User talk:Jacky720

Talk Page Archive

I don't know how, when, or why I set this up but it was getting relegated to the top-right corner instead of top-left and that's not really readable. User_talk:Jacky720/Archive

newest comic

Thanks for adding the newest comic. Just as a note though, please follow the steps here: User:DgbrtBOT, to make the rest of the links work. Natg19 (talk) 22:02, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

Ah, I missed that formal procedure. Good to know there is one; I suppose I just messed up the templates in doing so?

Nomination

See explain_xkcd:Community_portal/Coordination#New_admins Davidy²²[talk] 02:08, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

Please don't block IPs

Hello,

The way this wiki is set up, if an IP is blocked, it affects a lot of people. IPs are randomized by the reverse proxy. Please don't block IPs, and please disable autoblock when blocking users. 172.70.130.195 22:01, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

I'm new to adminhood, and I don't exactly know what you mean in the last sentence. Is there some MediaWiki configuration page you want me to look at? That's right, Jacky720 just signed this (talk | contribs) 22:15, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

Since I'm not an admin here, I'm not sure exactly what it looks like here. However, I am an admin on another MediaWiki wiki, so I can give instructions for that site, and they should be similar here. When you block someone, there should be a checkbox with this/a similar label: "Automatically block the last IP address used by this user, and any subsequent IP addresses they try to edit from" When blocking anyone, make sure you do not check that, and uncheck it if it is already checked. Then, go to Special:BlockList. On the block for "Xray Kilo Charlie Delta," click "change block", then uncheck that checkbox, click the "confirm block" checkbox, and click "Re-block the user with these settings." Also, go back to Special:BlockList, and unblock any IPs that you see. 172.70.178.115 22:38, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

Looking at the block log, it seems automatic IP blocks only last 24 hours. As for manual ones... Oh, there are hundreds of these. Most dating back to 2013. I'll do something about that. Jack (t|c) 23:06, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

The old ones are probably fine; just undo the recent one (it looks like there's only one recent one) 172.70.178.115 23:07, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

Done —theusaf (talk) 23:10, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

IP blocks

It looks like you just blocked an IP? Those blocks affect a lot of users too, not just autoblocks. 108.162.246.154 03:14, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

Well, they were directly trolling from that IP. I'm not giving them immunity to protect the five people who get assigned that address before the block expires and probably weren't going to edit anyway. --Jack (t|c) 10:57, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

I hope you checked with Davidy22. I get the impression that there are many more such attempts of a similar nature that are already blocked from happening, you may just be throwing the occasional baby away with a very small remaining amount of bathwater.

If you check the IP, it's a gateway in Singapore, though how much actual geolocation that smooches up into that (and other Singaporean) IP I wouldn't care to say. It could cover huge swathes of the region or just a fraction (by random timehsharing?) of the city itself. Probably somewhere between the two.

I doubt only the spammers' backroom operation are active uses of that particular Cloudflare gateway, and possibly some others in the region are. The calculation that it causes more trouble to the spam-engine than the next Singaporean who genuinely wishes to usefully contribute is a big assumption.

I won't argue too much with your ability or keenness to do this administrative fire-fighting (I note that you've been busy, in that regard, and all are somewhat reasonable acts) but the activity of the IP in question had just two (identical-ish) spam-type uses across virtually the span of an entire week, whereas in less than three weeks of time (before that) there were six interactions that (superficially, from the Contrib page) look like entirely genuine edits. That's not counting those via that IP who are logging into accounts, which I'm not sure you aren't in danger of blocking also.

If we guess that the next scripted spamming of this kind will be a further week onward (and assume we can predict it still arriving from the same assigned gateway) we need to have the block in place for another week (and may not know if our block was encountered, unless it pops up from another vector and we know that it wasn't, so whether to extend the block for additional week(s) is going to be a difficult question to answer). At the same time, maybe two genuine edits get stymied. The spambot machine won't care (its owner may not even notice!) but the real humans might do.

Sorry, just a dispassionate (if possibly passionately presented) opinion. For your consideration. I'm just saying that rolling back one page once a week is no problem, and something I've done in this particular signature of edit a number of times before. The stupid spam that is being sent there (and elsewhere) doesn't even appear to have any use as a spam, given the content. But the precedent of blocking an IP is troubling to me. Doubtful that particular one would ever be 'mine', in any given instant, but you could easily do me (and others like me) a disservice in the future if you take a consistent stance on this concept of blocking at the IP level and target one that is servicing my little corner of the webosphere.

I hope you get my reasoning. Longer in the telling than in the thinking of, unfortunately. 172.70.91.36 11:48, 24 May 2022 (UTC) <- I'm a different IP-type person from 108.162.246.154 - Whether it appears the same or (very likely) different from the original correspondent in this aside.

One way or another, I just reverted one of these, also from Singapore, but a different IP. Either by chance or because they(/their script) deliberately swerved round any block by trying again until it worked. FYI, but sorted for the time-being. 141.101.99.32 11:52, 26 May 2022 (UTC) -- addendum: Though of the 15 similar replacements on that page since October have had large gaps, from the last couple of weeks it looks like both a Tuesday and a Thursday cycle might exist. Probably manually triggered, though. Could just be a coincidence. 172.70.86.44 12:16, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

Crap

How can I help get rid of crap? Anticrap (talk) 15:48, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

It's all gone at the moment. If pages start turning into crap, revert the edits and wait for an admin to arrive. You really do not need a dedicated account for this. --Jack (t|c) 16:10, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

The CAPTCHAs make it hard to revert crap quickly, especially because I could use the one-click revert script without them. When will the CAPTCHAs go away? Anticrap (talk) 23:29, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

Block User:Donald Trump

Can you block User:Donald Trump? He is another spambot, like the others recently: Special:Contributions/Donald_Trump. Thanks, Natg19 (talk) 17:48, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

Errors

Hi Jacky720. I’m reaching out because there’s been a large amount of errors being thrown around recently. A lot of users are getting 503 Errors and saying that server can’t be reached at the moment, please check the Technical Community Portal to see. Do you have server access or are able to personally contact Jeff? I know that he has a Twitter but I don’t have a Twitter account since my parents don’t let me to. It seems that you’re semi-active, as you had edited only a week ago. If you see this message, please respond as soon as possible, as I don’t think that this issue will resolve itself. 42.book.addict (talk) 21:51, 19 September 2024 (UTC)

I'm actually getting similar issues myself, on and off, though somehow I didn't think to elevate it. As I'm writing this, the page CSS has failed to load.

I see on the portal that you've already reached out through... well, I think you hit all the good communication methods. I don't have a special communications channel for this that you don't. Would have replied sooner, but I typically only log in to make edits. --Jack (t|c) 03:30, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for your response! I saw that Davidy22 uses Reddit frequently and has helped out on r/xkcd before, so hopefully he can poke around the server soon, assuming that he still has access. If he responds and is unable to help, I plan on reaching out to Jeff via Twitter/X/Whatever it is Now. 42.book.addict (talk) 04:42, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

Sorry for the short amount of time in between, but I found out that Davidy22 uses GitHub a lot from a thread back in 2022, I’m going to try to reach out with the email linked on his profile page there. Cheers! 42.book.addict (talk) 04:44, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

Sitenotice

Hi Jacky720, could you please look at the sitnotice discussion page and make your judegement on whether or not to update the sitenotice? There has been discussion on including a call to action to Incomplete Transcripts, as well as my own conerns about 2288: Collector's Edition. 42.book.addict (talk) 18:35, 14 October 2024 (UTC)

Clunky Talk Page

I want to raise a concern that the "hidden comments" / "old squabbles" thing is a bad idea, and possibly completely unacceptable. It makes your page hard to navigate and unlike every other Talk page, and generally makes it impossible to find things for anyone not extremely familiar with your particular mechanism, which seems to be unique to you. Even knowing you have an "old squabbles" link to click, I have trouble finding it and get annoyed and frustrated, and that makes me annoyed and frustrated with you, even if I should not be. I do not think you want people annoyed and frustrated with you. I strongly recommend you remove it. Put your "old squabbles" on an archive page or remove them entirely, but please don't veil them in this fashion. Thank you. JohnHawkinson (talk) 19:23, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

Do you have the wrong user? Ah, fair enough. I had completely forgotten. --Jack (t|c) 22:35, 6 November 2024 (UTC)