Forum:User list?

Forums: Index > Village Dump > User list?

Note: This topic has been unedited for 6482 days. It is considered archived - the discussion is over.

So I was looking at our user list, and by golly was that in a sad state. Can we baleet spam user accounts? It's real ugly looking like that. --stillwaters/Talk 08:33, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

See the bottom of Forum:Articles = Users for a discussion. ~ Ghelæ ^talk_contribs 08:35, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Can we delete users with ugly Sigs? -- Sir Mhaille  (talk to me)

Probably not, but you and I both know that we can delete their sig... :) -- Sir Famine, Gun ♣ Petition » 01:02, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

For. 23:27, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Take a look at wikipedia's user list and what they did about it. You may want to create some accounts to flood it off. --Sbluen 08:46, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Now that is ugly, but something we may have to do if the domain having been sold out from under us prevents us from going to a server which gives us full SQL access. If meta:special:userlist was a mess of "GNAA Troll 1, GNAA Troll 2..." it's a very quick process in phpMyAdmin to go to the `user` table, check off thirty or so of these and click that X to make them all magically go away. Too bad, so sad. The same is not true on Wikia, where even an entire empty wiki (where the community, if any, has moved elsewhere) is virtually impossible to delete.

There are MediaWiki extensions which can auto-delete inactive (no posts) accounts. They're of no use to us if no one in this community has access to install them. If it's not our server, we're SOL. Installing the MediaWiki 'nuke' extension (removes all posts from a spamming user), upgrading to MediaWiki 1.8 (allows anon-IP range blocks without having to ban existing legitimate registered users that we wanted to keep, even fixing little things like broken SVG support or the badly-incomplete interwiki table for language links which have been the subject of months of futile complaints are now hopelessly beyond our reach on this domain. You can try taking the matter up with Wikia if you like, but no guarantee that anything will get done and (short of trying to simply hide the mess by creating our own User:!!!!!!! placeholder accounts or finding a new domain name) we can't do a bloody thing ourselves here.

Any attempt to implement common login across multiple wikis would only make the obstacles worse - by far. Sure, a name might have no valid posts here, but to remove it from a common list affects every wiki and would require that the name be not in legit use in any/every wiki in the set.

Create the placeholders if you like. It's an ugly kludge of a solution, but given the limitations of dealing with Wikia it may be the only easy fix. --Carlb 22:41, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

I have no clue what carl just said. --Brigadier General Sir Zombiebaron 15:24, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Wikia has developed an extension to show only users who have edited (example). Would this be useful on Uncyclopedia to hide the accounts that haven't edited? It's a much better option than simply deleting users since you can't block a user that doesn't exist, allowing someone to very easily recreate the account and vandalise with it until you redelete it. Angela 20:09, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

That sounds great. I would love to see us using that. -- Sir Mhaille  (talk to me)

Ok, it's now at Special:Activeusers. Angela 06:38, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

That's good, but you (or "one", for grammatical purists) can only see a few users at a time, when on special:listusers it is possible to see up to 5000 at a time (on Wikipedia, I think the number goes to double that). Can that be fixed (I mean about special:activeusers not special:listusers)? ~ Ghelæ ^talk_contribs 09:54, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure why it's different to the other special pages that let you specify a limit. I've suggested changing this at bug:416. Angela 10:51, 27 August 2006 (UTC)