[00:53:27] hello? [00:55:00] i need help [01:23:31] With what? [03:49:45] ask away [04:01:40] fellas, a tad lost w/ autoconfirmed/confirmed user rights [04:02:27] the latter should replace the former fully, or be added over it? [04:03:07] a user w/ autopatrolled, confirmed and rollback group reported that he can't upload files [04:05:36] confirmed group wasn't modified [05:56:53] @theoneandonlylegroom default setup they have same permissions yes [05:57:10] You have to edit both if you manually change though [06:09:06] hmm yeah, autoconfirmed was modified [06:09:18] thank you [06:09:42] I've updated permissions for confirmed but waiting for user to confirm (lol) [06:42:07] apparently there's another funky thing [06:43:04] [1/2] nobody assigned that user to rollback group, and there's no log entries in his Special:UserRights [06:43:04] [2/2] any idea what's going on here? [09:13:21] surround the transclusion with `` [09:15:40] maybe the user was renamed after being assigned rollback? It will still be in Special:Log/rights [09:24:29] nope [09:27:15] worked, thanks! [10:44:00] [1/2] Hello, [10:44:00] [2/2] How can I install interlanguage links on my wiki? The [[Interwiki]] page says to refer to an article mentioned above, but there are no articles linked to this page. [10:44:00] https://meta.miraheze.org/wiki/Interwiki [10:44:01]

[13:08:12] [1/2] new surprise from search console - "indexed despite robot.txt prohibition" [13:08:12] [2/2] what the hell lol [13:08:28] and it's index pages, like revision diffs [13:09:22] bruh, I don't want you to index them, that's why there's robot.txt 😂 [13:11:18] 363 of them ....... [13:59:40] Indexers love to index [14:18:30] Guh???? [14:21:11] Sounds like typical google doing their own stuff, not caring about the users [14:26:18] It’s google [15:08:09] honestly, what are chances I'll email google support (is it even possible) about this shit and they'll listen? [15:09:02] None [15:44:31] hello [15:55:21] hi [16:21:43] [1/3] Using robot.txt is an incorrect way of blocking indexing [16:21:43] [2/3] Use noindex meta tag or place auth on that particular page (this is how Fandom blocks indexing) [16:21:43] [3/3] https://developers.google.com/search/docs/crawling-indexing/block-indexing [16:22:51] [1/2] well, how exactly? [16:22:52] [2/2] I placed nofollow,noindex on namespaces [16:23:15] but in this case - the w/index pages - do I really have control over that? [16:23:17] did you also use robot.txt on the noindex page? [16:23:30] robot.txt blocks noindex signal [16:23:33] no? [16:23:42] again, talking about action pages [16:24:13] Well, unless someone links that page, you will have to wait for Google to crawl the page again. [16:27:00] for these? [16:28:14] namespaces I marked as noindex,nofollow already got dropped [16:28:32] my issue is whatever the hell this new thing means [16:28:42] which indexed absolutely useless pages [16:29:53] Wait, they are indexing those useless pages? [16:30:02] ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ [16:30:07] Or it was in one of the reason not getting indexed? [16:30:29] There is a button showing pages are on Google Search [16:30:45] that "view data about indexed pages" [16:31:07] these I know [16:31:13] it appeared bellow [16:31:54] I can't switch to English but it literally says "Indexed despite being blocked in the robots.txt file" [16:32:21] It seems like someone linked your URL on another website [16:32:31] So Google bypasses robot.txt [16:32:38] these w/index urls?? [16:32:44] Yes [16:32:54] how [16:33:00] wtf [16:33:17] I know handful of links posted openly on places [16:33:42] but they're either main URL, main page or some article [16:34:43] As far as I can tell someone looking at wiki history with Google Chrome can result that weird index [16:35:07] that's so dumb ...... [16:35:22] You know Chrome is spying right? [16:35:31] ofc, I don't use it tho lol [16:35:43] forever firefox uer [16:35:55] sigh [16:48:10] firefox might be doing that too? [16:48:32] Firefox is very privacy driven [16:49:08] okay... [17:08:36] firefox even has ad blocks on mobile [21:54:17] question in regards to admin conduct, is there a point where afterwards it's alright to not reply to a user? 'creeperexplode' seems to essentially be passively aggressively asserting that the site should be run differently in ways that are very subjective and also kind of trivial [21:56:03] [1/2] @orduin thank you so much for doing your work!!! [21:56:04] [2/2] Its going to be a good day! [21:58:29] so one of my users is trying to make an account but he's ip blocked via wikipedia. is there anything i/you can do about this or should i redirect him here [22:03:12] [1/4] wdym via wikipedia? [22:03:12] [2/4] ask them if they're using vpn/proxy/tor, these IPs are blocked from registration [22:03:13] [3/4] of there's different block reason, like vandalism, they probably happened to be on IP range of some bad guy [22:03:13] [4/4] either way they can email `stewards@miraheze.org` for unblock or account creation (ip and screenshot better attached) [22:05:08] alright ill foward this to him [22:40:43] how do you disable non-logged in ppl from editing? [22:41:35] Remove edit from * and make sure user has it [22:43:34] where's *? or where do you do that, I don't see it in permissions :o [22:46:46] Special:ManageWiki/permissions the `*` or everyone group [22:47:08] Thanks void [22:49:24] [1/2] all i see is a create user group thing [22:49:25] [2/2] what do i do [22:51:16] choose "(everyone)" and submit it [22:52:03] then uncheck the "edit" box and save it, seems like [22:52:15] oh! okay ty [22:52:18] got it [22:54:28] thank you, it showed as everyone so the * was confusing for a sec [23:12:34] Yeah, `*` is the technical name of the group, but (everyone) is the user-friendly name