![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. 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. |
News and updates for administrators from the past month (October 2022).
{{
rangeblock|create=yes}}
or {{
uw-ublock|contains profanity}}
.COI also. Email me if you want details. DMacks ( talk) 14:14, 1 November 2022 (UTC)
I don't think the WP:NOTHERE apply to this block. Wikpediauser0's knowledge of grammar and guideline is suboptimal, but all of their edits are attempting to be constructive. Roostery123 ( talk) 04:57, 2 November 2022 (UTC)
Hello, Bbb23. You may be interested to look into the (recent and general) conduct of Setswana ( talk · contribs). Its very possible that WP:COMPETENCE and WP:DISRUPTIVE could apply in this case. — Sundostund mppria ( talk / contribs) 12:25, 2 November 2022 (UTC)
It's been locked for 7 days now. I think it's time for the lock to be removed. Pyxis Solitary (yak). L not Q. 09:18, 3 November 2022 (UTC)
Hi! Yesterday you'd deleted Mehrshad Shahidi as G5. Today, E. Karimof has created Draft:Mehrshad Shahidi. Thought you'd want to take a closer look. Curb Safe Charmer ( talk) 14:59, 3 November 2022 (UTC)
Hi Bbb23. I found a user who is claiming to be a new account of User:Weegee1000. I didn't think it was worth opening an SPI, but I wanted to let someone know. The new account is User:Weegee1000 Revamped and they claim, on their user page, to be said user. Hey man im josh ( talk) 19:00, 3 November 2022 (UTC)
Thanks for telling me about overlinking, I didn’t know about that. SikiWtideI ( Speak to the backwards police) 00:34, 4 November 2022 (UTC)SikiWtideI
Thanks for your edits to User talk:Athaenara.
That was not my intention, I was just trying to provide advice to help them return to normal editing. I have done this before to other editors with no trouble.
I do not want to get in a heated debate, but I do want to help provide a path moving forward. I have done my best to focus exclusively on user conduct and not on the editor. What I have said regarding "If a specific comment, edit, pattern of edits, or the like is not going to be received well by the community, it is not a good idea to do it" holds true. I know the circumstances leading up to Athaenara's block is infuriating, at the same time people deserve second chances. Per our blocking policy as well we only block people if leaving them unblocked currently risks disruption to the project. I agree the comments made by Athaenara on RfA and similar should be received as trolling and should thus be handled at such. I do not agree that we should explicitly call people racists or bigots or whatever even if they are as that would also come out as a personal attack. I am a subscriber to "always assume good faith", as assuming bad faith can and does feed the trolls. If it helps no one then sure that comment I made can be reverted, but at the moment I think it may provide guidance to a long-term contributor, as the last thing we want is to drive away a long-term editor simply because they wrote a couple of things that were taken the wrong way.
In other words, yes I agree a forced break is warranted (and the other admins do too), no I do not agree that we should drive away an otherwise-productive editor. It might take a year, two years for this risk of disruption and personal attacks to go away, or it might never happen. Aasim - Herrscher of Wikis ❄️ 21:47, 4 November 2022 (UTC)
editors should really leave this Talk page alonethen why isn't the talk page protected? Also, if that is the case you should move back to this revision, not just remove that one comment. Aasim - Herrscher of Wikis ❄️ 17:22, 5 November 2022 (UTC)
Check out this. LMAO. -- Kansas Bear ( talk) 13:57, 7 November 2022 (UTC)
Hi Bbb23,
I saw that you have undone my edit on the user page "Otolemur crassicaudatus". You have also sent me a warning stating that I have vandalized their user page. I do not believe I vandalized it, as all I did was add the year that they closed the account, 2008, which was stated in the logs. I do not believe it was vandalism, unless it is not allowed to edit retired Wikipedians' user pages to insert more information. TinGamerTV ( talk) 09:07, 7 November 2022 (UTC)
Hi,
Can you undelete this page and send it to draftspace or WP:USERFY it for me? dannymusiceditor oops 02:23, 7 November 2022 (UTC)
Hello,
You just put something on my talk page regarding the deletion of one of my comments on JJMC89's talk page. Could you please tell me or link me to a page that tells me how to be more civil? And, if possible, a page in which I can report vandals, as I am unaware of one.
Thank you :) Greeny908 ( talk) 14:27, 9 November 2022 (UTC)
Given this and the attitude expressed there by two New Page Reviewers that it's not part of their function at AfC to see that article meet a basic standard of quality before moving them into mainspace, perhaps it would be a good idea to bock MaTF from draftspace as well. True, their writing has improved a little, but they still seem to be unable to write an entire short article in appropriate English, as evidenced by their three new articles. Beyond My Ken ( talk) 04:06, 9 November 2022 (UTC)
Sorry, I thought I'd help by adding the template as it's unusual that a discussion develops after an admin had made a decision. Again, sorry. RF354 ( talk) 16:23, 10 November 2022 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at
Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is
Discussion at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/TheCurrencyGuy. Thank you.
NotReallySoroka (
talk)
19:16, 12 November 2022 (UTC)
I don't know why, but you have deleted the page I have created I'm working to make a better Wikipedia, and I solve articles problems everyday, There are some articles from two years ago with 1-2 refrence and didn't deleted but this page that I have created have Wikipedia in two other languages I have a question now, If I translate again the topic next month, will the translation remain or that will be deleted too? Up to next month I will be able to translate topics to English Zeytoonwiki ( talk) 20:58, 12 November 2022 (UTC)
Hi Bbb23. I've had your block of User talk:Poorva12303 brought to my attention, But User talk:Poorva12303 is continuously rolling back my edits. So, what can i do ? Thank you. MT731 ( talk) 12:29, 13 November 2022 (UTC)
Hello. While I do not want to be overly aggresive or deliberately come at you for a simple action, may I please know why my edit at the article Doret, was undone? I saw nothing wrong with it. I simply wanted to expand the already [poorly-written article and even provided a full-fledged citation for my supposed claim I'd appreciate why you did it. Best regards and have a great rest of your day. Wikipedian10282 ( talk) 23:39, 13 November 2022 (UTC)
Hi, my page was deleted from sandbox. Can I please have my page back? I am working on an assignment for University and had no intention of updating Wikipedia. I do not have another copy and was not aware that working drafts could be deleted. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by KN2022 ( talk • contribs) 16:40, 14 November 2022 (UTC)
I blocked another of his socks last night. If he wants to go edit Bharatpedia, that's fine by me :) Girth Summit (blether) 14:02, 15 November 2022 (UTC)
Hi, my page was deleted from sandbox. Can I please have my materials back that you deleted? I do not have another copy and was not aware that working drafts could be deleted. Thank you. MichelePadua ( talk) 23:15, 13 November 2022 (UTC)
Could you please undelete it for one more day, so that I can copy my work and not have to lose months of intellectual materials? It was a lot of work, and because the page was deleted only 18 minutes after its "speedy" nomination, I was afforded to opportunity to contest which seems unfair. I am happy for you to delete this preliminary draft from my sandbox again tomorrow. In fact, I will even delete the draft myself after I have preserved the work. Thank you in advance for your decency in allowing this courtesy. MichelePadua MichelePadua ( talk) 17:13, 14 November 2022 (UTC)
Please confirm receipt of the above request. It would be reasonable to undelete my page briefly. Do I take it that I must instead lose all of this hard work? MichelePadua ( talk) 00:10, 16 November 2022 (UTC)
Hi Bbb23, is the block of Caresgenius compatible with the September 2022 blockevidence RfC? If not, could you take the necessary steps behind the scenes to make it become compliant? Thank you very much in advance! ~ ToBeFree ( talk) 19:27, 15 November 2022 (UTC)
I'm trying to reinstate this page. Here's an entire article -- today -- from the Washington Post: Where Girls Compete But Men Rule
ECNL is heavily referenced in the Yates Report.
95% of all female soccer players at NCAA Division I's Power 5 ( Pac 12, Big 10, Big 12, ACC, SEC) were recruited from ECNL clubs. > 75
Across all NCAA Division 1 schools, the #'s are roughly 75% or more.
PLEASE UNDO DELETION.
PeteWL (
talk)
20:41, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Hi Bbb23. I've had your block of User talk:Poorva12303 brought to my attention, But User:Poorva12303 is continuously rolling back my edits. So, what can i do ? As per official census table of Government of India. There are 53 urban agglomerations in India with a population of 1 million or more as of 2011. Thank you. MT731 ( talk) 07:58, 21 November 2022 (UTC)
Hello, Bbb23. I strongly suspect that banned user Mohammed106 ( talk · contribs) (blocked by you last year for disruptive editing) is active again, this time as Lamise2006 ( talk · contribs). — Sundostund mppria ( talk / contribs) 06:46, 21 November 2022 (UTC)
I find your decision biased. The text was about a real activist imprisoned for the second time. Xx236 ( talk) 14:05, 22 November 2022 (UTC)
See that you reverted my edit and said not the right venue. Where is the right venue? Thank you. MaskedSinger ( talk) 18:37, 21 November 2022 (UTC)
Hello Bbb23! I saw your latest edit in Template:Linguistic groups of the constitutionally recognised official languages of India. What you have done (reverting sock) is correct but the term that the sock edited is also correct. I don't want to intervene between you two's edits. But please rectify the correct term "Kannadigas" (for the people who speak "Kannada"). The reason I don't want myself to involve is because the edit conflict is relevant to sock puppet. Thanks! -- Haoreima ( talk) 14:24, 24 November 2022 (UTC)
Hi, Bbb23. What do you mean by your edit summary, "Restored revision 1121997616 by Vanjagenije (talk): Beyond repair - file a report following instructions)? I already filed a report. The editor replied. What do you mean by "beyond repair"? Thanks. - SusanLesch ( talk) 22:39, 25 November 2022 (UTC)
I marked this page for deletion since the redirect doesn't make any sense as it is redirecting the page belonging to one person to some other person of the same family. What's the right way to get this redirect deleted if this isn't the way? I saw you reverted my proposal for deletion.
Smarter1 ( talk) 19:30, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review
the candidates and submit your choices on the
voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{
NoACEMM}}
to your user talk page.
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk)
00:44, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
Hey Bbb23, just heads up this IP is clearly ANOTHER block evasion of 198.70.2.200, making the same edits on Ricardo López (stalker). Just letting you know as the blocking administrator. I did request page protection, which has been actioned! Have a good day Tommi1986 let's talk! 15:25, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
Hi @ Bbb23, I recently attempted to post an edit warring report on the administrators' noticeboard, but it looks like I botched it. Could you help me fix the problem, so that the instance of edit warring can be addressed? Revirvlkodlaku ( talk) 03:18, 1 December 2022 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (November 2022).
/64
to the end of an IP in
Special:Contributions to see all of a subnet's edits, and
consider blocking the whole subnet rather than an IP that may change within a minute.Fair enough, this needed deleting but you'll need to early close the AfD as a consensus close which also supports WP:SALTing. Bungle ( talk • contribs) 20:09, 1 December 2022 (UTC)
Hi, Based on my observation on bnwiki, I think they are back again here on enwiki: Special:Contributions/202.134.14.156, Special:Contributions/202.134.13.135. I observed many similarity, here are two example:
1. Months ago this bnwiki's and arwiki's article was heavily edited by the them (103.230...). And yesterday Uli al-amr was edited by an IP. I know this might be anyone but 202.134.14.156's behaviour on bnwiki matches with User:Lazy-restless (e.g. interest on Salafi movement, Template:Salafi & related). They also have habit of cross wiki editing.
2. On bnwiki they are pushing an article created by them (e.g. https://w.wiki/64gv). Months ago they even tried same thing here on enwiki, see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pak-Bangla language.
If possible, please block the IPs. আফতাবুজ্জামান ( talk) 02:10, 4 December 2022 (UTC)
I am wondering if there are any known typical behaviors of socks. I have observed a pattern of some detected socks which before having been blocked attempted made/or attempted to hide themselves behind monotone, repetitive edits and only later began to edit in the preferred area where they eventually got into trouble and subsequently were blocked. An example would be adding short descriptions. I see now one that does another task, which is useful work on wikipedia but I suspect they eventually get into trouble. Have you observed a similar pattern? Paradise Chronicle ( talk) 12:51, 4 December 2022 (UTC)
Now I've got a scathing message from 166.182.248.126] that reads:
Hi, i'm sorry for disturbing you again. A bnwiki wiki CheckUser found following are sock of Mostly shoaib and blocked them as Sockpuppet ( bnwiki SPI): Trilokadiponglar Bhilku, Sourabhossianrabbi, মাইনুল ইসলাম খোকন, MoviegeekSouthAsia, Rezaul Haque Shumon and Sm Fahim Ban. They are also actively editing this wiki. If possible please block them here as well. Thanks. আফতাবুজ্জামান ( talk) 14:38, 4 December 2022 (UTC)
Hello Bbb23. I ntoiced that you deleted Nuhash Humayun from mainspace under G5. It still exists as a draft at Draft:Nuhash Humayun so I wanted to check with you to see if the person who created it is also a sock or not. ― Blaze Wolf TalkBlaze Wolf#6545 16:38, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
I was wondering why you declined my request to increase the protection level on The Mousetrap. The film is famously known for its twist ending's request to not be revealed, and as such editors constantly remove it despite the policies against it. We've had such an incident happen today, and increasing the protection on the page would stop it from happening. I have a draft of an edit request to make an edit notice on my sandbox if you'd prefer that. RteeeeKed 💬 📖 03:06, 6 December 2022 (UTC)
I misspoke - User:HugoAcosta9 didn't edit my talk page - he pinged me 5 times today with their IP edits. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5. I'm not sure why we wouldn't mention it on their talk page, given it just happened. Nfitz ( talk) 20:43, 6 December 2022 (UTC)
Thanks. I suspect it will take more than 6 months at this rate ... sigh. Nfitz ( talk) 04:40, 7 December 2022 (UTC)
I hope you don't mind if I ask this here, since it's not quite something that rises to a noticeboard-level issue. There's a user, UTLisobel ( talk · contribs) who has been adding Template:Commons category and Template:Archival records to various articles. Their username implies an association with the University of Toronto, and all the archive links they're adding are from that school and they are certainly a SPA only focusing on adding links from that school. That's not really the issue I'm seeing though, it's that the Commons categories they're adding are more often than not links to Commons categories that do not exist. Sometimes even the archival records template they add doesn't actually link to anything. I've asked them a couple of times to please stop and check what they're adding before they add it and to not add these templates when they're not linking to an actual working link, but they have not responded and are instead continuing in alphabetical order down what I can only assume is a list they have of names. They're only on the letter C after however many such edits and are not communicating or adjusting what they're doing, so it's potentially going to create a very large list of edits that need to be made to check and remove these links to these non-existent ( or inaccurate) categories. It's certainly not vandalism but it's a minor thing that's going to add up over hundreds of articles, what should I do in this situation? Thanks for any advice you can give. - Aoidh ( talk) 21:32, 2 December 2022 (UTC)
I was considering pushing the button myself, but after looking at their talk page and saw your copyvio warning, I'm thinking, you know, you're better about this sort of thing. So I thought I'd put it on your radar and see what you thought. - jc37 19:27, 9 December 2022 (UTC)
please block IP hopping editor on https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Thrash_metal&action=history -- FMSky ( talk) 00:31, 12 December 2022 (UTC)
Hi, you left a comment on DefThree's talk-page [2]. You correctly suspected that this user is not a new-user. I have filed many SPI's against this user. I strongly suspect this is Belteshazzar who has been blocked many times. You may or may not be interested but here is a link to the SPI [3] Psychologist Guy ( talk) 13:44, 12 December 2022 (UTC)
Hi, I would like to know how to retrieve my deleted article. I tried using deleting administer. But I get No matching items in log. I feel like I am missing something here. Could you please guide me here. Thank you in advance. Adaline Lefe ( talk) 14:27, 13 December 2022 (UTC)
User:Freon has just widened the domain of his edit warring to the FAC currently in progress for James Madison. If you could re-open the Noticeboard filed by Jtbobwaysf for 24 hours, then I could add the links for edit warring by him since the edit warring is now active on the FAC page for Madison currently in progress. ErnestKrause ( talk) 18:03, 13 December 2022 (UTC)
You spotted that sock of Buzzards Watch Me Work in record time. Thanks for your hard work! Magnolia677 ( talk) 19:42, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
Wanted to flag this for you. I know you blocked Rio0601 ( talk · contribs) for sockpuppets and edit warring on Miss France 2023, but now that he has been blocked a new account just sprung up making the same edit he was making. It's Gillesmourey ( talk · contribs), and I noticed the account only has three total edits, the last of which was made in 2018. Could be coincidental but thought I'd flag for you in case you want to handle in some way. { [ ( jjj 1238 ) ] } 22:15, 15 December 2022 (UTC)
Hey Bbb23. I noticed you declined my RPP request per reasons that there had not been sufficient recent vandalism; this seems reasonable. However, this is a lesser-known page, and looking at the page history, the majority of the past 50 edits have been unconstructive. I should have specified that they were edit tests, and not major vandalism, though. One edit in particular had gone days without noticing, and I took the chance when I came across the page to revert it. Though you are correct that there has not been very recent disruptive activity, a lot has been and I think semi-protection would help lessen the load on anti-vandalism reverters and encourage content creation. Thoughts? Thanks. Silikonz (alt) 💬 23:09, 16 December 2022 (UTC)
Thanks. Could you please expand on why you think so? Looking at the amount of test edits coming up very frequently in the past few weeks, (mostly as the only edits to the article then, consecutive tests) and the amount of spam that gets added to the talk page regularly contribute to my stance on this as a worthy candidate for semi-prot. A day after my edits, I only caught this problematic modification via my watchlist. Not many editors have been able to keep up with the spam on this page. Thanks. Silikonz 💬 01:35, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
The edit history shows most edits are minor disruption, and the page has been protected twice in the past (vandalism is ramping up again). I'm sorry if this is a small deal, I just thought filtering autoconfirmed editors would solve the spam somewhat, and was a bit annoyed by this. Thanks! :) Silikonz 💬 01:43, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
Apologies, I don't comprehend why that would be the case when this happened just a minute ago. Thanks so much. Regardless, thanks for clarifying. Silikonz 💬 02:01, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
Hey, he is again back as Lllllu43 ( talk · contribs) it seems, if i'm not mistaken (threatens to report other users...) @ RoBri: and myself believe that it is indeed Charli, hope you can confirm (or deny if wrong, then sorry). Kante4 ( talk) 13:39, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
![]() |
Have a wonderful holiday season filled with peace, joy, prosperity and wonder. |
Hi Bbb23, Thank you for all your contributions during the year. |
Hello. The AN thread I had opened by mistake has already been removed by user Andrevan. Could you please restore my thread at ANI? Thanks. PhotogenicScientist ( talk) 23:03, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
![]() |
Cheery Day |
I felt you needed a Cheery Chihuahua, they always cheer people up.
![]() |
Hello! It seems the talk page for Barbie Girl may have been inadvertently deleted in the ensuing cleanup. Special:Redirect/logid/140790562 indicates the page got overwritten. Please do restore it when you find the time. Thank you! Chlod ( say hi!) 16:04, 23 December 2022 (UTC)
![]() |
Keep on fighting the good fight. Happy holidays. ResPM ( T🔈 🎵C) 16:21, 23 December 2022 (UTC) |
![]() |
Whatever you celebrate at this time of year, whether it's Christmas or some other festival, I hope you and those close to you have a happy, restful time! Have fun, Donner60 ( talk) 00:16, 23 December 2022 (UTC)}} |
![]() |
Donner60 ( talk) 01:14, 24 December 2022 (UTC)
I wanted to let you know that I made an effort to (unsuccessfully) "cool down" a new editor @ Chm-aus who was quite frustrated that the first edit they worked on was immediately reverted as possible vandalism by @ Materialscientist. (the "recent log" marked it as such - I was looking to attack vandalism myself and that is how I found the edit in question)
Based on personality, any kind of reaction is possible and there was a bad reaction right out of the essay "Please do not bite the newcomers."
So @ Chm-aus took the reversion personally, escalated into an edit war, and then followed @ Materialscientist around reverting random stuff. @ Chm-aus was then smacked around a bit more on their talk page. Who needs to be the adult in the room?
The initial edit was reasonable and it was made in good faith. There was nothing wrong with the edit that could not be addressed.
@ Chm-aus mentioned that they were engaged in primary research and had doubts about the accuracy of several hundred articles.
The whole chronology was quite disturbing (to me personally) - rather then letting it fester I am mentioning it; I understand the imperative to protect content but the human cost seems a bit too high.
In the end what was lost is at least a "new editor" and the value they might bring to the table. Flibbertigibbets ( talk) 01:23, 25 December 2022 (UTC)
CAPTAIN RAJU
(T) is wishing you a
Merry
Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes
WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a
Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Don't eat yellow snow!
Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{ subst: User:Flaming/MC2008}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 00:46, 26 December 2022 (UTC)
![]() |
The Admin's Barnstar |
Thanks for your good work Andre 🚐 20:17, 27 December 2022 (UTC) |
Good morning.
While I will admit that Hameln (website) wasn't a particularly well written article, as I couldn't go further beyond the original Japanese article (of which I also posted <nowiki>{{一次資料}}</nowiki>) which is also lacking in information and sources I could use, and certainly would not have been article that I would have published had it not been a translation, I do believe that the article should still exist on Wikipedia in some form. The reason why I believe so is that not only does the website have ''a'' Japanese Wikipedia article, as well as an article on both Pixpedia and Nicopedia (albeit not an independent article for the latter), as well as the fact that the website is one of the more used online novel platforms in Japan both for fanfiction and original work, and I was hoping for someone else to use the article as a springboard.
Thank you for your time.
-- Jnglmpera ( talk) 01:09, 28 December 2022 (UTC)
I'm curious why you blocked Gabidieppe when the disruption seems to have stopped? The account's last edit was before my comment on their talk page, which was left more than an hour before your block. ~ ONUnicorn( Talk| Contribs) problem solving 18:57, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
You have removed my comment here. Infinity Knight ( talk) 17:21, 28 December 2022 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at
Wikipedia:Administrative action review regarding an action which you performed. Thank you.
Happy Holidays! Can I ask for your assistance or advice regarding this issue? You warned this user Fred Zepelin to not post on my talk page (after repeated warnings and harassment). Yet, they are still posting Post here I don't want anything to do with this person, yet it's been years of this now. here Here is your warning here Any advice or direction would be appreciated. Film_Fanatical10069 t@lk 20:29, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
![]() |
Happy New Year! |
Hello Bbb23: Did you know ... that back in 1885, Wikipedia editors wrote Good Articles with axes, hammers and chisels? Thank you for your contributions to this encyclopedia using 21st century technology. I hope you don't get any unnecessary
blisters. |
Bbb23,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable
New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
Abishe (
talk)
03:49, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
Send New Year cheer by adding {{ subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.
Abishe ( talk) 03:49, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
Bbb23,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable
New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
—
Moops ⋠
T⋡
23:39, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
Send New Year cheer by adding {{ subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.
— Moops ⋠ T⋡ 23:39, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
An account you have banned recently, User:Fulcrum0, keeps misbehaving even after their ban, by falsely accusing me now that I am the reason you banned them as a WP:SOCKPUPPET. I have never instructed you, Bbb23, to ban them as a sock. As a matter of fact, in my ANI report against that account, I have never called them a sockpuppet. The only instances where I did, were only after their ban, and as result of their ban. Their ban occurred on 23:44, 31 December 2022, and it was only half day later that I informed the AN about the development, on 11:24, 1 January 2023.
Clearly, the banned account is abusing their User Talk Page privileges to make false accusations against others editors, and this while they are waiting for their second block appeal request to be approved. - ❖ SilentResident ❖ ( talk ✉ | contribs ✎) 18:55, 3 January 2023 (UTC)
Am i eligible for autopatrolled, senior? I had made a request on the Autopatrolled request place. Can you look into it. I will be very Happy if i got Autopatrolled user rights. It's like my dream. --- Hey It's Patnaite☝️ (talk) 16:32, 3 January 2023 (UTC)
I think User talk:203.115.106.84 might be a person/sock you've blocked before. Seems to have beef with you and @ 331dot: See diff Zinnober9 ( talk) 22:41, 3 January 2023 (UTC)
It is a Croatian political party that is currently part of the Croatian Parlament.
Source link: https://www.sabor.hr/hr/zastupnici/vrkljan-milan-10-saziv-hrvatskoga-sabora HR-Biograph ( talk) 17:21, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
Care to extend the block on 155.137.183.249? Pinging @ Callanecc: for awareness. S0091 ( talk) 20:02, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2022).
Before I repost what was reverted, I'd like to apolologize for causing trouble on this talk page. I did not mean to delete other people's discussions and overwrite them with my own message, and it won't happen again.
Anyways,I was hoping/wanting for you to give me feedback regarding Hameln (website). However, you didn't even bother to respond to my message and just straight up ignored me by archived my discussion. Can I please have some feedback from you regarding this article? The admin that posted the speedy deletion notification on my talk page ( M.Ashraf333) directed me to discuss with you (the deleting admin) regarding this article. I know I'm sounding like a stalker here, but as I said previously, I do think this article should stay up in some form. -- Jnglmpera ( talk) 04:15, 5 January 2023 (UTC)
You blocked AK The WikiEditor, they're back with the incredibly original name of AK The WikiEditoror. Would you mind looking and blocking them? Ravensfire ( talk) 14:37, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
Bbb23 You understand that it is he who put at least the template that the article of the blocked participant, I tried but I don’t know how it’s done ( WP:G5). Sulumbek of Sagopshi /info/en/?search=Sulom-Beck_Sagopshinski He changed the title of the article. Товболатов ( talk) 23:46, 6 January 2023 (UTC)
In Russian there is a template for simple deletion. They put it there without problems, I still haven’t fully learned how it’s done here, okay.-- Товболатов ( talk) 05:48, 7 January 2023 (UTC)
Yes you are right but he creates fake satyas. let's wait CheckUser. -- Товболатов ( talk) 05:43, 7 January 2023 (UTC)
Not only do I say that he writes fakes and other people write on the discussion pages of articles for example here Talk:Nazran conflict, Talk:Adermakh.-- Товболатов ( talk) 05:58, 7 January 2023 (UTC)
socketpuppet had taken a break for a few days but has reemerged and is now vandalizing pages on en wiki again /info/en/?search=Special:Contributions/Op233op2e Putitonamap98 ( talk) 20:37, 8 January 2023 (UTC)
Hello! Someone who is not autoconfirmed has asked for a deletion review of Draft:Independent Media Association. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. — Alalch E. 13:17, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
Thank you very much for your help to me, you just misunderstood me, I meant the blocked member. No problem, I'll stop. Nice to meet you, you are a good person.-- Товболатов ( talk) 17:49, 8 January 2023 (UTC)
Bbb23 Hello, sorry to bother you but there is a new vandal Ingush Orsthoy blocking bypass returns edits Niyskho here Abrek perhaps they are related to it WikiEditor1234567123 . Please check one last time if you can. -- Товболатов ( talk) 17:16, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
He is definitely connected with this group and just now became more active after blocking several accounts Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Dzurdzuketi/Archive. -- Товболатов ( talk) 17:27, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
Hello @ Bbb23, I believe another sockpuppet (of Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Dzurdzuketi/Archive) popped up and is doing quite the damage on a few articles, please see Ingush_Orsthoy ~~~~ Reiner Gavriel ( talk) 18:45, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
I have removed excess citations and linked my page to SF Express. If you could advise for more to help me get the page accepted, that would be great. Thank you. Limnewiy ( talk) 14:26, 11 January 2023 (UTC)
Could you take a quick look at the Wikipedia page Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/SuhailShaji786 ? The user in question has previously been blocked for UPE and is now creating more articles with similar UPE content. I believe this requires immediate action, which is why I have brought this to your attention. Akevsharma ( talk) 03:30, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Good afternoon, from Portugal,
maybe still a bit early to be 100% sure, but per list of contributions ( /info/en/?search=Special:Contributions/ErmosDrousiotis) the new sock seems to be User:ErmosDrousiotis. I leave it in your capable hands.
Continue the good work, have a nice weekend! RevampedEditor ( talk) 15:35, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Hi, just a note that a colleague of mine on the English Wikinews received an intimidating email from some troll making threats against you. This account was globally locked for unrelated reasons shortly after. Interestingly, the Internationale was included, which makes me think of a person both of us recently had negative interactions with, whom I will not name. Heavy Water ( talk) 19:11, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
While the master wasn't blocked until yesterday, other socks in the group ( MullHiw Sikandvau, Shahzeela01, Tenderos019 Saidulislam1991) were blocked on December 1. The article was created on December 13 and would have been in violation of those blocks. Spicy ( talk) 16:42, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
Hi, I would like to clarify the situation in 2022–23 Super League Greece 2. I am requesting a protection because User:Αθλητικά (whom it might be important to view the long sockpuppetry history , as he is a well-known sockmaster) has been vandalizing 2022–23 Super League Greece 2 in the same way as he has done for 2022–23 Super League Greece and several other Greek football pages (usually Super League for older years) for which he has been reported and banned. There were at least 10 reported vandalisms of 2022–23 Super League Greece, which led to the page being extended protected until 12 February 2023. This is why he has moved to editing 2022–23 Super League Greece 2 and vandalizing it in the same way. Changing the tiebreaker criteria as he has constantly been doing with several IPs is something that could require a lot of work to revert and is very tiring. This situation with this user has been going back and forth for the last two years, and it is not improving. It has happened three times in the last month and twice in the last week in 2022–23 Super League Greece 2, and it is quite likely to happen again, as it is quite likely to happen in 2022–23 Super League Greece in the near future when it gets unprotected. I believe this is more than enough disruptive behavior not only for this page, but by this specific user as a whole. It is undeniable that it is an IP sock from User:Αθλητικά, as he is doing exactly the same edits, and has been banned in several accounts for this. I kindly suggest you reconsider the declination of protection for the sake of the page. Tranquill Komnin ( talk) 22:48, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
Hello, Bbb23,
I see you blocked this editor and User:Sakhawatay. I also had suspicions that they might be User:Yourguidepk and were committing block evasion but I never got around to filing an SPI case today. I started doing the digging around but didn't follow through on my suspicions. Liz Read! Talk! 05:58, 17 January 2023 (UTC)
Hi how come the table is not right even though there is a second series due out soon?
Thanks Adavid299 ( talk) 15:50, 17 January 2023 (UTC)
This page should not be speedy deleted as pure vandalism or a blatant hoax, because... (your reason here) -- Stephen2nd ( talk) 18:33, 18 January 2023 (UTC) These 22 members of the 1925 cabinet meeting of NSDAP, have been listed on the German Wikipedia for several years, the 22 member numbers are each individually referenced from 22 published authors. All I have done is transferred these numbers to the English Wikipedia, and added images to them. The details of the 22 individuals, are taken directly from their existing articles on their names. As an editor for several years, I believe that cross referencing existing allowed Wikipedia articles should not be disallowed. If you wish to change the title or any of the text you are welcome. Please keep the article until this matter has been debated. Stephen2nd ( talk) 18:33, 18 January 2023 (UTC)
Am I not allowed to contest your deletion, which I wish to do ? Stephen2nd ( talk) 19:01, 18 January 2023 (UTC)
I usually don't post to 3RR, so I'm not sure what I should do with Homosexuality in ancient Greece, so I will leave it in your experienced hands. Since you just removed my report without taking any action and I don't understand you edit summary and you left no other reply, I'll leave everything as it is since I know an admin would obviously do something if it was needed, and I posted in the first place to prevent an edit war. I'll be busy for a few days, so if something needs done you might need to contact one of the other editors in the article. Best wishes from Los Angeles. // Timothy :: talk 00:29, 19 January 2023 (UTC)
I made a pun using an ip address on the talk page of ScottishFinnishRadish. Prior to that I made an adjustment of adding (SAW) to a post I made (my router or something is using different ip's every so often for some reason) on the Islamism article talk page. The first instance was a harmless joke, but a light warning would have been enough. The other was fixing an oversight I made. A 31 hour block for disruptive edits (I'm not entirely sure how they were disruptive) seems very excessive with no warning. I don't like logging in because it's a hassle for me (it's its own thing). So, could you please explain what's going on here?
Lede or Follow ( talk) 15:41, 19 January 2023 (UTC)
Lede or Follow ( talk) 00:55, 20 January 2023 (UTC)
Obviously I was unclear.
Equally obviously, I am not going to argue with you on that noticeboard, or at all. I am just uncertain why I would not be notified of a matter in which I have been involved. I would appreciate it if you could help me to understand.
The main gist of my complaint is that I was not notified of *this* complaint at *this* Noticeboard, which concerns a matter I have carefully followed, and in which I have offered to help a new user. The comment about the AE complaint was merely intended to demonstrate that Trangabellam well knows that I am involved. I am all over the article talk page, for one thing, and I have discussed Minaro123, and Aryan Valley and Trangabellam's behavior there with Trangabellam so recently that it doesn't seem as though it would have slipped their mind.
I am totally unfamiliar with the workings of the 3RR board, so it's possible (as always!) that I am the one who misunderstood something. I would appreciate a clarification. I just got back from an appointment and haven't had a chance to look at the links there yet.
Was your point that it's a behavioral Noticeboard and so the issue at hand solely concerns Minaro123? If so, maybe I was off-topic, yeah. There is a much larger picture here, however, and I feel that context matters here. I had previously warned Minaro that they seemed to be trying to set him up for some sort of a block, and to refrain from giving them grounds to say he was edit-warring, so I will be telling him that that I can't help him if he doesn't listen to me. I will look at the links in the section and talk to him about whatever behavior was complained of there. As an aside, yes, there have in the past been issues of competency with Minaro, but since I got him calmed down and explained reliable sources to him, which nobody had done until then, he has been doing quite well with that, to the point of correctly pointing out that a source is not on the perennial sources list. So he is responsive, and here to build an encyclopedia, yes. English is still going to be his 6th or 7th language, but I can definitely help him with that until he finds another way to work around it.
I am not requesting any particular action on your part beyond this clarification.
But was your revert based on the belief that I was injecting a separate complaint? Should I rephrase? Just let this complaint go and help him with his appeal? Expedite the AE complaint about editors who lose an AfD then edit-war (this) article into their preferred version, which is not the one that survived AfD? Figure out whether to add to that complaint whatever went on at 3RR? And what is to be done about the point-y version of the article?
Is it appropriate to open another AfD, since the text is now completely different? I ask the latter on behalf on Minaro, since that is probably what he cares about the most in this process. I will advise him to draft an accurate version of the article meanwhile, probably off-wiki at this point, lest some sinister motive be imputed to doing so. If I had been around at the time, I would have suggested that he continue to work on it in Draft rather than publish when he did, but I was blissfully unaware of all this until I saw the article at AfD. It's been going on for quite a while though, and the provocation should definitely be considered IMHO. Somewhere.
Your input would be appreciated. Elinruby ( talk) 23:20, 18 January 2023 (UTC)
Mmm ok. You said that the section was not the place for my complaint. Ok, except that I am in this story? And was pinged there by one of the parties? So I am uncertain what I am did wrong specifically that I are warning me not to do again. I will be happy to refrain from anything you don't want me to do. Can we start there? Also, Minaro123 told me he doesn't want to file an appeal until after his exams, so I withdraw my questions about that. Is that better? Sorry if I was unclear. Elinruby ( talk) 06:54, 19 January 2023 (UTC)
TB said discretionary sanctions did not apply.- Care to provide a diff? What I told you was that a similar article came under DS (ARBIPA) but there was no 30/500 restriction in ARBIPA. An administrator confirmed the same. TrangaBellam ( talk) 02:06, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
TB, as I've said a couple of times in a couple of places now, I did not ask *you*. I asked BB to explain something to me. It involves you only peripherally and I told Bbb23 I wasn't here to argue or to ask for anything other than a clarification. I am absolutely not going to argue with you here either. Elinruby ( talk) 05:55, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
I'm concerned that we silence and block editors on sight for contributions such as this. Although the sarcastic tone is unhelpful, the editor makes several valid points with which many of us agree, though I'd have tried to phrase them more diplomatically. We have several new accounts with similar names, clearly created by regular readers for the purpose of expressing disappointment with the new skin, and there is a risk of being seen to suppress their views. Certes ( talk) 18:31, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
Hi, you blocked Belteshazzar's IP for several days [7] on the 17th January. Unfortunately this user has just gone back on it again after their other IPs were blocked for several months. I don't think it is worth me wasting time to file an SPI because this is obvious block evasion. Is it possible the block can be extended on that IP? Thanks. Psychologist Guy ( talk) 12:08, 23 January 2023 (UTC)
Hi Bbb23, could you take a look at User:Dunny123b? He keeps reverting edits made by Charredshorthand. -- Grapefanatic ( talk) 18:54, 23 January 2023 (UTC)
This user Does Not Appear To Be Here To Build An Encyclopedia ( Hundred Acre Wood capitalisation!) but not in a way WP:ARV will do anything about. I'm inclined just to ignore them but there's a really creepy edge to their edits; see, for example, [8]. Thanks for taking a look? - Julietdeltalima (talk) 00:43, 24 January 2023 (UTC)
![]() |
Hey, Bbb23. I'd like to wish you a wonderful First Edit Day on behalf of the
Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Have a great day! Chris Troutman ( talk) 15:34, 25 January 2023 (UTC) |
![]() |
Mind banning this addtional sock: Dunny125b TheManInTheBlackHat (Talk) 17:59, 25 January 2023 (UTC)
who created the page?! but i think HYLT should redirect to How You Like That, as a shortcut for people who can't type fast and are blinks Jishiboka1 ( talk) 00:16, 27 January 2023 (UTC)
User:witman21 has an open UTRS appeal. To my statement "The only way you're going to be unblocked is if you explicitly agree to not attempt to create an article about yourself or add your name to any articles" their response was "Hello, I agree to this. I understand why this is wrong as well." Any thoughts on an unblock? I'd be happy to reblock in a second if they started hassling anyone about the article again. OhNoitsJamie Talk 21:47, 27 January 2023 (UTC)
May I ask what led you to determine that this wasn't actually a hoax? It seems completely made up. ― Blaze Wolf TalkBlaze Wolf#6545 17:26, 30 January 2023 (UTC)
You deleted all my work on the page Color-blind casting
The reasoning was that IMDb was not a valid source. It is considered "disputed", not "inappropriate" Wikipedia:Citing IMDb, when it comes to the existence of movies and their cast, which is all I was using it for. If I replace it all with Rotten Tomatoes, will the edits get deleted again? I think it is ironic that Wiki admins are deleting sources where users, not "experts" are allowed to make changes...
Nonperson1 (
talk)
23:37, 30 January 2023 (UTC)
Hello Bbb23! I've recently encountered an IP (the IP appears to be fairly static atm) who appears to have serious WP:CIR issues regarding their English. It appears that English is not their first language, and they seem to have some issues communicating in proper English. Normally I wouldn't have an issue with this, however they have been told this before and seem to have ignored it and have continued making edits to articles in poor English. I'm not exactly sure what to do here so I figured I'd bring this up with your first rather than go straight to ANI since I don't want to assume bad faith here because I've seen another user have issues with this. ― Blaze Wolf TalkBlaze Wolf#6545 17:29, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
17:12, 30 January 2023 Bbb23 talk contribs deleted page Gerard Basset Foundation ( G11: Unambiguous advertising or promotion)
Is there any way this page could have avoided deletion? Thank you. STolliver2 ( talk) 10:23, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
How was this user insufficiently warned? ― Justin (koavf)❤ T☮ C☺ M☯ 18:38, 1 February 2023 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2023).
Can the current HaughtonBrit SPI archive be changed so that the master is listed as WorldWikiAuthorOriginal Special:Contributions/WorldWikiAuthorOriginal as that account precedes the creation of HaughtonBrit. The two are undeniably linked, QEDK indeff blocked WWAO on March 25, 2020 [9] after his comment that he would continue to edit logged out [10]. HaughtonBrit was created just one day later [11]. WWAO heavily edited the page Battle of Saragarhi [12], a battle that was led by a British Lt. Colonel John Haughton, hence the succeeding sock account being named HaughtonBrit. WWAO was blocked by and edit warred against admin Utcurush in the Battle of Saragarhi [13], HaughtonBrit has a sock that was clearly intended to impersonate the same admin [14]. Note that
Behavioural evidence: Both add Sikhs fought long enough for reinforcements to arrive.
[15] and
[16]. Both add 10,000 to Afghan strength in the infobox
[17],
[18] and
[19]. Both add that 12000-24000 Orakzais (Afghans) were present
[20] and
[21],
[22]. Both add or have edits consistent with supporting the narrative that Indian/Sikh troops had poor weaponry, and removing content which state that Afghans had inferior weaponry
[23],
[24],
[25] and
[26],
[27]. Both remove the same sourcs that claim only 1000-1500 Orakazi tribesman were present instead of 12-24K
[28] and
[29]. Note that WWAO was engaged in a significant content dispute with Utcursh in 2020
[30] causing him to get temp blocked , when Utcursh made this edit on May 20, 2021
[31], HaughtonBrit created the account AtmaramU just 10 hours later-
[32] and both HaughtonBrit and AtmaramU began to revert Utcursh's edits on the page
[33],
[34] thereafter. Please also note, this is just one page I looked at and there is far more evidence from other pages but I felt that would make the post excessively long, if you feel like more is required, kindly ping me and I will provide more.
Suthasianhistorian8 (
talk)
21:03, 2 February 2023 (UTC)
Some stupid LTA isn't grown up enough to stop himself from spamming the English wikibooks, including talkpages (here's mine), about how much he dislikes you. Any idea why he might dislike you? Or is this simply revenge since you were the first person to ban one of his accounts or something? — L10nM4st3r / ROAR at me! 11:14, 3 February 2023 (UTC)
In this edit you decline a speedy deletion request. No argument, but I don't understand something you clearly do. ? BusterD ( talk) 23:02, 2 February 2023 (UTC)
I can't tell if you meant to close that discussion, or a different discussion, and either way I don't feel blocked. Not enough, anyway. Mackensen (talk) 21:11, 3 February 2023 (UTC)
Could you please change the closure summary, ideally to something that summarises the consensus among the admins responding. This 'newcomer' hasn't been blocked in 18 years and there is no reason that people reading the closure summary in the future will think you were anything other than serious. JeffUK 10:57, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
You deleted the article "Sonu Kanwar" who is a famous folk singer in Rajasthan. You can check on internet as well. She have millions of followers in Rajasthan and she is known for folk singing in marwadi region of Rajasthan. Wikione9 ( talk) 07:57, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
It's clear at this point Kautilya3 won't compromise or cooperate at all. I can't keep engaging him just because he won't agree. He's clearly trying to game the system with stonewalling. I hope other editors weigh against him, but if he still stonewalls I hope you act. Roman Reigns Fanboy ( talk) 15:32, 6 February 2023 (UTC)
I'm reaching out to you to request you bring back my article on Serena Terry. I initially let it go out of respect and naivety. I am aware that Wikipedia relies on good will and consensus. I am not assuming anything as we all have our reasons for doing things, however I do think what you did was neither fair nor justified nor was I given a 2nd chance to fix the allegation of unambiguous promotional tone. I came across WP:BACKLOG, where there are literally thousands of pages with actual cited issues with promotional tone, one of which I have been working on myself, one which nobody thought needed to be deleted. When mine was nominated for proposed deletion by user:MrsSnoozyTurtle, no template was added to indicate to the rest of the community that the page had those issues. It was simply put up for deletion without much notice. I removed the deletion proposal tag because I wanted to improve it to remove its perceived promotional tone, and you went ahead and got rid of it. I was following all the basics I understood till then: I drew on reliable secondary sources, I paraphrased the texts as best as I could, and I tried to include all and every viewpoint I could find about the subject matter. It was not my intention to promote or advertise the subject matter. It was simply my first article so I didn't full mastery over a neutral style of writing, something I have picked up a bit better along the way.
Perhaps the article was imbalanced, this was simply because I could not find any opposing viewpoint that contradicted or taken things from a different angle. Perhaps the fact that I added the subject matter's works that it was flagged for promotional content. It was neither my intention to promote nor should it be the case. On previous discussions with other editors who have pointed out potenetial rule breaking I would have been made aware beforehand that quality of the article was not fit for purpose and to fix it or remove it altogether. I was not given any heads up, even after weeks of the initial creation.
Additionally, I disagreed with MrsSnoozyTurtle's motion altogether, as there was another thread raised where multiple editors complained about the editor's other actions by indicating some violation of rule breaking on multiple occasions.
I look forward to hearing from you on this matter
Regards Saussure4661 ( talk) 22:20, 6 February 2023 (UTC)
You recently blocked 2404:7A83:B1C0:7D00:0:0:0:0/64 ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), they're back at it on 2400:4053:D182:FE00:54D9:BEB4:4359:3B9E ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). – 2. O. Boxing 04:37, 7 February 2023 (UTC)
There's this account and this one. Don't know how the edit was deleted while in the process of typing this new topic. And for the petition to ban you? How ironic! Tails Wx 19:13, 7 February 2023 (UTC)
Just figured I"d tell you that I was fine with Lilliana removing that comment from my talk page, I told them I was just gonna remove it anyway for being malformed and just blatantly wrong but they beat me to it. ― Blaze Wolf TalkBlaze Wolf#6545 00:52, 8 February 2023 (UTC)
Last year, I made you aware of a sockpuppet of Albertaont. I'm confident, I have found another, an older account named Sinwiki12. This isn't as blatant as the previous cases. Both accounts have almost identical topic interests and similar editing, primarily content that is pro-China, including focuses on vaccines, vehicle manufacturers, Chinese military tech, spacecrafts, energy power in China and more. They also made edits critical of the US and UK and edits related to racial issues. Both accounts have a similar POV across a wide range of different topics and have made similar edits including on the same pages. See the Editor Interaction Analyser, Sinwiki12 Top edits, and Albertaont Top edits.
For example see the similarities in these edits critical about the Iraq War: [36], [37], and [38]. The last edits by the Albertaont account were on 2021 Kabul airport attack: [39]. These are similar to Sinwiki12's edit to the related August 2021 Kabul drone strike: [40]. This edit by Sinwiki12 to the United States: [41] includes a critical mention of drone strikes and Qasem Solemeini assassination. Albertaont also made this edit about Solemeini's assassination: [42] and also made similar edits to the United States: [43], [44].
On China, both accounts also made very similar edits where they removed mass surveillance and censorship from the lede: [45], [46]. On COVID-19 vaccine both accounts have numerous edits, including some that are pro CoronaVac: [47], [48]. On CoronaVac both accounts made edits regarding the same Chile study: [49], [50]
Both accounts made edits to the same Chinese military and vehicle manufacturer pages including Long March (rocket family): [51], [52], Type 039A submarine: [53], [54], BYD Auto: [55], [56]. Both accounts edited Sukhoi articles: [57], [58], and made multiple edits to Concerns and controversies at the 2020 Summer Olympics: [59], [60], and to Nuclear power in China: [61], [62]
There are many other similarities between the accounts, including with edit summaries: [63], [64]. Sinwiki12's recent editing history, however, rarely contains edit summaries and includes a very high rate of being reverted due to alot of problematic edits. Nettless ( talk) 19:00, 9 February 2023 (UTC)
The page in question Centro_Cultural_Universitario was a translation of a page that already exists in the spanish version of Wikipedia. https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Centro_Cultural_Universitario_(UNAM)
The place is the largest cultural center in the Americas and houses one of the largest concert halls in the Americas, which also has its own web page https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sala_Nezahualc%C3%B3yotl
Seems to me to be fairly arbitrarily since pages like Royce Hall, from the UCLA ( /info/en/?search=Royce_Hall), Performance Hall from Utah State ( /info/en/?search=Performance_Hall_(Utah_State_University)) are admitted.
This seems a blatant bias towards US institutions, and an indirect message that the WIkipedia represents unfairly the cultural centers of their main editors rather than a good representation of all the world. Leonoel ( talk) 18:52, 11 February 2023 (UTC)
Look, it's me, editing on a weekend!!-- Ponyo bons mots 21:11, 12 February 2023 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at
Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is
Achaudhary0205 continues to make ungrammatical edits and modify quotes, does not reply to talk page. Thank you.
—DIYeditor (
talk)
02:20, 15 February 2023 (UTC)
2400:4053:D182:FE00:0:0:0:0/64 is back on 210.135.80.72. This edit summary confirms. – 2. O. Boxing 13:36, 15 February 2023 (UTC)
Sorry about that. I had my head up my... uh, place where it doesn't think well. I didn't realize it was off-limits to edit because other discussions I've been involved in turn blue when they are closed and no more edits are allowed. That's a feeble excuse, but it's how I was thinking. I knew the rule against editing archived pages but managed to forget it. Archive means no edit.
Still, if someone is sockpuppeting around a block for disruptive editing and personal attacks in order to do more of the same, what should someone like me do? I screwed up. As a teacher, I would tell my students this is a teachable moment. Thanks. Dcs002 ( talk) 00:35, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
Hi, what believable claim to fame is there here? That she's editorial board member of a predatory journal? That she has published papers? That she's a scientist? This is all run-of-the-mill stuff, so I'm genuinely curious why you think A7 is not applicable. Thanks. -- Randykitty ( talk) 22:25, 16 February 2023 (UTC)
Hi, I just stumbled upon this sock you blocked a few days ago. While I do believe it is indeed a sock, I don't think it is related to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/LastEdit2008. From quickly looking, I would believe this is actually Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Agustin Sepulveda Venegas 2004 Fan: apart from their obsession with Bigfood, see previous socks such as ' Bigfood meme', ' Bigfood22', ' BigfoodFan2', and ' Sasquash-Bigfood', as well as socks including 'Fan' and/or a year at the end of their username.
Hope this helps... Magitroopa ( talk) 16:53, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
Thanks for your note. I am quite forgetful sometimes, and have acknowledged the warnings. Something I haven't had an opportunity to do in quite a while is to re-study WP policies in detail; I've had little chance to do this since getting my head muddled in work. With a short wikibreak, I'll do that and return refreshed. I am listening. Thanks again, Silikonz 💬 01:06, 20 February 2023 (UTC)
2400:4053:D182:FE00:0:0:0:0/64 ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is back on 2405:6583:A240:1700:CC48:C34B:8357:C07A ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). – 2. O. Boxing 13:30, 20 February 2023 (UTC)
Hi there. I wanted to make you aware of several IPs and a "new" editor who have both been making identical—or at least extremely similar—edits to previously banned accounts Frenkestain, Soares1967, and Aknulby. The IP looks to be part of an array of IPS beginning with "185." ( Special:contributions/185.224.0.120; 185.224.1.90; and 185.224.1.54 are just three of many that appear to be used) that are clearly controlled by the same person block evading. The "new" editor is called Andreapietro34. The account started making edits on 14 February 2023, the day after the three sock accounts mentioned above were banned for sockpuppetry. Trying to undo the unproductive and often entirely incorrect edits made by these socks is exhausting. I appreciate your work in helping in that fight. I would appreciate anything you can do to quell this latest assault on Wikipedia. Anwegmann ( talk) 16:51, 15 February 2023 (UTC)
Many thanks for altering my heading to Ponyo. I was rushing to a hospital appointment and rather messed-up. Best regards, David, David J Johnson ( talk) 16:53, 20 February 2023 (UTC)
![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. 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. |
News and updates for administrators from the past month (October 2022).
{{
rangeblock|create=yes}}
or {{
uw-ublock|contains profanity}}
.COI also. Email me if you want details. DMacks ( talk) 14:14, 1 November 2022 (UTC)
I don't think the WP:NOTHERE apply to this block. Wikpediauser0's knowledge of grammar and guideline is suboptimal, but all of their edits are attempting to be constructive. Roostery123 ( talk) 04:57, 2 November 2022 (UTC)
Hello, Bbb23. You may be interested to look into the (recent and general) conduct of Setswana ( talk · contribs). Its very possible that WP:COMPETENCE and WP:DISRUPTIVE could apply in this case. — Sundostund mppria ( talk / contribs) 12:25, 2 November 2022 (UTC)
It's been locked for 7 days now. I think it's time for the lock to be removed. Pyxis Solitary (yak). L not Q. 09:18, 3 November 2022 (UTC)
Hi! Yesterday you'd deleted Mehrshad Shahidi as G5. Today, E. Karimof has created Draft:Mehrshad Shahidi. Thought you'd want to take a closer look. Curb Safe Charmer ( talk) 14:59, 3 November 2022 (UTC)
Hi Bbb23. I found a user who is claiming to be a new account of User:Weegee1000. I didn't think it was worth opening an SPI, but I wanted to let someone know. The new account is User:Weegee1000 Revamped and they claim, on their user page, to be said user. Hey man im josh ( talk) 19:00, 3 November 2022 (UTC)
Thanks for telling me about overlinking, I didn’t know about that. SikiWtideI ( Speak to the backwards police) 00:34, 4 November 2022 (UTC)SikiWtideI
Thanks for your edits to User talk:Athaenara.
That was not my intention, I was just trying to provide advice to help them return to normal editing. I have done this before to other editors with no trouble.
I do not want to get in a heated debate, but I do want to help provide a path moving forward. I have done my best to focus exclusively on user conduct and not on the editor. What I have said regarding "If a specific comment, edit, pattern of edits, or the like is not going to be received well by the community, it is not a good idea to do it" holds true. I know the circumstances leading up to Athaenara's block is infuriating, at the same time people deserve second chances. Per our blocking policy as well we only block people if leaving them unblocked currently risks disruption to the project. I agree the comments made by Athaenara on RfA and similar should be received as trolling and should thus be handled at such. I do not agree that we should explicitly call people racists or bigots or whatever even if they are as that would also come out as a personal attack. I am a subscriber to "always assume good faith", as assuming bad faith can and does feed the trolls. If it helps no one then sure that comment I made can be reverted, but at the moment I think it may provide guidance to a long-term contributor, as the last thing we want is to drive away a long-term editor simply because they wrote a couple of things that were taken the wrong way.
In other words, yes I agree a forced break is warranted (and the other admins do too), no I do not agree that we should drive away an otherwise-productive editor. It might take a year, two years for this risk of disruption and personal attacks to go away, or it might never happen. Aasim - Herrscher of Wikis ❄️ 21:47, 4 November 2022 (UTC)
editors should really leave this Talk page alonethen why isn't the talk page protected? Also, if that is the case you should move back to this revision, not just remove that one comment. Aasim - Herrscher of Wikis ❄️ 17:22, 5 November 2022 (UTC)
Check out this. LMAO. -- Kansas Bear ( talk) 13:57, 7 November 2022 (UTC)
Hi Bbb23,
I saw that you have undone my edit on the user page "Otolemur crassicaudatus". You have also sent me a warning stating that I have vandalized their user page. I do not believe I vandalized it, as all I did was add the year that they closed the account, 2008, which was stated in the logs. I do not believe it was vandalism, unless it is not allowed to edit retired Wikipedians' user pages to insert more information. TinGamerTV ( talk) 09:07, 7 November 2022 (UTC)
Hi,
Can you undelete this page and send it to draftspace or WP:USERFY it for me? dannymusiceditor oops 02:23, 7 November 2022 (UTC)
Hello,
You just put something on my talk page regarding the deletion of one of my comments on JJMC89's talk page. Could you please tell me or link me to a page that tells me how to be more civil? And, if possible, a page in which I can report vandals, as I am unaware of one.
Thank you :) Greeny908 ( talk) 14:27, 9 November 2022 (UTC)
Given this and the attitude expressed there by two New Page Reviewers that it's not part of their function at AfC to see that article meet a basic standard of quality before moving them into mainspace, perhaps it would be a good idea to bock MaTF from draftspace as well. True, their writing has improved a little, but they still seem to be unable to write an entire short article in appropriate English, as evidenced by their three new articles. Beyond My Ken ( talk) 04:06, 9 November 2022 (UTC)
Sorry, I thought I'd help by adding the template as it's unusual that a discussion develops after an admin had made a decision. Again, sorry. RF354 ( talk) 16:23, 10 November 2022 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at
Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is
Discussion at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/TheCurrencyGuy. Thank you.
NotReallySoroka (
talk)
19:16, 12 November 2022 (UTC)
I don't know why, but you have deleted the page I have created I'm working to make a better Wikipedia, and I solve articles problems everyday, There are some articles from two years ago with 1-2 refrence and didn't deleted but this page that I have created have Wikipedia in two other languages I have a question now, If I translate again the topic next month, will the translation remain or that will be deleted too? Up to next month I will be able to translate topics to English Zeytoonwiki ( talk) 20:58, 12 November 2022 (UTC)
Hi Bbb23. I've had your block of User talk:Poorva12303 brought to my attention, But User talk:Poorva12303 is continuously rolling back my edits. So, what can i do ? Thank you. MT731 ( talk) 12:29, 13 November 2022 (UTC)
Hello. While I do not want to be overly aggresive or deliberately come at you for a simple action, may I please know why my edit at the article Doret, was undone? I saw nothing wrong with it. I simply wanted to expand the already [poorly-written article and even provided a full-fledged citation for my supposed claim I'd appreciate why you did it. Best regards and have a great rest of your day. Wikipedian10282 ( talk) 23:39, 13 November 2022 (UTC)
Hi, my page was deleted from sandbox. Can I please have my page back? I am working on an assignment for University and had no intention of updating Wikipedia. I do not have another copy and was not aware that working drafts could be deleted. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by KN2022 ( talk • contribs) 16:40, 14 November 2022 (UTC)
I blocked another of his socks last night. If he wants to go edit Bharatpedia, that's fine by me :) Girth Summit (blether) 14:02, 15 November 2022 (UTC)
Hi, my page was deleted from sandbox. Can I please have my materials back that you deleted? I do not have another copy and was not aware that working drafts could be deleted. Thank you. MichelePadua ( talk) 23:15, 13 November 2022 (UTC)
Could you please undelete it for one more day, so that I can copy my work and not have to lose months of intellectual materials? It was a lot of work, and because the page was deleted only 18 minutes after its "speedy" nomination, I was afforded to opportunity to contest which seems unfair. I am happy for you to delete this preliminary draft from my sandbox again tomorrow. In fact, I will even delete the draft myself after I have preserved the work. Thank you in advance for your decency in allowing this courtesy. MichelePadua MichelePadua ( talk) 17:13, 14 November 2022 (UTC)
Please confirm receipt of the above request. It would be reasonable to undelete my page briefly. Do I take it that I must instead lose all of this hard work? MichelePadua ( talk) 00:10, 16 November 2022 (UTC)
Hi Bbb23, is the block of Caresgenius compatible with the September 2022 blockevidence RfC? If not, could you take the necessary steps behind the scenes to make it become compliant? Thank you very much in advance! ~ ToBeFree ( talk) 19:27, 15 November 2022 (UTC)
I'm trying to reinstate this page. Here's an entire article -- today -- from the Washington Post: Where Girls Compete But Men Rule
ECNL is heavily referenced in the Yates Report.
95% of all female soccer players at NCAA Division I's Power 5 ( Pac 12, Big 10, Big 12, ACC, SEC) were recruited from ECNL clubs. > 75
Across all NCAA Division 1 schools, the #'s are roughly 75% or more.
PLEASE UNDO DELETION.
PeteWL (
talk)
20:41, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Hi Bbb23. I've had your block of User talk:Poorva12303 brought to my attention, But User:Poorva12303 is continuously rolling back my edits. So, what can i do ? As per official census table of Government of India. There are 53 urban agglomerations in India with a population of 1 million or more as of 2011. Thank you. MT731 ( talk) 07:58, 21 November 2022 (UTC)
Hello, Bbb23. I strongly suspect that banned user Mohammed106 ( talk · contribs) (blocked by you last year for disruptive editing) is active again, this time as Lamise2006 ( talk · contribs). — Sundostund mppria ( talk / contribs) 06:46, 21 November 2022 (UTC)
I find your decision biased. The text was about a real activist imprisoned for the second time. Xx236 ( talk) 14:05, 22 November 2022 (UTC)
See that you reverted my edit and said not the right venue. Where is the right venue? Thank you. MaskedSinger ( talk) 18:37, 21 November 2022 (UTC)
Hello Bbb23! I saw your latest edit in Template:Linguistic groups of the constitutionally recognised official languages of India. What you have done (reverting sock) is correct but the term that the sock edited is also correct. I don't want to intervene between you two's edits. But please rectify the correct term "Kannadigas" (for the people who speak "Kannada"). The reason I don't want myself to involve is because the edit conflict is relevant to sock puppet. Thanks! -- Haoreima ( talk) 14:24, 24 November 2022 (UTC)
Hi, Bbb23. What do you mean by your edit summary, "Restored revision 1121997616 by Vanjagenije (talk): Beyond repair - file a report following instructions)? I already filed a report. The editor replied. What do you mean by "beyond repair"? Thanks. - SusanLesch ( talk) 22:39, 25 November 2022 (UTC)
I marked this page for deletion since the redirect doesn't make any sense as it is redirecting the page belonging to one person to some other person of the same family. What's the right way to get this redirect deleted if this isn't the way? I saw you reverted my proposal for deletion.
Smarter1 ( talk) 19:30, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review
the candidates and submit your choices on the
voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{
NoACEMM}}
to your user talk page.
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk)
00:44, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
Hey Bbb23, just heads up this IP is clearly ANOTHER block evasion of 198.70.2.200, making the same edits on Ricardo López (stalker). Just letting you know as the blocking administrator. I did request page protection, which has been actioned! Have a good day Tommi1986 let's talk! 15:25, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
Hi @ Bbb23, I recently attempted to post an edit warring report on the administrators' noticeboard, but it looks like I botched it. Could you help me fix the problem, so that the instance of edit warring can be addressed? Revirvlkodlaku ( talk) 03:18, 1 December 2022 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (November 2022).
/64
to the end of an IP in
Special:Contributions to see all of a subnet's edits, and
consider blocking the whole subnet rather than an IP that may change within a minute.Fair enough, this needed deleting but you'll need to early close the AfD as a consensus close which also supports WP:SALTing. Bungle ( talk • contribs) 20:09, 1 December 2022 (UTC)
Hi, Based on my observation on bnwiki, I think they are back again here on enwiki: Special:Contributions/202.134.14.156, Special:Contributions/202.134.13.135. I observed many similarity, here are two example:
1. Months ago this bnwiki's and arwiki's article was heavily edited by the them (103.230...). And yesterday Uli al-amr was edited by an IP. I know this might be anyone but 202.134.14.156's behaviour on bnwiki matches with User:Lazy-restless (e.g. interest on Salafi movement, Template:Salafi & related). They also have habit of cross wiki editing.
2. On bnwiki they are pushing an article created by them (e.g. https://w.wiki/64gv). Months ago they even tried same thing here on enwiki, see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pak-Bangla language.
If possible, please block the IPs. আফতাবুজ্জামান ( talk) 02:10, 4 December 2022 (UTC)
I am wondering if there are any known typical behaviors of socks. I have observed a pattern of some detected socks which before having been blocked attempted made/or attempted to hide themselves behind monotone, repetitive edits and only later began to edit in the preferred area where they eventually got into trouble and subsequently were blocked. An example would be adding short descriptions. I see now one that does another task, which is useful work on wikipedia but I suspect they eventually get into trouble. Have you observed a similar pattern? Paradise Chronicle ( talk) 12:51, 4 December 2022 (UTC)
Now I've got a scathing message from 166.182.248.126] that reads:
Hi, i'm sorry for disturbing you again. A bnwiki wiki CheckUser found following are sock of Mostly shoaib and blocked them as Sockpuppet ( bnwiki SPI): Trilokadiponglar Bhilku, Sourabhossianrabbi, মাইনুল ইসলাম খোকন, MoviegeekSouthAsia, Rezaul Haque Shumon and Sm Fahim Ban. They are also actively editing this wiki. If possible please block them here as well. Thanks. আফতাবুজ্জামান ( talk) 14:38, 4 December 2022 (UTC)
Hello Bbb23. I ntoiced that you deleted Nuhash Humayun from mainspace under G5. It still exists as a draft at Draft:Nuhash Humayun so I wanted to check with you to see if the person who created it is also a sock or not. ― Blaze Wolf TalkBlaze Wolf#6545 16:38, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
I was wondering why you declined my request to increase the protection level on The Mousetrap. The film is famously known for its twist ending's request to not be revealed, and as such editors constantly remove it despite the policies against it. We've had such an incident happen today, and increasing the protection on the page would stop it from happening. I have a draft of an edit request to make an edit notice on my sandbox if you'd prefer that. RteeeeKed 💬 📖 03:06, 6 December 2022 (UTC)
I misspoke - User:HugoAcosta9 didn't edit my talk page - he pinged me 5 times today with their IP edits. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5. I'm not sure why we wouldn't mention it on their talk page, given it just happened. Nfitz ( talk) 20:43, 6 December 2022 (UTC)
Thanks. I suspect it will take more than 6 months at this rate ... sigh. Nfitz ( talk) 04:40, 7 December 2022 (UTC)
I hope you don't mind if I ask this here, since it's not quite something that rises to a noticeboard-level issue. There's a user, UTLisobel ( talk · contribs) who has been adding Template:Commons category and Template:Archival records to various articles. Their username implies an association with the University of Toronto, and all the archive links they're adding are from that school and they are certainly a SPA only focusing on adding links from that school. That's not really the issue I'm seeing though, it's that the Commons categories they're adding are more often than not links to Commons categories that do not exist. Sometimes even the archival records template they add doesn't actually link to anything. I've asked them a couple of times to please stop and check what they're adding before they add it and to not add these templates when they're not linking to an actual working link, but they have not responded and are instead continuing in alphabetical order down what I can only assume is a list they have of names. They're only on the letter C after however many such edits and are not communicating or adjusting what they're doing, so it's potentially going to create a very large list of edits that need to be made to check and remove these links to these non-existent ( or inaccurate) categories. It's certainly not vandalism but it's a minor thing that's going to add up over hundreds of articles, what should I do in this situation? Thanks for any advice you can give. - Aoidh ( talk) 21:32, 2 December 2022 (UTC)
I was considering pushing the button myself, but after looking at their talk page and saw your copyvio warning, I'm thinking, you know, you're better about this sort of thing. So I thought I'd put it on your radar and see what you thought. - jc37 19:27, 9 December 2022 (UTC)
please block IP hopping editor on https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Thrash_metal&action=history -- FMSky ( talk) 00:31, 12 December 2022 (UTC)
Hi, you left a comment on DefThree's talk-page [2]. You correctly suspected that this user is not a new-user. I have filed many SPI's against this user. I strongly suspect this is Belteshazzar who has been blocked many times. You may or may not be interested but here is a link to the SPI [3] Psychologist Guy ( talk) 13:44, 12 December 2022 (UTC)
Hi, I would like to know how to retrieve my deleted article. I tried using deleting administer. But I get No matching items in log. I feel like I am missing something here. Could you please guide me here. Thank you in advance. Adaline Lefe ( talk) 14:27, 13 December 2022 (UTC)
User:Freon has just widened the domain of his edit warring to the FAC currently in progress for James Madison. If you could re-open the Noticeboard filed by Jtbobwaysf for 24 hours, then I could add the links for edit warring by him since the edit warring is now active on the FAC page for Madison currently in progress. ErnestKrause ( talk) 18:03, 13 December 2022 (UTC)
You spotted that sock of Buzzards Watch Me Work in record time. Thanks for your hard work! Magnolia677 ( talk) 19:42, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
Wanted to flag this for you. I know you blocked Rio0601 ( talk · contribs) for sockpuppets and edit warring on Miss France 2023, but now that he has been blocked a new account just sprung up making the same edit he was making. It's Gillesmourey ( talk · contribs), and I noticed the account only has three total edits, the last of which was made in 2018. Could be coincidental but thought I'd flag for you in case you want to handle in some way. { [ ( jjj 1238 ) ] } 22:15, 15 December 2022 (UTC)
Hey Bbb23. I noticed you declined my RPP request per reasons that there had not been sufficient recent vandalism; this seems reasonable. However, this is a lesser-known page, and looking at the page history, the majority of the past 50 edits have been unconstructive. I should have specified that they were edit tests, and not major vandalism, though. One edit in particular had gone days without noticing, and I took the chance when I came across the page to revert it. Though you are correct that there has not been very recent disruptive activity, a lot has been and I think semi-protection would help lessen the load on anti-vandalism reverters and encourage content creation. Thoughts? Thanks. Silikonz (alt) 💬 23:09, 16 December 2022 (UTC)
Thanks. Could you please expand on why you think so? Looking at the amount of test edits coming up very frequently in the past few weeks, (mostly as the only edits to the article then, consecutive tests) and the amount of spam that gets added to the talk page regularly contribute to my stance on this as a worthy candidate for semi-prot. A day after my edits, I only caught this problematic modification via my watchlist. Not many editors have been able to keep up with the spam on this page. Thanks. Silikonz 💬 01:35, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
The edit history shows most edits are minor disruption, and the page has been protected twice in the past (vandalism is ramping up again). I'm sorry if this is a small deal, I just thought filtering autoconfirmed editors would solve the spam somewhat, and was a bit annoyed by this. Thanks! :) Silikonz 💬 01:43, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
Apologies, I don't comprehend why that would be the case when this happened just a minute ago. Thanks so much. Regardless, thanks for clarifying. Silikonz 💬 02:01, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
Hey, he is again back as Lllllu43 ( talk · contribs) it seems, if i'm not mistaken (threatens to report other users...) @ RoBri: and myself believe that it is indeed Charli, hope you can confirm (or deny if wrong, then sorry). Kante4 ( talk) 13:39, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
![]() |
Have a wonderful holiday season filled with peace, joy, prosperity and wonder. |
Hi Bbb23, Thank you for all your contributions during the year. |
Hello. The AN thread I had opened by mistake has already been removed by user Andrevan. Could you please restore my thread at ANI? Thanks. PhotogenicScientist ( talk) 23:03, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
![]() |
Cheery Day |
I felt you needed a Cheery Chihuahua, they always cheer people up.
![]() |
Hello! It seems the talk page for Barbie Girl may have been inadvertently deleted in the ensuing cleanup. Special:Redirect/logid/140790562 indicates the page got overwritten. Please do restore it when you find the time. Thank you! Chlod ( say hi!) 16:04, 23 December 2022 (UTC)
![]() |
Keep on fighting the good fight. Happy holidays. ResPM ( T🔈 🎵C) 16:21, 23 December 2022 (UTC) |
![]() |
Whatever you celebrate at this time of year, whether it's Christmas or some other festival, I hope you and those close to you have a happy, restful time! Have fun, Donner60 ( talk) 00:16, 23 December 2022 (UTC)}} |
![]() |
Donner60 ( talk) 01:14, 24 December 2022 (UTC)
I wanted to let you know that I made an effort to (unsuccessfully) "cool down" a new editor @ Chm-aus who was quite frustrated that the first edit they worked on was immediately reverted as possible vandalism by @ Materialscientist. (the "recent log" marked it as such - I was looking to attack vandalism myself and that is how I found the edit in question)
Based on personality, any kind of reaction is possible and there was a bad reaction right out of the essay "Please do not bite the newcomers."
So @ Chm-aus took the reversion personally, escalated into an edit war, and then followed @ Materialscientist around reverting random stuff. @ Chm-aus was then smacked around a bit more on their talk page. Who needs to be the adult in the room?
The initial edit was reasonable and it was made in good faith. There was nothing wrong with the edit that could not be addressed.
@ Chm-aus mentioned that they were engaged in primary research and had doubts about the accuracy of several hundred articles.
The whole chronology was quite disturbing (to me personally) - rather then letting it fester I am mentioning it; I understand the imperative to protect content but the human cost seems a bit too high.
In the end what was lost is at least a "new editor" and the value they might bring to the table. Flibbertigibbets ( talk) 01:23, 25 December 2022 (UTC)
CAPTAIN RAJU
(T) is wishing you a
Merry
Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes
WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a
Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Don't eat yellow snow!
Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{ subst: User:Flaming/MC2008}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 00:46, 26 December 2022 (UTC)
![]() |
The Admin's Barnstar |
Thanks for your good work Andre 🚐 20:17, 27 December 2022 (UTC) |
Good morning.
While I will admit that Hameln (website) wasn't a particularly well written article, as I couldn't go further beyond the original Japanese article (of which I also posted <nowiki>{{一次資料}}</nowiki>) which is also lacking in information and sources I could use, and certainly would not have been article that I would have published had it not been a translation, I do believe that the article should still exist on Wikipedia in some form. The reason why I believe so is that not only does the website have ''a'' Japanese Wikipedia article, as well as an article on both Pixpedia and Nicopedia (albeit not an independent article for the latter), as well as the fact that the website is one of the more used online novel platforms in Japan both for fanfiction and original work, and I was hoping for someone else to use the article as a springboard.
Thank you for your time.
-- Jnglmpera ( talk) 01:09, 28 December 2022 (UTC)
I'm curious why you blocked Gabidieppe when the disruption seems to have stopped? The account's last edit was before my comment on their talk page, which was left more than an hour before your block. ~ ONUnicorn( Talk| Contribs) problem solving 18:57, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
You have removed my comment here. Infinity Knight ( talk) 17:21, 28 December 2022 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at
Wikipedia:Administrative action review regarding an action which you performed. Thank you.
Happy Holidays! Can I ask for your assistance or advice regarding this issue? You warned this user Fred Zepelin to not post on my talk page (after repeated warnings and harassment). Yet, they are still posting Post here I don't want anything to do with this person, yet it's been years of this now. here Here is your warning here Any advice or direction would be appreciated. Film_Fanatical10069 t@lk 20:29, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
![]() |
Happy New Year! |
Hello Bbb23: Did you know ... that back in 1885, Wikipedia editors wrote Good Articles with axes, hammers and chisels? Thank you for your contributions to this encyclopedia using 21st century technology. I hope you don't get any unnecessary
blisters. |
Bbb23,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable
New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
Abishe (
talk)
03:49, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
Send New Year cheer by adding {{ subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.
Abishe ( talk) 03:49, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
Bbb23,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable
New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
—
Moops ⋠
T⋡
23:39, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
Send New Year cheer by adding {{ subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.
— Moops ⋠ T⋡ 23:39, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
An account you have banned recently, User:Fulcrum0, keeps misbehaving even after their ban, by falsely accusing me now that I am the reason you banned them as a WP:SOCKPUPPET. I have never instructed you, Bbb23, to ban them as a sock. As a matter of fact, in my ANI report against that account, I have never called them a sockpuppet. The only instances where I did, were only after their ban, and as result of their ban. Their ban occurred on 23:44, 31 December 2022, and it was only half day later that I informed the AN about the development, on 11:24, 1 January 2023.
Clearly, the banned account is abusing their User Talk Page privileges to make false accusations against others editors, and this while they are waiting for their second block appeal request to be approved. - ❖ SilentResident ❖ ( talk ✉ | contribs ✎) 18:55, 3 January 2023 (UTC)
Am i eligible for autopatrolled, senior? I had made a request on the Autopatrolled request place. Can you look into it. I will be very Happy if i got Autopatrolled user rights. It's like my dream. --- Hey It's Patnaite☝️ (talk) 16:32, 3 January 2023 (UTC)
I think User talk:203.115.106.84 might be a person/sock you've blocked before. Seems to have beef with you and @ 331dot: See diff Zinnober9 ( talk) 22:41, 3 January 2023 (UTC)
It is a Croatian political party that is currently part of the Croatian Parlament.
Source link: https://www.sabor.hr/hr/zastupnici/vrkljan-milan-10-saziv-hrvatskoga-sabora HR-Biograph ( talk) 17:21, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
Care to extend the block on 155.137.183.249? Pinging @ Callanecc: for awareness. S0091 ( talk) 20:02, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2022).
Before I repost what was reverted, I'd like to apolologize for causing trouble on this talk page. I did not mean to delete other people's discussions and overwrite them with my own message, and it won't happen again.
Anyways,I was hoping/wanting for you to give me feedback regarding Hameln (website). However, you didn't even bother to respond to my message and just straight up ignored me by archived my discussion. Can I please have some feedback from you regarding this article? The admin that posted the speedy deletion notification on my talk page ( M.Ashraf333) directed me to discuss with you (the deleting admin) regarding this article. I know I'm sounding like a stalker here, but as I said previously, I do think this article should stay up in some form. -- Jnglmpera ( talk) 04:15, 5 January 2023 (UTC)
You blocked AK The WikiEditor, they're back with the incredibly original name of AK The WikiEditoror. Would you mind looking and blocking them? Ravensfire ( talk) 14:37, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
Bbb23 You understand that it is he who put at least the template that the article of the blocked participant, I tried but I don’t know how it’s done ( WP:G5). Sulumbek of Sagopshi /info/en/?search=Sulom-Beck_Sagopshinski He changed the title of the article. Товболатов ( talk) 23:46, 6 January 2023 (UTC)
In Russian there is a template for simple deletion. They put it there without problems, I still haven’t fully learned how it’s done here, okay.-- Товболатов ( talk) 05:48, 7 January 2023 (UTC)
Yes you are right but he creates fake satyas. let's wait CheckUser. -- Товболатов ( talk) 05:43, 7 January 2023 (UTC)
Not only do I say that he writes fakes and other people write on the discussion pages of articles for example here Talk:Nazran conflict, Talk:Adermakh.-- Товболатов ( talk) 05:58, 7 January 2023 (UTC)
socketpuppet had taken a break for a few days but has reemerged and is now vandalizing pages on en wiki again /info/en/?search=Special:Contributions/Op233op2e Putitonamap98 ( talk) 20:37, 8 January 2023 (UTC)
Hello! Someone who is not autoconfirmed has asked for a deletion review of Draft:Independent Media Association. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. — Alalch E. 13:17, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
Thank you very much for your help to me, you just misunderstood me, I meant the blocked member. No problem, I'll stop. Nice to meet you, you are a good person.-- Товболатов ( talk) 17:49, 8 January 2023 (UTC)
Bbb23 Hello, sorry to bother you but there is a new vandal Ingush Orsthoy blocking bypass returns edits Niyskho here Abrek perhaps they are related to it WikiEditor1234567123 . Please check one last time if you can. -- Товболатов ( talk) 17:16, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
He is definitely connected with this group and just now became more active after blocking several accounts Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Dzurdzuketi/Archive. -- Товболатов ( talk) 17:27, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
Hello @ Bbb23, I believe another sockpuppet (of Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Dzurdzuketi/Archive) popped up and is doing quite the damage on a few articles, please see Ingush_Orsthoy ~~~~ Reiner Gavriel ( talk) 18:45, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
I have removed excess citations and linked my page to SF Express. If you could advise for more to help me get the page accepted, that would be great. Thank you. Limnewiy ( talk) 14:26, 11 January 2023 (UTC)
Could you take a quick look at the Wikipedia page Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/SuhailShaji786 ? The user in question has previously been blocked for UPE and is now creating more articles with similar UPE content. I believe this requires immediate action, which is why I have brought this to your attention. Akevsharma ( talk) 03:30, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Good afternoon, from Portugal,
maybe still a bit early to be 100% sure, but per list of contributions ( /info/en/?search=Special:Contributions/ErmosDrousiotis) the new sock seems to be User:ErmosDrousiotis. I leave it in your capable hands.
Continue the good work, have a nice weekend! RevampedEditor ( talk) 15:35, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Hi, just a note that a colleague of mine on the English Wikinews received an intimidating email from some troll making threats against you. This account was globally locked for unrelated reasons shortly after. Interestingly, the Internationale was included, which makes me think of a person both of us recently had negative interactions with, whom I will not name. Heavy Water ( talk) 19:11, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
While the master wasn't blocked until yesterday, other socks in the group ( MullHiw Sikandvau, Shahzeela01, Tenderos019 Saidulislam1991) were blocked on December 1. The article was created on December 13 and would have been in violation of those blocks. Spicy ( talk) 16:42, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
Hi, I would like to clarify the situation in 2022–23 Super League Greece 2. I am requesting a protection because User:Αθλητικά (whom it might be important to view the long sockpuppetry history , as he is a well-known sockmaster) has been vandalizing 2022–23 Super League Greece 2 in the same way as he has done for 2022–23 Super League Greece and several other Greek football pages (usually Super League for older years) for which he has been reported and banned. There were at least 10 reported vandalisms of 2022–23 Super League Greece, which led to the page being extended protected until 12 February 2023. This is why he has moved to editing 2022–23 Super League Greece 2 and vandalizing it in the same way. Changing the tiebreaker criteria as he has constantly been doing with several IPs is something that could require a lot of work to revert and is very tiring. This situation with this user has been going back and forth for the last two years, and it is not improving. It has happened three times in the last month and twice in the last week in 2022–23 Super League Greece 2, and it is quite likely to happen again, as it is quite likely to happen in 2022–23 Super League Greece in the near future when it gets unprotected. I believe this is more than enough disruptive behavior not only for this page, but by this specific user as a whole. It is undeniable that it is an IP sock from User:Αθλητικά, as he is doing exactly the same edits, and has been banned in several accounts for this. I kindly suggest you reconsider the declination of protection for the sake of the page. Tranquill Komnin ( talk) 22:48, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
Hello, Bbb23,
I see you blocked this editor and User:Sakhawatay. I also had suspicions that they might be User:Yourguidepk and were committing block evasion but I never got around to filing an SPI case today. I started doing the digging around but didn't follow through on my suspicions. Liz Read! Talk! 05:58, 17 January 2023 (UTC)
Hi how come the table is not right even though there is a second series due out soon?
Thanks Adavid299 ( talk) 15:50, 17 January 2023 (UTC)
This page should not be speedy deleted as pure vandalism or a blatant hoax, because... (your reason here) -- Stephen2nd ( talk) 18:33, 18 January 2023 (UTC) These 22 members of the 1925 cabinet meeting of NSDAP, have been listed on the German Wikipedia for several years, the 22 member numbers are each individually referenced from 22 published authors. All I have done is transferred these numbers to the English Wikipedia, and added images to them. The details of the 22 individuals, are taken directly from their existing articles on their names. As an editor for several years, I believe that cross referencing existing allowed Wikipedia articles should not be disallowed. If you wish to change the title or any of the text you are welcome. Please keep the article until this matter has been debated. Stephen2nd ( talk) 18:33, 18 January 2023 (UTC)
Am I not allowed to contest your deletion, which I wish to do ? Stephen2nd ( talk) 19:01, 18 January 2023 (UTC)
I usually don't post to 3RR, so I'm not sure what I should do with Homosexuality in ancient Greece, so I will leave it in your experienced hands. Since you just removed my report without taking any action and I don't understand you edit summary and you left no other reply, I'll leave everything as it is since I know an admin would obviously do something if it was needed, and I posted in the first place to prevent an edit war. I'll be busy for a few days, so if something needs done you might need to contact one of the other editors in the article. Best wishes from Los Angeles. // Timothy :: talk 00:29, 19 January 2023 (UTC)
I made a pun using an ip address on the talk page of ScottishFinnishRadish. Prior to that I made an adjustment of adding (SAW) to a post I made (my router or something is using different ip's every so often for some reason) on the Islamism article talk page. The first instance was a harmless joke, but a light warning would have been enough. The other was fixing an oversight I made. A 31 hour block for disruptive edits (I'm not entirely sure how they were disruptive) seems very excessive with no warning. I don't like logging in because it's a hassle for me (it's its own thing). So, could you please explain what's going on here?
Lede or Follow ( talk) 15:41, 19 January 2023 (UTC)
Lede or Follow ( talk) 00:55, 20 January 2023 (UTC)
Obviously I was unclear.
Equally obviously, I am not going to argue with you on that noticeboard, or at all. I am just uncertain why I would not be notified of a matter in which I have been involved. I would appreciate it if you could help me to understand.
The main gist of my complaint is that I was not notified of *this* complaint at *this* Noticeboard, which concerns a matter I have carefully followed, and in which I have offered to help a new user. The comment about the AE complaint was merely intended to demonstrate that Trangabellam well knows that I am involved. I am all over the article talk page, for one thing, and I have discussed Minaro123, and Aryan Valley and Trangabellam's behavior there with Trangabellam so recently that it doesn't seem as though it would have slipped their mind.
I am totally unfamiliar with the workings of the 3RR board, so it's possible (as always!) that I am the one who misunderstood something. I would appreciate a clarification. I just got back from an appointment and haven't had a chance to look at the links there yet.
Was your point that it's a behavioral Noticeboard and so the issue at hand solely concerns Minaro123? If so, maybe I was off-topic, yeah. There is a much larger picture here, however, and I feel that context matters here. I had previously warned Minaro that they seemed to be trying to set him up for some sort of a block, and to refrain from giving them grounds to say he was edit-warring, so I will be telling him that that I can't help him if he doesn't listen to me. I will look at the links in the section and talk to him about whatever behavior was complained of there. As an aside, yes, there have in the past been issues of competency with Minaro, but since I got him calmed down and explained reliable sources to him, which nobody had done until then, he has been doing quite well with that, to the point of correctly pointing out that a source is not on the perennial sources list. So he is responsive, and here to build an encyclopedia, yes. English is still going to be his 6th or 7th language, but I can definitely help him with that until he finds another way to work around it.
I am not requesting any particular action on your part beyond this clarification.
But was your revert based on the belief that I was injecting a separate complaint? Should I rephrase? Just let this complaint go and help him with his appeal? Expedite the AE complaint about editors who lose an AfD then edit-war (this) article into their preferred version, which is not the one that survived AfD? Figure out whether to add to that complaint whatever went on at 3RR? And what is to be done about the point-y version of the article?
Is it appropriate to open another AfD, since the text is now completely different? I ask the latter on behalf on Minaro, since that is probably what he cares about the most in this process. I will advise him to draft an accurate version of the article meanwhile, probably off-wiki at this point, lest some sinister motive be imputed to doing so. If I had been around at the time, I would have suggested that he continue to work on it in Draft rather than publish when he did, but I was blissfully unaware of all this until I saw the article at AfD. It's been going on for quite a while though, and the provocation should definitely be considered IMHO. Somewhere.
Your input would be appreciated. Elinruby ( talk) 23:20, 18 January 2023 (UTC)
Mmm ok. You said that the section was not the place for my complaint. Ok, except that I am in this story? And was pinged there by one of the parties? So I am uncertain what I am did wrong specifically that I are warning me not to do again. I will be happy to refrain from anything you don't want me to do. Can we start there? Also, Minaro123 told me he doesn't want to file an appeal until after his exams, so I withdraw my questions about that. Is that better? Sorry if I was unclear. Elinruby ( talk) 06:54, 19 January 2023 (UTC)
TB said discretionary sanctions did not apply.- Care to provide a diff? What I told you was that a similar article came under DS (ARBIPA) but there was no 30/500 restriction in ARBIPA. An administrator confirmed the same. TrangaBellam ( talk) 02:06, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
TB, as I've said a couple of times in a couple of places now, I did not ask *you*. I asked BB to explain something to me. It involves you only peripherally and I told Bbb23 I wasn't here to argue or to ask for anything other than a clarification. I am absolutely not going to argue with you here either. Elinruby ( talk) 05:55, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
I'm concerned that we silence and block editors on sight for contributions such as this. Although the sarcastic tone is unhelpful, the editor makes several valid points with which many of us agree, though I'd have tried to phrase them more diplomatically. We have several new accounts with similar names, clearly created by regular readers for the purpose of expressing disappointment with the new skin, and there is a risk of being seen to suppress their views. Certes ( talk) 18:31, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
Hi, you blocked Belteshazzar's IP for several days [7] on the 17th January. Unfortunately this user has just gone back on it again after their other IPs were blocked for several months. I don't think it is worth me wasting time to file an SPI because this is obvious block evasion. Is it possible the block can be extended on that IP? Thanks. Psychologist Guy ( talk) 12:08, 23 January 2023 (UTC)
Hi Bbb23, could you take a look at User:Dunny123b? He keeps reverting edits made by Charredshorthand. -- Grapefanatic ( talk) 18:54, 23 January 2023 (UTC)
This user Does Not Appear To Be Here To Build An Encyclopedia ( Hundred Acre Wood capitalisation!) but not in a way WP:ARV will do anything about. I'm inclined just to ignore them but there's a really creepy edge to their edits; see, for example, [8]. Thanks for taking a look? - Julietdeltalima (talk) 00:43, 24 January 2023 (UTC)
![]() |
Hey, Bbb23. I'd like to wish you a wonderful First Edit Day on behalf of the
Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Have a great day! Chris Troutman ( talk) 15:34, 25 January 2023 (UTC) |
![]() |
Mind banning this addtional sock: Dunny125b TheManInTheBlackHat (Talk) 17:59, 25 January 2023 (UTC)
who created the page?! but i think HYLT should redirect to How You Like That, as a shortcut for people who can't type fast and are blinks Jishiboka1 ( talk) 00:16, 27 January 2023 (UTC)
User:witman21 has an open UTRS appeal. To my statement "The only way you're going to be unblocked is if you explicitly agree to not attempt to create an article about yourself or add your name to any articles" their response was "Hello, I agree to this. I understand why this is wrong as well." Any thoughts on an unblock? I'd be happy to reblock in a second if they started hassling anyone about the article again. OhNoitsJamie Talk 21:47, 27 January 2023 (UTC)
May I ask what led you to determine that this wasn't actually a hoax? It seems completely made up. ― Blaze Wolf TalkBlaze Wolf#6545 17:26, 30 January 2023 (UTC)
You deleted all my work on the page Color-blind casting
The reasoning was that IMDb was not a valid source. It is considered "disputed", not "inappropriate" Wikipedia:Citing IMDb, when it comes to the existence of movies and their cast, which is all I was using it for. If I replace it all with Rotten Tomatoes, will the edits get deleted again? I think it is ironic that Wiki admins are deleting sources where users, not "experts" are allowed to make changes...
Nonperson1 (
talk)
23:37, 30 January 2023 (UTC)
Hello Bbb23! I've recently encountered an IP (the IP appears to be fairly static atm) who appears to have serious WP:CIR issues regarding their English. It appears that English is not their first language, and they seem to have some issues communicating in proper English. Normally I wouldn't have an issue with this, however they have been told this before and seem to have ignored it and have continued making edits to articles in poor English. I'm not exactly sure what to do here so I figured I'd bring this up with your first rather than go straight to ANI since I don't want to assume bad faith here because I've seen another user have issues with this. ― Blaze Wolf TalkBlaze Wolf#6545 17:29, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
17:12, 30 January 2023 Bbb23 talk contribs deleted page Gerard Basset Foundation ( G11: Unambiguous advertising or promotion)
Is there any way this page could have avoided deletion? Thank you. STolliver2 ( talk) 10:23, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
How was this user insufficiently warned? ― Justin (koavf)❤ T☮ C☺ M☯ 18:38, 1 February 2023 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2023).
Can the current HaughtonBrit SPI archive be changed so that the master is listed as WorldWikiAuthorOriginal Special:Contributions/WorldWikiAuthorOriginal as that account precedes the creation of HaughtonBrit. The two are undeniably linked, QEDK indeff blocked WWAO on March 25, 2020 [9] after his comment that he would continue to edit logged out [10]. HaughtonBrit was created just one day later [11]. WWAO heavily edited the page Battle of Saragarhi [12], a battle that was led by a British Lt. Colonel John Haughton, hence the succeeding sock account being named HaughtonBrit. WWAO was blocked by and edit warred against admin Utcurush in the Battle of Saragarhi [13], HaughtonBrit has a sock that was clearly intended to impersonate the same admin [14]. Note that
Behavioural evidence: Both add Sikhs fought long enough for reinforcements to arrive.
[15] and
[16]. Both add 10,000 to Afghan strength in the infobox
[17],
[18] and
[19]. Both add that 12000-24000 Orakzais (Afghans) were present
[20] and
[21],
[22]. Both add or have edits consistent with supporting the narrative that Indian/Sikh troops had poor weaponry, and removing content which state that Afghans had inferior weaponry
[23],
[24],
[25] and
[26],
[27]. Both remove the same sourcs that claim only 1000-1500 Orakazi tribesman were present instead of 12-24K
[28] and
[29]. Note that WWAO was engaged in a significant content dispute with Utcursh in 2020
[30] causing him to get temp blocked , when Utcursh made this edit on May 20, 2021
[31], HaughtonBrit created the account AtmaramU just 10 hours later-
[32] and both HaughtonBrit and AtmaramU began to revert Utcursh's edits on the page
[33],
[34] thereafter. Please also note, this is just one page I looked at and there is far more evidence from other pages but I felt that would make the post excessively long, if you feel like more is required, kindly ping me and I will provide more.
Suthasianhistorian8 (
talk)
21:03, 2 February 2023 (UTC)
Some stupid LTA isn't grown up enough to stop himself from spamming the English wikibooks, including talkpages (here's mine), about how much he dislikes you. Any idea why he might dislike you? Or is this simply revenge since you were the first person to ban one of his accounts or something? — L10nM4st3r / ROAR at me! 11:14, 3 February 2023 (UTC)
In this edit you decline a speedy deletion request. No argument, but I don't understand something you clearly do. ? BusterD ( talk) 23:02, 2 February 2023 (UTC)
I can't tell if you meant to close that discussion, or a different discussion, and either way I don't feel blocked. Not enough, anyway. Mackensen (talk) 21:11, 3 February 2023 (UTC)
Could you please change the closure summary, ideally to something that summarises the consensus among the admins responding. This 'newcomer' hasn't been blocked in 18 years and there is no reason that people reading the closure summary in the future will think you were anything other than serious. JeffUK 10:57, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
You deleted the article "Sonu Kanwar" who is a famous folk singer in Rajasthan. You can check on internet as well. She have millions of followers in Rajasthan and she is known for folk singing in marwadi region of Rajasthan. Wikione9 ( talk) 07:57, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
It's clear at this point Kautilya3 won't compromise or cooperate at all. I can't keep engaging him just because he won't agree. He's clearly trying to game the system with stonewalling. I hope other editors weigh against him, but if he still stonewalls I hope you act. Roman Reigns Fanboy ( talk) 15:32, 6 February 2023 (UTC)
I'm reaching out to you to request you bring back my article on Serena Terry. I initially let it go out of respect and naivety. I am aware that Wikipedia relies on good will and consensus. I am not assuming anything as we all have our reasons for doing things, however I do think what you did was neither fair nor justified nor was I given a 2nd chance to fix the allegation of unambiguous promotional tone. I came across WP:BACKLOG, where there are literally thousands of pages with actual cited issues with promotional tone, one of which I have been working on myself, one which nobody thought needed to be deleted. When mine was nominated for proposed deletion by user:MrsSnoozyTurtle, no template was added to indicate to the rest of the community that the page had those issues. It was simply put up for deletion without much notice. I removed the deletion proposal tag because I wanted to improve it to remove its perceived promotional tone, and you went ahead and got rid of it. I was following all the basics I understood till then: I drew on reliable secondary sources, I paraphrased the texts as best as I could, and I tried to include all and every viewpoint I could find about the subject matter. It was not my intention to promote or advertise the subject matter. It was simply my first article so I didn't full mastery over a neutral style of writing, something I have picked up a bit better along the way.
Perhaps the article was imbalanced, this was simply because I could not find any opposing viewpoint that contradicted or taken things from a different angle. Perhaps the fact that I added the subject matter's works that it was flagged for promotional content. It was neither my intention to promote nor should it be the case. On previous discussions with other editors who have pointed out potenetial rule breaking I would have been made aware beforehand that quality of the article was not fit for purpose and to fix it or remove it altogether. I was not given any heads up, even after weeks of the initial creation.
Additionally, I disagreed with MrsSnoozyTurtle's motion altogether, as there was another thread raised where multiple editors complained about the editor's other actions by indicating some violation of rule breaking on multiple occasions.
I look forward to hearing from you on this matter
Regards Saussure4661 ( talk) 22:20, 6 February 2023 (UTC)
You recently blocked 2404:7A83:B1C0:7D00:0:0:0:0/64 ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), they're back at it on 2400:4053:D182:FE00:54D9:BEB4:4359:3B9E ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). – 2. O. Boxing 04:37, 7 February 2023 (UTC)
There's this account and this one. Don't know how the edit was deleted while in the process of typing this new topic. And for the petition to ban you? How ironic! Tails Wx 19:13, 7 February 2023 (UTC)
Just figured I"d tell you that I was fine with Lilliana removing that comment from my talk page, I told them I was just gonna remove it anyway for being malformed and just blatantly wrong but they beat me to it. ― Blaze Wolf TalkBlaze Wolf#6545 00:52, 8 February 2023 (UTC)
Last year, I made you aware of a sockpuppet of Albertaont. I'm confident, I have found another, an older account named Sinwiki12. This isn't as blatant as the previous cases. Both accounts have almost identical topic interests and similar editing, primarily content that is pro-China, including focuses on vaccines, vehicle manufacturers, Chinese military tech, spacecrafts, energy power in China and more. They also made edits critical of the US and UK and edits related to racial issues. Both accounts have a similar POV across a wide range of different topics and have made similar edits including on the same pages. See the Editor Interaction Analyser, Sinwiki12 Top edits, and Albertaont Top edits.
For example see the similarities in these edits critical about the Iraq War: [36], [37], and [38]. The last edits by the Albertaont account were on 2021 Kabul airport attack: [39]. These are similar to Sinwiki12's edit to the related August 2021 Kabul drone strike: [40]. This edit by Sinwiki12 to the United States: [41] includes a critical mention of drone strikes and Qasem Solemeini assassination. Albertaont also made this edit about Solemeini's assassination: [42] and also made similar edits to the United States: [43], [44].
On China, both accounts also made very similar edits where they removed mass surveillance and censorship from the lede: [45], [46]. On COVID-19 vaccine both accounts have numerous edits, including some that are pro CoronaVac: [47], [48]. On CoronaVac both accounts made edits regarding the same Chile study: [49], [50]
Both accounts made edits to the same Chinese military and vehicle manufacturer pages including Long March (rocket family): [51], [52], Type 039A submarine: [53], [54], BYD Auto: [55], [56]. Both accounts edited Sukhoi articles: [57], [58], and made multiple edits to Concerns and controversies at the 2020 Summer Olympics: [59], [60], and to Nuclear power in China: [61], [62]
There are many other similarities between the accounts, including with edit summaries: [63], [64]. Sinwiki12's recent editing history, however, rarely contains edit summaries and includes a very high rate of being reverted due to alot of problematic edits. Nettless ( talk) 19:00, 9 February 2023 (UTC)
The page in question Centro_Cultural_Universitario was a translation of a page that already exists in the spanish version of Wikipedia. https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Centro_Cultural_Universitario_(UNAM)
The place is the largest cultural center in the Americas and houses one of the largest concert halls in the Americas, which also has its own web page https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sala_Nezahualc%C3%B3yotl
Seems to me to be fairly arbitrarily since pages like Royce Hall, from the UCLA ( /info/en/?search=Royce_Hall), Performance Hall from Utah State ( /info/en/?search=Performance_Hall_(Utah_State_University)) are admitted.
This seems a blatant bias towards US institutions, and an indirect message that the WIkipedia represents unfairly the cultural centers of their main editors rather than a good representation of all the world. Leonoel ( talk) 18:52, 11 February 2023 (UTC)
Look, it's me, editing on a weekend!!-- Ponyo bons mots 21:11, 12 February 2023 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at
Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is
Achaudhary0205 continues to make ungrammatical edits and modify quotes, does not reply to talk page. Thank you.
—DIYeditor (
talk)
02:20, 15 February 2023 (UTC)
2400:4053:D182:FE00:0:0:0:0/64 is back on 210.135.80.72. This edit summary confirms. – 2. O. Boxing 13:36, 15 February 2023 (UTC)
Sorry about that. I had my head up my... uh, place where it doesn't think well. I didn't realize it was off-limits to edit because other discussions I've been involved in turn blue when they are closed and no more edits are allowed. That's a feeble excuse, but it's how I was thinking. I knew the rule against editing archived pages but managed to forget it. Archive means no edit.
Still, if someone is sockpuppeting around a block for disruptive editing and personal attacks in order to do more of the same, what should someone like me do? I screwed up. As a teacher, I would tell my students this is a teachable moment. Thanks. Dcs002 ( talk) 00:35, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
Hi, what believable claim to fame is there here? That she's editorial board member of a predatory journal? That she has published papers? That she's a scientist? This is all run-of-the-mill stuff, so I'm genuinely curious why you think A7 is not applicable. Thanks. -- Randykitty ( talk) 22:25, 16 February 2023 (UTC)
Hi, I just stumbled upon this sock you blocked a few days ago. While I do believe it is indeed a sock, I don't think it is related to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/LastEdit2008. From quickly looking, I would believe this is actually Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Agustin Sepulveda Venegas 2004 Fan: apart from their obsession with Bigfood, see previous socks such as ' Bigfood meme', ' Bigfood22', ' BigfoodFan2', and ' Sasquash-Bigfood', as well as socks including 'Fan' and/or a year at the end of their username.
Hope this helps... Magitroopa ( talk) 16:53, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
Thanks for your note. I am quite forgetful sometimes, and have acknowledged the warnings. Something I haven't had an opportunity to do in quite a while is to re-study WP policies in detail; I've had little chance to do this since getting my head muddled in work. With a short wikibreak, I'll do that and return refreshed. I am listening. Thanks again, Silikonz 💬 01:06, 20 February 2023 (UTC)
2400:4053:D182:FE00:0:0:0:0/64 ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is back on 2405:6583:A240:1700:CC48:C34B:8357:C07A ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). – 2. O. Boxing 13:30, 20 February 2023 (UTC)
Hi there. I wanted to make you aware of several IPs and a "new" editor who have both been making identical—or at least extremely similar—edits to previously banned accounts Frenkestain, Soares1967, and Aknulby. The IP looks to be part of an array of IPS beginning with "185." ( Special:contributions/185.224.0.120; 185.224.1.90; and 185.224.1.54 are just three of many that appear to be used) that are clearly controlled by the same person block evading. The "new" editor is called Andreapietro34. The account started making edits on 14 February 2023, the day after the three sock accounts mentioned above were banned for sockpuppetry. Trying to undo the unproductive and often entirely incorrect edits made by these socks is exhausting. I appreciate your work in helping in that fight. I would appreciate anything you can do to quell this latest assault on Wikipedia. Anwegmann ( talk) 16:51, 15 February 2023 (UTC)
Many thanks for altering my heading to Ponyo. I was rushing to a hospital appointment and rather messed-up. Best regards, David, David J Johnson ( talk) 16:53, 20 February 2023 (UTC)