User talk:Ohwilleke/Archive
From dKosopedia
--Centerfielder 05:10, 3 Jun 2005 (PDT) Ohwilleke, I just granted you sysop priv. You can now do things like protect and unprotect pages, edit Mediawiki pages, and grant other users sysop. Please do the last sparingly, if at all -- you yourself are only the 5th to be granted sysop in the past couple of years. Mainly, though, you can now edit the front page and the Mediawiki page that gets turned into the Feature Article. I'll give you more detail on this later.
Ohwilleke 13:52, 3 Jun 2005 (PDT) Thanks. I'll try to be sparing overall. I think my DailyKos info has an e-mail address if you need to contact me that way.
Characterization of Los Angeles
CSTAR 15:16, 13 Nov 2004 (PST) Your characterization of Los Angeles is not very helpful. It's the home for Anglos,African Americans, Latinos, Asians , Iranians, Jews. It's an extremely cosmopolitan city with rich history, lots of human energy, interesting neighborhoods, arts and culture of all kinds. Yes it has social problems, but to dismiss in this way will certainly raise eyebrows!
--Pyrrho 17:26, 11 Nov 2004 (PST) Ohwilleke - what are the conflicts... it's hard to keep up with all the edits these days... cheers... I'm now watching when I get messages so hopefully I'll notice if you edit the talk page of my user page. cheers.
Ohwilleke 13:37, 15 Nov 2004 (PST) See the Talk area on Non-Democratic States and Dictatorships.
-Pyrrho 18:08, 3 Jun 2004 (PDT)
Ohwilleke,
since you filled in the International Affairs page I was wondering your opinion on if that article should be named "Foreign Affairs" or something else?
--Ohwilleke 19:07, 3 Jun 2004 (MDT). I think either would be fine. International Affairs is a little less U.S. centric, however, as it implies that nations might have interactions with each other which don't involve the U.S., while Foreign Affairs implictly implies a link to the U.S.
- --Pyrrho 18:26, 3 Jun 2004 (PDT) good point about internationalism... thanks.
--pastordan 19:32, 3 Jun 2004 (PDT) Ohwilleke: thanks for all your input on the Churches and Denominations page. It's starting to fill out nicely. I'm intending to find links for the various denoms as soon as I can. Thanks!
---Ohwilleke 20:31, 3 Jun 2004 (MDT). Great. I plan on putting together a linked page ranking the denominations a couple of way (liberal to conservative; high church to low church) when I get some time.
- --pastordan 08:43, 4 Jun 2004 (PDT) I will be adding some of this information to the page itself, but in more of a narrative form. The page sounds good.
--Opendna 22:34, 3 Jun 2004 (PDT) Internationa Affairs: Cosmopolitan and Supernational Ethnic Identification... could we change C.a.S.E.I. to "nationalism"? Excellent material, btw.
---Ohwilleke 7:39, 4 Jun 2004 (MDT). How about "National Identity"?
--Opendna 18:36, 6 Jun 2004 (PDT) "National Identity" works for me.
-Joshyelon 16:46, 10 Jun 2004 (PDT) Just wanted to thank you for your work on taxation. This is information I can really use. - Josh
--Ohwilleke 18:21, 10 Jun 2004 (MDT) No problem. I spend a lot of my professional career doing this stuff so I can pretty much do it from memory.
--Centerfielder 14:25, 18 Jun 2004 (PDT) Ohwilleke, how'd you like to be the first to oversee the Featured Article process? (I'm not sure how much time it would take.) As I see it, it would consist of monitoring Feature Article Candidates, perhaps posting a diary entry or two requesting help in fleshing out an article if a potentially interesting candidate doesn't seem to be attracting contributions, and promoting an article to featured article status, with all the concommitant housekeeping required.
--Ohwilleke 16:40, 18 Jun 2004 (MDT) Sound's OK, and the monitoring part sounds easy, but I'm quite weak technically on the wiki and I'm not sure I know how one would actually code a featured article.
- --Pyrrho 15:56, 18 Jun 2004 (PDT) we can help set up the technical stuff and it would be a matter of editing a wiki page like any other. However... question for you and Centerfielder --- how do you see the Featured Article working... is this different from a "showcase", is it something voted on, it's the discretion of some individual... does the individual rotate... does the individual propose choices that are voted on, etc.?
- Not to be coy about it, I think some collaborative (i.e. voting) approach is needed even though likely there needs also to be an individual that helps the process happen and possibly personally pens the descriptions, etc.
- --Centerfielder 16:10, 18 Jun 2004 (PDT) I see it as something akin to Wikipedia's process - or at least how it looks to me. Anyone can submit a candidate, anyone can comment on it, and Support or Oppose it. Wikipedia, being a larger community, probably has a number of people who actually enact it. I suggested Ohwilleke be first shepherd since I suspect he has seen a lot of different articles given the breadth of his contributions.
- Let's take the rest of this discussion to Talk:Feature Article Candidates.
-Joshyelon 10:18, 2 Jul 2004 (PDT) Remember how I wrote that diary entry comparing the growth of the top 10 wealthiest nations over the last 30 years, and you responded by giving me a reference to Schumpeter?
One web page I read on Schumpeter said of his theory that it was "not entirely ludicrous." That isn't exactly a resounding endorsement. But the data I was dinking around with seems pretty conclusive. More importantly, it's data from after Schumpeter's death, which means his theory shows predictive accuracy. To me, his theory looks pretty solid. What am I missing? Is there some good evidence against him?
Despamming
Looks like you and I are both trying to thwart the same spammer. I didn't see any contact info at dKosopedia so I used the "Contact" link at dailykos. I couldn't decide whether to send it to technical or non-technical so I chose the former. Anyway, thanks for your efforts and good to know there are at least two of us collaborating! -- EqualOpportunityCynic 09:35, 23 May 2005 (PDT)
Ohwilleke 09:52, 23 May 2005 (PDT) The recent changes page is checked regularly, so you needn't fear that the spam attack or our efforts to stop it will go undetected. By the way, your general involvement in the Wiki is appreciated.
--Centerfielder 12:02, 23 May 2005 (PDT) Boy, what a pain in the butt... I've cut out the last spam edit but it'll probably come back. It must be checking to see if it's been deleted and adding it back in. The maybe instead of cutting all the spam out if we comment it out then the spambot will think it's there and not add it again. If the intent is add to linkcounts then that won't defeat their purposes. Or maybe I should just change the code to diallow username creation of 6 chars in the range a-fA-F0-9 with 3 or more numbers. But then that'll make upgrades more difficult (yes, I really need to upgrade soon, I know).
Or let the wiki operate as normal and let those monitoring fix it, and wait for it to stop...
- So you have access to the source running on this wiki (but not administrative access to block IPs)? That certainly opens up more options. Can you force human intervention for a 6-character name? All we need is a short-term fix until someone blocks the IP address[es], assuming they're fairly stable. EqualOpportunityCynic 12:08, 23 May 2005 (PDT)
Ohwilleke 13:48, 23 May 2005 (PDT) Can we freeze all new registrations for 72 hours or so and see if that works?
- Well, just in the past 16 hours or so this spambot has used over a dozen IP addresses; the good news is it's only spamming known MediaWiki pages, such as "Current Events," "Community Portal," and the like. From the log it looks like it used one IP address to grab a handful of known pages and then farmed them out to different machines to process them. If it's only interested in those few pages for the moment then, ok, it's a pain but ultimately not harmful and we have time to figure out the right thing to do. Let's see what the rest of the MediaWiki sites come up with. I'd hate to hack in a fix and then have the MediaWiki guys develop a filter that I can get by just upgrading... --Centerfielder 13:53, 23 May 2005 (PDT)
- OK, sounds good. FWIW LibertarianWiki.org has been having more or less the same problem. The only real problem I see is, if someone decides to "see what this DKos wiki thing is all about" (as I did a few days ago, then became wiki-obsessed!) and then sees a page full of spam, they're less likely to want to come back and participate. So it's not a disaster, but definitely worth getting fixed asap. -- EqualOpportunityCynic 14:17, 23 May 2005 (PDT)
- Wiki-obsessed is good. And I just did a quick looksee at the new user code and it's not real straightforward; in any case yes, it's a bit sloppy to let hawkers in the door, but they're not in every room. And that other wikis are affected means a fix by those more in the know than I should be coming soon.
- Interesting, looks like reverting pages to get rid of the spam actually encourages them, because the idea is to increase link count, and every time we revert we create a new (history) page with the spam on it... Sort of argues for leaving it alone. Centerfielder 15:30, 23 May 2005 (PDT)
- Ah, good point. I forgot to edit and comment instead. I'll try that next and see if it works.
- That said, on one of these wikis I went a long time without reverting, and saw that the same bot had left its trail 3 or 4 times, so i'm not sure they really care whether we edit them or not. -- EqualOpportunityCynic 16:13, 23 May 2005 (PDT)
Um, oh yeah, pages can be protected. I've done so with the pages in question. Let's see what it does. Centerfielder 20:16, 23 May 2005 (PDT)
![[Main Page]](../../../../upload/banner-blue-135.jpg)