Wikipedia talk:Request an account

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).

Contents

[edit] Email

Is this madness, or am I missing something? By asking users to post an email address, you are promoting spam. On talk pages and help desks we instruct users to never post an email address. Savvy users will create a throw-away address, but here we don't advise others to do so. This whole CAPTCHA thing seems like an emergency response that needs to be reconsidered with more community input. --KSmrqT 15:43, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Maybe a separate mailing list would be a better idea. John Reaves (talk) 18:37, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
I was just going to post the same thing. I don't really have a problem with image verification, but asking people to post plaintext email addresses here is just asking for trouble. Could the "email this user" function not be somehow incorporated into this process so the folks that need to know the potential editors addy will get it but it won't be publicly posted here - for example a prospective editor would simply post a username request and once they have a valid one (since I see there are quite a few with usernames already taken) then an admin can reply asking them to contact them through the "email this user" function with their email address and they will then mail them their password. I think this definitely needs to be better thought out. SFC9394 20:09, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
It's only possible to e-mail someone with the e-mail this user function if you already have an account with a valid e-mail address, so it won't work for this page. E-mailing a mailing list would probably work well. It could be set up like the oversight mailing list, so that anyone can send e-mails to it but only trusted users can read it. Another option might be to ask people to put the e-mail address in HTML comments, reducing its visibility, and perhaps regularly delete and recreate the page in order to clear out old e-mail addresses that have been used. Tra (Talk) 22:10, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
Anyone specifically targeting this page would be able to glean e-mail addresses from history. However, to just view the page with a normal spam targeter would only get addresses that haven't yet been processed. I can also get this page added to the robots.txt file if necessary. Ral315 » 23:18, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
So we expect scum-of-the-Earth spammers to respect the robots.txt directions? I quote from the linked article:
The protocol, however, is purely advisory. It relies on the cooperation of the web robot, so that marking an area of a site out of bounds with robots.txt does not guarantee privacy.
As for what they can glean, so far as I can tell determined spammers could automate the harvesting of everything, and use a zombie computer farm (a botnet) to help do it. --KSmrqT 08:08, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

I tried getting a mailing list; the developers rejected my request. The e-mail addresses are removed immediately upon the creation of an account, so the spamming likelihood is relatively low. We can't ask these users to add their e-mail in HTML comments, though, because many don't know what they're doing. Hell, half of them replace other people's requests with their own (requiring a diff-by-diff restoration). I'm willing to consider other alternatives if there are any, but we need to make it easier for end-users, not harder. Ral315 » 23:03, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

There's still the option of periodically deleting the whole page when the requests have been dealt with, then recreating it with the basic instructions. That way, although they are visible for a short period of time, e-mails and IP addresses are taken completely out of sight eventually, which is good for privacy reasons. Tra (Talk) 23:18, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
+1 for that proposal. — Edward Z. Yang(Talk) 00:55, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
Once spammers learn they can keep an eye on one page to get a never-ending supply of valid email addresses, these lame rationalizations will be exposed for the nonsense they are. Please, discuss this whole CAPTCHA idea with the larger community. This page is too tiny and hidden a forum for such an important design dialog. --KSmrqT 01:54, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
Tell that to Bugzilla. — Edward Z. Yang(Talk) 02:36, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Why not just have requests sent to the admin mailing list? John Reaves (talk) 17:48, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

There's an admin mailing list? Titoxd(?!?) 23:18, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
Er, I think I confused it the IRC channel, which, in this case, wouldn't help since it requires permission and new users most likely don't use IRC. Oooops...John Reaves (talk) 23:21, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Potential for Abuse

And I don't even mean malicious abuse. I mean well-meaning folks who haven't the slightest that Wikipedia can be edited by anyone and think you have to go through some sort of screening process in order to get an account. Given the amount of traffic this page has received since its inception, I highly doubt that every person who requested an account was unable to solve the captcha (and much less use a text-only browser.) — Edward Z. Yang(Talk) 04:08, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

The instructions do say that the page should be used if the captcha can't be solved, so someone who posts here incorrectly will only create a bit more work, and this should not cause too many problems. Also, this page could perhaps also be used for allowing people to register a username that would normally not be permitted for being too similar to another username. Tra (Talk) 17:31, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Possible changes

It would seem possible to make this list something automatically generated by the account creation procedure and display it on a '/Special:' page visible only to admins. Just capture the userid, password, and e-mail they use to try to create the account and write them out to the page if they click a 'I cannot resolve this image' button. That would require dev work, but remove all the problems of users over-writing other requests, e-mail addresses being displayed, et cetera.

Also, hasn't anyone developed a sound-based equivalent to CAPTCHA? As in, click a button to play a sound file and then type in the word spoken. That would enable most blocked users to create their own accounts. Some users/browsers would still require an account to be created for them, but it should be a tiny percentage. --CBD 13:24, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

If a sound-based equivalent was developed, it would probably end up generating OGG files, which would require plugins to use and it would not be very user-friendly. Tra (Talk) 17:36, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
Since they're small enough, we could serve raw WAV files. — Edward Z. Yang(Talk) 21:38, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Evaluation - waste of time?

I have just done my bit for this function. Seems to me that many new users (as noted above) are deleting other requests when they add their own. With that level of competence, I wonder have they even tried to create their own account (or how they are going to go editing). I also notice that for the accounts created - only one (Scepterstein Records (talk • contribs)has any contributions - is this a waste of time? --Golden Wattle talk 01:26, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

I'd argue that there are accounts who don't edit immediately (I didn't edit for a while after creating my account); also, if even one editor becomes a constructive member of the Wikipedia community, I consider that a success. Ral315 » 19:55, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
I scroll back through the diffs since the last administrator marked it as completed-to-that-point. Daniel Bryant 08:03, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
That's what I do as well. Ral315 » 07:02, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Do you need to be an admin to handle requests?

All the documentation here talks about how admins can handle requests and create accounts. However, I, a normal user, have managed to follow the instructions mentioned successfully to assist in the creation of a few accounts through this page. So, is it a mistake or is there something I've missed? Tra (Talk) 00:07, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

You don't; however, I've envisioned the page as aimed at mostly admins and experienced users, since it can involve e-mailing users, and most importantly, because users are only limited to 6 account creations per IP per day, and I've put in a bugzilla request to allow admins to create unlimited accounts. Ral315 » 00:15, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Usernames too similar to existing accounts

Perhaps this page could be expanded to allow users to register accounts that would normally be prevented for being too similar to an existing account, since it is quite likely that the account that it clashes with is dormant/unused so there shouldn't be too much of a problem in registering the name in most cases. This could probably be done by linking to this page from the error message given by MediaWiki:antispoof-name-conflict. Tra (Talk) 22:14, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

I have no personal objection for doing so. Ral315 » 23:36, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
In that case, maybe MediaWiki:antispoof-name-conflict could be changed to say something like The name "$1" is very similar to the existing account "$2". To prevent abuse, please [[Wikipedia:Request an account|request an administrator]] to create this account for you. Tra (Talk) 00:08, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
I'd prefer something more along the lines of The name "$1" is very similar to the existing account "$2". Please choose another nickname, or [[Wikipedia:Request an account|request an administrator]] to create this account for you.
Yes, I think that sounds better. Tra (Talk) 00:16, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
This has been done, seeing no objection. Administrators will have to handle these, obviously, and they should be declined when they're close to quite established users. Ral315 » 02:25, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
I think there should be a seperate page for handling those, and requests here which are similar should be moved to there. Requests there should be required to, in addition to the requested account name, contain the name of the existing account to allow admins to check if it's humanly close to the name of an acitve user. Od Mishehu 09:02, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
What might work would be to have two sets of instructions and preloads for each type of request, then get everyone to add their request to one page making it easy to deal with. The preload for accounts that are similar to other accounts would look different, so they would be easy to distinguish. Tra (Talk) 17:59, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
It seems that the new bot, User:AccReqBot, has removed a bunch of requests that were "too close" to an existing user name. A lot of those were valid requests, where the existing user name was old and inactive. They should be reinstated, I think. jwillburtalk 20:38, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
I agree. I've put them back and notified ST47 (talk • contribs). Tra (Talk) 20:52, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Usurpation

Has anyone come across a request for an account that could be usurped? We should create a procedure for allowing user to request usurpation, perhaps creating username (temporary) and directing them to WP:CHU/U. John Reaves (talk) 09:31, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Would probably just confuse newcomers, in my opinion. If they want to have their usernames renamed, then we should let them find CHU?U themselves/demonstrate that they will be solid contributors, rather than busying the beaurecrats with username usurpations that will never be used.
Because usurps take 30 days, sending every newcomer to CHU/U when 90% of them never make another edit would only be a waste of time, in my opinion. Daniel Bryant 11:13, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
Good point. John Reaves (talk) 11:18, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Request an account/top

Is anyone opposed to moving the instructions and whatnot to Wikipedia:Request an account/top and transcluding it so the page isn't as frightening to new users in edit mode? John Reaves (talk) 22:45, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

That's quite a good idea. Another benefit of this is that the page history of updates to the instructions is preserved, which will increase compliance with the GFDL, since Wikipedia:Request an account is deleted periodically. Tra (Talk) 23:25, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Re-arrangement of page

I've re-arranged the page so that requesters now add their request using &section=new, which should hopefully reduce the number of users who overwrite each other's requests. Tra (Talk) 01:37, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

A great idea. I award you a cookie, or something. Ral315 » 20:48, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Template, if anyone else wants to use it

See Wikipedia:Request an account/T. Provides some very handy links to make things easier. Added benefit is it doesn't display emails on page (and instead adds it to the autofill link to create the account - thanks VoA for that one!). Could maybe be used to format requests, when a person is over their 6-limit quota and can't create the account straight away? Cheers, Daniel Bryant 05:39, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

PS: any news about the limit removal? Daniel Bryant 08:06, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
When we get a scap, we'll be fine; until then, we're waiting. However, I found out that my IP is dynamic, so I should be able to get a lot of requests taken care of during the week. Ral315 » 09:14, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
It might be a few days before I can do this again- please, someone bug brion to scap :) Ral315 » 21:49, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Spam

Moved from WP:ACC

Hello, I put my new spamless for-six-months email address on this page and within days it got spam. I'm rather unhappy about this. Please warn users signing up here not to put their email address in plaintext. E.g, put the following text under item 2:

DO NOT enter it in plain form (e.g. "foo@bar.com"); it WILL be picked up by spammers. Instead enter something like "foo_removeThis_@bar.com" or "foo (a t) bar d o t com".

Thank you.

I've added a note to the yellow box recommending that people use disposable e-mail addresses. Tra (Talk) 18:52, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
Dunno if that's doable (i.e. if people will understand the directions), but we could ask them to "cut" their e-mail address in 2 parts username and domain, for example foo@bar.com would be email1=foo|email2=bar.com. Hopefully that would make things harder for spambots. -- lucasbfr talk 11:02, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Bot Desperately Needed

We really need a bot to tend this page and add completed requests to the archive. This is becoming quite a disaster. I'm posting over on Wikipedia:Bot requests, but I'd encourage anyone with bot experience to consider coding up a solution. Thanks! alphachimp 18:51, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

That's probably easier said than done. For one thing, since this page is aimed at new users, a lot of them do not fill out the form correctly, which can confuse the bot. Also, when the bot completes requests, it would be limited to 6 accounts per IP address, which would slow it down. There's also the problem of dealing with all of the captchas. I think what's mainly needed is just more people handling requests. Tra (Talk) 18:58, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
I'm going to simplify the form a little. Honestly, I don't think it'd be too hard. The bot just has to check whether the account exists. If it exists when the request is posted, the request will be marked as bad. If it exists anytime after 5 minutes after the request and is shown as created by another user, it'd move the request to the archive. This is mostly a solution to ease the archiving process. alphachimp 19:05, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Please see and comment at Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/AccReqBot. --kingboyk 12:43, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Updated Preload Text

I've updated the preload text to make it a lot easier for admins/users to create accounts. Check out Wikipedia:Request an account/preload. I'd be interested in your comments about the new formatting. I think it will improve our workflow quite a bit. alphachimp 23:04, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

This should make it much easier to create accounts, and save a lot of copy and pasting. You could even put &wpPassword=123&wpRetype=123 into the URL, since the passwords entered in the form will not work if you click 'by e-mail'. Fingers crossed that the requesters manage to fill out the form correctly, however. Tra (Talk) 23:23, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
That's my big concern, and why I put the example in the commented area. We do have to expect a certain amount of errors, but it might help. Could you add the 123 password bit? I'm not quite sure where to put it. alphachimp 23:31, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, I've put it in. Now, as long as people fill in the form correctly (which I hope they do), all that needs to be done is fill in the captcha. Tra (Talk) 23:33, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
Hmm, I think we need to change the template name from Template:LEAVE THIS TEXT UNCHANGED, as it might be interpretted as "leave this line unchanged". The last two users completely missed changing that line of text. alphachimp 23:35, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
How about changing the template so it can be used in the form:
{{account request

|username =
|e-mail address =

}}
This might be easier to fill in maybe. Tra (Talk) 23:44, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
That might help out a lot. I just changed it to Template:Enter username and email on the right, but feel free to move it at your leisure. alphachimp 23:47, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
Let's see if your version works for the next few people who sign up and if it doesn't, maybe try my idea. Tra (Talk) 00:10, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Am I missing something?

Hi, I've recently posted a request for an account and it appears to have been created. The username requested was "Ab.er.rant". I have received an email requesting that I confirm the account registration by clicking on the link (which I did). The link does not auto-login so I stumped as to what the password for my account is (and no, the password wasn't mentioned in the email. Am I supposed to wait for a second email? Thanks. 58.71.154.194 06:48, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

I might have done that one wrong, you should receive another e-mail with a temporary password shortly. John Reaves (talk) 07:18, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
Got it! Thanks! Ab.er.rant 08:17, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] on pneumatic conveying

i m not able to find topic on pneumatic coneying

That might be quite a specific topic. You could try asking for the information you're looking for at the Reference desk. Tra (Talk) 23:45, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../r/e/q/Wikipedia_talk%7ERequest_an_account_2765.html"