and then defcon 1. It seemed to work because suddenly there were many editors envolved and after awhile the defon was able to be lowered again. Good judgement seems to work better than a set parameter in this case. Thanks ♠ B.s.n. ♥R.N.contribs 05:17, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

text: (undent) It would also depend on epm as well. If there's 50 rpm but 500 epm would that get a higher defcon then 10 rpm and 30 epm? Q T C 07:00, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vandalism Levels 

message: I don't know who asked for this to be semi protected but the only reason I registered was to help with the template, so I need these changes made on my behalf.
New level: 3
Comment: Vandalism picking up a little.  Pretty quiet, but the rollbacks and reports keep coming on recent changes.
Icanhasaccount (talk) 02:13, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: There's no need for anons to edit this, hence no need for unprotection. You can make 10 edits and wait 4 days, then you will be able to edit semiprotected pages. Xenon54 (talk) 22:11, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: That's the point, I only joined so I could update the stupid thing. Icanhasaccount (talk) 19:37, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Come on 

message: Why is there a block obscuring part of the #3 in all but the Wikidefcon 4 image? UntilItSleeps Public PC 15:50, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm seeing the same thing, there doesn't seem to be any problem with the raw SVG file itself... Netalarm 15:57, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The problem seems to be back. Netalarmtalk 03:54, 9 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Problem with image? 

message: I've never actually seen the DEFCON level raised to 1. I've also only personally seen level 5 once. It seems to hover around four and three. What would need to happen to get vandalism that high, or that low, to change the level? For that matter, what determines the change in the level at all? --Delta1989 (talk) 20:19, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: You can change the level yourself if you think the level of vandalism is five or one. --I dream of horses (T) @  23:59, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I think an example of Defcon 1 is that raid by those 4chan idiots a while back (the Grawp attack might also suffice, I suppose). Both were of considerable severity and while the Grawp one took ages to revert/figure out/etc. the 4chan one was plain stupid. 1 block a minute or something. Aditya Ex Machina 06:38, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I remember that ^_^. --Tyw7  (Talk • Contributions)   Changing the world one edit at a time! 13:47, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  What would allow for DEFCON 1 or 5? 

message: How can I tell the reverts per minute in HUggle? --Tyw7  (Talk • Contributions)   Changing the world one edit at a time! 13:49, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Upper right hand corner, I believe.  Hope this helps!--GnoworTalk2Medid wha? 22:05, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  RPM 

message: Yesterday, I wanted to put up a message about Lupin's, but there was also a message that huggle was down. Can't the two messages be there at the same time?  Kayau  Voting  IS   evil  01:07, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry about messing up. I meant 4 but typed 2. Apologies to those who were misled.  Kayau  Voting  IS   evil  10:19, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Two messages at the same time? 

message: Hello!  I updated this template, as Huggle is showing 10-12 RPM now.  I updated earlier when it went from 5 to 7.  As for setting the levels, I wasn't sure where to set it.  When I updated earlier, I left the level at 5.  When I just updated, I set the level to 3 after seeing in the history that "10 RPM" was a level 3.  Is there a formal scale as to how many RPM constitutes what DEFCON level?  If there isn't, we really should institute one.  Anyway, if I got the current level (10-12 RPM = Level 3) wrong, please correct it for me. --ANowlin: talk 19:53, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I've been wondering that myself. I don't think there is anything, and I think at least a standard should be agreed on. –dffgd 00:33, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

text: This has been discussed before. Calvin 1998 (t·c) 01:46, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reverts per Minute scale for setting levels