Bio Petite française toute gentille et affectueuse <3 (sauf avec les spammeurs, que je déteste è_é ) Je suis là même là où tu le penses pas, bou :D || Note : évitez de me contacter sur mon mur, vous avez une chance que je n'aie pas d'alerte ou que je l'ai avec un certain délai / please avoid contacting me on my wall, you have a chance I get no alert or I get it delayed
Mais je vois que vous et TokihikoH11 ont normalement anime Profile Photos. Mais les différences que je vois sur vos têtes de mât sont que vous êtes né le 11 octobre et Tokihiko était le 26 août.J’ai raison ?
Recently, there has been a modification from you on a page from our Wikia (https://w40k-flufffan.fandom.com/fr/wiki/Dread_Lords?diff=prev&oldid=20202) mentionning the deletion of invisible characters and a test of the Phalanx filter on it. As Administrator of this Wiki, I am inexperienced in that type of dealing, so if I can get some light on what happen, on behalf of our Moderation and the Writer of this specific page, who does not understand what was wrong with his page.
Also, I wished to present some excuses for the message we've posted on your User:page. Azkaelus was simply unaware of the SOAP's meaning and existence.
OK to explain you the whole thing, since yesterday noon I'm leading an experiment against both a global troll and Pakistanese money spammers. Both are using invisible characters to evade filters. The experiment is composed of about a dozen of Phalanx filters, each of them containing a single invisible character. Over all of these filters, some got deactivated because too many FPs, one was even horribly poisonous (= way too many FPs within few mins), some other are still online. Two filters even caught spam bots! oO
The issue when these filters are online is that, the concerned user who tried to edit the concerned page hit many, many times the concerned filter. In order to unlock the concerned user, I had to remove the char and I tagged the edit as "not undoable", it just means this is a repair against Phalanx, so the user can then edit the page. (= when filter is online, trying to undo a such change will result the person trying to undo the edit being blocked by the anti-spam filter)
Most of the invisible characters are easily noticeable in the UCP source editor and are displayed by little red middots (these are dots being aligned in the middle of the current line, ref also middot when you code on wikis). It's not the case for all of them since I have one that revealed itself to be invisible even in this editor, but most of the concerned characters can be noticed thanks to that.
Other than this, it is possible to use a converter from Unicode to HTML to see where the characters are. And take the concerned space into this converter to see "which one it is". I use this for the case of the special character still invisible in UCP source editor or when I'm on a non-UCP wiki.
Repairing a Phalanx issue, especially when users are not used to report FPs (and in this case, I have the filters under hand on a personal sheet so I often check them and I log EVERYTHING that can happen!) it goes above local laws, it's considered as an extreme emergency case. It happens to some of us when users are complaining about FPs for filters we can't deactivate (abused URL shorteners are a typical example) to intervene and fix the issue within the page. After yeah, for the case of the invisible character, I got users telling me "I can't see what is blocking", and yeah, it's because an invisible character, so you would have to select the whole line, set it into a software that can "play" with encodings and it would reveal what was the issue.
First of all, congratulations on your recent onboarding to VSTF! I was not aware of this fact when I was initially writing this message, but nonetheless– I wanted to convey a concern we had with a recent report made out to VSTF. (And I apologize if the following message comes across as abrasive, this is not my intention.)
Takriiiia made a report on (at the time) an active vandal. Many vandals are blocked or thwarted by our abuse filters, but as this one managed to subvert the filters that actually mattered– this vandal managed to cause more harm on our wiki than most of our vandals can muster. However, upon the report being addressed, the active vandal was instead deferred to us.
This is a determination that we believe to be an oversight. Since the time of the vandal's initial contribution to the report being addressed, the vandal madeseveralconcerningedits over the span of an hour.
We have since addressed this issue and dealt with the vandal accordingly, but we would just like to request your future consideration and cognizance when it comes to future reports from our wiki or any other wiki. We just wanted to bring this to your attention in hopes that it well help you with other wikis in the future. I wish you best of luck as VSTF, and hope you continue to do well as a wiki well-doer.
Thanks :) And no, it's not abrasive, I saw more angry than that XD
Actually, I know this wiki has many active admins, especially when there were times where spammers attacked the wiki, it was managed super quickly. The first line of defense against vandals it's you, the local admins. And it's not something that we can deny, we can't step directly on your feet (if you see what I mean) X)
As for the vandal themself, I said there were edits that I couldn't confirm as vandalism. And that was the main issue when I saw the report, so I rathered the user to ask the admins about it, since they better know about the situation. If in the contribs I saw only really bad edits (it's like inserting insults, inappropriate text whatever for which wiki it would be, page blanking), there I would have gotten no doubt and it would have been a block. There are things anyway we can't deal with as all that is local content issues or edit warring between users. After, I'll be honest, but all VSTFs don't always have the same specialty everywhere. Most of time they are very good at both dealing with both vandalism and spam, while some others will take care more of vandalism or more take care of spam (I'm more in this last category).
But now I have a bit more info, if ever they come back as a sockpuppet, now this can be better dealt with. :)
So clearly if you have to retain something in what all I said: when we have a doubt generally we either ask users to ask their local admins, and in some cases staff (when it's constant harassment for example), and it's a bit normal since admins are first defense line, VSTF more being a second defense line. It's the line who will act if ever there is no admin at the moment. But now there is a bit more info, this can help a bit :D
I am also an administrator on the Roblox Wikia, where the report was filed, and I have a question regarding your response.
I said there were edits that I couldn't confirm as vandalism
Can I ask what you guys identify as vandalism? I'd expect that this contribution as well as this can easily be identified as vandalism, regardless of the circumstance.
The whole reason the report was filed was due to the active vandal and that all of the staff were offline due to the early morning time that the vandal appeared. Takriiiia is one of our former staff members and has a private channel to report users on the wiki. Knowing that, they would've reported to us had we would have been online.
Like JoTS said, we're not trying to be abrasive or anything of the sort, we're just wondering why VSTF would direct to the local admins when there were pretty obvious contributions of vandalism.
"inserting insults, inappropriate text whatever for which wiki it would be, page blanking"
Said in the earlier post, but these ones are vandalism. Clearly, the first one linked it's easily identifiable, the second one however is more mixed but it's not really this edit that gave me a doubt. All that is false info is not something we can normally deal with. :/
When a VSTF member has a doubt over someone, technically if there are admins active they'll redirect towards them ; if there are none active they may redirect towards staff.
Hope this can help you understand a bit better. So:
- pornography/R18 content, blanking articles, inserting insults in general (replacing text with these works too) or inappropriate text or pictures: we can deal with it
- false info, edit warring, local dispute with admins: these ones we can't intervene
- racial slurs: staff directly
And when we have a doubt over "maybe something is more in the field of a false info" for some contributions (it's what happened) -> it's always local admins to decide about it first, otherwise staff if there is really nobody, but we can't decide for local admins and we can't step over their decisions.
I do want to preface this to thank you for getting back to us and taking time to address our concerns.
That said, even based off of this clarified criteria, it is still our belief as a staff that this report was not addressed satisfactorily. I do want to take a moment to expound upon a few of the concerning contributions I had linked in my original post– and I apologize as some of the links in the original message may have been made less accessible (e.g. "several" contains three distinct links packed together).
From the links in my initial message, the following are five of some of the very first chronological contributions by this vandal on our primarily family-oriented wiki:
We do maintain our belief that deference was not the obvious option, based off of these very first indentifiable contributions from this vandal. We hope that you can agree that there is little room for ambiguity that these are malicious contributions, inline with the criteria you stated.
From our correspondence, I hope that I am not misconstruing our message– we vehemently believe in the tasks performed by you and the rest of the VSTF. I do not mean to convey entitlement on our part by dictating our expectations for those of you who graciously volunteer to clean whole sloughs of wikis. However, we still do place considerable trust that our editors can reliably resort to the VSTF where our local moderation lacks (i.e. U.S. overnight when many of our staff is offline). We did ultimately render appropriate actions to resolve the issue locally, but we only managed this 8 hours after the initial report– which is solely a fault of ours.
To take a page from my original message, we bring this up in hopes that this instance may help with addressing reports from other wikis in the future and mitigate future reports from being overlooked. We do not believe this report is the start of a trend of mishandled reports, but we thought to bring it up anyways for your consideration. Thank you.
Just wanted to let you know I have sent an email to your email address on record regarding some conversations we've had with the VSTF group regarding interest you may have in joining the team. I am letting you know here just in case you do not check your email regularly.