User talk:HJ Mitchell

Hi!

Spammers

Hi,

I'm wondering if we ought to have a couple of standard templates and a space for discussing the approach for dealing with spammers and vandals. We seem in the habit of indef blocks as the first step and it might be an idea to move to at least one 24 hour block first with an associated template with a fair explanation of what this website is, where else they can try playing with wikis in general and a warning about why the next step could be an indef. We could even bundle these into a user script that any :wmuk admin could then reuse as a handy bust-vandals-but-be-nice tool. Cheers --Fæ 08:42, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

Hey Fae. It might be worth discussing it at the water cooler if we ant to develop a standard approach, but personally I don't think we should give blatant spammers the time of day. If it's obviously in bad faith, and it's the kind of thing that would be deleted from just about any wiki, I would just block them. I take a similar approach on Wikipedia, though I might give them an "only warning" first, depending on the severity of the spamming. I might cut some slack for people who are trying to write encyclopaedia articles that are overly positive in tone, but most of the stuff we see here is pretty obviously in bad faith and a lot of it looks coordinated. Harry Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 18:20, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

Wiki conference 2012

Thanks for your changes on the page Harry. I have actually copied that over from 2011 one, but it is good that this year's version does not have the mistakes. Daria Cybulska (talk) 11:03, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Fair enough, I'll let you off then. ;) There are a lot of errors like this on this wiki, and they irritate me, so I fix them where I spot them! Harry Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 16:27, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Welcome template

Hi, I put the auto sig in after having to add the 'clear' template. If you use it and have to sign it, the signature would be in the next paragraph rather than against the text, which seems a bit naff. I'm not actually sure why you would object to an auto signing template, it saves a step in the process. --Fæ (talk) 10:57, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

I hate templates that automatically add a signature. It's nice to give people the option to leave a personal message at the end of the boilerplate (before the signature) and the pedant in me hates the double hyphen. That said, the sig appearing on a new line is indeed naff. Is there nothing we can do to fix that? Harry Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 18:18, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

I've changed it so that parameter "1" allows a custom message after the main text or to automatically include a sig if you choose not to add such a message. Regards, Rock drum (talk • contribs) 18:30, 10 May 2012 (UTC)