Template talk:Vandalism information/Archive 2

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

Archive 2

Standard

Most of these statistics are derived from Huggle, which gives a edits per minute count with a reverts per minute count. Do you think we could make a standardized percentage so it would be less opinionated? We could do a percentage, example, when I set it to 4 the vandal percentage was 5.7%. Allmightyduck  What did I do wrong? 19:37, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

How would you calculate the vandalism percentage? (not just a percentage of edits that are reverted) And have you read the discussion in the section immediately above? -- œ ^™ 07:33, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

Do we even need a standard? Jmlk 1 7 07:40, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

Well, I use AVT's filter and Huggle info is irrelevant to me. Kayau Voting IS evil 09:08, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

OK... help

I tried to update the meter with new information and it seems to act a little funny. The one on the CVU homepage, for example, is still displaying the update previous to mine.

What's going on here? Icanhasaccount has an account 04:19, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Yup, still showing the old data. Icanhasaccount has an account 06:34, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

I got it. Had to remove and replace the Wdefcon template on the CVU homepage (same thing had to happen with the one on my userpage). Not sure that's how it's supposed to work, but it works for now. Hey, does anyone still read this? Also, sorry for multi posting. Icanhasaccount has an account 06:41, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Crazy!

Ok, that is just crazy. Very high vandalism? Let's semiblock the entire thing except for user talks so people can at least edit 10 times and then edit everything. Ian (talk) 02:48, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

Levels should 1 to 5, not 5 to 1

Is it just me, but I've noticed at least twice this past month that some of our good vandal fighters have "raised" the number (for example, from 3 to 4), when they probably meant to "lower" the number, in order to increase the warning level of vandalism?? Maybe the chart should be ascending, instead of descending in value? Curious to know what others think! --Funandtrvl (talk) 22:12, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

I think that would be even more confusing, as it would conflict with the (original) DEFCON. Arthena ^(talk) 00:00, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

Yes, I kinda thought it had something to do with the previous versions, thanks! --Funandtrvl (talk) 00:31, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

RPM notice

I think we should add a note, either above the template, a hidden note within the template, or a page notice, that says, "if possible, please include the number of reverts per minute", or something along those lines. It's a very helpful measurement of vandalism, so a polite request to include the number when possible would definitely be a big help. Anyone agree with or oppose this? Swarm ^X 10:22, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

I suppose it would work, but probably best if you are armed with Huggle (which I don't, I tend to use you-know-what as a backbone in my reports if you have seen any). So my opinion is Neutral. --The Master of Mayhem (talk) 10:47, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

Well, if someone doesn't use Huggle, they don't have to give an rpm, it certainly wouldn't be required and anyone can reference AIV or nothing at all, if they want. However, those who do use Huggle have that information, so if they happen to update the template I don't see any harm in requesting that they throw in the info. I, for example, revert vandalism based on the information provided below the image. If AIV is severely backlogged, or we're at 15+ rpm, I'll certainly lend a hand in reverting. However, if I see a level 2 with a vague "It's really picking up" statement, it's just not as helpful. Swarm ^X 12:23, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

I intend on running for rollback soon- according to someone who got it, one of the extra help tools you get is Huggle. I'm changing my opinion to (and I borrowed this from the Robot Wars Wiki RfP) Neutral leaning towards support.--The Master of Mayhem (talk) 18:52, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

Yep. That's correct, and Huggle is an excellent tool. Anyway, I've added a hidden comment above the template, we'll see if anyone objects. Swarm ^X 06:11, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

The RPM figure is extremely useful. Whether Level 1 or Level 5, I still patrol recent changes. I look into anonymous edits closely: they might be vandalism. I try to revert vandalism but 9 times out of 10, ClueBot or someone else beats me to it. Never mind... practice makes perfect.--^{The Master} _{of Mayhem} 20:56, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

Is there a chat connecting DEFCON levels and RPM? --Guerillero | My Talk 04:04, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

A chat? I think you mean chart!--^{The Master} _{of Mayhem} 19:04, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

Someone removed the RPM note. Don't blame me- I was the one who restored it: albeit slightly different from the original.--^{The Master} _{of Mayhem} 19:16, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

Please, can someone stop removing the RPM note. --^{The Master} _{of Mayhem} 20:45, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

@Guerillero: The de facto norm seems to be, approximately:

15+ = Level 1
10-15 = Level 2
~10 = Level 3
5-10 = Level 4
Below 5 = Level 5

It's certainly subjective, but this is roughly the norm, with 10rpm being 'moderate' or 'average'.

@Mayhem: I've restored the note again. Thanks for doing so previously; I haven't been monitoring it. Swarm ^X 20:16, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

Herostratus's Nautical Version not working

I don't know why but Herostratus's Nautical Version is not working. The pictures used out there has been removed for some reason. Fix it soon.Ankit Maity 06:44, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

It's not fixed yet. Can't Herostratus get another picture?--Ankit Maity ^{Talk • contribs} 16:36, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

It's been fixed by an admin/file mover.--The Master of Mayhem 10:34, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

Meaning

I find that the template isn't very clear on whether it is how much a user vandalises, how much a page is vandalised, or how much vandalism a user combats. If any one knows, could you mention it in the template information section? Thanks. pluma Ø 22:44, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

The template just basically represents roughly how much vandalism is going in in general. It really has nothing to do with individual pages or users. Swarm 22:51, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

I updated the /doc to reflect as it was confusing. Crazynas^t 22:55, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

Thanks! pluma Ø 00:34, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

DEFCON

Can I try out the different levels and see how it looks? StormContent (talk) 19:13, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

No. --I dream of horses (T) @ 17:22, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

Where can I go to see the different styles of DEFCON 5 to 1? StormContent (talk) 02:18, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

Use the preview button. →Σ τ c. 02:12, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

Or you could copy and paste the source to your sandbox and experiment there. pluma Ø 16:36, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

Automatic updates

Has anyone ever thought of making the updates to this template automatic? I like the idea of the template, but I think its usefulness is compromised by often being out of date. I was thinking of a bot updating it every 15 or 30 mins, and for the RPM we could use an average of the figures for the last 30 minutes. Does this sound do-able? — Mr. Stradivarius ^♫ 10:01, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

The bot would need to be re-written unfortunately. Maybe raise the point on his owner's talk page.--The wikifyer's corner 17:54, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

I'm not sure what existing bot you're referring to, Master of Mayham; I think Mr.Stradivarius is referring to a new bot being written from scratch. --I dream of horses (T) @ 19:26, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

It's WDefcon Bot or however it's written, but now you mention it, I should bash myself with the lump hammer (only joking).--The wikifyer's corner 19:57, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

I don't know about the technical limitations, but it seems like a good idea. If it is possible, it would make it much more useful, I think. ItsZippy (talk) 17:05, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

In my home wiki, German Wikipedia, the vandalism information is already updated automatically for about half a year. This template is edited by a bot every 30 minutes and shows the total number of reverts made during the last 60 minutes. Other templates use that number to show the current vandalism level. Regards --Ist e (☎) 13:12, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

This seems like a good idea. I'm sure we can request on be written or created based on the German Wikipedia's bot. CJ ^{Drop me a line! • Contribs} 14:20, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

How?

How can you tell how many "ripples" are there? Confused, --19maxx (talk) 04:30, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

Update to the way the levels are defined

Hi, I thought it would be a good idea to defined the levels of vandalism based on the stats in huggle.

LEVEL	Description	RPM Stat on Huggle
1	Very high level of vandalism	>20
2	High level of vandalism	15-19
3	Moderate to high level of vandalism	10-14
4	Low to moderate level of vandalism	5-9
5	Very low level of vandalism	<5
0	Vandalism levels unknown.	Unknown

I have also redesigned the template so that you just input the RPM stat and the template will calculate the correct vandalism level. CJ ^{Drop me a line! • Contribs} 16:07, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

Good idea, but I think the revert threshold needs to be lowered a little, something like:

LEVEL	Description	RPM Stat on Huggle
1	Very high level of vandalism	15 or more
2	High level of vandalism	12-14
3	Moderate to high level of vandalism	8-11
4	Low to moderate level of vandalism	5-7
5	Very low level of vandalism	4 or less
0	Vandalism levels unknown.	Unknown

Traditionally, I have always considered 11 rpm the point where I stop whatever else I was doing and fire up Huggle. Pol430 talk to me 17:13, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

It's Cool - I've changed the levels in the documentation and the parsing template at Template:WikiDefcon/levels. CJ ^{Drop me a line! • Contribs} 21:20, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

I think lvl. 4 should be 5-9, 3=10-14, 2=15-19 and 1 should be 20 or more. Which, just checking my numbers, was the original, lol. The original should be it because it corresponds to the colors of vandalism on huggle, the green, black, and red. Dan653 (talk) 03:17, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

Agreed, perhaps my suggestion was too low. Pol430 talk to me 11:53, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

I have updated the levels Pol430 talk to me 12:04, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

I personally disagree with the way the new system is set up. This is mainly because it doesn't pertain to edits per minute, or allow the updater to use a specific level under special circumstances, such as ClueBot-NG going down. I feel as though it works out better when the updater uses their own judgement. Instead of having preset forced levels, the table above should simply be included on the documentation, under something like "Recommended Levels" or something similar. --Seahorseruler ^{(Talk Page) (Contribs) (Report a Vandal)} 05:47, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

I don't think that RPM is a completely accurate guide to vandalism levels. It is certainly a good guideline, but there are other significant factors, such as the state of ClueBot, other vandal-fighters online, etc. I suggest that the RPM is used as a guideline, rather than a definite rule. ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 16:58, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

I can see where you're coming from but how are people easily and reliably supposed to know whether other people are online. I do agree however that maybe in specific circumstances, someone can override the levels. The basic template is still there to adjust manually, but there is just another template added to interpret the levels. CJ ^{Drop me a line! • Contribs} 18:50, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

Update

The current Rpm rate is around 10-14, please update it.--Deathlaser : Chat 19:07, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

It seems to be around 8 now, and it is very easy to update it yourself. Dan653 (talk) 21:51, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

Automatically

Can anyone by any chance connect this to huggle so that it auto updates.--Deathlaser : Chat 16:30, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

Template_talk:Vandalism_information/Archive_2#Automatic_updates Dan653 (talk) 21:00, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

Let's get the part of Huggle that views the RPM.--Deathlaser : Chat 17:24, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

requested over here [1].--Deathlaser : Chat 11:10, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

I'm already working on a bot that will update it automatically.—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 20:56, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

Would it be possible to base it off the "edits"/"reverts" ratio, as 10 reverts a minute when there are 40 edits a minute is very different to 10 reverts a minute when there are 140 edit a minute? Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 16:12, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

10 reverts per minute is 10 reverts per minute even if there's 1,000 edits per minute. I see no need to do it that way. Dan653 (talk) 17:01, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

I suppose it depends what it is being used for - and I'm happy with the later. If it's being used as measure of vandalism then I don't agree, but if it's being used as an alert tool for users then I agree with you. Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 08:30, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

RPM template

Since huggle is really slow for me (I'm a mac user), I cannot use the RPM template. That's why I took it out. --I dream of horses (T) @ 06:44, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

STiki + WikiDefcon

Now that Stiki has the ability provide "Recent usage stats" for the past hour (or 6 hours) which include the number of classifications (edits looked at) as well as the % of those that were vandalism, would it possible to make some way for frequent users of STiki (like myself) to input this data into the WikiDefcon template (similar to the way it is currently done for Huggle) in order to aid in gauging the current amount of vandalism? Just wondering... Thanks! Theopolisme _TALK 10:28, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

Theo, how to you get to the Recent usage stats? Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 13:11, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

In the menu bar area or whatever-you-want-to-call-it of the actual application, click on Rev Queue and then you'll see an option for it. Theopolisme _TALK 20:14, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

So... are STiki users allowed to update the Vandal-Information? 00:45, 2 November 2012 (UTC) ♠♥♣Shaun9876♠♥♣ ^Talk 00:46, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

We'd need to have some sort of framework for devising the WikiDefcon levels first (depending on reverts/hr, etc); I'll work on something in the template sandbox... will get back to you, Shaun. —Theo polisme 00:54, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

I started this:

STIKI USERS: <br/>
You'll need to do some math in order to garner the Reverts/Minute. Do the following: <br/>
- In STiki, click "Rev. Queue", then "Recent usage stats." <br/>
- Next, note the number of classifications (total, from all queues) from the last hour. <br/>
- Multiply this number by the percentage of reverts (in parentheses). <br/>
- Round to a whole number, and then ?? multiply it by ??? in order to adjust for less use of STiki vs. Huggle. <br/>
- Divide your result by 60 (minutes in an hour).

While everything at the start seems fine, I'm not sure as to what to do in order to even out the less adoption of STiki vs Huggle — how can we make these... fair? Thoughts? —Theo polisme 01:04, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, Putting this on the STiki TalkPage ♠♥♣Shaun9876♠♥♣ ^Talk 02:23, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

Extreme levels of vandalism

Holy crap we're at a One? §h₳un 9∞76 02:06, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

No we aren't - fixed now. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 02:59, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Wdefcon

This template was moved from Template:Wdefcon to its current name 5 years ago. But the old name persists in all the various versions in people's userspace. I propose that we move all these templates to have the Vandalism information and retire the old name properly. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 18:00, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Bot to auto-update this template

I and Vacation9 have written VoxelBot, a bot to auto-update this template. It uses a method similar to Huggle to find reversions per minute, and currently edits in its userspace (User:VoxelBot/Vandalism information). The relevant request for approval is at Wikipedia:Bots/Requests_for_approval/VoxelBot, I would appreciate it if you commented on the bot. It's a Fox! (Talk to me?) 00:07, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Note: VoxelBot has been approved for trial and is now editing this template. Any complaints or concerns should be directed to our BRFA. Vacation^nine 05:10, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

Exactly what does it mean when it says 114/4? Numbermaniac - T - C 02:30, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

Revise levels?

First let me say that I'm coming at this from a standpoint of a fairly new editor with an outside perspective, who semi-frequently combats vandalism manually via RC patrol and Twinkle. I tend to take a look at the WikiDefcon fairly frequently to get an idea of what's going on, and I find myself relying far more on the reverts/minute figure ("r/m" for the rest of this comment) than I do anything else. While I realize that the graphic representation and the 1-5 scale is something of a gimmick and that the data will always be more accurate, I think the "at-a-glance" usefulness of the level could be improved.

In my (limited) experience, what I've noticed is that if I see 3 or less r/m, there's typically not much for me to do as a manual patroller - most vandalism is caught by Cluebot or editors with more powerful tools than I, and while I might catch something that might slip through the cracks, I'm typically better off digging into something else. 4-5 r/m is borderline and depends on the day - some days with the numbers at 4 or 5 I wind up doing quite a bit, others not so much. Anything above that and there's usually plenty going on, even with the expanded vandal-fighting force that comes out of the woodwork, that I feel like I'm being productive by manually patrolling. Obviously there are exceptions to all of these cases, these are merely trends I've noticed.

Something else I looked at was the number of times the reported vandalism level went above level 4 since VoxelBot took this task over in January. By my count (looking simply at edit summaries of the revision history), the level peaked above level 4 only four times in the last five and a half months - twice at level 3 (10 and 11 r/m), once at level 2 (16 r/m), and once at level 1 (29 r/m). (I disregarded the other instance of level 1 which was apparently caused by a massive amounts of reverts in rapid succession due to a single user's good-faith error.) I submit that those are rare enough to be near-meaningless, and I think things could be spread out to be a bit more meaningful to what's actually occurring, rather than stepping up in increments of 5 r/m as it appears the levels are set now.

I propose the following new levels:

Level 5: 0-3 r/m
Level 4: 4-6 r/m
Level 3: 7-9 r/m
Level 2: 10-15 r/m
Level 1: >15 r/m

Using today as an example, and basing on US Eastern time (GMT-4) - that would've put it at level 5 through the overnight hours, flirting with level 4 during the early morning, then hitting 4 and staying there for the rest of the day, poking periodically up into 3 at a few points during the day. That seems to jibe with what I ran into today in my own patrolling - today was a pretty lively day, with plenty of educational IP vandals and quite a few others as well. To me that seems like it would be fairly typical, and represents things more accurately than what did happen, which was to bounce back and forth between 4 and 5 through much of the day.

Obviously the numbers can (and probably should) be tweaked by someone with more experience and data access than I, but I think this could be a better "at-a-glance" representation - defaulting to 4 much of the time, dropping to 5 or raising to 3 for normal lulls and peaks, and still reserving 2 and 1 for unusual spikes.

Thoughts? --ElHef (Meep?) 04:35, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

In the recent past, although not a vandalism patroller per se, I have been heavily involved in anti-vandalism matters. I don't think I have ever referred to the defcon and I would be more interested to know just how many people use it as a guide. Do remember however, that the English language Wikipedia is not restricted to the USA and that people edit (and vandalise) from very different times zones - including some highly populated countries Asia. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 03:24, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

I agree with wanting more information on the use of the defcon level - that's part of why I'm seeking input here. That said, I know that the data generated through the template is useful to me (even if the template itself isn't so much) and I think that even if the template isn't useful to a lot of people right now, it could be improved and made to be a useful tool. And yes, I'm aware that ENwiki is a worldwide environment - I was just using that as an example based on my own timezone over one particular day I observed. Not trying to exclude any other parts of the world, I promise! --ElHef (Meep?) 17:12, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

As it happens, I have been working on this for the last couple of days, because VoxelBot's current classifications are frankly useless. Assuming I haven't broken it before you look

, take a look at some data: http://tools.wmflabs.org/cluestuff/cgi-bin/charts.py?width=1000

If it doesn't improve soon, I'll be filing a request for ClueBot to take over. 930913(Congratulate) 15:32, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

To be honest I don't really know what all I'm looking at there, but if I'm reading the middle bits right with the suggested vandalism level vs. what VoxelBot is reporting, that suggestion seems a lot more reasonable and useful to me... it also seems to make more sense to me in general that ClueBot might have the most accurate and timely vandalism information. --ElHef (Meep?) 17:39, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

a930913, before you do anything, you might want to read this, but if ClueBot does have better information taking that discussion into account (in particular the response from Vacation9), then I'm all for it. It's a Fox! (What did I break) 00:43, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

Also see this, which doesn't seem to correlate as well as it should with the graph that ClueBot gives. This may mean code errors, I'll look into it as well after discussion. It's a Fox! (What did I break) 00:49, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

Using ClueBot's stats sounds like a very good idea to me. The thing is pretty impressive when it comes to detecting vandalism. Yintan 08:10, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

Level 5 not showing?

I've just noticed that even when Voxelbot updates it to level 5 vandalism (low), the templates still show it as 4 (normal). Example: here Voxel says and changes it to level 5 here but the templates clearly show level 4. -Ugog Nizdast (talk) 17:14, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

Template:WikiDefcon/levels (which this template calls) was using a passed in value of 1 or less for level 5, while VoxelBot is passing in 2. I edited the template to match what VoxelBot is doing. Mojoworker (talk) 01:00, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, I've changed the documentation page too. -Ugog Nizdast (talk) 07:09, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

New Metric

Before VoxelBot came along, this template was updated manually. It was used as a call to arms. When someone was patrolling and found themselves unable to keep up with the vandalism, they would increase the level, as a request for other patrollers to come online. Subsequently, were a patroller unable to find much vandalism, either due to the lack of it, or because others were reverting it faster, the level would be decreased, to show that the vandalism was under control.

Since VoxelBot, the template has been tied to how much vandalism has been reverted. However this could be because of the level of vandalism, or the level we are catching it at. Essentially, when we get a high level on the template, we are by definition already on top of it. Because of this, many users, including myself, have stopped using this template as a means of determining when to patrol.

VoxelBot has not been restarted since it was automatically migrated on the wikimedia labs, due to inaction of the operators. I have taken this opportunity to propose that we change the metric used (and bot if necessary). I have recorded data over Tuesday night, which should be representative of the range 2-4 on this template. (From my experience.) There are mainspace edits (EPM), reverts (RPM) and ClueBot NG's sum of vandal scores (CVS), all per minute.

This chart shows the data, including some derivations.
This chart shows the moving average of five from the above chart, less the minimum and maximum.
You can view these values live, with this visualisation.

I invite a discussion on the future of this template. 930913(Congratulate) 14:14, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

It's a useful display for anyone uncertain whether to pile in on vandalism work, but only if kept updated 24/7 by the bot, which for the past 2 weeks it hasn't been. Do people making manual changes to the numbers not realise that levels over 5 are not recognised and display as Level 1?: Noyster (talk), 15:42, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

I like the "Call to arms" idea, and why only Huggle? What about all the people using Twinkle and "Restore this version" and all the other options. I think that User:K6ka has been maintaining the metric, BTW. Supernerd11 :D Firemind ^_^ Pokedex 22:01, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

I do sort of think that the template is somewhat biased. Huggle isn't the only anti-vandalism tool out there. Twinkle and STiki are huge ones that catch quite a bit too. And of course, ClueBot NG, the best vandal fighter that doesn't need to eat, sleep, or carry out the functions we humans need to perform to stay alive.

The call to arms idea is pretty cool, and it apparently tells the outside world just how seriously we treat vandal-fighting as. With VoxelBot, however, the template merely shows how much vandalism is coming into the wiki, and how much of it is being reverted by Huggle, with CBNG, Twinkle, STiki, and all the other anti-vandalism tools excluded. Not really fair, right?

Change is welcome, and it would be nicer if the template was a bit more accurate on how much vandalism was going on and whether rollbackers and sysops need to get on or not. Getting a new bot to do the task would be nice as well. For now though, it feels great to have my username displayed on thousands of pages across Wikipedia :D --k6ka (talk | contribs) 13:11, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

Bumping thread. --k6ka (talk | contribs) 12:00, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

DefconBot is undergoing approval at BAG - Wikipedia:Bots/Requests_for_approval/DefconBot. --k6ka (talk | contribs) 11:59, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

Why not just base it off of ClueBot NG's reverts per minute and update the template minute-by-minute? Basing it off of cluebot's reverts would be a good way to indicate simply how much vandalism is occurring, rather than how much is being reverted, since it wouldn't take into account the amount of human activity. Thoughts?

Edit: Ah, I guess that's what Defcon Bot would do. TheCascadian 19:45, 17 May 2014 (UTC)

Some explanation needed

Perhaps when hovering over, it should show what "vandalism" this is about. I guessed correctly that its talking about Wikipedia vandalism, but there is no hint on the widget or the texts surrounding it. Put a tiny image on top saying: Current Wikipedia Vandalism, or even just Current Wikipedia and leave the giant "vandalism" or under the vandalism: to Wikipedia. Then somewhere between the text and the thermometer: Current status. And on the bottom: 'Last updated:' and date. Woops, wasn't logged in.
Also, have a link to the anti vandalism group page. פשוט pashute ♫ (talk) 15:11, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

User:DefconBot not updated in 10 days

Should we switch to manual mode, seeing as the bot has not updated since August 1st? Jab843 (talk) 05:26, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

It seems to be fixed now. Grognard 123chess456 (talk) 13:58, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

Another Template

This doesnt fit in the template catagory because its abotu a template for sometihng else. I created a template using most of the vandalism code and the vandalism images exept it doesn trelate to vandalism. It is a wiki "Community Defcon Meter". It shows the possibilty of hostilities worldwide based on the communities input. It is recomended that DEFCON levels only be changed in major events or series of events. The page for it is at User:Npop/www . — Preceding unsigned comment added by RotaryAce (talk • contribs) 03:09, 17 November 2007

Simple inline template

How to use:

> Normal levels detected.<>

Code: {{User:flyingidiot/tinyWdefcon|showsig=no|showinfo=no}}

4 > Normal levels detected.--Message:08:10, 7 May 2024 (UTC):3.88 RPM according to EnterpriseyBot<>

Code: {{Wdefcon|prefix=User:flyingidiot/tiny}}

> Normal levels detected.--Message:Not connected to WDEFCON SMS server.:<> Code: {{User:flyingidiot/tinyWdefcon}}

Wonder if anyone still reads this

Level colors

Hi, it's Allen. The level 1 or 2 color of the vandalism readiness information is wrong. Saying that level 1 is red and level 2 is orange will be fine on Wikipedia.

Level 1 - RED
Level 2 - ORANGE
Level 3 - YELLOW
Level 4 - GREEN
Level 5 - BLUE

--Allen ^{(talk to me! / ctrb / E-mail me)} 21:07, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 14 October 2014

This edit request to Template:Vandalism information has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Ufukgocmensartkalesi (talk) 04:10, 14 October 2014 (UTC) dou you thing done? ya sen okumayi bilmiyorsun yada isine geldigi gibi okuyorsun ve okutuyorsun.ay okyonusa benzer, gebe yukselir gunduz ufuk'a cekilir, sen olunce nereye cekileceksin?terazine bak.they will check your TERAZI.

ufuk gocmen...

bayrakta cekilir iner kara geceden geceden deniz misali...

Not done: ??? Stickee (talk) 05:13, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Left aligning

What's up with several of the templates (i.e. {{Wdefcon|style=box}} and {{wdefcon|style=simple-light}}) aligning to the left? They've been doing this for some time now, I can't figure it out. Kharkiv07 (T) 23:54, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

Defcon bot down for a month

What's going on? Does anyone know? ~ NottNott let's talk! contrib 19:17, 13 September 2015 (UTC)

Another updating bot

FYI

I've just filed a BRFA at Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/APersonBot 5 for a bot that's supposed to update this template. APerson (talk!) 00:54, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

Trial approved, for BAG, — xaosflux ^Talk 02:00, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

And another update; APersonBot's 5th task was approved, so it'll be updating this template for the forseeable future. APerson (talk!) 01:40, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

New bot

As of just now, per a request on IRC, I've just switched over the template to use the updates in the userspace of DefconBot and deactivated APersonBot's task. Nothing should be changing, really, except for the bot that's doing the updating (and, I guess, the accuracy of the resulting defcon levels). APerson (talk!) 02:09, 4 April 2016 (UTC)

Switching over

K6ka, it may take a while before I can get on a computer and make APersonBot stop editing the template (perhaps a few hours) - just a quick note. APerson (talk!) 11:24, 19 May 2016 (UTC)

@APerson: Maybe we could have APersonBot edit a page in its userpage and then transclude that page onto the template like DefconBot does, that'll make switching back to DefconBot easier. —k6ka 🍁 (Talk · Contributions) 11:27, 19 May 2016 (UTC)

Sounds like a great idea. I'll implement that as soon as I get on a computer. APerson (talk!) 11:28, 19 May 2016 (UTC)