Jump to content

User talk:Girth Summit/Archive 18

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 15Archive 16Archive 17Archive 18Archive 19Archive 20→Archive 22

New Pages Patrol newsletter January 2023

Hello Girth Summit,

New Page Review queue December 2022
Backlog

The October drive reduced the backlog from 9,700 to an amazing 0! Congratulations to WaddlesJP13 who led with 2084 points. See this page for further details. The queue is steadily rising again and is approaching 2,000. It would be great if <2,000 were the “new normal”. Please continue to help out even if it's only for a few or even one patrol a day.

2022 Awards

Onel5969 won the 2022 cup for 28,302 article reviews last year - that's an average of nearly 80/day. There was one Gold Award (5000+ reviews), 11 Silver (2000+), 28 Iron (360+) and 39 more for the 100+ barnstar. Rosguill led again for the 4th year by clearing 49,294 redirects. For the full details see the Awards page and the Hall of Fame. Congratulations everyone!

Minimum deletion time: The previous WP:NPP guideline was to wait 15 minutes before tagging for deletion (including draftification and WP:BLAR). Due to complaints, a consensus decided to raise the time to 1 hour. To illustrate this, very new pages in the feed are now highlighted in red. (As always, this is not applicable to attack pages, copyvios, vandalism, etc.)

New draftify script: In response to feedback from AFC, the The Move to Draft script now provides a choice of set messages that also link the creator to a new, friendly explanation page. The script also warns reviewers if the creator is probably still developing the article. The former script is no longer maintained. Please edit your edit your common.js or vector.js file from User:Evad37/MoveToDraft.js to User:MPGuy2824/MoveToDraft.js

Redirects: Some of our redirect reviewers have reduced their activity and the backlog is up to 9,000+ (two months deep). If you are interested in this distinctly different task and need any help, see this guide, this checklist, and spend some time at WP:RFD.

Discussions with the WMF The PageTriage open letter signed by 444 users is bearing fruit. The Growth Team has assigned some software engineers to work on PageTriage, the software that powers the NewPagesFeed and the Page Curation toolbar. WMF has submitted dozens of patches in the last few weeks to modernize PageTriage's code, which will make it easier to write patches in the future. This work is helpful but is not very visible to the end user. For patches visible to the end user, volunteers such as Novem Linguae and MPGuy2824 have been writing patches for bug reports and feature requests. The Growth Team also had a video conference with the NPP coordinators to discuss revamping the landing pages that new users see.

Reminders
  • Newsletter feedback - please take this short poll about the newsletter.
  • There is live chat with patrollers on the New Page Patrol Discord.
  • Please add the project discussion page to your watchlist.
  • If 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.


WikiProject Yorkshire Newsletter - January 2023

Delivered January 2023 by MediaWiki message delivery.
If you do not wish to receive the newsletter, please add an N to the column against your username on the Project Mainpage.

12:42, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

Sock?

Back in October last year, you blocked User:Mr vili for sockpuppetry. Would the overlap of interests shown by this new account seem likely to be rather more than coincidental to you, as they do to me? AndyTheGrump (talk) 08:10, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi @AndyTheGrump. Could you please explain how our accounts overlap besides being involved in the same WikiProject? I haven't looked at Mr Vili's contributions so far. I don't think you are assuming good faith HeliosSunGod (talk) 08:21, 3 January 2023 (UTC)
How did you come across Draft:Network State without looking at Mr Vili's contributions? As for 'being involved in the same Wikiproject', said Wikiproject seems to attract almost nothing but socks and random newly-created accounts with no significant editing history. Are you sure you want to be associated with it? AndyTheGrump (talk) 08:31, 3 January 2023 (UTC)
You are acting as if Network State is a concept created by Mr Vili... No it is not. I discovered the page, when I linked to it via Wikipedia:WikiProject Autonomous Zones/Sandbox finding that it already existed, so therefore I added the wikiproject banner to it's talk page, and marked it as a draft article. HeliosSunGod (talk) 08:37, 3 January 2023 (UTC)
It must be fascinating to live in a world where so many such coincidences happen. Changing the subject slightly, your user page states that it is a "Fresh start account". Would you be prepared to divulge the name of your previous account(s) in confidence to an administrator? AndyTheGrump (talk) 08:43, 3 January 2023 (UTC)
@AndyTheGrump I am not going to continue this discussion anymore. Please maintain civility moving forward and assume good faith. If you continue with your passive aggressive attacks on myself, and articles I am involved in editing I will report you to the administrative noticeboards. HeliosSunGod (talk) 08:52, 3 January 2023 (UTC)
I have no objection to you raising our interactions at an administrative noticeboard. AndyTheGrump (talk) 08:55, 3 January 2023 (UTC)
Meanwhile, perhaps Girth Summit and/or talk-page lurkers might like to take note of how yet another new account signed up for WikiProject Autonomous Zones only today. Presumably just another coincidence, as newcomers rush in to engage on a topic that established Wikipedians seem not to give a rats arse about. Assuming they can figure out what the topic is supposed to be, since Mr Vili never succeeded in properly explaining... AndyTheGrump (talk) 09:22, 3 January 2023 (UTC)
And then there is the astonishing coincidence of how this new account chose today to edit their user page to remove their links to a "Lumina New City Project", about which HeliosSunGod is creating a blatantly-promotional draft. AndyTheGrump (talk) 12:21, 3 January 2023 (UTC)
HeliosSunGod is ducky, and  Confirmed to Mr vili. The other account hasn't really done a huge amount yet - maybe keep an eye on them, and open an SPI if you think the evidence is persuasive. Girth Summit (blether) 13:08, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

They're back

[1] Actually, they are being less disruptive than previously, although see their edit warring here. Gog the Mild (talk) 21:08, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

@Gog the Mild: none of these links work. Seasider53 (talk) 21:11, 2 January 2023 (UTC)
Drat! Gog the Mild (talk) 21:18, 2 January 2023 (UTC)
Blocked again for three months. Girth Summit (blether) 12:57, 3 January 2023 (UTC)
Ta. Gog the Mild (talk) 13:37, 3 January 2023 (UTC)
If you ever find a way to actually communicate with them, let me know... Girth Summit (blether) 12:58, 3 January 2023 (UTC)
If I find a way to communicate, you may well be blocking me for incivility. Gog the Mild (talk) 13:37, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

Mistakes happen

See User talk:Jpgordon#Lively Toad and pay attention to the link there to the ANI thread and my comment. Seems to me that if LT hasn't already been checked, that JP probably shouldn't be the one to do so. Also seems the new user is suspicious enough to check. I even had a target in mind, mainly based on the edits to Oakland and Campbell, California, namely Awolf58, but it might be reaching. Also, given how many socks that master has had, I don't know if any of them were "good hand" socks (until their meltdown, LT's edits were all constructive). Happy New Year! --Bbb23 (talk) 13:47, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

I've reblocked, without tags. Don't know whether they were Awolf58, but they were up to no good. Girth Summit (blether) 14:19, 3 January 2023 (UTC)
Thanks. Do you think their vote at the RfA should be removed?--Bbb23 (talk) 14:38, 3 January 2023 (UTC)
Yes, I do. Girth Summit (blether) 14:43, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

AFD Sockpuppet

Hello, Girth Summit,

I had suspicions about HeliosSunGod when they first started editing and headed straight to AFD when they only had a dozen edits. Lately, when I see this happen, I go directly to their User talk page and request that they don't participate in AFD until they have more editing experience. But HeliosSunGod's User page stated they were a fresh start account so I gave them the benefit of the doubt that they had learned about deletion discussions with a previous account. I think now when I see these accounts, I'll come straight to you since you are so familiar with their MO. Thanks for seeing to this so quickly. Liz Read! Talk! 03:36, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi Liz, feel free to let me know any time you see suspicious activity at AfD. I can't promise to run a check every time (per WP:NOTFISHING), but if I recognise the behaviour or have specific suspicions I can use my discretion. In the case of HeliosSunGod, see the comments under the title 'Sock?' a couple of sections up. Girth Summit (blether) 17:24, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Insaanhuok

I realize that Furaro has never been discovered in a check, but there are so many similarities in terms of types of edits, as well as article intersection, that I'm wondering whether they've avoided detection because they use different IP ranges. Also, Stylish Siba was blocked, albeit not as a sock, shares similar interests, as well as a username similarity to Itsmestylish. Unfortunately, unless there is login or CU data on Stylish Siba, that account is stale. Still, I think there is sufficient evidence to warrant a check on Furaro. Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:20, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

I compared against Itsmestylish, and took a look at the cu logs for the master - same large country as Furaro, but there isn't any overlap in terms of the IP ranges used. Girth Summit (blether) 17:50, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
Thanks. If you were to make a finding, what would it be? In other words, would a behavioral block be reasonable in light of the check, or would it be better to let it go?--Bbb23 (talk) 17:58, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
To avoid overlapping on IP ranges entirely, they'd have to have been a lot more careful than they have been previously (and indeed, more careful than they were while editing as Istmestylish, which overlaps in terms of when they were active). As you know, the lack of a positive match doesn't prove the negative, but just looking at the technical data, I'd probably be coming down around  Unlikely territory - I wouldn't block unless there was a behavioural smoking gun. Girth Summit (blether) 18:13, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
Nah, not as good as all that (smiling). Thanks for elaborating.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:24, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

Feedback request: History and geography request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Coat of arms of Lithuania on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 19:30, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

When I am SPI suspicious...

but when I cannot identify the master, as in this editor, what process should I use, please? 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 11:42, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

This one os likely best treated as an example, for their trajectory looks as though they will soon be indeffed for behaviour 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 21:18, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
Hey - sorry for the slow response. I didn't log in for a few days, and came back to find about twenty pings! Missed this on until now. So, SPIs without a proposed master are difficult - you would need to get pretty lucky for a clerk to recognise the editing, and CUs aren't allowed to use the tool to go on fishing expeditions. What you could do though is pretty much do what you have just done - bring it to the attention of an admin, and let them worry about it. We can see deleted pages/contribs, which makes it easier for us to look for connections. In this case, since they have been blocked for DE, and have admitted using previous accounts in the past, I thought a check was justified - I found and blocked Kkmishra1111, who has also edited about Ifshaq Manzoor, but I wouldn't be surprised if there were other accounts. Girth Summit (blether) 10:52, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
Hmm. And also Afaq41, who has also edited on the subject. I may come back to this later to do a deeper dive and see if I can tie it back to an older master (and record my findings in an SPI case for future reference). Being able to see editors' deleted contribs makes this a whole lot easier. You've never been tempted to apply for the sysop bit yourself? Girth Summit (blether) 11:02, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
No worries about a lengthy response time. Is anything ever actually genuinely urgent in this bizarre hobby?
This one made my antennae twitch without their spurious declaration, but yes, I guess alert a friendly admin and let "nature" take its course. They were always heading for an indeff block right from the start
Ah, putative adminship. There are times when it would be convenient, of course there are, but I feel more "powerful" without it. With it I suspect I could get myself into trouble, potentially by being over-zealous. When one has a reasonably obsessive personality it's far too easy to fool one's self that one is correct. You'll see from the link that I have definitely given the matter a great deal of thought. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 23:19, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
Well, a few things are genuinely urgent - I've had a few requests on my talk to ask me to remove personal private information before, which is totally out of whack since that's an OVERSIGHT deal, but yeah - most stuff can either chill for a while, or be dealt with at AIV. I just felt bad because I'd responded to all the more recent stuff, and hadn't worked my way back to your enquiry.
I read through your link. I wasn't active when you put yourself forward for Arbcom last time but I might well have voted in your favour had you done so this year. Sorry to be slightly mealy-mouthed, but I have not done the deep dive into your contribs to be certain. For sure though, after our many interactions regarding content, users' behaviour (including my own), and your 'sniff test' results of new accounts: I consider you an admin in all but name. And technical permissions, obvs, which is the part that actually makes a difference.
If I can try one little thing to change your mind? A wise man once told me, that a wise man once told him, that the most useful thing about being an admin was the ability to see deleted content. This was before my RfA, when I was an eager vandal-whacker, and I confess that I didn't fully understand the point at the time. I get it now though - there's no point just blocking accounts willy-nilly, you need to be able to join the dots, and deletion obscures those dots from regular users.
So yeah - I fully understand your position if you don't want the sysop bit, I just want you to know that I think you'd be well-suited to it, and that you'd have a reason to request it. Girth Summit (blether) 00:00, 5 January 2023 (UTC)
Good point well made, though I am not persuaded. A number of folk have tried to persuade me over the years. Perhaps I might have succumbed early on, but RFA now is just evil, and that steers me right away. It shows the unpleasant underbelly of the less imaginative of us.
I think I might have been elected to Arbcom back then, likely being the first not to be an admin to do so. Luckily I discovered in time that my life priorities had changed (perforce) and I had not the time to devote to the task. Indeed I took a multi-year wikibreak. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 00:43, 5 January 2023 (UTC)
Time available is indeed a big deal. I have a draft underway, and had hoped to get it finished today; instead I logged in to find a dozen people asking me to look at stuff, mostly involving misdeeds by multiple accounts, many of which needed cross-wiki locking...
Don't get me wrong, I'm not complaining (much) and I asked for this role. However, I can understand why someone might not want the bother. I can also understand why someone would not want to go through the RfA process, which can be particularly (and perversely) brutal for editors with a lengthy track record. Regardless, I would be honoured to nominate you if you were ever to change your mind. Girth Summit (blether) 01:18, 5 January 2023 (UTC)
Thank you for the compliment, but I truly don't want to do it. I'm addicted enough already! Without the bit I can also push just a little harder, always with militant patience and politeness, and trip the malefactors over. I think my role as "Encourager of use of sufficient rope" is currently perfect for me 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 07:43, 5 January 2023 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – January 2023

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

Administrator changes

added
readded Stephen
removed

Interface administrator changes

removed Nihiltres

Guideline and policy news

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

  • Voting for the Sound Logo has closed and the winner is expected to be announced February to April 2023.
  • Tech tip: You can view information about IP addresses in a centralised location using bullseye which won the Newcomer award in the recent Coolest Tool Awards.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:08, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

Need advice

Sorry to bother you again, but I haven't had to deal with this particular problem before, and I know you're familiar with the Defeedme harassment and threats. This new account has been exclusively editing articles that I've edited before, and undoing my edits to them. In this case it was an edit I made almost a year ago! I don't know if this account is connected to the Defeedme account but it seems likely. They're avoiding protected articles and just focusing on my edits to unprotected articles. How do I handle this? Wes sideman (talk) 15:19, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

I've started by warning them on their talk page to stop. I'm guessing WP:ANI would be the next step, does that seem reasonable? Wes sideman (talk) 15:28, 6 January 2023 (UTC)
ANI would have done it, but I've just blocked them - it's obviously an account created exclusively to harass you. I can't say for sure whether it's Defeedme or not, but that doesn't strike me as particularly important. Girth Summit (blether) 15:56, 6 January 2023 (UTC)
Yeah that's why I didn't go with reporting a sock. Thanks for the help. Wes sideman (talk) 16:45, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

Urgent Swarna Pandey

Hi please can you create a page of Child actress Swarna Pandey, you can also check on google.

Thanks Sourabhact (talk) 07:04, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

Sorry, I don't write articles on demand. Girth Summit (blether) 10:50, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Michael Goguen on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 22:30, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Original Barnstar
thanks for helping us get rid of the ManySockAccounts

(hee hoo hee hoo wasn't that a funny joke) SniperReverter (Talk to me) 18:16, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia talk:Criteria for speedy deletion on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 17:30, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

Recent edits

Hello @Girth Summit:

I get it you blocked me for using different accounts that I use on separate devices for contributing to Wikipedia. But can you stop User:Editorkamran from undoing my edits and reverting to older vandalised versions of articles without any reason.

Also you may say that I somewhat know how to edit articles as I have around 3000 combined edits on English Wikipedia and I do not find anything wrong with my recent contributions, you can check it yourself and see if the above user's actions are correct.

P.S. - Logged into this account just to say this, you can block it also as a sockpuppet. 🙂

Regards - Soap Boy 2 (talk) 19:11, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

I can't stop Editorkamran from doing that - policy allows for edits made by socks to be reverted. Having said that, I will observe that Editorkamran may want to look at the edits, and decide for themselves whether or not the need to be reverted - it's not always productive to knee-jerk revert socks.
Now, Soap Boy - some advice for you. If you continue making socks, the next step would be to mark your oldest account as community-banned per WP:3X. We're already at the point where I could do that. I would also likely block the IP ranges that you edit from. You would be much better advised to request unblock from your oldest account, explaining why you created the sock accounts, and undertaking to stick to one account moving forward. I wouldn't review the request myself - another CU would do that. Chances are you'd be told to go away for six months then come back, per WP:SO, but if there is no vandalism or harassment in your edits, you have a good chance of being unblocked after a period away, especially if you do productive work on other Wikimedia projects in the meantime (perhaps another language version of Wikipedia). Girth Summit (blether) 19:22, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

JustTheT BLP issues

I wanted to make you aware that the recent edits by User:JustTheT are similarly concerning as their edits that were highlighted on their talk page in September before they were given a one month block for violations of Biographies of living persons policy. I came across their edits on Ned Price. This edit is purely POV unsourced commentary. Their other edits to that article aren't much better. Their recent edits follow the exact same problematic patterns highlighted to them on their talk page. In edits to Britt K. Slabinski and George Friedman, they copied text word for word from the source. On the Slabinski article, they initially added the text from an IP account without a source but were reverted. They made this edit to Adam Smith (Washington politician). None of the sources they added even mention Adam Smith. They also made this unsourced edit to Titiek Suharto. The edits i have highlighted are the majority of their recent edits. GreenCows (talk) 23:23, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

Block evasion

Hi, just giving you the heads up that I'm reverting Biasheeds per WP:DUCK, as they're restoring changes by sock Soap Boy 1 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) (blocked by you). Kind regards, —MelbourneStar☆talk 09:15, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

I recently opened a new SPI casepage, but forgot to check the "request CheckUser" button. Is there a template that is used to add the CU request? For whatever reason I can't seem to find out the answer. Best, GPL93 (talk) 16:16, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

Edit the report. Change {{SPI case status}} to {{SPI case status|CU}}. Add a comment that you are requesting CU.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:27, 13 January 2023 (UTC)
@Bbb23: just added it. Thank you for your help! Best, GPL93 (talk) 16:29, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

Suspicious report

See my Talk page. I find the reporter RevampedEditor, a newish user (who doesn't act like one) with an unusual username, more suspicious than the user, ErmosDrousiotis, they are reporting. I also don't think the ED is Dealer07, although they strike me as incompetent.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:46, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

I agree that ErmosDrousiotis doesn't look like Dealer07, looks more like they just stumbled across a page Dealer had recently edited. The reporter does have a suspicious username, and for an editor with so few edits, they have left notes on a lot of admins' userpages. The do most of their editing while logged out, and they have in the past edited the same articles both with their account, and with their IP. However, I'm not seeing anything that makes me think it's deliberate, there aren't any other accounts, and their IPs are pretty stable - I expect they're just not bothering to log in sometimes. I've asked them to be more careful about that, don't think anything else needs doing. Girth Summit (blether) 17:30, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Thanks. I know this is a bit of a wild guess, but while the IPs are fresh in your mind, I don't suppose there's any connection to BKFIP.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:02, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
No, not a chance. Since they have declared their location themselves, I don't mind telling you that their statement was true - they're in Portugal, and their IPs have been very stable. Girth Summit (blether) 18:10, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

You have probably seen my ping

It is at User talk:Abbasulu#January 2023 where the editor has now been warned for canvassing. It may be that your judgement is that they need a break from Wikipedia in order to consider their behaviour, but my saying that shows you why I am reluctant to request the janitorial bit. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 16:08, 16 January 2023 (UTC)

You've got mail

Hello, Girth Summit. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.   Aloha27  talk  16:38, 22 January 2023 (UTC)
Cheers - looks like them, and it's on a range they've used before. I've blocked the /64 for a week. Girth Summit (blether) 16:47, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

Possible sock

Hi, user:WIMBPLYBIDC might be sock of Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Pcmishradigital. The user recently created EKA (manufacturing company). I found the article while nominating afd another Bangladesh-related article, then i moved the article to draftspace but the user reverted that. Then i went looking and found that the parent company Pinnacle Industries was created by Columnistvivek. The user was blocked on 14 January. Same day WIMBPLYBIDC was created. Their interest looks same + they also created similar type username e.g. PCM092022. Can you check if possible? Thanks. আফতাবুজ্জামান (talk) 22:37, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

Hey - sorry, I just noticed this message. I see that someone else already reported them at SPI, and they've been blocked. Girth Summit (blether) 16:49, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia talk:Noticeboard for India-related topics on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 21:30, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

SPI

Hi Girth Summit, hope you're doing well. As someone who confirmed the previous sock of user Solavirum, I believe this might be of interest to you. Regards, ZaniGiovanni (talk) 22:14, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

Possible socks

Hi @Girth Summit, I wanted to bring to your attention something unusual. There are two identical drafts, Draft:Anil. V. Nagendran and Draft:Anil V Nagendran created by two new users who may be sock puppets. I don't want to open another SPI so I came to you directly. I think a checkuser is needed to investigate this further as there may be more sock puppets hiding. Additionally, if possible, please review Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/SuhailShaji786. I have also identified some other suspicious IDs and wanted to clear this up first. Thank you. Akevsharma (talk) 15:34, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

Please could you go ahead and raise an SPI? Sorry, I've been staring at CU data for too long today, I need to go do something active! Better to have things logged properly for future reference anyway. Thanks Girth Summit (blether) 17:41, 24 January 2023 (UTC)
So, one an editor who started a month ago, creating the article first in their sandbox, then draft, then on talk page. Second a new editor who put a COI notice on their talk page and then removed it. Probably a duck but I did CU and of course they are the same. I think I'll block both. I guess some people might only short term block the original editor, but what's the point? Doug Weller talk 11:20, 25 January 2023 (UTC)
And how do I delete the sock's draft? The master wasn't blocked at the time. I should know but... Doug Weller talk 11:26, 25 January 2023 (UTC)
I'd probably use G6 - if they are identical, getting rid of one of them seems like housekeeping to me. Girth Summit (blether) 13:05, 25 January 2023 (UTC)
Makes sense, thanks again. Doug Weller talk 13:19, 25 January 2023 (UTC)
Hey Doug Weller, I have reported another new suspected sockpuppet in the latest report at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/SuhailShaji786. This requires immediate attention as the sockpuppet is continuously creating new UPE articles again and again. Akevsharma (talk) 04:05, 26 January 2023 (UTC)
@Akevsharma It needs more details, have you looked at it recently? Doug Weller talk 15:20, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Gritty on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 21:30, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

Could you take a look at this one?

[2] - gotta be a sock. Thanks. Doug Weller talk 10:04, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

Goodness me, there are some incredibly shitty people in the world. I see that Widr already blocked; I'm on mobile at the moment, but I'll poke around later when I'm on my laptop and see whether anything else needs doing.
As for your news, I'm so sorry. I hope you're able to figure out the right care plan, and that you're able to stay active and enjoying life for as long as possible. You've been a real inspiration to me in my time here - if there's ever anything I can do, just let me know. Girth Summit (blether) 10:21, 28 January 2023 (UTC)
Thanks very much. I'm moved and humbled by the comments on my talk page. I don't even know how so many people saw it. Doug Weller talk 12:36, 28 January 2023 (UTC)
You've been very active for a very long time Doug - there are few people who have done so much to maintain the quality of our articles, so I'm not surprised that so many people appreciate that. I was thinking about you this morning while I was tramping the stray with the dog. My mother is living with thyroid cancer. They operated to remove as much of it as they can, but there are still cells spreading slowly around her body that they can't do anything about. She's a retired doctor herself, and she's very pragmatic about it - she says that at her age, it's most likely that something else will get her before the cancer actually causes any real problems. I don't know what kind you've got, but I just hope that it's something like that, which can be managed without causing you pain, and that you have a decent bit of enjoyable life ahead of you. Girth Summit (blether) 12:48, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

AFDs

Hello, Girth Summit,

User:Doctorlimp is the latest editor who created an account and immediately jumped into AFD discussions. An unrelated editor, Serratra, has had an account longer but has shown up at AFDs to vote in opposition to however all of the other editors are voting, I can't tell what their priorities are except to be a contrary voter. He might just be a troll, not a sockpuppet but I thought I'd mention him since he has ignored my requests to get more experience editing articles. Just another week at AFD. Liz Read! Talk! 05:31, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Doctorlimp is definitely someone's sock, and I think it's probably Ugbedeg (see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Ugbedeg). Aside from the AfD contributions, which I think is likely a smokescreen, they've edited two articles, one of which has an Ugbedeg sock in its recent history; the other has a number of untagged blocked accounts that might have been them. They're editing out of two ranges, both of which Ugbedeg has used recently. I'm going to block and tag as suspected. Haven't looked into the other one yet. Girth Summit (blether) 16:11, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Jenna Haze on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 02:30, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

Checkuser Request

Hello there again. I wanted to inquire if you would be able to run a checkuser on User:Australianblackbelt and User:Agnez Mo fan. Here is my reasoning.

  • User:Australianblackbelt was blocked indefinitely at the beginning of the month for continually using Wikipedia for promoting either themselves, or their friends and acquaintances. They had a very long convoluted history of trying to name drop Maurice Novoa into every possible article they could to the extent they're blatantly either that person, or very closely related to them.
  • Maurice Novoa was deleted at AfD exactly 2 years ago (give or take a few hours)
  • Yesterday an account recreated the Maurice Novoa page, User:Badak Jawa, with content and wording a cut down version of the deleted article, but using Australianblackbelt's uploaded photos (that are clearly personal collection photos that they somehow got access to.)
  • In very short order this brand new account, Agnez Mo fan, dropped details onto Badak Jawa's talk page with basically a here is what the page is translated from the Indonesian wikipedia page. However it's clear that what was pasted here was not a translation from the Indonesian Wikipedia, but a copy and paste of the content of the now deleted article (I can't recall if new accounts etc have access to the contents of deleted articles, I don't believe so.)
  • Agnez Mo fan then proceeded to add links to the newly created Maurice Novoa page to several other articles that were favourites of Australianblackbelt, and even add Maurice's name to another which is again an MO of Australianblackbelt.

I genuinely don't know if Badak Jawa is connected to this, or if it's completely coincidence on timing and subject matter, though the jumping in of Agnez Mo fan so quickly is suspicious to me. However their other edits don't feel the same. I feel fairly certain (though willing to be proven wrong) that Agnez Mo fan is a sock of Australianblackbelt. (which also makes me wonder if there are more.) I'm not so sure on Badak Jawa, possibly meat but I really don't know but I just find the topic and timings suspicious. Though if Badak Jawa is connected to Agnez Mo fan and Australianblackbelt then it would present the possibility that there are more accounts out there based on account history and and creation times. Let me know if you'd like anything else. Canterbury Tail talk 12:15, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

Hello let me clarify your misunderstanding. I wanted to create this article to interwiki to Wikipedia English as a translation from Wikipedia Indonesia and did not know that this article had been made by another user, therefore I apologize and promise not to post articles on English Wikipedia. Regards Badak Jawa (talk) 12:19, 30 January 2023 (UTC)
@Canterbury Tail please don't block my account because I just want to translate the article to English Wikipedia Badak Jawa (talk) 12:22, 30 January 2023 (UTC)
While contributing to the English Wikipedia, I only made 4 articles, namely: Persipu FC, Reza Mozafari Manesh, Hotma Sitompul and Maurice Novoa. But only Persipu FC and Hotma Sitompul was not deleted by the Wikipedia English administrator Badak Jawa (talk) 12:48, 30 January 2023 (UTC)
Canterbury Tail: Australianblackbelt and Agnez Mo fan are definitely  Possible to one another - they're operating on different IP ranges, but their geolocations are identical (same city), and they use the same (very common) UA. It's not conclusive, but based on the date of account creation (shortly after the previous account was blocked) and the identical editing interests, that's enough for me - I'm blocking as suspected. Badak Jawa looks like someone else, but they should read WP:MEAT and WP:PROXYING, and ensure that they don't do anything that looks like it could be interpreted as colluding with or editing on behalf of a blocked user. Girth Summit (blether) 13:19, 30 January 2023 (UTC)
Forgive me for not reading the policies contained in the English Wikipedia but please don't block me because I am not their sockpuppet Badak Jawa (talk) 13:24, 30 January 2023 (UTC)
I don't currently see any reason to block your account, but I'd advise you to walk away from this subject. Girth Summit (blether) 13:26, 30 January 2023 (UTC)
Thank you Girth Summit. And Badak Jawa sorry for dragging you into this, but we needed to check. Canterbury Tail talk 13:58, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

You've got mail

Hello, Girth Summit. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template. Doug Weller talk 16:37, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

WikiProject Yorkshire Newsletter - February 2023

Delivered February 2023 by MediaWiki message delivery.
If you do not wish to receive the newsletter, please add an N to the column against your username on the Project Mainpage.

19:04, 1 February 2023 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – February 2023

News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2023).

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • The Vector 2022 skin has become the default for desktop users of the English Wikipedia.

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

  • Voting in the 2023 Steward elections will begin on 05 February 2023, 21:00 (UTC) and end on 26 February 2023, 21:00 (UTC). The confirmation process of current stewards is being held in parallel. You can automatically check your eligibility to vote.
  • Voting in the 2023 Community Wishlist Survey will begin on 10 February 2023 and end on 24 February 2023. You can submit, discuss and revise proposals until 6 February 2023.
  • Tech tip: Syntax highlighting is available in both the 2011 and 2017 Wikitext editors. It can help make editing paragraphs with many references or complicated templates easier.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:37, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

Blether

"Blether", in your signature, is a great word! David10244 (talk) 07:55, 4 February 2023 (UTC)

Thanks. Aye, a good Scottish word, capturing pretty much everything that goes on on my talk. Girth Summit (blether) 00:45, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

MOS transgressions and failure to Engage

I assumed they were racing to ECP and was wondering what they would edit after getting it, and possibly removing it from them then. We'll see what they do. I also suspect this might not be their first account. Doug Weller talk 10:42, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

Those thoughts had occurred to me too; even if we AGF though, editing like that is disruptive in itself. Girth Summit (blether) 10:44, 24 January 2023 (UTC)
Agreed. Doug Weller talk 12:07, 24 January 2023 (UTC)
See my update at ANI. I'm off for a walk, that was too much copying and pasting of account usernames for one sessions... Girth Summit (blether) 17:41, 24 January 2023 (UTC)
I envy you. I hurt my calf muscles last month and had to get picked up twice, so I’m only using y treadmill, which is gym quality. What sort of place are you walking? Trail? Doug Weller talk 18:27, 24 January 2023 (UTC)
Nah, just round the local green space with the dog. The local (Yorkshire) name for it is the 'stray' - just a big patch of grass really, but you can get a tennis ball a decent distance, which keeps my whippet happy. It's dark here now though, so we just had a bit of a muddy stroll and did the necessary doggy business. I do get out for a proper walk at weekends though - usually something in the North York Moors or the Yorkshire Wolds.
Sorry to hear about your calves - it's important to stay active. I'm not so far down the road as you, but I'm starting to feel the effects of age myself - over Christmas, I was playing Trivial Pursuit with my mum, and found myself unable to read the questions because the light wasn't good enough. Instead of turning the light on, mum passed me her reading glasses - suddenly, the questions were entirely legible. I have accepted the inevitable, and am watching my hands type this through my first pair of specs. Girth Summit (blether) 18:42, 24 January 2023 (UTC)
Those are lovely areas to walk in. I need new specs, Specsaver may come to me. We have a lot of repurposed train lines and also fields and copses. But my wife is too fast for me now! I’ll never be able to walk in those again, maybe on the old train lines when it’s less frozen. Doug Weller talk 19:17, 24 January 2023 (UTC)
What part of the world are you in? I remember making great use of old railway lines when I lived in Hertfordshire. Girth Summit (blether) 23:07, 24 January 2023 (UTC)
Derbyshire. Meanwhile could you CU check [3] as I probably shouldn't do it myself as they've been vandalising my talk page. I've blocked them (hm, if I can block them because it's something any Admin would do, does that mean I could CU them? Doubt it). Doug Weller talk 10:10, 25 January 2023 (UTC)
I wouldn't have any concerns about someone running a check on an account that was vandalising their page - responding to clearcut vandalism/harassment doesn't make you involved in my view. Anyway, I've run a check, it's an IPv4 address with no other usage within the cu window. I didn't recognise the range I'm afraid, and I don't see any other abuse on the /16; you'll be able to see the address in the logs, the geolocation might mean something to you (someone you've blocked recently perhaps?). Girth Summit (blether) 10:26, 25 January 2023 (UTC)
Which logs? There are still things in the labyrinthine lore of CU I don't know or have forgotten. Doug Weller talk 11:44, 25 January 2023 (UTC)
The CU logs (here - you can see the check I ran on the account, and the IPs I looked at afterwards. Girth Summit (blether) 12:57, 25 January 2023 (UTC)
Thanks. Of course, but I’ve never done that. Doug Weller talk 13:19, 25 January 2023 (UTC)
It's a really handy trick to use, especially if you're trying to work out whether a new account is connected to a blocked account from way back when - the old account may be stale, but there is often useful info in the logs. I've got some clever scripts installed that give me links to go directly to all the checks that have been run on an account - I can dig out what they're called if you're interested, but probably only useful if you spend a lot of time sniffing out socks. Girth Summit (blether) 13:22, 25 January 2023 (UTC)
Thanks but I’m being cautious with scripts, I think I have one causing problems with Safari on my iPad. Doug Weller talk 13:32, 25 January 2023 (UTC)
When they go wrong it can be a real pain that's for sure. Girth Summit (blether) 15:47, 25 January 2023 (UTC)
I think it may be fixed.Something happened today with Vector 2022 which took away the white space. Nothing I did. Doug Weller talk 16:44, 25 January 2023 (UTC)
Yes it was, somehow I zoomed to 250%! No idea how I managed that. Doug Weller talk 08:10, 27 January 2023 (UTC)
I think they are at it again. I logged it at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Abbasshaikh124, but they have already raced to 250 edits overnight, so won't be long until they do get to ECP, should that be their aim. Spike 'em (talk) 10:26, 7 February 2023 (UTC)
Clearly a sock and I've said so, but it needs another CU as I don't know enough to be sure. Doug Weller talk 13:06, 7 February 2023 (UTC)
It certainly looks like them. CU says they're using proxies a lot of the time, but there's enough there for me to call it pretty  Likely, and to block. I reviewed about a dozen of their edits - some of them were 'meh', most of them degraded the article, so I've rolled them back en masse. Cheers Girth Summit (blether) 14:48, 7 February 2023 (UTC)
Thanks. Doug Weller talk 15:39, 7 February 2023 (UTC)

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia:Village pump (policy) on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 00:30, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

Help Please

I'm having troubles with User talk:BenGoldstein69 and his edits on CatboyKami, The user has been earned several time for vandalism and just continues to revert edits. Regards. Hughesdarren (talk) 22:28, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

Hi - looks like it's already been dealt with, let me know if they reappear. Cheers Girth Summit (blether) 00:04, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

Question about starting an RFC

Hello! I am going to take your advice about not pinging anyone and just starting an RFC. Since July 2022, there has been a set of discussions going on in a sub-talk page, Talk:List of F5 and EF5 tornadoes/Discussion, which currently has 66 individual discussions, but all around a central idea. Per the generic RFC starting guidelines, the RFC is posted on the articles talk page or rarely sub-pages of RFC. I’m specifically wanting to start an RFC for one discussion, not all of them (as some have already been formally closed) Since this discussion is on a sub-talk page, would I post the RFC to the sub-talk page, main article’s talk page, or a sub-page of the RFC? Elijahandskip (talk) 02:14, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

You should post the RfC on the article's main talk page. If there is an ongoing (or has been a recent) discussion on a sub-page, it would be a good idea to post a neutrally-worded notice about the RfC on the thread on that subpage. Girth Summit (blether) 07:13, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

Help

Hi! There was someone who I stumbled across and their userspace sandbox looks concerning- I don't know the policies around user sandboxes but I noted that you had previously dealt with a sockpuppet investigation into the same person, so I figured I'd reach out to you since I'm unsure of policies for sandboxes and them having questionable content to put it lightly- Sandbox in Question. Rhayailaina (talk) 22:25, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 22:32, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:List of F4 and EF4 tornadoes on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 18:30, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

More amusement

here 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 20:07, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

Obvious sleeper - blocked. Technically different though - looks like someone else. May spend some time on it tomorrow. Girth Summit (blether) 20:17, 11 February 2023 (UTC)
This grows and grows. Ah well. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 20:18, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

One you may wish to cast an eye over

[4] Gog the Mild (talk) 23:11, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

I don't recognise the IP. Just revert I guess, and report at WP:AN3 if they don't knock it off? Girth Summit (blether) 23:27, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

Query

Hello, Girth Summit,

User:Sawelito is a 3 day old account who is creating Talk pages, reverting IP editors and participating in AFD discussions. I think they might be one of our AFD sockpuppet regulars. I had another account to check in with you about but they were focused on one AFD while our sockpuppets seem to want to comment on a lot of different AFD discussions. Liz Read! Talk! 00:28, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

For example, look at this diff...from a brand new account! Liz Read! Talk! 01:56, 11 February 2023 (UTC)
I'm surprised and disappointed by my findings. This is Bradford, an autopatrolled user with tens of thousands of contribs, socking to votestack AfDs about his articles. Girth Summit (blether) 10:38, 11 February 2023 (UTC)
I'm also saddened that this is where my little report led you. I just thought it was another one of our low level sockpuppeteers who bounce around AFD all of the time. The sockpuppetry seems limited but I guess your discovery is also limited by the 3 month time constraints of information retention. I really hate to think about articles that might have been deleted over the years because of one determined editor utilizing sockpuppets but I've seen some old AFDs where almost all of the accounts that participated in it were later blocked. But I've seen it happen more often with Keep closures than Delete closures and one can always launch another AFD if an article is Kept and an editor suspects gaming was involved.
I just came to report all sorts of what I think is meat puppet activity at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rahul Chimanbhai Mehta over the course of the past few days. I don't think a veteran editor is responsible for all of these sleeper accounts springing to life to participate in this AFD. It does amaze me that someone thought ahead to create an account 3 or 4 years ago that they thought they might use years later for these kinds of situations. Who plans years ahead for possible sockpuppetry in the future? Obviously a sockmaster who thinks differently than I. Liz Read! Talk! 22:10, 11 February 2023 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) Liz I just made Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/ErKapilBishnoi just prior to your message here. It may be a lot pf planning for the launch or a political party, or there may be no relationship at all 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 22:14, 11 February 2023 (UTC)
Thanks. It was worth a shot. It's a rather painful AfD. I've just been logging SPAs and striking duplicate !votes. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 08:33, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

Feedback request: Maths, science, and technology request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard on a "Maths, science, and technology" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 15:30, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

Me again

I have seen [[Special:Contributions/Correct spelling of cities in Ukraine]] and am surprised at how this new account has hit the ground knowing about SPI and Page Protection in their first three edits. I'm not sure if this is sufficient to trigger your checking up or whether further (future) data is required. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 14:49, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

Ah! Someone beat me to it and has better information: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Slava Ukraini Heroyam Slava 123 farers. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 14:54, 13 February 2023 (UTC)
There's an SPI already open, I'm on the case. Girth Summit (blether) 14:54, 13 February 2023 (UTC)
We must stop meeting like this 😇 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 14:56, 13 February 2023 (UTC)
I found quite a few socks - they are very persistent. I imagine we'll see them again... Girth Summit (blether) 15:14, 13 February 2023 (UTC)
so I see! I just started with a "hit the ground running" concern 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 15:15, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

Feedback request: History and geography request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:List of genocides on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 23:30, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

Request

Any chance you could protect my talk page for a year? He's back, still begging for attention. Thanks. Wes sideman (talk) 11:51, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

I've gone for three months; maybe they'll be bored by then. Girth Summit (blether) 12:10, 15 February 2023 (UTC)
Thanks. Wes sideman (talk) 13:41, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Alitta Cat

Hey, sorry to pick on you, but you were the CU who disposed of the only report in this case, even though it was quite some time ago. I just blocked Elsaandanna34, and although they are blocked at multiple projects, they really should be globally locked. Other than going to Meta myself, I don't suppose there's an easy way for me to request a glock as there is at SPI itself using the helper script? Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:47, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

I either use the script, or I go over to meta and hand-crank it. They're on the same IP range as they were using before, so I'd be comfortable calling it proven; gimme a minute and I'll see if there are any other likely looking accounts. Girth Summit (blether) 16:51, 15 February 2023 (UTC)
Nah, nobody else obvious. There are some others that might be them, but nobody I'd be confident about. Girth Summit (blether) 16:54, 15 February 2023 (UTC)
You can't use the script outside SPI, though, can you?--Bbb23 (talk) 17:10, 15 February 2023 (UTC)
No, I don't don't know of a way to do it automatically without raising a proforma SPI. Girth Summit (blether) 17:47, 15 February 2023 (UTC)
Supposedly there's a global version of Twinkle that allows you to request a global lock from en.wiki itself, but when I investigated it, I got confused (easy for me when it comes to scripts) and developed a brief headache...which disappeared as soon as I dropped the idea. I need a personal assistant, you know like celebrities have. Or maybe a dog who's smarter than I am.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:58, 15 February 2023 (UTC)
You can borrow Fleet - she's much smarter than I am. She has recently learned to open the kitchen pedal bin to snaffle the contents. Girth Summit (blether) 19:30, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

You've got mail!

Hello, Girth Summit. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 22:57, 17 February 2023 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Someone who's wrong on the internet (talk) 22:57, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

Hey someone. I got your email; there wasn't really very much for me to go on I'm afraid. Like, pretty close to zero, actually. Please don't assume I'm familiar with the case - even if I once was, I handle a lot of cases, and am forgetful, I need it spelling out. If you'd like to send another one that explains your reasoning, go ahead. Girth Summit (blether) 02:21, 18 February 2023 (UTC)
Hi again, Someone who's wrong on the internet - I went back and had a look at some of the history to remind myself of the case. I think I can see what you meant in the email actually, but I don't think that that alone is enough to act upon; I'll keep an eye on it. Cheers Girth Summit (blether) 14:34, 18 February 2023 (UTC)

Canvassing Question

Hello Girth Summit! I would like to ask for an uninvolved user (asking you since I think an admin is needed) to decide if Talk:1974 Super Outbreak/Archive 1#Xenia tornado page involved canvassing. Earlier today, I closed the discussion on the basis of canvassing, which occurred prior to the recent weather-related canvassing AN/I. A few minutes ago, my closure was reverted by United States Man, saying, “That's not for you to decide”. Since this involves potential canvassing and both myself and United States Man were involved in the canvassing AN/I, I wanted to request an uninvolved admin to help sort what is or isn’t canvassing. Thank you! Elijahandskip (talk) 01:25, 18 February 2023 (UTC)

Elijahandskip is scared to death of being blocked and seems to be on a warpath as of late, starting unnecessary discussions over subjects during which a consensus has already been developed. This user seems to just be deciding himself which discussions are valid or not and trying to nullify discussion that has previously taken place. United States Man (talk) 02:01, 18 February 2023 (UTC)
Simply looking at who was pinged and who all responded, that discussion is clearly severely canvassed. NoahTalk 02:09, 18 February 2023 (UTC)
(edit conflict) Well, it seems United States Man is focusing on targeting me as an editor rather than the content in discussions. Since we are on an Admin’s talk page an once again, United States Man seems to be discussion me as an editor rather than the content, I would like to mention a specific interaction post-AN/I that we had. United States Man accused me of wishcasting, then I asked them to “focus on the content rather than the editor”, which was followed by another comment directed at me and not the discussion topic. Now United States Man seems to be accusing me of almost mini-modding discussions and started/closing them at random/will. Since that is how United States Man interprets me self-closing discussions, should I request discussion closure on future discussions I participate in? Elijahandskip (talk) 02:10, 18 February 2023 (UTC)
OK, so a few thoughts. 1 - no discussion is required before an article is created. We don't do pre-creation consensus, write the article and if anyone disagrees, they can nominate for deletion. So that discussion was unnecessary. 2 - it's not clear to me that the discussion actually arrived at any kind of decision, or was even heading in a particular direction, so I'm not sure what nullifying it was intended to achieve. 3 - yeah, if that discussion was supposed to be a consensus-building process, then pings like that would have been improper canvassing. But since I'm not even sure what the point of the discussion was, meh, I guess? And, perhaps most importantly, 4 - I am an admin who has recently expressed fairly strong views about canvassing, in a situation involving the same editors that this situation involves. I would suggest that approaching me directly, rather than bringing it to general attention at ANI, feels a bit like admin canvassing, or something. If you are contacting me because you think you can predict how I will react, you're doing it for the wrong reasons - bring it to the community for all to see. Good night all. Girth Summit (blether) 02:16, 18 February 2023 (UTC)
Honestly, I'd like to see some discussion and clarification on this matter. Canvassing was also the subject of an ArbCom case and I think not all the editors involved in that case agreed on exactly what did or did not constitute canvassing. The question came up again during a recent discussion between Hurricane Noah and me. TornadoLGS (talk) 04:01, 18 February 2023 (UTC)
What aspects would you like to discuss? I'm happy to give you my view; I'm not the world expert on the subject of course. Girth Summit (blether) 11:24, 18 February 2023 (UTC)
Well, I guess it's a matter of when it is appropriate to ping or otherwise notify specific editors in a discussion. For instance, I was under the impression that it was only canvassing if it was done with the intention of getting support (though understanding that other editors can't exactly know another editor's intentions). Yet, in a recent discussion, to which I was pinged, there was a suggestion that that was canvassing even though those pinged had a good chance of disagreeing with the one doing the pinging. I've pinged editors if a discussion I started didn't get any responses one way or the other. I also appreciate being pinged on occasion, since discussions can sometimes get buried under other watchlist notifications. TornadoLGS (talk) 19:44, 18 February 2023 (UTC)
For me, a lot of it depends upon the type of conversation it is. If you're spitballing ideas and everyone is getting along amicably, then saying 'Hey, I'll ping so-and-so, they might have some good ideas' isn't any kind of problem. Where it becomes more of an issue is when there are opposing sides, or there's a !vote taking place. Then you have to be very careful about who you ping, and why. It obviously can't be 'because they'll agree with me', but nor should it be 'this feels like the kind of thing they'd be into'. If in doubt, don't ping individuals - leave a neutrally worded post at a relevant noticeboard or whatever. Girth Summit (blether) 20:09, 18 February 2023 (UTC)
I see. I think once thing I might do is, say, if a tornado article for this year is AfD'd I might put a notice at Talk:Tornadoes of 2023 for instance, but I know there was an issue of editors from the same WikiProject tending to be like-minded. Though that is not always the case, as in the AfD where you had to intervene. We have our own mix of deletionists and inclusionists. TornadoLGS (talk) 04:21, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
I personally feel that messages posted at WikiProject talk pages about AfD discussions shouldn't be necessary - we have automated article notification systems which people can monitor to find out about deletion discussions on particular subject areas. Having said that, a neutrally worded notice (e.g. 'There is an ongoing discussion at <link> concerning <article name> which editors of this project may be interested in.') probably wouldn't rise to the level of canvassing; a non-neutral message (e.g. 'Someone has nominated <article name> for deletion, help me save it <here>') would definitely be improper canvassing. Girth Summit (blether) 09:59, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
Another thing that would be relevant, in my view, would be what you are actually asking of someone. If you contact someone to tell them about an AfD discussion because you know they are interested in articles of that nature and are hoping that they will come along and !vote keep, that's not OK. On the other hand, if you know someone has access to particular sources, or is familiar with a subject area, I wouldn't have any problems with approaching them saying 'Hi - <article> is up for deletion, on the grounds that the sourcing is inadequate - would you be able to see whether there are any more sources that we could use to improve it and demonstrate notability?' Girth Summit (blether) 11:01, 19 February 2023 (UTC)

You've got mail

Hello, Girth Summit. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template. Doug Weller talk 18:45, 19 February 2023 (UTC)

Thank

You guided me tonight. I didn't know how to message you and thank you. You took the time to answer my questions very patiently. I noticed a mistake in my writing. I hope you are safe wherever you are in the world Garshaasp 22:53, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

Feedback request: Maths, science, and technology request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Tornadoes of 2023 on a "Maths, science, and technology" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 03:30, 24 February 2023 (UTC)

Francis Hindes Groome

Upon creating Ordnance Gazetteer of Scotland: A Graphic and Accurate Description of Every Place in Scotland today, I found myself wondering how it was actually compiled. Given the ground covered, it would have been an almighty effort if it was done in person. Do you have any insight as to how books such as these are compiled? I'm assuming some, if not large parts, are pulled from information presented by other people. Similar to the works of Charles McKean, I suppose. Seasider53 (talk) 20:33, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

Interesting question; honest answer is that I'm not sure. I know a few people who might know, however: I'll ask a few historical friends. Watch this space... Girth Summit (blether) 02:26, 18 February 2023 (UTC)
I found a review of the book by John Scott Keltie, who offers his thruppence regarding its composition:

Most articles seem to us to have been written or revised on the spot, the only method by which accuracy can be secured. In some cases, however, we have noticed statements that could not have been made had this plan been invariably adopted.

Seasider53 (talk) 21:36, 23 February 2023 (UTC)
Interesting. I've got a prof of 18th/19th C Scottish history coming round for dinner tomorrow night - was planning to ask her opinion on the matter. Will let you know if I learn anything. Girth Summit (blether) 21:44, 23 February 2023 (UTC)
She is familiar with that one, and says that they were generally heavily cannibalised. Some of it will have been original, some second-hand stuff collected from friends who knew places, but much of it will simply have been knicked from other publications. Copyright, she says, existed in theory, but was largely ignored. Girth Summit (blether) 19:15, 24 February 2023 (UTC)
Excellent. Still an almighty feat of writing nonetheless. Seasider53 (talk) 22:01, 24 February 2023 (UTC)

Question

I suspect a sock and would like to have it checked out, but every time they appear to come back having learned more about how we discovered them, as if I'm up against an AI. Is there a way to substantiate a report without them adapting? Vacosea (talk) 11:43, 25 February 2023 (UTC)

If you're concerned that they are using the information recorded at the SPI to learn how we connected the accounts, you're welcome to submit evidence by e-mail. Girth Summit (blether) 12:21, 25 February 2023 (UTC)
Confirmed, blocked. Girth Summit (blether) 10:18, 26 February 2023 (UTC)

Some help needed

Hi GS, hope all is well. I need some help on what path I should take going forward with a somewhat complex socking situation. I'll give you the background. I noticed Khaddy4 and also noticed that they were sock-blocked at wikidata as a sock of Marcyway4, a user who's never edited at en.wiki. I then took a look at this page at wikidata that lists all the Marcyway4 socks, two pages of them. After checking a few to see if any ever edited here and not finding any, I opened a thread at User talk:Jasper Deng#Marcyway4 asking for his help. As you can see, he said he'd follow up with me privately, but, unsurprisingly because he doesn't edit on weekends, he hasn't done so yet.

This morning I started looking at quite a few more of the Marcyway4 socks and this time I did find some hits, some stale and some not stale. One of the more interesting hits was Minasta who was blocked as a suspected sock of Bennet43, who is the master of a lengthy SPI case. Meanwhile, I've blocked Khaddy4 as a sock, but I'm not sure the sock connection is valid, although meat is a reasonable possibility. They are complaining and 331dot and I are, uh, arguing with them. I point-blank asked them if they had ever had any other accounts at en.wiki, and they said none.

So, with all that, I was hoping you could run some checks. I suspect just checking Khaddy4 may not turn up anything and that you will need other accounts. That's why I provided you with Minasta. I do have some other non-stale Marcyway4 socks for you to check; if you need them, let me know. My goal is to file an SPI but I'm not sure who to name as the master. Thanks very much.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:39, 25 February 2023 (UTC)

I don't mean to overwhelm you when you finally get a chance to look at this, but I've been doing some more work on this today and wanted to add a couple of things. First, it's important to know that almost all of this is based on promotional edits. Second, there are at least two SPIs at en.wiki I've uncovered thus far: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Galantoe000 and Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Ndizzy4glo. The master in the latter is not stale but will be soon.--Bbb23 (talk) 01:52, 26 February 2023 (UTC)
Comparing Minasta to Khaddy4, I'd say they're  Possible to each other, maybe  Possilikely (a mix between possible and likely): both using IPs that geolocate to the same country, and that spur thinks are residential proxies; they mostly use different ranges, but have overlapped on the same IPv4 /24 range, both using very similar (super common) UAs. Their IPs are very busy. Pinging Blablubbs, who has also looked at Bennet43 socks recently, and is better at proxies than I am. Girth Summit (blether) 09:08, 26 February 2023 (UTC)
Yeah,  Possible seems like a reasonable assessment. The proxy thing looks like a red herring; there are almost certainly compromised devices on those IPs, but they're also shared and dynamic, so the users we're looking at probably aren't on proxy. My hunch is that they're not Bennet43, but I might be wrong about that. Considering that they're blocked as part of a huge sockfarm on Wikidata, and their behaviour frankly looks both GAMEy and spammy to me, I wouldn't sweat it too much. --Blablubbs (talk) 11:12, 26 February 2023 (UTC)
Did either of you check Ndizzy4glo? Here are some other non-stale accounts: Omotolani Oyeniyi; Ohiseroje; Yahuzaishat; Yinka Ogunsina; Rock2222 (sock of Ndizzy4glo); and Bemmax. Bemmax has edited for many years and edited as recently as February 16. If this is too many to throw at you on a Talk page, I can file a report at SPI so it's done in a more structured way and creates a record. At this point for lack of a better place to put it, I'd reopen Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Ndizzy4glo. Or I'm open to other suggestions. Thanks to both of you.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:33, 26 February 2023 (UTC)
Yeah, I'd probably put it in an SPI so everything gets recorded and archived. Not sure when I'll have time to do any major digging around - I've got a lot on at work next week. Girth Summit (blether) 18:05, 26 February 2023 (UTC)
Understood, I'll probably do it later today.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:10, 26 February 2023 (UTC)

Scott Adams

Thank you for your changes at Scott Adams. The response to them in this talk page discussion has been positive. If possible, I think it would be very helpful and appreciated if you added your two cents to the discussion. Stoarm (talk) 16:21, 27 February 2023 (UTC)

WikiProject Yorkshire Newsletter - March 2023

Delivered March 2023 by MediaWiki message delivery.
If you do not wish to receive the newsletter, please add an N to the column against your username on the Project Mainpage.

12:34, 1 March 2023 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – March 2023

News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2023).

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

  • The 2023 appointees for the Ombuds commission are AGK, Ameisenigel, Bennylin, Daniuu, Emufarmers, Faendalimas, JJMC89, MdsShakil, Minorax and Renvoy as regular members and Zabe as advisory members.
  • Following the 2023 Steward Elections, the following editors have been appointed as stewards: Mykola7, Superpes15, and Xaosflux.
  • The Terms of Use update cycle has started, which includes a [p]roposal for better addressing undisclosed paid editing. Feedback is being accepted until 24 April 2023.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:19, 1 March 2023 (UTC)

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (conflicts and protests) on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 18:30, 4 March 2023 (UTC)

Note about User:Canistia

Riopex and Ebasti were both been confirmed as sock to user Rajputbhatti [5]; so User:Canistia [6] who been confirmed to Riopex and Ebasti is sock of user:Rajputbhatti.2.54.43.228 (talk) 18:15, 8 March 2023 (UTC)

Good point, mysterious IP editor - I will amend the tags. Girth Summit (blether) 18:19, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
Your edit showed up in Anti Vandal for me and I almost reverted it because I thought it was an account impersonating you. Just thought it would be funny to let you know about that. SkyTheWolf (Talk) 18:21, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
What - my edit showed up, or the IP editor's? I'd have thought I'd be whitelisted or something... Girth Summit (blether) 18:23, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
It was one of them but I just thought it was funny because I almost did something bad. SkyTheWolf (Talk) 18:23, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
Nothing that couldn't have been fixed with a fish. Let. E know if you see me vandalising any other talk pages... Girth Summit (blether) 18:33, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
Please move User:Canistia to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Rajputbhatti. Thanks.2.54.43.228 (talk) 18:22, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
I've requested that a clerk move the case over there - I've had enough screen time for now. Girth Summit (blether) 18:33, 8 March 2023 (UTC)

Antennae

Would you mind having a look at Special:Contributions/PrelutskyChaos 49 to see if your antennae also twitch. Chaotic, rather more knowledgeable than time served... 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 13:15, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

I have an account to check out as well, Girth Summit. User:Charsaddian has been editing for 11 days and from their 2nd edit, has only been editing AFD discussions. Typical AFD sock behavior. Many thanks! Liz Read! Talk! 17:44, 20 February 2023 (UTC)
Hi both - I'm afraid this isn't ringing any bells for me - I don't see a connection to anybody else at the moment. I agree that things like requesting undeletion and immediately jumping into AfDs is suspicious, but I think at the moment this is just 'keep an eye on it and look for patterns' territory. Girth Summit (blether) 18:31, 20 February 2023 (UTC)
Thanks GS. @Liz I agree yours is concerning. I've placed a Multiple Account agf warning on their TP. Mine is perplexing, and your thoughts would be welcome 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 19:07, 20 February 2023 (UTC)
Ah, events have overtaken it. Blocked! Sock of Feetfeet 341. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 19:10, 20 February 2023 (UTC)
Ah - that gives me a reason to run a check. See also Pow!333 and the very recently created WomanBear44. Girth Summit (blether) 19:45, 20 February 2023 (UTC)
Great, thanks! --Bbb23 (talk) 20:38, 20 February 2023 (UTC)
Strikes me the master will be unable to resist more socks. Good catch Bbb23. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 22:20, 20 February 2023 (UTC)
Hi Liz. I wasn't aware that starting AFD comments immediately after Wikipedia account creation can make the Wikipedia Administrators suspicious. Although my account is new but being a Wikipedia user since childhood, I have often seen different Tags on the Wikipedia pages and I always thought about contributing meaningful things on Wikipedia whenever I will get a chance to edit. Thanks again. Charsaddian (talk) 07:55, 9 March 2023 (UTC)

Should I stop talking to Display name 99?

Hey, so I'm sorry for assuming things about the guy and acting as if I can call him out like it was social media. The best I can do is tell him he needs to be civil, but even then, he called me "pretentious" and "countlessly lecturing him on how to act, when I'm the one inserting myself into the situation". which is like... dude, I'm trying to be chill. okay-

Is there any point to talk to him? I say this because I checked on how he was, as he showed up on my talk page. I don't think you should take action on him necessarily, it's just that he still acts the same a year later. For some reason. I don't know. --WannurSyafiqah74 (talk) 04:05, 9 March 2023 (UTC)

I think he's made it pretty clear that he's not interested in having a conversation with you. I don't know why you went back to his talk page - better just to stay away from there. Girth Summit (blether) 07:06, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
I see. I'll remove my comments towards him then. WannurSyafiqah74 (talk) 09:05, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
Side note, but I don't know who added the extra comment. I decided to take out my extra comment towards him, I guess I'll wait to see if he'll ever change himself, as much as his tone is... blunt. WannurSyafiqah74 (talk) 09:10, 9 March 2023 (UTC)

Possible Sockpuppet

Hey, hope you're doing well. Could you run a check on user:Ddj17 ? They have been on Wikipedia for over 2 weeks and already starting out creating articles. Nothing really seems that suspicious but a check wouldn't hurt, I suppose. Rejoy2003(talk) 14:44, 9 March 2023 (UTC)

I don't run checkuser on accounts just because they have started creating articles - lots of accounts do that. If you have specific concerns about that user, please articulate them in a report at SPI. Girth Summit (blether) 15:24, 9 March 2023 (UTC)

Sock farm

Hi, it is regarding this edit by the banned sockfarm [7], username, editing area, et al. I believe their edit needs to get WP:BANREVERTED and new SPI case be filed. Please do the needful, thanks. - 117.201.115.37 (talk) 09:29, 10 March 2023 (UTC)

Hello mysterious IP editor. Look, I don't want to be rude, but I don't know who you are, and you're not providing much context here. How do you know it's part of the sockfarm? Where is the evidence? How did you come across the edit? Etc. More info please. Girth Summit (blether) 20:03, 11 March 2023 (UTC)

Added information

Hi, I apologize for not fitting everything within my first reply but have added further comments, personal attacks are grounds maybe for blocking the attacker but are not grounds for hiding information from Wikipedia Dweisz94 (talk) 14:37, 11 March 2023 (UTC)

I've replied on your talk page; let's keep the discussion in one place. Girth Summit (blether) 14:51, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
You truly, truly possess an unlimited patience which I would otherwise lack. --⛵ WaltClipper -(talk) 19:19, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
I'm a primary school teacher - large reserves of patience are essential. Not for the kids mind - I can shout at them all I want - it's dealing with anxious, competitive, pointy-elbowed parents that need the endless reserves of patience... Girth Summit (blether) 19:33, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
Noted the insult to myself, this is a "ganging up" it's not a respectable aspect to any community, was never worth bringing up the issue to be directly reasoned with Dweisz94 (talk) 20:48, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
Was a reply to WaltClipper*, I've appreciated the suggestion to open with future concerns by GirthSummit Dweisz94 (talk) 20:50, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
Please don't take it personally. I appreciate that you are neurodivergant,and I hope that you won't interpret this as being patronising: you have transgressed some behavioural norms here, and have actually violated some of our core policies and guidelines, such as WP:AGF and WP:NPA. I am sorry if you were offended by WaltClipper's comment, but I think that it is indicative of the fact the the community is not receptive to people who make unfounded accusations towards others. I repeat my offer of helping you to understand our deletion processes, and our notability criteria, if you so wish. Girth Summit (blether) 21:05, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
My accusations are not unfounded, yes like the other causes of problem I will not be reading WP:AGF nor WP:NPA, apparently articles that aren’t AfD can be interpreted as AfD of another article which I think is incorrect and this “misunderstanding” has disgraced my Wikipedia account because the other user was incorrect, anyways on the ANI article many other users demonstrated that it’s not worth my time, yes another insult, doesn’t matter it’s not as ugly as ganging up on a an unlikable person Dweisz94 (talk) 22:04, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
By unfounded, I suppose I mean unevidenced. You have nowhere set out the reasons why you feel people are getting at you personally. I genuinely would be willing to look at that if you would provide diffs, but I can't go through all your contribs and figure out what the problem is. Girth Summit (blether) 22:24, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
The thing to prove in this situation is that articles that aren't AfD can't be grouoed with articles thst are, I assume that would be self explanatory but for some reason it isn't Dweisz94 (talk) 22:32, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
It is valid and normal to have two articles or lists covered by the same AfD nomination. There is nothing unusual about that, but I'm sorry if it's the first time you've come across it and it seemed like it was out of process. Girth Summit (blether) 23:46, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
It was the first time and thank you. Dweisz94 (talk) 00:25, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

Quick admin action needed

Could you look at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Jehowahyereh as it is currently awaiting administrative action? This needs immediate admin action because there are now new sleeper accounts involved and significant sockpuppetry occurring on both Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jayaram Kailas (2nd nomination) and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Akkaldhamayile Pennu. The intention appears to be to manipulate the outcome of the AFD, which is expected to conclude tomorrow. Akevsharma (talk) 00:23, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

Hey @Girth Summit, thanks for checking. Christopheronthemove began voting quickly in AFD discussions immediately after joining, which is a common behavior of a sock. I believe it is a reasonable reason to justify a block. Christopheronthemove is still actively voting in multiple AFD discussions which could impact the outcome of these discussions. Akevsharma (talk) 03:40, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

ByteOr

Just want to let you know that I believe that Special:Contributions/Budrtinki is probably a ByteOr sock. Note the mini edits before creating their user page and their use of the word "scholarhistorian". Not sure where else to post as the SPI is locked. wizzito | say hello! 03:38, 19 March 2023 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) Handled. :) firefly ( t · c ) 09:46, 19 March 2023 (UTC)

You've got mail

Hello, Girth Summit. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template. Doug Weller talk 11:44, 21 March 2023 (UTC)

SPI (Kafkabade)- Investigated more, found sockfarm

Hello, I was the user who reported User:Kafkabade earlier for sockpuppetry. I searched the SPI archives regarding this case, and the Kafkabade case seems to be part of another case about User:Bodyoaken2 (https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Bodyoaken2/Archive) due to one of the socks of Kafkabade (User:Edifyaugur) also being a confirmed sock of User:Bodyoaken2.

Shadow of the Starlit Sky (talk) 13:51, 23 March 2023 (UTC)

Oh, and there's behavioral evidence that backs up this claim too: Bodyoaken2 also replaced English text with text from the Lithuanian Wikipedia much like Kafkabade and their socks. Shadow of the Starlit Sky (talk) 13:52, 23 March 2023 (UTC)
Thanks, I have merged the SPI cases. Girth Summit (blether) 14:13, 23 March 2023 (UTC)
No problem. I will report additional socks if I ever find them. Shadow of the Starlit Sky (talk) 14:29, 23 March 2023 (UTC)

We

and "made by us." Don't they see they're admitting the sock puppetry? -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 13:47, 25 March 2023 (UTC)

I can't make much sense of their writing. It could just be a simple mistake in their grammar, or maybe they're referring to the articles made by themselves, and those by the master (while maintaining that they are different people), I can't really tell. I don't know anything about the case, I haven't looked into it at all - goodness knows why they emailed me - but I agree with the notion that someone with that level of proficiency in the English language isn't likely to be a good fit for this project, regardless of whether they're socking. Girth Summit (blether) 13:53, 25 March 2023 (UTC)

Question about page protection

This reminds me a bit of my CVUA days because I remember that talk pages typically aren't protected. Are pending changes ever considered? The protection policy doesn't mention it at all (see here). The reason I'm asking is Talk:2023 Hamburg shooting. There's been some recurring distruptive edits where someone keeps claiming that "no one died" and that it's "false flag" etc. I doubt that right now it meets that threshold of being persistent enough to qualify for any sort of protection. But if this keeps happening, maybe? What are your thoughts? My question is more generalized to applying pending changes to talk pages so maybe that'd be better suited to the associated policy talk page. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 23:18, 24 March 2023 (UTC)

When it's just one or two people doing it, blocks are proferred to protection - it looks like it was a single person operating out of an IPv6 /64 range, which I have just blocked for a while, so let's see whether that stops the disruption. Let me know if it continues and we can see about whether more blocks or a period of protection of some kind would be more appropriate. Cheers Girth Summit (blether) 11:27, 25 March 2023 (UTC)
Could you explain the /64 thing? I know that some people have dynamic IPs and others have static ones but my understanding of all that is rudimentary at best. Like usually similar numbers at the start can mean someone's in the same range but it can also be more complicated than that. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 11:54, 25 March 2023 (UTC)
We've got an article about it, if you want the full story - Classless Inter-Domain Routing.
Short version - some people get assigned a static IP that doesn't change; some people get assigned an IP which will vary from time to time within a range. Depending on a bunch of different factors, that range might be quite narrow, with just a few addresses on it, or it might be wide with millions of possible addresses. A particular range always starts with the same few numbers; it's the last numbers that change. The more of them that change, the wider the range.
With IPv4, you get a set of four numbers, each of them from 0 to 255. A number like that takes up 8 bits to store (00000000 = 0, 00000001 = 1, 00000010 = 2, all the way up to to 11111111 = 255). So, let's say you're on a range where the first three numbers stay the same, but the last number changes, e.g. 150.160.170.x. We'd call that a /24 range, because the first 24 bits stay the same. That's reasonably narrow - there are 256 possible IPs, from 150.160.170.0 to 150.160.170.255.
IPv6 is a bit more complicated, but the same principle applies - you have a string of 32 hexadecimal numbers, sorted in eight groups of 4 and separated by colons (e.g. 1234:5678:90ab:cdef:1234:5678:90ab:cdef). Each hex number takes 4 bits to store, so again ranges are labelled based on how many of the digits stay the same. In a /64 range, the first 64 bits are stable - which equates to the first 16 digits, or the first four groups of numbers.
Now, IPv6 ranges allow for massively more possible combinations than IPv4. Even in a /64 range, which is considered very narrow, you have billions of billions of possible IPs. However, it is often the case that many people get assigned a /64 range all of their own to bounce around within. That's not always the case, and even when it does happen your /64 might change every now and again, but generally speaking, if you see a bunch of IPv6 IPs editing and the first four sets of numbers are the same, it's pretty likely that it's just one person - that was the case on that talk page, so I blocked that range.
Does that all make sense? Girth Summit (blether) 12:28, 25 March 2023 (UTC)
Thank you for giving such a detailed response! I think I understand all that a bit better now. :) By the way, I intended to have phrased my original question better. If I thought the level of distruption was protection-worthy, I would've gone to WP:RFPP. It's more that seeing distruptive edits on a talk page prompted me to think about the situations where you actually would protect a talk page. The protection policy page solely mentions semi-protection... I was just curious if pending changes is ever implemented in that sort of sitation because it sounds like something that would work better when talk page protection is generally discouraged. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 02:04, 26 March 2023 (UTC)
Think about the purpose of PC protection - it allows IPs and new accounts to edit an article, but unregistered users don't see the changes, essentially hiding the edits from general readers, but letting regular editors see them. Talk pages are already hidden from the general reader - a tiny percentage of Readers click through to the talk page - it's only really regular editors who are likely to see the changes. So, yeah, I don't think applying PC to a talk page would achieve very much - better to using semi, but better still to block the IPs where possible. Girth Summit (blether) 10:11, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

Relative of yours?

Just stumpled over this "new" editor. Created, though not active, on pt-Wiki. So far, one edit per day on en-Wiki. Nothing exciting, but my spider sense is tingling. Favonian (talk) 11:58, 25 March 2023 (UTC)

It's not me, that much I know! I don't recognise them, I'm not aware of having blocked any Polish trolls recently. Girth Summit (blether) 12:05, 25 March 2023 (UTC)
I misread, it originated on the Portuguese Wiki. For now, I'm performing the Ancient Wikipedian Rope Trick. Favonian (talk) 12:12, 25 March 2023 (UTC)
Looks like rope is in short supply these days. Girth Summit (blether) 10:36, 26 March 2023 (UTC)
Behold, a sock! I was deceived by the "wiki of origin" and overlooked that they also swung by the Swedish one – and the usual WP:NOTBROKEN stuff, of course. Favonian (talk) 12:36, 26 March 2023 (UTC)
Ah - that makes sense now, I think I've blocked them recently. Girth Summit (blether) 14:29, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

Hello!

Hello Girth Summit! Lately I've been following some articles and noticed that you and other admins are blocking kyrgyz wikipedists because of a possible association with a Cianzera user. I would like to clarify some points in order to avoid confusion, I will say right away - I am familiar with the Cianzera, but I am not connected with his activities. I would just like to be able to edit wikipedia with peace of mind on topics that interest me, of course I'm willing to be tested.  Aykol Manas (talk) 10:56, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

I can't speak for other admins, but I have been blocking accounts only because they have been used to evade existing blocks - I am not permitted by policy to comment on their geolocation, and I haven't spent time looking at their editing to establish whether they support a particular national viewpoint.
Now, you have obviously been around longer than your account's age would suggest - would you be willing to tell me what previous accounts you have used? Girth Summit (blether) 14:36, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

Range blocks

Hey, Girth Summit,

I just read the discussion about about range blocks and found your explanation very helpful. I rarely do range blocks because I'm so concerned with collateral damage. Is there a way for non-CUers to see whether other editors are editing on a range and predict how much collateral damage there might be? Also, I was once told by an editor that a range block I did was too large but I just reimposed the same range that was previously blocked in that block log. I'm not sure how to even track down that range block I imposed or who I'd ask for advice about it. I guess I could just go back pages in my block log to try to track it down but it was months ago. Any admin that you can recommend who is superknowledgeable about devising the best range to block? Other than yourself, of course. ;-) Liz Read! Talk! 03:36, 27 March 2023 (UTC)

If they're editing through an account, only CUs can see their IPs (and we need good reason to look at them); if they're editing without logging in, and the starting bits of their IPs look the same, you can put them into a range calculator that will tell you what range they're in. I use the calculator built into the CU tool, but there are equivalent ones available online (talk page watchers feel free to suggest your preferred ones). You can also put them into the Bullseye tool to get more information about them - User:GeneralNotability/ip-ext-info.js is a very handy script that makes a link direct to that tool appear next to IP addresses. GeneralNotability and Blablubbs are both good people to go to with questions about IPs, they know a lot more than I do about them! Girth Summit (blether) 07:33, 27 March 2023 (UTC)

TIL...

the expression "cocking a snook" :-) -- RoySmith (talk) 20:30, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

User:Lillyput4455

Greetings. First, thanks for all the work you put in over at SPI. It's incredibly difficult. Now, as this user. Are they a sock or a puppeteer? Or neither. I can't tell from your block message on their talk page. I had a feeling they were, but could never figure out how to frame the investigation. And if so, who is the puppeteer/socks? Onel5969 TT me 18:13, 30 March 2023 (UTC)

HI Onel5969 - they are both. Sorry the initial block message was short on detail - I'm afraid I made a technical screw-up the SPI page, which I think has been resolved now. They have been evading a block since 2017, and have been using more than one account to do it. I believe that the SPI should now have all the details you need. Cheers Girth Summit (blether) 20:55, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
It does! Thank you. This editor has been a thorn in NPP's side for a long time. Onel5969 TT me 21:08, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
I'm glad to have pulled a thorn - these account went undetected for far too long. Girth Summit (blether) 22:07, 30 March 2023 (UTC)

AFDs

Hello, Girth Summit,

There are a bunch of brand new editors who headed directly to AFD discussions, citing policy in their requests for deletion. The most active ones today are User:MetricMaster and User:Locu so I thought I'd run them by you. Locu would be quite a sleeper account. Thank you. Liz Read! Talk! 05:23, 24 March 2023 (UTC)

Hi Liz - I agree that the behaviour is suspicious. I'll email you (BEANS). Girth Summit (blether) 11:53, 25 March 2023 (UTC)
Two new active players, User:ImperialMajority and User:SuperSharanya who are spending way more time participating in AFDs that is typical for an account a week or two old. Liz Read! Talk! 07:02, 29 March 2023 (UTC)
Liz - ImperialMajesty has already been picked up, and I have just declined their unblock request. SuperSharanya was different, but I was able to confirm them to Ranjith207, a confirmed sock of Jomontgeorge, based on historic data (courtesy ping to Ponyo, in case she disagrees with that finding). Cheers Girth Summit (blether) 10:43, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
My browser crashed so fantastically while checking SuperSharanya that I actually had to restart my computer and never had a chance to finish poking about for their socks. By the way, you tried to courtesy ping me using the noping template, which is really quite funny.-- Ponyobons mots 20:13, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
Urgh - my eyes can't read usernames, and my fingers think they know what to type better than my brain does. I need a holiday... Girth Summit (blether) 20:15, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
I think you're giving IM a title they don't deserve.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:30, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
Hah! I should put my reading glasses on before editing... Girth Summit (blether) 13:48, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
Well, looks like I correctly called 3 out of 4 socks. My nose for socks is improving. I'll continue to keep my eye out on AFDs but I've chatted up ImperialMajority on their talk page after they accused me of harassment in a comment in this discussion (that has been removed) so socks might become less obvious in the future. Socking activity in AFDs bothers me as I've come across instances where sock vote-stacking determined the outcome of AFDs. Thanks again. Liz Read! Talk! 16:28, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
Look at my recent contribs - there's a whole host of it going on. By the way, you might want to reconsider whether a relist was really necessary at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mujhe Pyar Hua Tha (2nd nomination) after you see all the !votes I've just struck through... Girth Summit (blether) 16:30, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
I'll take a look at that AFD. I probably relist more than other closers because I want to be as certain as possible of the outcome. As you know, it's not impossible but it's very hard to recreate an article that has been deleted through an AFD so I want to have the best possible sense of the consensus of editors who participate in the discussion before deleting an article. Thanks again. Liz Read! Talk! 21:35, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
Hey - I just want to be super-cl
L
lear that I am not calling your judgment intoi qn here. You work in the sockiest part of the project, and you try to treat everyone e. So, hats off. ually Girth Summit (blether) 22:22, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
Enjoying a wee dram this eve? Seasider53 (talk) 23:00, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
Harsh! Editing via smartphone - I'm not as good at it as Cullen is, probably should have looked at 'preview' before hitting 'publish'... Girth Summit (blether) 06:41, 31 March 2023 (UTC)

WikiProject Yorkshire Newsletter - April 2023

Delivered April 2023 by MediaWiki message delivery.
If you do not wish to receive the newsletter, please add an N to the column against your username on the Project Mainpage.

19:52, 1 April 2023 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – April 2023

News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2023).

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Arbitration

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:11, 4 April 2023 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Girth_Summit/Archive_18&oldid=1220023524"