User talk:Blablubbs/Archive 8

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 5 Archive 6 Archive 7 Archive 8 Archive 9


Administrators' newsletter – September 2022

News and updates for administrators from the past month (August 2022).

Guideline and policy news

  • A discussion is open to define a process by which Vector 2022 can be made the default for all users.
  • An RfC is open to gain consensus on whether Fox News is reliable for science and politics.

Technical news

Arbitration

  • An arbitration case regarding Conduct in deletion-related editing has been closed. The Arbitration Committee passed a remedy as part of the final decision to create a request for comment (RfC) on how to handle mass nominations at Articles for Deletion (AfD).
  • The arbitration case request Jonathunder has been automatically closed after a 6 month suspension of the case.

Miscellaneous

  • The new pages patrol (NPP) team has prepared an appeal to the Wikimedia Foundation (WMF) for assistance with addressing Page Curation bugs and requested features. You are encouraged to read the open letter before it is sent, and if you support it, consider signing it. It is not a discussion, just a signature will suffice.
  • Voting for candidates for the Wikimedia Board of Trustees is open until 6 September.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:11, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

Happy First Adminship Anniversary!

Wishing Blablubbs a very happy adminship anniversary on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Chris Troutman (talk) 17:19, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

Happy Adminship Anniversary!

About removing sections from other user's talkpages

Why am I not allowed to remove sections that I created from other user's talk pages? When Dunkleosteus77 told me not to talk about User talk:Dunkleosteus77#Paramylodon GA anymore, I thought that he meant to remove it at his request. But then, he tells me not to remove it, and I don't know why. Please respond. Magnatyrannus (talk | contribs) 01:55, 16 September 2022 (UTC)

@Magnatyrannus: It is considered acceptable to remove or alter posts to other people's user talk pages for a brief period after posting, but you should not do so after someone has responded, and you should never remove other's posts from their talk pages. The decision of whether to remove/archive/keep exchanges on their talk page is left to the user in question; someone telling you that they do not wish to continue a conversation does not mean that they don't wish to retain the discussion on their talk page. Please have a look at Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines for more detailed guidance. --Blablubbs (talk) 16:36, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Even when i adequately explain the deletion of the section, they keep it? Magnatyrannus (talk | contribs) 22:00, 24 September 2022 (UTC)
@Magnatyrannus: It's their prerogative to keep it if they wish, yes. --Blablubbs (talk) 22:24, 24 September 2022 (UTC)

October 2022 New Pages Patrol backlog drive

New Page Patrol | October 2022 backlog drive
  • On 1 October, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin.
  • Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles patrolled and for maintaining a streak throughout the drive.
  • Barnstars will also be awarded for re-reviewing articles.
  • Redirect patrolling is not part of the drive.
  • Sign up here!
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

(t · c) buidhe 21:16, 23 September 2022 (UTC)

Globcal International

Hi, would you be willing to email me a copy of the deleted wikitext for the subject article? I promise not to post it here without WP:THREE.   — Jeff G. ツ 12:27, 27 September 2022 (UTC)

@Jeff G.: May I ask what you plan to use the article text for/what drew your attention to it? The article is pretty promotional and there was some concerning history surrounding it, so I'm rather hesitant. --Blablubbs (talk) 19:50, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
I would like to compare it with https://deletionpedia.org/en/Globcal_International . See also this edit.   — Jeff G. ツ 01:19, 29 September 2022 (UTC)
@Jeff G.: It's almost the same text, but looks to have been reworked before it was posted to deletionpedia; there are some formatting changes and additional text that wasn't present in the Wikipedia version. I hope that's sufficient for your purposes – if you need details, everybodywiki (which I can't link to because it's full of spam and hence blacklisted here) has an import of the Wikipedia page shortly before deletion; that import was also later rewritten. --Blablubbs (talk) 10:47, 29 September 2022 (UTC)
Thanks!   — Jeff G. ツ 15:02, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

Draft:Alexandre Arnault and Paulo.gomes.1964

Hi Blablubbs, back in July you blocked Sedentaire (talk · contribs) along with Jaffredo (talk · contribs) in relation to the Avisa Partners scandal. Sedentaire had submitted Draft:Alexandre Arnault (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs), which actually was originally created by Paulo.gomes.1964 (talk · contribs), later G13d then recreated by Sedentaire. @MER-C: rejected the draft but now it has been resubmitted by Paulo.gomes.1964. Given the history and looking at Paulo.gomes.1964 contribution history I suspect they are part the "ring". For example, a focus on net worth: Jaffredo, Paulo.gomes.1964. Also, I found this news article which summaries the scandal and states Bernard Arnault, Alexandre's father was an Avisa client (fr.wiki had referenced a this Mediapart article but it required a subscription). I started to reject the draft outright but thought I'd better get a second opinion. S0091 (talk) 18:29, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

@S0091: Thanks for the message – I can certainly see where your suspicion comes from. I'm about to log off, but I'll try to have a closer look tomorrow (if MER-C doesn't beat me to it). Also pinging @Jules*: In case he'd like to have a look (also, Jules, I just responded to your e-mail :). --Blablubbs (talk) 20:19, 29 September 2022 (UTC)
Hi and thanks for the ping. I will take a look tomorrow! — Jules* talk 20:29, 29 September 2022 (UTC)
Hm. Upon review, I think there might well be something here, but I'm not confident enough to block. The resubmission piques my interest, especially because Paulo.gomes.1964 previously created the same draft. The editing pattern is otherwise somewhat divergent though, and so I wouldn't quite be willing to block based on behaviour alone. @GeneralNotability: Could I ask you to have a look with your CU goggles? Between Special:PageHistory/Draft:Alexandre Arnault and Special:Undelete/Draft:Alexandre Arnault, I think there should be enough for a check. Sedentaire and Jaffredo are both non-stale. --Blablubbs (talk) 21:49, 30 September 2022 (UTC)
Blablubbs,  Inconclusive, I'd say it is fairly likely that Paulo.gomes is using residential proxies. The one IP I see that might not be a proxy is not in the same country as Sedentaire's apparent location. GeneralNotability (talk) 21:59, 30 September 2022 (UTC)
Thanks all for taking at look. The inconclusive finding is not surprising as I imagine those involved are all over the place and I agree the behavioural evidence is a bit loose so AGF is the way to go unless something else turns up. Blablubbs, I hope you do get the CU tools as I think you will be a great addition to the CU team. S0091 (talk) 20:14, 2 October 2022 (UTC)
@S0091: I concur with your analysis – sorry for not following up earlier. I came back to this a couple times and couldn't really get a good read on the situation – I'm frankly still not entirely sure what to make of it – but it does fall short of the threshold of evidence where I would be comfortable taking action. And thank you for the kind words, they are much appreciated! --Blablubbs (talk) 20:33, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

Jgqdg

See the dialogue under his unblock request. Would you be in favor of unblocking under those terms? Daniel Case (talk) 18:43, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

@Daniel Case: I'd lean towards declining, given that these accounts have a significant history of COI editing, and the productive edits mostly struck me as attempts to cover up the rest, as opposed to genuine efforts toward building an encyclopaedia. They've written quite a few articles that raise eyebrows, so I'd also be interested to get a more complete COI (and maybe PAID(?)) disclosure. I do feel obligated to point out that while I did block their most recent sock, I am otherwise not super familiar with the case – paging @GeneralNotability and @Spicy: You two handled Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Mostly shoaib/Archive#28 April 2022 (which was about their most prolific account, Tamingimpala), I'd be curious to hear your thoughts, if you have the time. --Blablubbs (talk) 20:07, 29 September 2022 (UTC)
I'm not an administrator, just a clerk, so I don't know if my input on an unblock request is of any use. However, since I was invited to share my opinion, I'll go ahead and say say that I would oppose an unblock. I don't agree with their claim that almost every bit of edits were to make this wiki a better place, except those tiny few ones which were of self-promotion. The Tamingimpala account had actually been on my radar for a long time before I was aware of the sockpuppetry/COI issue, because they were engaging in a variety of strange and disruptive behaviour. In particular, many of the non-spam articles that they created were unattributed machine translations from other wikis, with fake sources.
For example, see Marie von Bunsen. This is a translation of de:Marie von Bunsen, but the reference list is entirely different from that of the dewiki article. It's quite curious that an article on a British-born German writer would mainly be referenced to American newspaper clippings. Checking the sources reveals that they do not support the content at all. For example, the first citation, used to reference her birth and death dates, does not mention either date; it only states that she was 70 at the time the article was written (in 1931). This is used to support Marie was born in London, United Kingdom, to a wealthy, liberal family. It does not mention her birthplace, and the "wealthy, liberal" bit is at best implicit. The next citation is this, used to support Her father was a Prussian politician and member of the Reichstag, Georg von Bunsen (1824–1896). The cited source has absolutely nothing to do with her father. It is just a quote of Marie talking about her opinion on divorce. And so on. Mathilde Mann has the same issue - many of the sources have already been tagged as failing verification. Louise Pagenkopf is similar, and the first reference cited there is a mirror of the dewiki article. There were many more pages like this, but most of them have been G5d.
The impression is that the user was machine translating articles from other wikis en masse to build up a track record to apply for rights such as autopatrolled - perhaps because this would be beneficial if one intends to engage in promotional editing. However, most other wikis have looser attitudes towards inline referencing, and their articles would not pass NPP review in their original state. So, they punched the subject's name into newspapers.com or Google and inserted whatever they found without bothering to check if the sources actually supported the content. Even without taking the COI and sock issues into account, this is highly disruptive, bad-faith behaviour. There were also repeated issues with unattributed copying within Wikipedia [1]. I think the goal of this behaviour was similar, although it's not quite as disruptive as adding fake references.
In their unblock request, they cite their NPP and AfC work as a reason why they should be unblocked. I disagree and see their pursuit of those user rights as a bad-faith attempt to subvert community processes for promotional purposes. I also do not believe the claim that they only created 2 promotional articles - evidence regarding the extent of their COI editing was sent to the paid-en mailing list. Apologies for the length of this reply. Spicy (talk) 22:35, 29 September 2022 (UTC)
Don't think I have anything to add that Spicy hasn't already said. GeneralNotability (talk) 23:35, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – October 2022

News and updates for administrators from the past month (September 2022).

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • The Articles for creation helper script now automatically recognises administrator accounts which means your name does not need to be listed at WP:AFCP to help out. If you wish to help out at AFC, enable AFCH by navigating to Preferences → Gadgets and checking the "Yet Another AfC Helper Script" box.

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:42, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

User:Mostly shoaib

I would like to make an enquiry about the user. Could you please tell me the intention of the mastersock on editing Wikipedia? I asked you because you blocked his previous sock account, also I observe an account where simple:Bidhan Rebeiro was created today where it's enwiki page was deleted under G5. If I get some basic info, I will keep an eye on that account (on simplewiki of course), best. DMK-C5 (talk) 12:34, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

  • Blablubbs, I'm inclined to block this user as a sock of Ankitdevarpan. Thoughts?--Bbb23 (talk) 13:01, 1 October 2022 (UTC)
    @Bbb23, do you mean I'm the sock of the above user? DMK-C5 (talk) 08:07, 2 October 2022 (UTC)
    Or User:MoviegeekSouthAsia? DMK-C5 (talk) 08:20, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

PravinGanechari

Hi, I noticed that you complained twice about getting e-mails from PG. Yesterday latish I got an e-mail as well. However, it isn't the "normal" e-mail I receive from users. Instead, it looked like it was associated with UTRS #63897, but when I look at the UTRS, I don't see any indication that an e-mail was sent to me. I do see his appeal comment, which, as usual, is not completely clear and says in part: "But on which mail to send the information of SPI case. Just give mail id." The text of the e-mail is not the same as the text of the appeal. Anyway, I've never received an e-mail like this from a user before. Do you know how all this works (like you, I'm not keen on receiving e-mail from blocked users, even when they don't have Talk page access). Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 12:48, 9 October 2022 (UTC)

Hey Bbb23 – that's strange. I don't believe UTRS has much email functionality (judging from WP:UTRS, it does notify appellants by email if their account isn't actually blocked, but that shouldn't be relevant here) – I've never gotten any, at least. All the emails I received from PG were sent via Special:EmailUser/Blablubbs, i.e. they were delivered by wiki@wikimedia.org and end with the usual "This email was sent by user..." blurb. What was different about the one you got? --Blablubbs (talk) 13:04, 9 October 2022 (UTC)
It's completely different. First, I received no notification by en.wiki that an e-mail was sent. Second, PG's e-mail address is not there, meaning I couldn't reply even if I wished to. Third, it's formatted differently with an icon and a button in it. Fourth, it doesn't have the usual disclaimer at the bottom that starts with "The sender has not been given the recipient's email address ..." Instead, it has something that I believe is in Hindi and the Foundation's San Francisco address. Deepfriedokra, you appear to spend a large chunk of your life at UTRS - does any of this mean anything to you?--Bbb23 (talk) 13:14, 9 October 2022 (UTC)
Ooh, I have an idea what this might be: Is it possible that the e-mail is an automatic notification for this edit that PG made to your hiwiki talk page? That would explain the Hindi text, WMF information and absence of a return email address. --Blablubbs (talk) 14:03, 9 October 2022 (UTC)
Good job! Now, how do I prevent that from happening, preferably on all projects. I know I don't get e-mail notifications when my en.wiki Talk page is edited (god help me if I did). There's a setting in Global preferences/Email options that might do it, but it's not clear to me. The second entry has two checkboxes, one on the left and one on the right. Currently, the left one is checked. The one on the right ("Allow other users to email me/This global preference has a local exception on this wiki.") is unchecked. What would happen if I unchecked the left one?--Bbb23 (talk) 14:44, 9 October 2022 (UTC)
The left checkbox indicates that you wish to make a setting global, while the right one modifies the actual setting. In this case, this means that Special:EmailUser is disabled by default on all wikis, and only works if you have set a local exception in the Email options section of Special:Preferences. Unchecking the left one would simply mean that you have not set any global preference for Special:EmailUser, so it would fall back to whatever the default setting is. Notifications like the one you received are handled separately: If you go to Special:GlobalPreferences#mw-prefsection-echo and look at the Notify me about these events section, you should see detailed global notifications preferences. Make sure the blue checkbox on the left is checked to enable global handling of notification settings, and then see if the "Email" box in the "Edit to my user talk page" column is checked; if it is, uncheck the box and then save your settings, which should disable email notifications for talk page edits on every wiki where you have not explicitly enabled it. I believe that should fix it – let me know if you want me to leave you a message on another wiki to test the settings. --Blablubbs (talk) 15:14, 9 October 2022 (UTC)
The e-mail box is unchecked, but I think that means only that it will default to local settings unless I make the whole thing global. BTW, I've never understood what the other two columns mean (Web and Apps). I suspect they don't apply to me because of the way I edit, but can you explain it to me? Thanks for your continuing help.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:33, 9 October 2022 (UTC)
Indeed, you will have to enable the global preference checkbox in the left column for that section in order to make the setting apply to other wikis. You can still keep your current enwiki settings by navigating to Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-echo and enabling Set a local exception for this global preference. in the relevant section, though. "Web" refers to the notification area on the Wikipedia site, i.e. the place that display pings, "thanks" and revert notifications and so on. "Apps" refers to notifications displayed by Wikimedia mobile apps, so that section only matters if you use any of those. --Blablubbs (talk) 15:54, 9 October 2022 (UTC)
That all makes sense. I edit Wikipedia on only two devices, a PC and a tablet, the latter comparatively little. When it comes to mobile phones, I am a creature of the 19th century. I have a mobile, but it's very old and I only keep it around for emergencies and because it doesn't cost me anything - I can't remember the last time I used it. Even if I had a smartphone, I wouldn't use it to edit Wikipedia. As for PG, I just received two e-mail from him in the "usual" way and have disabled e-mail. I'll deal with my global preferences later today. Thanks again.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:33, 9 October 2022 (UTC)
You're not missing out on much, at least when it comes to Wikipedia – I edit from a phone more often than I'd like, usually by using the desktop website in a browser because the mobile skin doesn't have good script support and the apps are mostly made for readers. Even on a reasonably big display, it's mostly a game of "Blablubbs tries to hit the right button in under 3 attempts", and I lose pretty often. At least I've managed to not accidentally break the main page (yet). Anyway: Happy to help! --Blablubbs (talk) 18:05, 9 October 2022 (UTC)
Even with a larger screen on my tablet, I worry when I edit Wikipedia. I'm a relatively good, fast touch typist on a physical keyboard, but I'm not very used to virtual keyboards, so I have to stare at what I'm editing and the keyboard, making sure I'm even in the right spot in the edit box...anyway, the whole thing usually takes me forever to do what on the PC would have taken me a few moments. Back to global options - I waited too long yesterday to change my global options and so got two more notification e-mail from our friend. My global options are now changed, so would you please post a message to my Talk page at de.wiki and let me know here when you've done so? BTW, something has occurred to me even as I write this. I'm fairly certain that there have been posts to my Talk pages on other projects before this and I've not received these *%&* e-mail. Are the local option defaults different on different projects (if you know)?--Bbb23 (talk) 12:42, 10 October 2022 (UTC)
 Done in w:de:Special:Diff/226918976. Did it work? I'm not entirely sure about the answer to your second question – I checked using my testing alt for which I'm certain that I haven't previously messed with any preferences on any project except enwiki, and the notification defaults looked to be the same on all the ones I checked (itwp, dewp, commons, meta, enwikibooks, wikidata); I can't tell you whether local projects have the option of specifying different defaults if they choose, though. --Blablubbs (talk) 13:06, 10 October 2022 (UTC)
Worked; thanks! As far as the second question, I guess it'll remain a mystery...maybe it's my brain that's not working properly. :) --Bbb23 (talk) 13:31, 10 October 2022 (UTC)
AFAIK, UTRS does not email us. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 16:36, 9 October 2022 (UTC)
  • Blablubbs, sorry to bother you again so soon, but could you e-mail me using the en.wiki e-mail system and let me know when you've done so? If you look at my Talk page, you'll see that an editor says that they e-mailed me several hours ago. However, I have not received it or a notification of it. When I changed my global preferences, I did not touch User profile/Email otions, so it is as follows: "Allow other users to email me" is checked, and "Set a local exception for this global preference." is checked. Thanks a lot.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:18, 11 October 2022 (UTC)
    @Bbb23:  Done. --Blablubbs (talk) 13:22, 11 October 2022 (UTC)
    Received and notified, so I'll assume it's the user's problem. Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:31, 11 October 2022 (UTC)
  • Do I have to be nicer to you now that you're a big shot? Congratulations.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:59, 12 October 2022 (UTC)
    You should be nice, but only because I'll withhold tech support if you're mean to me . Seriously though – thanks. --Blablubbs (talk) 20:54, 12 October 2022 (UTC)

2022 CheckUser and Oversight appointments: candidates appointed

The Arbitration Committee is pleased to welcome the following editors to the functionary team:

The committee thanks all members of the community who participated and helped bring this process to a successful conclusion.

For the Arbitration Committee,

Cabayi (talk) 09:07, 12 October 2022 (UTC)

Discuss this at: Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard § 2022 CheckUser and Oversight appointments: candidates appointed

New Page Patrol newsletter October 2022

Hello Blablubbs,

Much has happened since the last newsletter over two months ago. The open letter finished with 444 signatures. The letter was sent to several dozen people at the WMF, and we have heard that it is being discussed but there has been no official reply. A related article appears in the current issue of The Signpost. If you haven't seen it, you should, including the readers' comment section.

Awards: Barnstars were given for the past several years (thanks to MPGuy2824), and we are now all caught up. The 2021 cup went to John B123 for leading with 26,525 article reviews during 2021. To encourage moderate activity, a new "Iron" level barnstar is awarded annually for reviewing 360 articles ("one-a-day"), and 100 reviews earns the "Standard" NPP barnstar. About 90 reviewers received barnstars for each of the years 2018 to 2021 (including the new awards that were given retroactively). All awards issued for every year are listed on the Awards page. Check out the new Hall of Fame also.

Software news: Novem Linguae and MPGuy2824 have connected with WMF developers who can review and approve patches, so they have been able to fix some bugs, and make other improvements to the Page Curation software. You can see everything that has been fixed recently here. The reviewer report has also been improved.

NPP backlog May – October 15, 2022

Suggestions:

  • There is much enthusiasm over the low backlog, but remember that the "quality and depth of patrolling are more important than speed".
  • Reminder: an article should not be tagged for any kind of deletion for a minimum of 15 minutes after creation and it is often appropriate to wait an hour or more. (from the NPP tutorial)
  • Reviewers should focus their effort where it can do the most good, reviewing articles. Other clean-up tasks that don't require advanced permissions can be left to other editors that routinely improve articles in these ways (creating Talk Pages, specifying projects and ratings, adding categories, etc.) Let's rely on others when it makes the most sense. On the other hand, if you enjoy doing these tasks while reviewing and it keeps you engaged with NPP (or are guiding a newcomer), then by all means continue.
  • This user script puts a link to the feed in your top toolbar.

Backlog:

Saving the best for last: From a July low of 8,500, the backlog climbed back to 11,000 in August and then reversed in September dropping to below 6,000 and continued falling with the October backlog drive to under 1,000, a level not seen in over four years. Keep in mind that there are 2,000 new articles every week, so the number of reviews is far higher than the backlog reduction. To keep the backlog under a thousand, we have to keep reviewing at about half the recent rate!

Reminders
  • Newsletter feedback - please take this short poll about the newsletter.
  • If you're interested in instant messaging and chat rooms, please join us on the New Page Patrol Discord, where you can ask for help and live chat with other patrollers.
  • Please add the project discussion page to your watchlist.
  • If you are no longer very active on Wikipedia or you no longer wish to be a reviewer, please ask any admin to remove you from the group. If you want the tools back again, just ask at PERM.
  • To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

Fincy

Whoops! Thanks for the heads up! I've CSD'd it as G5. - UtherSRG (talk) 14:02, 24 October 2022 (UTC)

@UtherSRG: Oh, I think your deletion conflicted with my response on the talk page – I don't think it's technically eligible for G5, see [2]. --Blablubbs (talk) 14:20, 24 October 2022 (UTC)

Happy First Edit Day!

Happy First Edit Day!

Administrators' newsletter – December 2022

News and updates for administrators from the past month (November 2022).

CheckUser changes

removed TheresNoTime

Oversight changes

removed TheresNoTime

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • A new preference named "Enable limited width mode" has been added to the Vector 2022 skin. The preference is also shown as a toggle on every page if your monitor is 1600 pixels or wider. When disabled it removes the whitespace added by Vector 2022 on the left and right of the page content. Disabling this preference has the same effect as enabling the wide-vector-2022 gadget. (T319449)

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:43, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

Sock

As the blocking admin for User:Sedentaire I would love to draw your attention this User who just came out of the blue to re-submit this Draft:Alexandre Arnault. Probably the same group of people trying to evade block. Worth another check. Jamiebuba (talk) 20:43, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

@Jamiebuba: This one has come up before, see User talk:Blablubbs/Archive 26#Draft:Alexandre Arnault and Paulo.gomes.1964 – they haven't edited since. I'm happy to take another look if they make any more related edits. --Blablubbs (talk) 21:04, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
Thanks and cheers. Jamiebuba (talk) 09:00, 6 December 2022 (UTC)

DevilBlack69

You know the drill. Active on es.wiki, created account here. ☆ Bri (talk) 05:06, 6 December 2022 (UTC)

 Likely. Blocked. --Blablubbs (talk) 09:23, 6 December 2022 (UTC)

Cheers ☆ Bri (talk) 01:59, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

 Confirmed, blocked. No others seen. I'll ask for a lock. --Blablubbs (talk) 16:04, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

Happy new year! ☆ Bri (talk) 23:42, 8 January 2023 (UTC)

Handled, thanks. And to you as well! --Blablubbs (talk) 11:44, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

User:Kofi4495 and User:Evelynkwapong539

Hey. One thing I noticed while going through User:Kofi4495 and User:Evelynkwapong539 while I was blocked is that Evelyn’s socks have Kofi’s username in them. They haven’t socked in a while, according to behavioral evidence, but I believe based on their username’s that Kofi4495 is the master. Evelyn also created their account after the third and final User:Kof4456 the last sockpuppet from Kofi495 was blocked. I think their pages should be merged. Both masters have similar editing habits as well. Regardless, they’re blocked anyway, so it's up to you and other admins, but I think it's notable to merge their socks into one page. What do you think? Orange Mo (talk) 18:43, 6 December 2022 (UTC)

@Orange Mo: Seems like they are probably the same, but I haven't looked closely because none of the accounts in question have edited in over a year, and so I'm not convinced there's that much value in fiddling with the tags or moving the case around. At the end of the day, "sock genealogy" like that is just a means to the end of abuse prevention, and I'm not sure we'd achieve much in that respect. I'd leave the question aside and perhaps revisit if and when they ever resume activity. --Blablubbs (talk) 14:08, 8 December 2022 (UTC)
It's probably a good idea to merge them if they come back. I was just wanting to note that in case they do. They seem to be stale and probably could have given up socking for good. Orange Mo (talk) 21:40, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

What's the problem guys.. I didn't get what's going on Mrishtika (talk) 06:54, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Found hoax from 2009 (maybe)

I think I stumbled upon an individual with at least four accounts/personas who orchestrated a complex hoax back more than ten years ago. It's possible that the individual left the behavior behind but is still active under yet another account (on another Wikipedia site). The hoax was carried out in user space and didn't negatively affect any articles that I can see. On the other hand, it devastated some users emotionally. Please let me know if you think it's worth pursuing based on that, and I will email you with details. My main worry is reopening wounds for people who were affected, but the hoax was appalling. I will absolutely drop it and never mention it again depending on your thoughts. Thank you. Cerulean Depths (talk) 17:59, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

Sock of Eswaran Naveen returned

Seems sock of Eswaran Naveen returned as as Mrishtika removing content, awards and facts with sources at:

Cinema Express Award For Best Actress [3]

Rajeswari Kalyanam [4]

Nandi Award for Best Actress [5]

Filmfare Award for Best Female Debut [6] Nehansaxan (talk) 23:28, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

  • Yup, that's them. Thanks. --Blablubbs (talk) 11:03, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
    Hi User:Blablubbs would like alert you that i suspect that User:Atsbi is a sock of blocked User:Solniun, they have similar writing styles: [7] and [8] Banabakabiroshitha (talk) 11:47, 23 December 2022 (UTC)
    Thanks, blocked, along with some others. In the future, please create new sections on talk pages when raising an unrelated issue. Thanks! --Blablubbs (talk) 13:22, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

Sock

Virgilanthony (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) who is now banned is trying to return to the same subjects via IP editing 122.57.69.102 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)--Maleschreiber (talk) 01:54, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Albanian racists against Greeks like @Maleschreiber will never be left alone. <3 122.57.69.102 (talk) 02:00, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
After the block, could you please also semi-protect my talkpage and delete the IP's edits? I think that such reactions are interesting but they tend to get repetitive and I would prefer to have constructive discussions on my talkpage. Thanks--Maleschreiber (talk) 02:08, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
So why are you deleting your Talk page entries? Racism against Greeks by Albanians, like yourself, is a shame. @Maleschreiber 122.57.69.102 (talk) 02:11, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
It looks like Bbb23 has blocked the IP – I don't think this warrants anything beyond that at this point, but please let me know if it continues. --Blablubbs (talk) 11:30, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
They created a new account Greekalbanian (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) + IP use: 122.57.70.61 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log).--Maleschreiber (talk) 21:05, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Rio0601‎

Just curious: what caused you to check for other accounts? As an aside, I'm at a loss as to why the master hasn't been reblocked at fr.wiki.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:30, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

@Bbb23: A few things: Special:Diff/1127962494 sounded like someone who has no intention of stopping, and might thus be stashing sleepers (or in need of an IP block); they used multiple accounts concurrently the first time around and I figured they might be doing so again; and the username T7693 gave me vague "sleeper farm" vibes. As for frwiki: So am I; then again, I'm consistently deeply confused by the way other projects handle (sock-)blocks (in the case of dewiki, I'm just confused in general), so that's par for the course. --Blablubbs (talk) 20:17, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
Heh. Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:27, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

The block on my ip is nonsense

I have no contributions 2605:B100:1111:A676:1D3:7DCB:4CE5:9101 (talk) 20:14, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Sorry, I'm not sure what IP you're referring to. --Blablubbs (talk) 20:18, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

CU

Hey, I need you take a look at this as I am not sure an SPI should be filed. Boki disrupted the Vasojevići article. Since he got a block for that, several French IPs have tried to push the same POV (Boki used the French GoogleBooks .fr). Today such an IP appeared, and after being reverted, Krisitor was created and started to push the same POV. Can a CU look at these accounts in this case? Ktrimi991 (talk) 16:29, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

Sorry, I do not want to be time-consuming. If an editor gets a temporary block for edit warring on an article, and then "retires" that account and uses IPs and a new account to continue the edit warring, is that in line with socking policies? Ktrimi991 (talk) 14:46, 23 December 2022 (UTC)
I can't comment on IPs, but these are  Confirmed:
There isn't all that much page overlap between these, and use is partially sequential, but it's also not merely a situation where someone keeps forgetting passwords, and the frequent account switching smacks of evasion of scrutiny. I'd like a second opinion on the best course of action here; if one of the SPI regulars who watch my talk page could take a look, that would be much appreciated. --Blablubbs (talk) 12:00, 24 December 2022 (UTC)
Thank you for the check. Krisitor was created to avoid scrutinity. Boki got a temporary block for edit warring. If Boki kept reverting again on the Vasojevici article after the block, a longer one could be applied. So they waited for some time, reverted with IPs and then created Krisifor to continue the edit war. This is against socking policy, IMO. On the other accounts I can't comment as I have never interacted with them. Thanks again. Ktrimi991 (talk) 14:49, 24 December 2022 (UTC)
Btw, while using the Krisitor account they stated that "Regarding my own edits, they were done first under an IP, then I created this account to continue working on the page". Their claim is not true, because before using the IPs and Krisitor, they used Boki to make the same changes on the Vasojevici article. Ktrimi991 (talk) 15:07, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Just to give my own explanation: I retired as Boki becaude I got tired of the tag teaming behavior of some user in some specific pages and the lack of support. But as I still wanted to finish working a one specific page that nobody cares about, I created the Obodina account a few weeks later, to work on that specific page and tweak a few related ones, then I abandoned the account after a few last tweaks in November. The Leerlapse account was created to work on historical pages on my area of interest, but I avoided all pages controlled by the tag teaming users that I used to edit as Boki. I also abandoned this account in November. The one that I use now is the only one I use, but honestly, you can block it if you want, I don't care at all now that I observe the same lack of support after my legitimate edits of the Vasojevici page. Cheers, Kris Krisitor (talk) 15:38, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

Seasons Greetings

Whatever you celebrate at this time of year, whether it's Christmas or some other festival, I hope you and those close to you have a happy, restful time! Have fun, Donner60 (talk) 00:16, 23 December 2022 (UTC)}}

Donner60 (talk) 05:44, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

Thank you, @Donner60! Happy holidays to you and yours. --Blablubbs (talk) 12:02, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

Identical headings

Regarding this. Maybe you haven't noticed, but identical headings are not allowed because they misdirect and create confusion, sometimes with disastrous consequences. -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 19:18, 26 December 2022 (UTC)

Mediawiki already does the automatic numbering for links even if it's not explicitly specified – Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Soibangla#Suspected sockpuppets 2 will send you to the second section called "suspected sockpuppets", for example. This format has been used at SPI for years, and I haven't ever encountered any problems; explicit numbering would also become fairly confusing in the archives of long-running cases. --Blablubbs (talk) 19:24, 26 December 2022 (UTC)
I trust you are right about the SPI page. On other talk pages, that is not the case. One can click on a heading in the TOC and end up at a very different section with the same heading. If one doesn't notice and just leaves a comment, all hell can break loose. That happened to me once, creating confusion, misunderstandings, and assumptions of bad faith. -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 19:38, 26 December 2022 (UTC)

My e-mail

Did you receive it?--Bbb23 (talk) 11:48, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

Yes, sorry – looks like I missed the notification. I'll get back to you as soon as I can. --Blablubbs (talk) 11:51, 27 December 2022 (UTC)
Responded. :) --Blablubbs (talk) 12:25, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

Storchy

Greetings. Can you give me any insight as to why this editor was blocked beyond the template on their talk page? I was taking them through NPP school, and did not notice anything, and was wondering if there is something I should be on the lookout for, or something that I should have spotted? Thanks. Onel5969 TT me 02:39, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

@Onel5969: I blocked Storchy as a good hand of WP:LTA/BKFIP after conferring with two other checkusers. I know this isn't a satisfying answer, but I don't think there is anything that you could (or should) have seen. --Blablubbs (talk) 02:47, 28 December 2022 (UTC)
Satisfactory or not, I thank you for your explanation. Learned a new term regarding the good hand/bad hand thing. I'm just aggravated at the hours I spent on them in NPP school. But thank you for the tedious work you do over at SPI, as well as all your other contributions. Onel5969 TT me 10:00, 28 December 2022 (UTC)
I was surprised by seeing this block as well so I came here. I don't see their name on the most recent SPI complaint when you scanned for sleepers. But I guess they drew your attention in some way. Liz Read! Talk! 07:37, 29 December 2022 (UTC)

Sockpuppet

Hello. I think I have found two sockpuppet accounts. 103.120.39.33 (talk) 05:15, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

Can you help me? 103.120.39.33 (talk) 14:55, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

@Blablubbs: I think User:RoboCric is a sock.103.120.39.33 (talk) 15:12, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

ACC #327754

Hi Blablubbs. It looks like you may have missed one of the two rangeblocks on the IP in ACC request #327754. There was a partial on /21, but a sitewide (anon. only, account creation disabled) on the /20. However, it seems like you only noticed the /21, and said to AGF on that basis. Can you please give this another look or confirm you were aware of the /20? Best, — Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 18:41, 29 December 2022 (UTC)

Responded via ACC, thanks. --Blablubbs (talk) 18:48, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
Archive 5 Archive 6 Archive 7 Archive 8 Archive 9
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Blablubbs/Archive_8&oldid=1143200970"