Are the checkuser tools part of the Wikipedia repository?

We examine the less than successful stories of the Wikimedia Foundation to create and use technology. The poster boy for this forum is Visual Editor.
User avatar
Earthy Astringent
Banned
Posts: 1548
kołdry
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2015 7:16 am

Are the checkuser tools part of the Wikipedia repository?

Unread post by Earthy Astringent » Tue Sep 10, 2019 7:43 am

I’ve no idea how the Wiki software is organized. I’m assuming it’s in a github repo that you can download and create your own wiki site. Is that correct?

If so, do the checkuser tools come with it, or is that in its own private repo only available to the WMF? I can’t imagine that it’s public, because that would expose its secrets and any limitations.

User avatar
Dysklyver
Cornishman
Posts: 2337
Joined: Sun Nov 26, 2017 2:02 pm
Actual Name: Arthur Kerensa
Nom de plume: Dysk
Location: England

Re: Are the checkuser tools part of the Wikipedia repository

Unread post by Dysklyver » Tue Sep 10, 2019 9:12 am

Earthy Astringent wrote:I’ve no idea how the Wiki software is organized.
It's open source, go check out mediawiki.org.
Earthy Astringent wrote: I’m assuming it’s in a github repo that you can download and create your own wiki site. Is that correct?
Yes it's on github.
Earthy Astringent wrote:If so, do the checkuser tools come with it, or is that in its own private repo only available to the WMF?
No it's public and open source, available for everyone.
Earthy Astringent wrote: I can’t imagine that it’s public, because that would expose its secrets and any limitations.
Yeah it's slightly limited. As I outline in this thread and probably quite a lot elsewhere.
Globally banned after 7 years.

User avatar
Poetlister
Genius
Posts: 25599
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2013 8:15 pm
Nom de plume: Poetlister
Location: London, living in a similar way

Re: Are the checkuser tools part of the Wikipedia repository

Unread post by Poetlister » Tue Sep 10, 2019 10:02 am

I am aware of wikis not owned by the WMF which have checkusers. There is absolutely no secret about what the tools can and cannot do.
"The higher we soar the smaller we appear to those who cannot fly" - Nietzsche

User avatar
Kumioko
Muted
Posts: 6609
Joined: Sun Mar 03, 2013 2:36 am
Wikipedia User: Kumioko; Reguyla
Nom de plume: Persona non grata

Re: Are the checkuser tools part of the Wikipedia repository

Unread post by Kumioko » Wed Sep 11, 2019 7:25 pm

Years ago someone created a tool offisight that would let you run a checkuser type tool using the database download. It hasn't worked in years, but I believe it was called something like the "Poor man's checkuser tool" or something like that.

I don't know if it stopped working because the WMF stopped putting that data in the download or if it just stopped being maintained, but it shows that it can be done if the data is available.

User avatar
Poetlister
Genius
Posts: 25599
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2013 8:15 pm
Nom de plume: Poetlister
Location: London, living in a similar way

Re: Are the checkuser tools part of the Wikipedia repository

Unread post by Poetlister » Wed Sep 11, 2019 7:36 pm

As I understand it, IPs are kept in the live database forever. The checkuser tool is just a device to make things easier, rather than needing a developer each time an IP is needed. Obviously, the WMF does not want anyone other than very carefully selected people to see IPs, so they have somehow sabotaged the tool, possibly by stripping the IPs out of the downloadable database.
"The higher we soar the smaller we appear to those who cannot fly" - Nietzsche

Beeblebrox
Habitué
Posts: 3859
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 9:30 pm
Wikipedia User: Just Step Sideways
Location: The end of the road, Alaska

Re: Are the checkuser tools part of the Wikipedia repository

Unread post by Beeblebrox » Thu Sep 12, 2019 12:37 am

yeah, it's open source. And quite limited.
It's not at all intuitive for non-techies like myself.
I finally gave it up as I'd been promised some sort of training for 5 years but never got it. BURob was going to do it this year but we al know how that turned out, so I just kinda gave up on it.
information is not knowledge, knowledge is not wisdom