User talk:Abuse filter

From Nesdev wiki
Jump to navigationJump to search

The Abuse filter blocks extremely way too many false positives, as seen in Special:RecentChanges. Piotr Grochowski (talk) 04:40, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

They are NOT false positives. Every single one is attempted spam, because someone cracked the CAPTCHA and we don't have permissions to update it. —Lidnariq (talk) 18:04, 14 September 2021 (UTC)
Are you sure? They seem to be constructive edits. 79.185.223.15 15:06, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
How would you know whether they were constructive, given that they're all being blocked for attempting to add URLs? --Quietust (talk) 15:47, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
This wiki appears to be quite popular as seen by the amount of users wanting to link to external reliable sources. 79.185.223.15 19:27, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
Yes. Obviously. Thousands of users all come here, never having posted anything before, to have their very first post contain a URL. Sounds legitimate. By the way, I have a bridge to sell you. —Lidnariq (talk) 19:40, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
That's a clear indication that Nesdev wiki is extremely severely lacking in external source links, and editors are trying to fix that. 79.185.223.15 19:47, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
Clearly you're associated with those spambots, otherwise you wouldn't be arguing on their behalf. Though I'm rather confused as to why you're using {{PAGENAME}} and {{SITENAME}} instead of just spelling things out directly... --Quietust (talk) 13:52, 16 September 2021 (UTC)
I'm not associated with any spam bots and am not arguing on any of them. I use the {{PAGENAME}} and {{SITENAME}} to directly refer to the page name or site name directly. 79.185.223.15 15:43, 16 September 2021 (UTC)
We actually have a lot of original research here and prefer it unlike wikipedia. If someone comes here as a new user, copy/pasting from somewhere else, that doesn't help us much. I think if someone gets a false positive, they can find a way to contact and get that fixed. The alternative is a maintenance nightmare that I'm not wishing upon anyone. Ben Boldt (talk) 15:22, 16 September 2021 (UTC)
Original research is never allowed anywhere. 79.185.223.15 15:43, 16 September 2021 (UTC)
We hack the hardware, post what we find in the wiki. One of its main purposes is to document original research from that sort of thing. :) Makes me wonder who you are and your intentions if you don't know that. Ben Boldt (talk) 17:30, 16 September 2021 (UTC)
You should document that with reliable sources, not 'original research'. Which many users would have done if not for the broken filter. 19:18, 16 September 2021 (UTC)``Piotr Grochowski (talk)
Someone makes a discovery that has, until now, been undocumented. They put that information directly into the nesdev wiki, which is the typical and preferred way that this wiki gets updated with new information. How can they conform to your rule? Please explain. Ben Boldt (talk) 21:56, 16 September 2021 (UTC)