Minecraft Wiki:Admin noticeboard

Service error 500 on certain page edit
Somehow I'm unable to edit Renewable resource at all. I can edit my userpage, but this page (now) always gives a 500 error no matter what I do. I want to revert this edit, but I can't. I wonder if this is a problem specific to that page or more areas of the wiki, so I tried my own page but worked fine. – [ Jack McKalling ] 10:41, 3 April 2018 (UTC)
 * 500 errors/whatnot are being investigated. I have undone that edit through the "rollback" feature (if you can't undo something and rollback might work, ping me on Slack or Discord for quick assistance). -Xbony2 (GRASP) (FTB Wiki Admin) (talk) 12:04, 3 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks! – [ Jack McKalling ] [ Grid Book.png Grid Book and Quill.png Grid Diamond Pickaxe.png ] 12:07, 3 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Ah, if only you were on Slack. We literately created a whole new channel called "server-error-rage" where the only thing we do is rage about 500 internal server errors.-- Madminecrafter12 Orange Glazed Terracotta.png to meLight Blue Glazed Terracotta.png 12:11, 3 April 2018 (UTC)

Pages take very long to upload
Usually, when I edit a page, it takes several hours before my edits actually become visible in that page. This also happens to me when I edit other Gamepedia wikis such as the Terraria wiki. Does anybody know why it takes so long for my edits to appear? 194.251.17.11 16:04, 7 April 2018 (UTC)

Persistant vandal on Tutorials/Units of measure, can it get protected
There is an ip that keeps changing information on Tutorials/Units of measure, me and several others have reverted the changes but they almost always made new ones after. Is there any way the page can get protected. jjlr (talk) 11:50, 11 April 2018 (UTC)

Can't edit links of my own program
When trying to update the links for my own program (WorldPainter) on the Mapping page, I was unpleasantly surprised to be confronted with the following text: "Your action has been automatically identified as harmful, and therefore disallowed. A brief description of the matched abuse rule for your action is: Global AF - New user adding link at end or in heading If you believe your edit was constructive, please post a message on the admin noticeboard or notify an admin directly." I believe my edit was constructive. How do I go about changing the links for my program on that page? 83.87.130.122 15:07, 13 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Edits from IP addresses are necessarily suspect on a platform that is prone to spam / vandalism. If you create an account and make enough edits while logged in to that account to become trusted, then you should have no problem — Game widow (talk) 15:16, 13 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Alright, I managed to dredge up my old Minecraftforum/Minecraftwiki/Curse/Gamepedia/Twitch/Whatever account and it let me do it. Thanks! I seem to remember that the reason I usually do this anonymously is that the sessions here were annoyingly short. Can I configure somewhere how long I want to stay logged in? Captain Chaos (talk) 15:37, 13 April 2018 (UTC)
 * At the rate such questions are asked, I think a mention in the noticeboard header may be beneficial. --AttemptToCallNil (report bug, view backtrace) 15:45, 13 April 2018 (UTC)
 * I wonder whether it might be worthwhile to change the text of that notification. Telling legitimate users that their attempts to contribute are "harmful" might put them off, while malicious users won't care what you say. Captain Chaos (talk) 16:02, 13 April 2018 (UTC)
 * It is difficult to craft a message that works in all instances and does not give spammers / vandals the information they need to defeat the filter — Game widow (talk) 16:19, 13 April 2018 (UTC)

My talk page
Why do ips keep creating my talk page?!--TheCreeperStrikes (talk) 15:21, 13 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Spammers ? Children? Vandals ? People who just get a kick out of it? it could be any of those. Have you tried protecting it? — Game widow (talk) 15:23, 13 April 2018 (UTC)
 * i cant because i dont have admin privileges for protecting talk pages--TheCreeperStrikes (talk) 04:39, 14 April 2018 (UTC)

Archiving
Guys, I'm only going to say this once: if a topic on this page is archivable, just archive it. There's no point in moving stuff to a "ready to be archived" section, and no requirement that an admin be the one to do the actual archiving. 「 ディノ 奴 千？！ 」? · ☎ Dinoguy1000 09:58, 15 April 2018 (UTC)


 * I agree that there's not really any use of the "archivable issues" section - once an issue is definitely solved, there's no reason to keep it here; it just clutters up the page. So are you saying that we should go ahead and create Archive 30 and call it "Jan - May 2017" or something, move the existing archivable issues there, remove that section, and for future reference go ahead and add any solved issues directly to Archive 30, unless it's after May 2017? Or do you have another idea?-- Madminecrafter12 Orange Glazed Terracotta.png to meLight Blue Glazed Terracotta.png 12:21, 15 April 2018 (UTC)


 * If all the discussions currently in that section were wrapped up in that timeframe, yes; otherwise the discussion should be archived to the appropriate-dated archive page. The only other suggestion I'd have about this would be to formalize what date ranges each new archive covers, and how long after the conclusion of a discussion to wait before archiving (my immediate thought would be three months for both of those, but there's no reason they have to be the same either). 「 ディノ 奴 千？！ 」? · ☎ Dinoguy1000 12:47, 15 April 2018 (UTC)


 * Yep, we should archive this page. If anyone want's to continue their discussion, they should make a new topic in the new page.--Skylord wars (talk) 13:01, 15 April 2018 (UTC)


 * I would suggest an entirely different archival method, as well as wiki-wide archival guidelines. However, this is beyond the scope of this page. I suggest creating a new topic at Minecraft Wiki talk:Talk page guidelines. For some reason, there were two archival-related proposals on that page, but apparently neither passed. --AttemptToCallNil (report bug, view backtrace) 13:02, 15 April 2018 (UTC)


 * The only alternative archival method I'd suggest would be to have an archival bot automatically handle archiving pages. There are plenty of examples running on Wikipedia, many with public code that could be reused. 「 ディノ 奴 千？！ 」? · ☎ Dinoguy1000 13:05, 15 April 2018 (UTC)


 * What I meant was that instead of determining archivable topics by date range we would e. g. place a fixed number of topics in each archive (on non-user talk pages). I find substantial flaws in date range based archiving. I will explain further in my next post. --AttemptToCallNil (report bug, view backtrace) 13:13, 15 April 2018 (UTC)


 * Wikipedia generally uses size in bytes. Number of discussions is better than date range, but a single monstrous thread can still drastically inflate the size of an archive. 「 ディノ 奴 千？！ 」? · ☎ Dinoguy1000 15:35, 15 April 2018 (UTC)


 * The original purpose of the archivable issues section was for me to separate them from the other issues, so that someone other than me could archive the bunch. I've learned a bit about the process now and I think I can do it myself as well when needed. But for now, I've kept the separation because the issues could not be/were not archived at once and I needed more tips about those dates to do the remaining. I agree the archives are not necessarily easily organized by date, because I'd ask myself a lot of questions before it's clear to me. Do I archive issues that were created or those that were updated within a certain date range? What about issues that were solved before but replied to after? Indeed what about thread length (mentioned above as well). Or issues that have not been marked as fixed/resolved but are indeed actually fixed? I had a lot of more detailed questions as well that I forgot, but simply put it was too much for me to just do myself. I really don't mind if we just archive the remaining issues now and break out the hard headers again, but I think we really need to agree to a set of rules and finalize them somewhere before we do. Currently the separation works for splitting the task of solving and archiving a subject between different editors (so I do think the separation is still useful to some extent). I really like the bot idea, but I don't know how they work and if they can follow the rules we'd set to the process. I'm sorry if it became unclear as to who should have done the archiving. – [ Jack McKalling ] [ Grid Book.png Grid Book and Quill.png Grid Diamond Pickaxe.png ] 10:38, 16 April 2018 (UTC)


 * I'm pretty sure, after my archiving edits got reverted, that what archive page the post should be archived to depends on is the date that the last comment was posted for that subject, even if it was after the issue was resolved (please correct me if I'm wrong). Honestly, I don't think we need a bot - I'd be happy to archive any solved issues, and some editors may be willing to as well. Unlike Wikipedia, we don't have a trillion issues that need to be archived every hour to prevent mass overload, so although a bot would be nice, there's no need to wait until we have a bot to start archiving.-- Madminecrafter12 Orange Glazed Terracotta.png to meLight Blue Glazed Terracotta.png 13:27, 16 April 2018 (UTC)


 * Archiving should be done from date of last comment, yes. As long as we settle on a timeframe of inactivity past which sections get archived, it doesn't matter whether the section is marked as resolved (or even is resolved), since any section with a last comment older than the cutoff would be archived. And for unresolved topics that get archived, if someone wants to raise the issue again, they can either unarchive the section or just start a new one.
 * I agree a bot would be overkill for us on a single page, but if we used one I'd strongly recommend it handle archiving all talk pages on the wiki, rather than individual opted-in pages (though we'd also still want a mechanism for opting in, since e.g. this page is a discussion page which is not in a talk namespace, and we'd also want a mechanism for customizing the cutoff date and archive size, or even opting out of auto-archiving, e.g. to allow individual editors to control archiving of their talk page). 「 ディノ 奴 千？！ 」? · ☎ Dinoguy1000 18:13, 17 April 2018 (UTC)


 * Well, I've archived all of the archivable issues now (/Archive 30) but I will wait to remove them from this page until an admin adds the new archive to the header. For future reference, I would suggest lowering the header protection to semi- OR, better yet, has the archive nav on a separate page.-- Madminecrafter12 Orange Glazed Terracotta.png to meLight Blue Glazed Terracotta.png 18:46, 17 April 2018 (UTC)


 * Regarding the global bot. To keep track of what the bot should and should not archive, it could globally opt-in those whole namespaces that we know, like Talk:(main) and Talk:Minecraft Wiki for instance, and for those pages that need to be excluded from those global settings, get a tag on the page, e.g.  or , depending on whether it wants to add to or remove from the global setting of that namespace, respectively. But I'm not sure how bots work (efficiently). – [ Jack McKalling ] [ Grid Book.png Grid Book and Quill.png Grid Diamond Pickaxe.png ] 07:58, 18 April 2018 (UTC)


 * As I've said before, bot archiving is largely a solved problem; there's little reason not to just adapt a Wikipedia archive bot with publicly-available code. In particular, for opt-in or opt-out of specific pages, we'd use something like wikipedia:User:MiszaBot/config. 「 ディノ 奴 千？！ 」? · ☎ Dinoguy1000 14:59, 18 April 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protect page Update Aquatic?
This page keeps getting IP edits with the exact same unsourced (false) information about vulcano biomes, which different editors have reverted and it keeps getting back. No source is given, no explanation, and it's always a different IP. The involved ones are, and. They don't listen. – [ Jack McKalling ] 11:40, 25 April 2018 (UTC)


 * Re-protected. –Majr ᐸ Talk Contribs 11:45, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

User subpages don't redlink
For some reason user subpages don't redlink anymore—why is this? – Nixinova   07:39, 26 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Am I correct to assume you're talking about links to non-existing subpages of a userpage? Like User:Jack McKalling/get to the chopper? I've noticed that too some time ago, didn't think of it. – [ Jack McKalling ] [ Grid Book.png Grid Book and Quill.png Grid Diamond Pickaxe.png ] 07:50, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

Simple edit - unable to submit
Trying to submit the new design for a clock circuit:

Dropper-Dropper clock
Simple design that does not require iron or pistons of any kind: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KJLxY6q7GxA

I understand the wiki has a rule that prevents new users from posting link. Please review the above edit and add to the "Clock circuit" page. –Preceding unsigned comment was added by 103.10.197.194 (talk) at 12:33, 27 April 2018‎ (UTC). Please sign your posts with

Global AF caught my constructive edit
I tried to edit Tutorials/Update_Java to reflect the current status of Oracle's Java versions. I got an error message telling me to post here: Your action has been automatically identified as harmful, and therefore disallowed. A brief description of the matched abuse rule for your action is: Global AF - New user adding link at end or in heading If you believe your edit was constructive, please post a message on the admin noticeboard or notify an admin directly. --79.242.6.179 10:23, 29 April 2018 (UTC)


 * Yep, that's the abuse filter. Can you tell us what edit you were trying to make? If you can, then we may be able to do it for you. This specific filter likely blocks all unregistered users as well as registered users who have not made 3 edits yet.-- Madminecrafter12 Orange Glazed Terracotta.png to meLight Blue Glazed Terracotta.png 12:18, 29 April 2018 (UTC)


 * Three things, mainly:
 * I changed the terminology so that "development versions" (they're not really development vesions) are now referred to as "short-term support versions", same for "stable" and "long-term support versions".
 * The Java 9 download link is now broken because Oracle removed it from their downloads, so I removed that and added a Note with a link to the Java Archive, also saying that Java 9 is no longer supported, will no longer receive security updates and that Oracle recommends you don't use Java 9.
 * I cited the Java Archive page and the the page where Oracle lays out the End-Of-Life dates of Java releases.
 * Updated the latest versions to 1.8.0_172 and 10.0.1
 * The complete new wikitext that I tried to change it to can be found at https://pastebin.com/raw/4yG5vR4s --79.242.6.179 17:24, 29 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Ninjaedited the above to include cited links separately because I feared the AF might catch my contribution to this page if I included all the links. --79.242.6.179 17:28, 29 April 2018 (UTC)  Ninjaedited the above again to include the "Updatedthe latest versions" because I completely forgot that change. Sorry! --79.242.6.179 17:40, 29 April 2018 (UTC)

Reduce issues pages protection down to semi- and note on /video pages
I suggest that we reduce the protection on issues pages down to semi. Although usually these pages don't need editing, you really just never know. Specifically, many pages and files are being moved to more appropriate names, causing a lot of links to need to be updated. If semi protection doesn't work out, then maybe we can go up to full again, but I really don't think full protection is necessary anymore.

On a similar note, I suggest reducing the number/types of users that are affected by the AF on the /video subpages. The abuse filter is one of the areas of wikis that I'm really not knowledgeable in, but would it be possible to do something like only allow users to edit it only if they have made at least 200 edits to the wiki or something like that? I know there's some kind of filter that filters registered users that have made less than 3 edits from performing certain actions, which is why I would even think something like this would be possible. I'm not sure if it would be a great idea to allow any registered user to edit video pages, but if something like a minimum of 200 edits is possible, I think it would be beneficial to try doing that for the /video subpages and see how it goes.

Oh, and one more thing. Are we going to start demoting admins who have been inactive for over a year? This was discussed on the community portal talk page and has now been archived, and it seems like most of the community supported this idea, but none of the admins who haven't edited in years have been demoted since.-- Madminecrafter12 Orange Glazed Terracotta.png to meLight Blue Glazed Terracotta.png 02:32, 3 May 2018 (UTC)


 * I don't have much comment on the protections, other than to note that /video protection specifically is a policy that was put in place when Curse was still producing videos for the wiki, at their request; the edit filter is a natural extension of that policy. It is definitely technically possible to change it to only apply to editors with fewer than x edits, but I'm not prepared to do so without a comment from or another Curse person giving the okay.
 * The inactive admin demotion not happening yet is just because I haven't taken the time to write up a notice and drop it on admins' talk pages. If anyone else wants to do so before I get around to it, feel free, and drop me a list of notified accounts on my talk page. 「 ディノ 奴 千？！ 」? · ☎ Dinoguy1000 04:11, 3 May 2018 (UTC)
 * If a video is out of date, then whether or not Curse produced it, it is fine to remove — Game widow (talk) 11:54, 3 May 2018 (UTC)

Please block 82.196.6.16
Persistent vandalism/Extremely disruptive editing on the Villager page. Something needs to be done about this user quick, as they will not stop vandalizing the page, which is why I'm pinging, , and , as they seem to be active with reverting vandalism and blocking users on the Minecraft Wiki.-- Madminecrafter12 Orange Glazed Terracotta.png to meLight Blue Glazed Terracotta.png 22:56, 5 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Now vandalizing Enchanting. – Auldrick (talk &middot; contribs) 23:04, 5 May 2018 (UTC)
 * And Redstone circuit now. Probably one of the worst vandalizers I've ever seen.-- Madminecrafter12 Orange Glazed Terracotta.png to meLight Blue Glazed Terracotta.png 23:05, 5 May 2018 (UTC)


 * Well, never mind now, it's already been taken care of - the IP has been blocked for 2 weeks. Thanks . :)-- Madminecrafter12 Orange Glazed Terracotta.png to meLight Blue Glazed Terracotta.png 23:29, 5 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Please poke me (or GRASP) on Slack if you need my attention here; echo notifications are totally broken. -Xbony2 (GRASP) (FTB Wiki Admin) (talk) 13:04, 13 May 2018 (UTC)

New snapshot page is getting IP edits that don't belong
The recently new 18w19a is excessively being vandalized by IP users as well as named users. Please protect it to reduce the spam. The newer 18w19b isn't being targeted yet, but I noticed a common trend in new snapshot pages. – [ Jack McKalling ] 13:25, 9 May 2018 (UTC)


 * I would also suggest blocking, as they seem to be spamming that page to publicize their YouTube channel . I think semi-protecting the page and blocking that user should reduce the spamming greatly.-- Madminecrafter12 Orange Glazed Terracotta.png to meLight Blue Glazed Terracotta.png 13:26, 9 May 2018 (UTC)
 * You beat me to it, I for to mention it. For reference, . – [ Jack McKalling ] [ Grid Book.png Grid Book and Quill.png Grid Diamond Pickaxe.png ] 13:29, 9 May 2018 (UTC)
 * If you're referring to Phoenix SC, then I don't think he's spamming his own channel, since Phoenix has a considerable subscriber base already and advertising it here wouldn't make much of a difference. - MinecraftPhotos4U (talk) 13:32, 9 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Well, you're probably right about that then. Still, it's certainly not at all constructive to the article and it's getting very annoying. just semi-protected the article (thank you), but it would probably be best to block  as well.-- Madminecrafter12 Orange Glazed Terracotta.png to meLight Blue Glazed Terracotta.png 13:34, 9 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Pinging, , , , and (active admins and GRASP), as there is so much spamming now that it's getting very difficult to even revert all of it, so something needs to be done very quickly.-- Madminecrafter12 Orange Glazed Terracotta.png to meLight Blue Glazed Terracotta.png 13:31, 9 May 2018 (UTC)


 * Also consider users and, they have been participating in this attack. – [ Jack McKalling ] [ Grid Book.png Grid Book and Quill.png Grid Diamond Pickaxe.png ] 13:36, 9 May 2018 (UTC)


 * Two more users, and, who have been spamming that page, have now been blocked. As for the two you mentioned, they only spammed once and then they stopped.-- Madminecrafter12 Orange Glazed Terracotta.png to meLight Blue Glazed Terracotta.png 13:45, 9 May 2018 (UTC)


 * Thanks. It was hard to keep track of everything, and I wasn't sure about the edits those two made. But they did a lot more indeed. – [ Jack McKalling ] [ Grid Book.png Grid Book and Quill.png Grid Diamond Pickaxe.png ] 13:48, 9 May 2018 (UTC)


 * I blocked the other two for a short time.  HorseHead.png MarkusRost (talk) 13:49, 9 May 2018 (UTC)

"Talk" button doesn't work
The "talk" button in the drop-down box in the top right doesn't work. – Nixinova   07:14, 12 May 2018 (UTC)
 * I don't know what you mean, it works for me? Or has it been fixed already. – [ Jack McKalling ] [ Grid Book.png Grid Book and Quill.png Grid Diamond Pickaxe.png ] 10:58, 12 May 2018 (UTC)

Abuse filter for Java Edition hardware performance/entries
So many entries added by IPs are completely empty (see history). Maybe a filter could be set up to prevent it? --AttemptToCallNil (report bug, view backtrace) 16:45, 12 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Personally I consider this extremely excessive vandalism instead, I'd vote for semi-protection. – [ Jack McKalling ] [ Grid Book.png Grid Book and Quill.png Grid Diamond Pickaxe.png ] 07:49, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
 * More likely to be testing than vandalism, I think. --AttemptToCallNil (report bug, view backtrace) 07:50, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
 * But still, I think that page should only be edited by trusted editors instead of everyone (because of this excess of malformed edits). There is a warning message on the page with instructions below it. Even in the edit form there are custom instructions. It's just no excuse IMHO to keep doing this like they have. I feel like if these IP editors cannot behave as requested, the page should get protected from them. – [ Jack McKalling ] [ Grid Book.png Grid Book and Quill.png Grid Diamond Pickaxe.png ] 10:08, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
 * ...Why do we even have that page in the first place? --AttemptToCallNil (report bug, view backtrace) 10:11, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
 * I don't know, I'm just defending the case of the page. It's been going on for more than half a year. – [ Jack McKalling ] [ Grid Book.png Grid Book and Quill.png Grid Diamond Pickaxe.png ] 10:13, 13 May 2018 (UTC)

Why do we even keep Java Edition HW performance data?
What's the purpose of users submitting their JE performance data?

Pro:

Contra:
 * There are external benchmarking software programs, some of them with more maintained and comprehensive result databases, which may also include submission verification.
 * There are official system requirements, and a free demonstration version to determine whether/how your computer runs MC.
 * A substantial portion of users are likely to use unofficial content which impacts performance (such as modifications or higher/lower resolution texture packs), making vanilla measurements not very useful.
 * Users are submitting bogus entries almost all the time. We have to revert it.
 * There are just too many factors affecting PC performance in general, far more than on mobile devices.

I propose we delete Java Edition hardware performance and all related pages. --AttemptToCallNil (report bug, view backtrace) 10:28, 13 May 2018 (UTC)


 * Bedrock Edition hardware performance isn't at all scientific either, so also isn't useful. –Majr ᐸ Talk Contribs 11:06, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Shouldn't it be archived and protected instead like with the old issues pages? - MinecraftPhotos4U (talk) 11:26, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Aren't issues pages just as pointless now? Oh, and there's recently been a proposal to unprotect issues pages.
 * The problem is maintenance. Unless it's deleted, we have to maintain it. --AttemptToCallNil (report bug, view backtrace) 11:29, 13 May 2018 (UTC)


 * Issue pages document historical bugs. If we knew all that data was documented elsewhere (maybe even including who reported it?), such as the issue tracker, then they could be deleted. The hardware performance pages don't contain any reliable information to begin with, so there's no reason to archive them. –Majr ᐸ <small style=display:inline-block;line-height:9px;vertical-align:-3px>Talk Contribs 11:42, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Letting users to submitting their performance data is complete useless. People only see the minimum requirements and recommended requirements. This page should only show the requirements, not the performance. The page Server/Requirements is long not updated. Server software from Mojang is completely free, so there is no need to worry. List of request for deletion page:
 * Java Edition hardware performance
 * Java Edition hardware performance/entries
 * These pages should instead be redirected to Java Edition hardware requirements. Skylord wars (talk) 11:53, 13 May 2018 (UTC)