User talk:Pikavoom/Archives/2022/July
 | This is an archive of past discussions with User:Pikavoom. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Constructive edits by sock;
Hello I'm restoring some of the content you removed such as at Mount Hay (Ethiopia), some of the sock's edits are constructive and properly sourced, and don't warrant content removal without source verification. Dawit S Gondaria (talk) 09:19, 2 July 2022 (UTC)
- @Dawit S Gondaria: I don't trust sock puppets to do source verification, they are not good faith actors. If you go ahead and verify the sources yourself, then it is totally fine to put it back. Pikavoom Talk 09:52, 2 July 2022 (UTC)
- @Pikavoom: no problem, i'll go through the edits and verify wherever i can. Good day Dawit S Gondaria (talk) 17:05, 2 July 2022 (UTC)
Another possible sock detected
After you just reverted the sock, another new account appeared and restored those editions. I think it's safe to say this page needs a protection to make it difficult for new users to gain accessibility or else the article will keep getting bombarded by the same sock master. [1] Ayaltimo (talk) 00:53, 10 July 2022 (UTC)
- @Ayaltimo: thanks, I reported and asked for protection at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Roy744. Pikavoom Talk 05:43, 10 July 2022 (UTC)
Hello, Pikavoom,
You tagged some page creations by this editor for deletion for being the work of blocked sockpuppeteer Metaverse Yadav, but they were actually identified as a sockpuppet of Comrade Sourav (see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Comrade Sourav). Please always make sure than an editor is a confirmed sockpuppet, through an official SPI case or through their block log, before tagging pages for CSD G5 page deletion. Thank you! Liz Read! Talk! 21:31, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
- @Liz:, I tagged corrected. I filed the case under Comrade Sourav. But the confirmed result was not to a proven Comrade Sourav sock but to a bunch of socks including Ankur K Yadav blocked as Metaverse Yadav. The block of Sir Ankur was based on a confirmed finding to a confirmed Metaverse Yadav sockpuppet. The filing itself might be moved to Metaverse Yadav, or if the clerk determines Metaverse Yadav and Comrade Sourav are the same then the two cases might be merged. My G5 tagging was based on the confirmation to Metaverse Yadav, blocked from 25 May. Pikavoom Talk 07:02, 12 July 2022 (UTC)
- I can see how the block log for Sir Ankur can be confusing as it points to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Comrade Sourav, while the finding in the case itself is a to separate case. The two cases might be merged, but that doesn't effect the G5s, as Sir Ankur only started in July which is after the G5 date for both cases. Pikavoom Talk 07:09, 12 July 2022 (UTC)
July 2022
Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.
If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should review the guide to appealing blocks, and then appeal your block by adding the following text below this notice:
{{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}}. Note that anything you post in your unblock request will be public, so you may alternatively use the Unblock Ticket Request System to submit an appeal if it contains information that must be private.Administrators: Checkusers have access to confidential system logs not accessible by the public or by administrators due to the Wikimedia Foundation's privacy policy. You must not loosen or remove this block, or issue an IP block exemption, without consulting with a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee. Administrators who undo checkuser blocks without permission from a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee may be summarily desysopped.