HRWiki talk:WikiTroll

From Homestar Runner Wiki

(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
(Comments on the new format.)
(Oops...Un-misplacing comment.)
Line 16: Line 16:
I notice many IP's are starting to troll, then deleting the trolling afterwards. Is this still considered trolling? -- <small>[[User:FireBird|FireBird]]</small>|<sub>[[User Talk:FireBird|Talk]]</sub>
I notice many IP's are starting to troll, then deleting the trolling afterwards. Is this still considered trolling? -- <small>[[User:FireBird|FireBird]]</small>|<sub>[[User Talk:FireBird|Talk]]</sub>
-
 
-
== New Format ==
 
-
 
-
Although I agree that the new format looks nicer, I have two concerns:
 
-
* By archiving the offense, we're adding to the exposure of spam.  If people are really curious about the offense, they could find it in the old format with a few mouse clicks.
 
-
* It's more difficult for people to contribute to the spam page.  Before, it was rather straightforward; now people have to figure out formatting for the chart when they add a submission. Perhaps we could devise a system in which people can add a simple comment and another person reformat it later; this adds an extra step, but is more convenient for those less familiar with Wikipedia who still wish to defend the sanctity of the Wiki. =)
 
:It depends really.  If it is something like they are adding "adsfafsd" to a page and then removing it, I'd think that's more a new person testing on a page instead of the sandbox.  If it's something that's defacement, then it's still defacement.  Do you have a specific example in mind?[[User:Tom|<nowiki></nowiki>]]  --  [[User:Tom|Tom]] 02:26, 13 Nov 2004 (MST)
:It depends really.  If it is something like they are adding "adsfafsd" to a page and then removing it, I'd think that's more a new person testing on a page instead of the sandbox.  If it's something that's defacement, then it's still defacement.  Do you have a specific example in mind?[[User:Tom|<nowiki></nowiki>]]  --  [[User:Tom|Tom]] 02:26, 13 Nov 2004 (MST)
Line 31: Line 25:
:Probably.  I was wondering how long it would take for someone to notice.  I'll move it now.[[User:Tom|<nowiki></nowiki>]]  --  [[User:Tom|Tom]] 18:37, 22 Nov 2004 (MST)
:Probably.  I was wondering how long it would take for someone to notice.  I'll move it now.[[User:Tom|<nowiki></nowiki>]]  --  [[User:Tom|Tom]] 18:37, 22 Nov 2004 (MST)
 +
 +
== New Format ==
 +
 +
Although I agree that the new format looks nicer, I have two concerns:
 +
* By archiving the offense, we're adding to the exposure of spam.  If people are really curious about the offense, they could find it in the old format with a few mouse clicks.
 +
* It's more difficult for people to contribute to the spam page.  Before, it was rather straightforward; now people have to figure out formatting for the chart when they add a submission. Perhaps we could devise a system in which people can add a simple comment and another person reformat it later; this adds an extra step, but is more convenient for those less familiar with Wikipedia who still wish to defend the sanctity of the Wiki. =)

Revision as of 04:32, 15 December 2004

Contents

Rollback link?

Okay, on the WikiTroll page it has instructions for reverting a page back to a previous version. In it, it says:

Next, click the "rollback" link near the upper right side of the page (directly to the right of the most recent author's name).

However it doesn't have a rollback link by the most recent author's name... do these instructions need to be revised?

--Kilroy 19:05, 28 Sep 2004 (MST)

Yes, of course. I have changed the text to refect this. -- Tom 10:26, 29 Sep 2004 (MST)

Semi off topic, but semi on. It's a very nice diversion from studying for your psychology exam that you're going to fail anyway to go through the trolled pages and check out all the...well...trolling ^_^ --Southpaw018 20:47, 3 Nov 2004 (MST)

Trolling or not?

I notice many IP's are starting to troll, then deleting the trolling afterwards. Is this still considered trolling? -- FireBird|Talk

It depends really. If it is something like they are adding "adsfafsd" to a page and then removing it, I'd think that's more a new person testing on a page instead of the sandbox. If it's something that's defacement, then it's still defacement. Do you have a specific example in mind? -- Tom 02:26, 13 Nov 2004 (MST)
A new user (daunrealist) posted "I am dumb" and "I spelled grammar and Mozillaa wrong" on my talk page, but then deleted it. I told him to stop, but he just said he was "commenting". --FireBird|Talk

Namespace

Shouldn't this be in the HRWiki namespace instead of the main one? --[[User:Kilroy|Kilroy/talk]] 17:18, 22 Nov 2004 (MST)

Probably. I was wondering how long it would take for someone to notice. I'll move it now. -- Tom 18:37, 22 Nov 2004 (MST)

New Format

Although I agree that the new format looks nicer, I have two concerns:

  • By archiving the offense, we're adding to the exposure of spam. If people are really curious about the offense, they could find it in the old format with a few mouse clicks.
  • It's more difficult for people to contribute to the spam page. Before, it was rather straightforward; now people have to figure out formatting for the chart when they add a submission. Perhaps we could devise a system in which people can add a simple comment and another person reformat it later; this adds an extra step, but is more convenient for those less familiar with Wikipedia who still wish to defend the sanctity of the Wiki. =)
Retrieved from "http://hrwiki.org/wiki/HRWiki_talk:WikiTroll"
Personal tools