User talk:While False

Explain xkcd: It's 'cause you're dumb.
Jump to: navigation, search


I just found a bug in the vandal bot: if a page starts with "crap", it won't vandalize. Should we run a similar bot that just prepends the word crap once instead of replacing the text with the word repeated, to "vaccinate" the pages? One crap in addition to the page content would be a lot less disruptive than a page full of it. 22:03, 3 May 2022 (UTC)

Maybe. (See the source for some code that might work)
crap 22:11, 3 May 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for fixing the "crap" on my page[edit]

Hi While False
Saw your comment on my page, and did not see the crap post before I was looking into this here. Also read about the problems you had with FaIse account. Sad this happens. Sadly I'm not an admin and have no way on contacting any of them. Shame that the x.k.c.d account again is active. But it is very annoying. Thanks for putting my page right again. Hope it stays that way. Not sure what we can do, I'm not tech wizard... --Kynde (talk) 08:59, 4 May 2022 (UTC)

My Script[edit]

I thought I owed you a little explanation, since you showed interest earlier.

  1. Yeah, all the API stuff is indeed by Ozank.
  2. The tweaks to automatically run the rollback are by my friend KockaAdmiralac who I called on shortly before entering the fray.
  3. I contributed... An autoconfirmed account and enough knowledge of JavaScript to turn down the timer on the script and almost lock myself out of my account by refreshing constantly.

So, you know who to thank. Troll slain. Back to business as usual. That's right, Jacky720 just signed this (talk | contribs) 01:22, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

More context:
  • The base script is by Ozank, though it got rewritten by me at some point (probably without changing the API calls, though)
  • It also had to be adapted to work on vanilla MediaWiki at all
  • The last about two thousand reverts were made in part by a different script I wrote on this occasion, that I can rerun later if needed
Cube-shaped garbage can (talk) 09:54, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

Concision and clarity[edit]

In case it helps, I think that your edit was in response to the same person as did a few other edits not long ago, that I reverted. Encompassed by the following lines in Recent Changes, at the end of 2nd June:

  • 23:09 1490: Atoms‎‎ (2 changes | history) . . (0)‎ . . [‎;‎]
  • 23:08 1368: One Of The‎‎ (2 changes | history) . . (0)‎ . . [‎;‎]
  • 20:43 352: Far Away‎‎ (2 changes | history) . . (0)‎ . . [‎;‎]
  • 20:41 1140: Calendar of Meaningful Dates‎‎ (2 changes | history) . . (0)‎ . . [‎;‎]
Leaving you to find and follow the links, tabbing around to copy and paste addresses to link directly is quite awkward, since the latest update of this browser... Urgh!

By 'coincidence' or not, all the IPs involved in these original edits we reverted have Contrib histories showing various disruptions from the recent vandal. Not proof in itself, but the insertion of uselessly florid language ( <- no stranger to that myself, admittedly! ) - it looks like a new phase of "trying to mess things up" from the same geographic-at-least source. Subtle and not so disruptive, but maybe a drip drip drip thing with a long-game, unless even cleverer than currently obvious.
Anyway glad I'm not the only one who thought it was odd. Just thought I'd say. 12:43, 3 June 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. Seems malucious indeed. While False (talk) 21:59, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
I've just reverted several more of the same kind. While False (talk) 22:12, 3 June 2022 (UTC)

'Interesting' edits...[edit]

Ambox notice.png This commenter has a point.
Ambox notice.png
Ambox notice.png
Ambox notice.png
Ambox notice.png
Ambox notice.png This comment has been taken to heart.

I get some of the reasoning behind the splurge of edits you just made, but must admit that the whole also looks like it has a lot of rather random tweaking. No complaints, but... perhaps some of the things you really meant to Sandbox (or at least Preview and then abandon without actually saving) whilst you were exploring whatever it was you thought it worth trying out? 22:54, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

Perhaps it is so. While False (speak) 06:35, 3 October 2022 (UTC)

I think you accidentally enabled a spambot...[edit]

I could be wrong, but the only edit they have so far made definitely link-spammed with what appears to be spam-links (not followed them myself, just based upon my spidey-sense upon reading the raw URLs). With no obvious attempt of xkcd-ish parody/irony. Looks (semi-)automated copypasta. — Anyway, I've reverted it (much against my principles, but leaving an 'obvious SEO-fodder' seemed an even worse result) but I would defer to any future "Hey, this is real!" from the user (despite it being a spammer-type username), yourself or the other mods who may investigate my interference and come to the other conlusion. FYI, however, so that you know (sooner) to actually check it yourself. 10:43, 7 October 2022 (UTC)

Oh, that was not my intention. Your revert is obviously sensible. --While False (speak|museum) 19:59, 7 October 2022 (UTC) did it again. Not going to link, you can easily find the page I 'blanked' (or replaced, as it turns out) and look at what happened. Plus loads of other weird page-creations. Really no idea what you need to do it all for. Try sandbox/preview-only/your own pages and subpages, perhaps, for most of the little experiments you're doing today. 20:58, 31 October 2022 (UTC)

Bot Whisperer with While FalseWhile False (museum | talk | contributions | logs | rights) 21:58, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

House style[edit]

Ref: Königsberg Talk, the house style leans heavily against ==Section Headers== in the discussion section, but would typically be downgraded to ;Section Title format that's more just an aesthetic. Of course, each has its place, for when there's a lot to keep track of. And potentially a hash-anchored jumping in point might be useful and need to be ==...==ed, to some degree or other. It's not a consistent policy, but on balance it works that way. (Without back-editing loads of historic stuff, which I think is unnecessary - in case a certain other recent newly-accounted editor is passing by and reading this! ;) )

That aside, I'm with you in removing it, even as a visual-only section label. As far as that the Alumin(i)um discussion started off as a Titled thing in a total vacuum (nothing else even for it to need it to be marked separate from...) and nobody then bothered to further enTitle discussions that arose outside that scope, either. So it was, at best, potentially confusing until you edited it away. ;)

And, together with your judicious cutting of the image-caption cruft, this is why I think you're a good contributor, and (above things notwithstanding) I just wanted an excuse to say that I value your continued involvement here, as a definite positive. The minor details are arguable, of course, but your heart is definitely in the right sort of place. (For whatever degree the words of an accountless lurker/tweaker might actually matter!) 12:36, 6 November 2022 (UTC)

I give you thanks for the kind words. You are obviously well-versed in this site as well as in the wiki thing; out of curiosity, why don’t you use an account? —While False (museum | talk | contributions | logs | rights) 22:16, 6 November 2022 (UTC)
...too much fuss, if I can avoid it. If I don't have a login, I can't forget its details, and irrecoverably lose whatever transient social benefits I somehow acrued through using it. Plus I've not yet thought up a good username/'brand' for my presence. :P 02:25, 7 November 2022 (UTC)
(Hey, how interesting. You also edited 1305: Undocumented Feature, which in many ways encapsulates how I feel about being in this place like I am. Except that it aint that 'deep' and hidden. Pure coincidence, but strangely relevent!) 02:32, 7 November 2022 (UTC)

For the gods' sakes, why???[edit]

I don't understand your need to uselessly comment, and now this latest batch of jumping into seemingly random image comment pages and responding to things often years out of date and which clearly need no new response.

Are you just trying to get yourself listed as Contributor to as much of the site as possible? I don't think that's a good idea. Not if you can't do it sensibly. 19:00, 17 November 2022 (UTC)

History of Unicode image file talk[edit]

Hi, you added File talk:history of unicode zoom.png to my talk page. I hadn't seen the comment in that file's talk page until you notified me. The image was Randall's broken version of the comic before he fixed it on I can't remember the exact reasoning why I added the image here, it can be removed if it serves no purpose. -Asdf (talk) 04:09, 19 November 2022 (UTC)

That was probably not a judicious transclusion considering the age of the comment in question. I have no problem with the image. Please excuse my overzealous attempt at connecting you with the questioner several years to late. —While False (museum | talk | contributions | logs | rights | printable version | page information | what links there | related changes | Google search | current time: 11:14) 05:10, 19 November 2022 (UTC)

Your reflections worry me.[edit]

I cannot establish your true intent, but your recent assertions that you are not going to be much longer doing whateveritisyouaredoing has one level of worry (...a feeling of imminent fatality? intent to suddenly change to a less benign mode of interaction?) and now you seem to be granting some form of successorhood towards a randomly sampled new user which (on the balance of probabilities) may well be nothing more than a failed avatar for some spam-house operation. I won't link to your text on this, you know what I mean and the others of us who have also expressed concerns will probably have seen/be able to find this strange form of baton-passing message.

I hope for you a honest and restful future full of peace of mind, whatever you think your future fate may actually be, and would personally not even mind you continuing in a more judicious manner of editing. But, if your aim is to quit, this is my qualified tribute to the good work that you have done whilst underlining the more puzzling aspects to your behaviour, etc. Such as ignoring some perfectly good 'new' editors in your choice of representative heir to the good causes you insist you're performing. 00:33, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

Don’t worry, I just intend to do something else than frequenting this site, but thank you. —05:16, 15 December 2022 (UTC)


With this post, While False bids farewell to the gang and all IPs. While False will now without delay, and without saving it in While False’s digital keychain, change While False’s password to something impossible to remember and then without delay log out. While False is largely satisfied with While False’s contributions to this wiki, and so feels that now is a good time to retire. New discoveries and works await elsewhere in the world. While False wishes everyone, from Dgbrt to JLZ0 and from Davidy to (assuming he exists) Bram, all the best.

Do take care.

Yours truly,

While False 19:05, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

Welcome, While False, to explain xkcd!
Dialog-information on.svgPreferences-system.svgEdit-find-replace.svgTools-hammer.svgHelp-browser.svg
  • Be sure to give our FAQ a read so that you can learn to participate as effectively as possible.
  • If you are interested in editing the wiki, you can reduce the number of incomplete explanations and transcripts.
  • See the Wikipedia pages on editing if you are new to editing wikis in general.
  • Browse all the xkcd comics by navigating the category tree at Category:Comics.
  • Check out our community portal for general chit-chat about the site and xkcd.