![]() | This 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. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | → | Archive 9 |
Hi Blablubbs, I found this through my Watchlist because the image is on the Divya S. Iyer article, and then noticed the image was originally uploaded by an editor at the Commons with the same name as one of the Phoenix man socks, so I figured I should let you know: Commons:Deletion requests/File:Divya s iyer.jpg. Thank you, Beccaynr ( talk) 04:36, 4 May 2021 (UTC)
Hello, and thank you for helping me create my account. I requested a user name of 'klaberte', but was assigned 'Klaberte'. I was going to ask if I can change that (as klaberte has been my handle since the mid-1990s), but then noticed most other users have a capital letter to start their user names. Is this a common practice, or a hard rule, to start usernames with a capital letter? Also, it seems that a new section uses the markup with four equal signs. I didn't see that as an option in the Wiki markup in the editor. Is there some other shortcut for this, or do you actually have to type it? Klaberte ( talk) 17:36, 4 May 2021 (UTC)
Hi here. I found a Zenmate proxy 146.70.13.0/16, but because disruption from it is still nonexistent yet, anon-blocking would be better at the moment. 146.70.13.8 ( talk) 09:46, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
Hi! SPI isn't an area where I'm familiar but trying to learn it as I keep running into it with my work in UAA, among other areas. Noticed your actions re: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Terago marketing (and agree it was blatant) but when I reported a similar scenario at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Depeterz/Archive, Sir Sputnik said that isn't socking. The follow up ( Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Depeterz) wasn't actioned so I didn't report Terago beyond letting Deepfriedokra know their warning should probably go elsewhere. Should I have? Thanks for any insight. StarM 17:02, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
Hello, Blablubbs,
I have asked another, more experienced administrator and been told that if another editor wanted to "take responsibility" for an article created by a sockpuppet, it would be okay to restore a page deleted for CSD G5 reasons or remove a CSD G5 tag. Proxying only applies if edits are being done at the direction of a blocked editor. I know that there is disagreement among administrators on this subject and I wasn't sure if would be okay which is why I asked another admin. Perhaps this matter is worthy of a RfC or a discussion on Village Pump. Liz Read! Talk! 03:43, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
Good day! Can you look into Dave Vincent C. Rafio? I have reason to suspect that he is another one of Ajhenson21's wikipedia sockupuppets. The pages that Ajhenson21 used to edit were protected in order to dissuade sock creation from him, and as I've noticed in the subject's edits, he first edited random pages in order to be autoconfirmed and after that started exclusively editing the pages that Ajhenson21 used to edit. Hoping for a positive response on this regard. Thank you and warmest regards. Gardo Versace ( talk) 07:07, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
Can you or RoySmith reopen Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Wareon?
I was about to publish my reply but it got archived. It is essential. Wareon ( talk) 14:45, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
I noticed this reverted by Liz. Just FYI. VV 06:31, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
How do I add the latest confirmed socks? Do I need to open a new SPI (even though they are already blocked)? Thanks. M.Bitton ( talk) 14:56, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
![]() |
Actually I need it now, due to weakness and headache i developed in last two days. Going for a short break. Hope, you people will see rest two cases which are opened. Heba Aisha ( talk) 12:50, 13 May 2021 (UTC) |
What's your evidence that I'm a proxy? 24.204.150.197 ( talk) 08:37, 14 May 2021 (UTC)
@ Blablubbs: my account has been hacked this morning as someone removed me from my email. Can you suggest to check the IP connection of Owlf with any check user? I'm mailed stewards to block the account. To find the fact of last three edits and removal I've also requested in WP:ANI but as i know you're CU helper so can you please proceed it? 103.10.31.47 ( talk) 10:13, 15 May 2021 (UTC)
Hello Blablubbs,
Thank you for your welcome message. This is my first time and I have a newbie question. I do understand how to edit pages and insert new information on the existing pages. I just don't know how to translate pages from English to my local language? Do I need to create new pages if it doesn't exist? Or can you please point me to a tutorial for a beginner? Thanks in advance. - Shah ahmadyusof ( talk) 17:23, 16 May 2021 (UTC)
I don't know much about the case at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Alvalade XXI, but is 213.141.15.42 ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) them due to the same edit at Gerda Schmidt-Panknin ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)? FDW777 ( talk) 13:02, 17 May 2021 (UTC)
Hi Blablubbs, my name is Sarah and I'm the Group Head of Public Relations at Henley & Partners. I'm writing to you because of your involvement in my company's article and related articles, as well as in the investigation surrounding the undisclosed paid editing on those pages. In short, the agency that had been editing Wikipedia on H&P's behalf was not forthcoming with us regarding the extent to which they were violating Wikipedia's guidelines. H&P is no longer working with that agency, and we are now being advised by a company that is helping me interact with the Wikipedia community transparently and follow the proper avenues for proposing changes to articles for which I have a conflict of interest.
Practically, I want to do all I can to help get the articles in question to the point where they no longer require the "undisclosed paid" notice. I would be more than happy to suggest new, drastically shorter versions of the articles where all promotional-sounding content is removed, or if you have a different suggestion, I would be eager to hear it. The bottom line is that I would like to do whatever it takes to make this situation right, and would love to work constructively with you to that end. Thank you, Sarah Nicklin ( talk) 09:43, 19 May 2021 (UTC)
I was going to mention this on IRC, but as freenode has forcibly changed hands to a for-profit via lawyers and I can't get the replacement run by the ex-freenode staff working, I'll mention it here. Just to note that your closures are not being reflected in the case status. For example, in this diff you say you tagged the sock and closed the case, but the close wasn't noted in the status. I've seen a number of other cases where this has happened, and I've then changed it to close for you. Dreamy Jazz talk to me | my contributions 14:17, 19 May 2021 (UTC)
I just sent you a very sensitive email. Celestina007 ( talk) 14:44, 20 May 2021 (UTC)
I didn't know spihelper could do this. Where's that hiding? -- RoySmith (talk) 14:30, 23 May 2021 (UTC)
All Sections
in the case selection dropdown and then click Change SPI options
. :) --
Blablubbs|
talk 14:32, 23 May 2021 (UTC)
Saw what happened on the SPI page earlier- unfortunate that the filer ended up being a sock themself. However, even though it was a discussion with a sock, my point still remains from these comments. Could it be possible that Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Zjholder and Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Caidin-Johnson are the same and cases should be merged ('evidence' to support this is in the 'these comments' link above). Magitroopa ( talk) 00:04, 24 May 2021 (UTC)
Sigh. this caused this. Fortunately, should be pretty easy to fix. -- RoySmith (talk) 17:05, 24 May 2021 (UTC)
Hello Blablubbs, thanks for your contribution in this SP investigation however the first IP is once again editing (reverting version BTW). here. Hope a warning or a 24 hour block could be made? Mr.User200 ( talk) 01:29, 26 May 2021 (UTC)
Alokechatterjee3 has been blocked as per your admin request at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Mysuperradishfinger. Thank you Run n Fly ( talk) 08:41, 27 May 2021 (UTC)
{{
Sockpuppet}}
remains to be tagged.
Run n Fly (
talk) 08:44, 27 May 2021 (UTC)
Hello Blablubbs, seems another Anon IP from the blocked IP ave returned to restore edits made by SP IP. I reopened the case could you request a Admin action, once again?? Mr.User200 ( talk) 17:03, 28 May 2021 (UTC)
Can you please tell me where we are discouraged from appropriately placing the {{ IPsock}} template? There is no such admonition in its documentation. I use it regularly when sockpuppets use IP addresses to avoid scrutiny. It helps everyone to track who's who. Elizium23 ( talk) 18:36, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
Only blocked accounts should be tagged as Category:Suspected Wikipedia sockpuppets and only upon sufficient evidence that would stand up to scrutiny.For the IPsock and {{ sockpuppet}} templates, the "an editor has expressed a concern" version does exist, but its use is not in line with policy (or at least its spirit) – it has been removed from the documentation of the latter and probably should be for the former. Outright removal from the code is unfortunately hard to implement technically.The second is that non-admin tags can pose an issue for clerks because they are sometimes placed incorrectly or despite us consciously electing not to tag socks per WP:DENY. Additionally, the "expressed a concern" version also leads to IPs and accounts being categorised as suspected sockpuppets, along with accounts that were actually examined at SPI and blocked on behaviour, which makes it harder to navigate our categories.Finally, tagging IP addresses has limited usefulness and potential negative effects because most (though by far not all) IPs nowadays are highly dynamic and sometimes shared. Chances are that by the time someone tags, they will never be used again or have been reassigned to a different, innocent user – if they are static enough to be reactivated at some point in time, then the IPs should be blocked. I concur that there is some potential merit to the tags, but the negatives outweigh the (potential) benefits; the template as a whole seems to be mostly a relic of the past; relevant ranges can always be noted at SPI. For what it's worth, I have never placed a tag like it or seen another clerk place one. -- Blablubbs| talk 18:56, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
Hi. You may look into this case as you are a SPI clerk. Thanks. — A.A Prinon Leave a dialogue 15:57, 2 June 2021 (UTC)
Sorry, I though the comment should have been put. So I did. Apologies. — A.A Prinon Leave a dialogue 16:52, 2 June 2021 (UTC)
Is it bad form to tack on to another user's SPI report? I made edits on Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/MPSCL, but I wanted to make sure this is something that is OK to do without filing a separate report. — Mikehawk10 ( talk) 05:35, 3 June 2021 (UTC)
Hi, was this the intended result? Heymid being a sock to himself looks wierd. Isn't there a different template to use for the sockmaster? EstrellaSuecia ( talk) 09:45, 3 June 2021 (UTC)
![]() |
The No Spam Barnstar |
For all your valiant effort against undisclosed paid editing. It’s only a handful of us remaining. Celestina007 ( talk) 00:20, 4 June 2021 (UTC) |
I created both Wikipedia:Not Omniscient and Wikipedia:Anti Spam Identity Conceal today and forgot to include the “WP” before the shortcuts as you would observe in both essays, in other not to muddy things up, I thought it wise to meet someone far more experienced than myself in page moving to handle this for me, could you please make the shortcourt in a manner that “WP” is included in each shortcut title? For example can you move SHAPESHIFT to WP:SHAPESHIFT and do the same for all? I think I have muddied things and don’t want accidentally muddy it more. Celestina007 ( talk) 00:37, 4 June 2021 (UTC)
Good day User:Blablubbs! I come to you for help again because I noticed a user who is possibly another sockpuppet of Ajhenson21. The user in question is one Garette24. I looked into when the account was created and it was around the same time that the last sockpuppet of Ajhenson21 was blocked. The user edits the same set of pages, with particular emphasis on Ang Probinsyano and its related pages. The editing behavior is likewise similar as the user focuses on updating episodes of Ang Probinsyano and other primetime shows broadcast by ABS-CBN and/or its partners. Can we run a CU on the said user? Thank you and warmest regards Gardo Versace ( talk) 06:41, 4 June 2021 (UTC)
TW
button. In the dropdown menu, select ARV
, and then choose Sockpuppet (WP:SPI)
in the dropdown menu. In the sockpuppeteer
field, type Ajhenson21
, and present your evidence in the box below, ideally using
diffs that clearly show similarities between Ajhenson (and/or their previous socks) and the account that you're reporting. To request CU, simply tick the checkbox, and then click Submit Query
. If you don't want to use twinkle, you can navigate to
WP:SPI, hit the "show" button for the "How to open an investigation:" box and then use the wizard below. --
Blablubbs|
talk 11:44, 4 June 2021 (UTC)
Hi I was trying to figure out why my username was implicated as well and came across this thread. I suddenly received several wiki emails about this user joelani sacdalan claiming my username as one of his accounts. I have not been active lately due to other activities taking me away from Wikipedia editing. I hope this guy gets blocked, and am concerned that he used my username. I am not associated with this guy. Thanks! Pipamidalton ( talk)
Thank you for responding quickly and acting on this swiftly. These type of folks are a nuisance and should be blocked. Their actions frustrate editors who have put in so much effort in improving wiki pages. More power to all you do to protect pages from vandals. Pipamidalton ( talk) 20:04, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
Case in point: User:Anisur365 which uses {{ blockedsock}}, which I don't parse correctly because when I wrote my parsing code, I didn't even know it existed. -- RoySmith (talk) 15:09, 4 June 2021 (UTC)
{{
blocked sockpuppet}}
will be gone soon, at least. My main concern is how some of the templates work by default; {{
sock|Example|suspected}}
and {{
sock|Example}}
produce "An editor has expressed a concern that this account may be a sockpuppet of Example", which is an issue since
WP:HSOCK mandates only blocked socks be tagged and it's pretty counterintuitive for the person doing the tagging.
ToBeFree has removed it from the documentation, but it still exists and is still used (sometimes by admins who don't realise that using the template with no parameters doesn't mark accounts as blocked, sometimes by editors who think the tag should be placed because the template variant does exist after all – I'd be in favour of prohibiting non-clerk/admin tagging altogether, but that's an entirely different discussion). I wrote some more about this
here, but unfortunately it hasn't generated much discussion – in short, fixing that would need a bot job. {{
sockpuppeteer|checked=yes}}
should probably also not exist. Another gripe of mine is {{
IPsock}}
, which also violates HSOCK by default and is often misused (see also
this thread above); I think that one should be deprecated entirely. I think simplifying and correcting the templates and redirects is one thing (I could probably figure out how to do that by just stealing code from elsewhere until things start working), but actually making it work would require a bot job to tweak or remove many existing templates since they're all transclusions. I'd try to work on it, but my programming knowledge is limited to running some statistical tests in R, and I wouldn't even know where to begin. --
Blablubbs|
talk 15:26, 4 June 2021 (UTC)Hi Blablubbs, I'm the alleged sockpuppet of MPSCL, [4] sorry if I come to disturb you here. I just wanted to point out that the user who reported me is using that SPI, in addition to making me ashamed in front of other users, to block an entire RFC. [5] I'm not going to say "hurry" but... at least now you know the situation.-- Mhorg ( talk) 17:36, 4 June 2021 (UTC)
You know better than I do, so i thought it wise to ask, are usage of VPN's allowed here? I’m sure there’s a policy or an essay regarding that I haven’t the time (right now) to begin digging, and if yes? Isn’t that going to be a major problem for CheckUsers? Celestina007 ( talk) 18:54, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
Hi, if you haven't already, please take a look at the above case, the tug-of-war between Jesse Rafe and me, and the post I made to Jesse's page a few moments ago, trying to explain why he should let go and what he can do in the future.
I know you can't merge the case because you're not an admin, but as a clerk, you can justifiably control the comments by other users. If I let Jesse comment, then I have to let Sucker for All defend himself, not to mention another user you'll see in the mix who has also demonstrated his desire to argue about what's happening, and none of that is useful given the unusual circumstances; it will only clutter the whole thing.
I wish an admin clerk would take care of the merge, but I don't know how to make that happen other than what I've already done.-- Bbb23 ( talk) 20:23, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
Celestina007 ( talk) 01:04, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
Regarding this, I've no problem not putting in the extra work for the boring VOAs. Generally, I think two things may be useful to keep in the archives: enough documention of particular behaviour (here, it's probably the pages on battles), and, enough fresh socks for a CU or behavioural comparison. Disclaimer: I am not known for my clerking skills. -- zzuuzz (talk) 06:36, 9 June 2021 (UTC)
Sock |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
Can you please deal with Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Adventurehqdubai? Sainthbabu is continuing to spam today like the blocked Adventurehqdubai did. v. Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Volunteer Marek, it has become a shitstorm and is beyond what I can wrap my little mind around. I lodged this because they said ( here and here) that they edited the article first, before me, and because they reintroduced the blocked vandal's edit (Masdafizdo). I found All for Poland diff diving through the recent editing and saw the similarities, but that's all I know about that one. I was also suspicious because the Volunteer made many references to new accounts and socking and I thought that was a sign of a guilty conscience. But it is too complicated, and there is too much history there, I won't post there again unless there are questions for me. VikingDrummer ( talk) 19:44, 9 June 2021 (UTC) |
Thank you for welcoming me. I had a question for you about my first edit. I'm trying to find out why my dates at Tim Lucas put up error messages. I tried to figure it out myself but there are about a thousand pages of Wikipedia instructions. Are you the right person to ask? TheHorror TheHorror ( talk) 15:20, 10 June 2021 (UTC)
Never mind. An editor named User:Keith D went in and wrote the names of the months out. I guess that was it. Where would I have gone to find this out in the instructions? Thank you. TheHorror TheHorror ( talk) 15:22, 10 June 2021 (UTC)
Hello, regarding your diff here, why did you choose to restore (remove from hat) two edits which do nothing but cast aspersions, call for unjustified admin intervention and provide no proof, but remove my edit which contained a cross-reference between past emails of Marek and this sockpuppet? I understand some of my comments could come off as having a "personal attack" tone, but I believe the information is relevant and of use. CPCEnjoyer ( talk) 16:20, 10 June 2021 (UTC)
I have a general question. Checkuser made a comment: "Inconclusive W.R.T. [user name] due to proxy use (they have ip block exempt)" What does it mean? I assume checkuser means they can not make any conclusion, so that a sockpuppetry can be established based only on behavior evidence? Hence this still can be a sockpuppet account? More important, does it mean that any named user who uses proxies is immune to the SP investigations? That would be strange. If anything, the editing by a named account through proxy should indicate the intention to evade an SP investigation. Thank you. My very best wishes ( talk) 14:20, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
{{
possible}}
– CU doesn't prove or disprove anything in cases like this. It does not mean that anyone on proxy is immune from
WP:SOCK. --
Blablubbs|
talk 15:11, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
![]() |
Whack! You've been whacked with a wet trout. Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know that you did something silly. |
For doing so much high-quality administrative work but not running for adminship. I will be the first to support you. Scorpions13256 ( talk) 00:12, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
Proxy hopper: [6]. I think this is master account. But unfortunately, I made a misprint in their name while submitting the SPI case. My very best wishes ( talk) 17:40, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
Hello Blablubbs, FYI I attempted to add another account at the SPI but got into an edit conflict with you - you may want to review the case in the event that it changes the endorsement. Thanks, Pahunkat ( talk) 16:50, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
Hi, Blablubbs. Thank you for your help the other day. I'm slowly trying to read all the many, many rules and I think this one paragraph at Tim Lucas violates a couple:
One of Lucas' film scripts, The Man with Kaleidoscope Eyes (co-written with Charlie Largent), a comedy about the filming of Roger Corman's 1967 film The Trip is currently optioned by Metaluna Productions for director Joe Dante. In October 2016, the script was the subject of a live table reading at the Vista Theater in Los Angeles, promoted as "The Best Film Never Made." The performance starred Bill Hader as Corman, Roger Corman himself as Roger Today, Ethan Embry as Jack Nicholson, and Claudia O'Doherty as Corman's longtime assistant Frances Doel. [1] Lucas has reportedly since adapted the script as a novel, but no release has yet been announced.
If I /info/en/?search=Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Dates_and_numbers#Statements_likely_to_become_outdated correctly, "terms such as now, currently, to date, so far, soon, and recently should usually be avoided in favor of phrases such as during the 2010s, since 2010, and in August 2020." So we should just say "is optioned as of (whatever date I can find to cite this)"? I think that applies to "no release has yet been announced" also?
And second, and I don't remember where I saw it, but are we supposed to use the word "reportedly"? Something doesn't feel right with that. TheHorror TheHorror ( talk) 21:51, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
Oh, I did remove this sentence since it read like /info/en/?search=Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view#Describing_aesthetic_opinions_and_reputations "Describing aesthetic opinions" without a footnote: "The novel was generally overlooked upon publication but can be seen in hindsight as the point of origin for the " mash-up" horror novels that rose to commercial prominence at the end of the decade, for its incorporation of approximately 50 pages of Stoker's novel into the weave of its original narrative." Was I right to do that or should I have put a "citation needed" by it? I can put it back. I'm still learning. TheHorror TheHorror ( talk) 21:57, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
References
I saw T280844 and thought of you. I wouldn't be surprised if this is some kind of malware using that page as an innocent-looking probe for network connectivity. -- RoySmith (talk) 14:24, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
Hi. Please see this thread at ANI that you have been involved in. Thanks. Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 16:45, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
prior sending you an email, this text pops up: Hello! Before you email me, please note that: Unless a matter is private, I prefer to be contacted via my talk page, as this gives better transparency. If extra security is needed, please encrypt your email using my PGP public key, which you can find here. I reserve the right to forward or publish any or all of the email contents at my discretion. I will not do so except in exceptional circumstances (that is, cases where partial or full disclosure is necessary to protect the integrity and safety of the project or the health and safety of its members). How in Gods name did you pull that off? Can you teach me? Celestina007 ( talk) 18:14, 19 June 2021 (UTC)
Hi Blablubbs, you are good with IP stuff. What do you make of 213.172.123.242 ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) WHOIS information (myHome?)? S0091 ( talk) 21:59, 19 June 2021 (UTC)
This is pertaining to security. Celestina007 ( talk) 18:28, 23 June 2021 (UTC)
Oops! Should I have just added the report to the main casepage and then just had a clerk archive it, then? I figured that would have been a pain in the ass. jp× g 20:23, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
![]() |
The Barnstar of Diligence |
For your hard work at SPI, thank you. We're better off as an encyclopedia because of you. KevinL (aka L235 · t · c) 06:17, 27 June 2021 (UTC) |
First, using the spi helper script, is there a way to block/tag and close at the same time? Second, I just disposed of Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Starboyedits, and I swear I checked the box that puts a block notice on the master's Talk page, but it didn't happen. I slapped a standard notice on Starboy's Talk page for socking with Twinkle, but it didn't refer back to the SPI, which would have been helpful. Third, and last, is the fact that the "Editor interaction utility" link doesn't work correctly known? Very annoying. Thanks.-- Bbb23 ( talk) 23:30, 29 June 2021 (UTC)
Block/tag socks
and Close SPI
, the script will do both in one go. I unfortunately can't help with the second question because that part of the script doesn't show without the sysop flag; paging
GeneralNotability who may be able to help. The editorinteract thing is a known issue. As far as I can tell, the link gets filled for filings that are made using the main SPI page, but not for ones done with Twinkle (compare e.g. the editorinteract bit in
this Twinkle filing with the one in
this non-twinkle one; the link works for the former, but not the latter). I personally use
https://spi-tools.toolforge.org/ for editorinteract – type in the SPI name (there's a list of current cases, you can type in the full name and it will work with archived ones as well) and hit "Interactions", that should take you to a properly filled EIA. It might be worth bringing this up with the Twinkle maintainers for a "proper" fix. I hope this helps. Best,
Blablubbs|
talk 23:49, 29 June 2021 (UTC)
Oh man, talk about good cop, bad cop :-) -- RoySmith (talk) 18:26, 30 June 2021 (UTC)
I just wanted to show you that I've learned how to cite books! See "Origins" at Fangoria! The Horror, The Horror ( talk) 14:57, 2 July 2021 (UTC)
Hi RoySmith and Blablubbs. Archiving of UAK went wrong due to renaming the archive. I'm not sure how to fix it, perhaps you could look into it? (Posting on both of your user talk pages.) Trijnstel talk 13:50, 4 July 2021 (UTC)
You don't get it. It's fine to have two pages. But please remove the redirect then (on the top of the page). Trijnstel talk 13:56, 4 July 2021 (UTC)
Hi Blablubbs, As you are the page mover . I request to move this article List of districts of Nepal to List of districts in Nepal.Which you can see detail information of talk page of that article.( Fade258 ( talk) 14:41, 7 July 2021 (UTC))
I think you misread one of the two IPs (69.158.90.121 and 69.156.107.94) as the /16 range you mentioned is not possible. I don't normally favor editing archives, but I would delete your comment in this instance.-- Bbb23 ( talk) 13:22, 13 July 2021 (UTC)
![]() |
Thanks for filling in some key details I left out on my SPI report. Keep up the great work! Yeeno ( talk) 🍁 03:59, 15 July 2021 (UTC) |
Given User talk:Doug Weller#I amediting wiki and the post above, I'd think the blocks could be changed now to reflect probable socking. What say you? Doug Weller talk 14:21, 20 July 2021 (UTC)
( edit conflict)I'd forgotten about the lack of edit summaries for one account, although I noticed it at the time. Hadn't thought of a joe-job. I'm happy with the status quo now. Thanks. Doug Weller talk 15:11, 20 July 2021 (UTC)
See Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Myers Court, as an example, but this has happened before. I blocked the puppet without tags, but it asks me for the name of the master. Why?-- Bbb23 ( talk) 21:03, 21 July 2021 (UTC)
![]() |
The Barnstar of Diligence |
Need I say what this is for? Ah! Okay, for your tireless efforts at SPI. Celestina007 ( talk) 19:50, 22 July 2021 (UTC) |
Hi, Re. Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Vikhyat Dubey Virat Brothers/Archive, User:Vikhyat Dubey is certainly the oldest account and thus the master. It would be consistent to move the SPI to master, will you agree? Cheers, — kashmīrī TALK 11:41, 24 July 2021 (UTC)
Hi Blablubbs, but also @ Possibly and TSventon:.
Yeasterday, Bédévore (who works on fr-wp, like me, on SPI and, moreover, promotion/COI/UPE) and I had an idea, following en:Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/MARdF (thanks for the ping, btw). When we discover, on a specific wiki, abuses like promotion/UPE/COI that are cross-wiki, it's not always easy to know how to alert other wikis. Here, you pinged me because we already cooperated in the past, but for example, TSventon asked if we did know trusted users on es, hu and pt... and as for me, no.
So here is the idea: create a hub (a page, in fact) on metawiki with volunteer referents/contacts for as many wikis as possible, and a talk page for coordination on big cross-wiki cases. The volunteer referents/contacts would be wikipedians used to SPI, fighting promotion and UPE; if they have a role (sysop, CU, this could be indicated, along with the languages spoken). For example, in our case, we could have reached contacts/referents listed on this page and/or use the talk page as a way to coordinate.
To create such a hub would request, obviously, to look for other people invested in fighting UPE, promotion, etc., and to make some publicity for this new hub on other wikis. This would be an occasion to create a bit of an international coordination against UPE and more broadly uses of Wikipedia for promotion. On fr-wp, we have a fr:Projet:Antipub, but not that much contacts with collegues from other wikis.
What do you think about it?
Best regards, Jules* ( talk) 10:43, 25 July 2021 (UTC)
Hi @
Giraffer,
TSventon,
Blablubbs, and
MER-C:. Before reaching out other wikis, we are going to create a draft of this coordination page on Metawiki. Do you have an idea for the name/title in English (it will be translated in other languages, obviously)? "Anti-advertising coordination"? "Cross-wiki anti-advertising group"? My English level is basic, so you may find something better
. (I would like to avoid names with "ambassadors", as this page may be used to coordinate investigations too, beyond the list of users willing to help.) —
Jules*
Talk 15:27, 29 July 2021 (UTC)
Thank you for your help with this. Now all the users have been blocked, what action is needed on removing non notable content in other Wikipedias? Will SPI checkers already be on the case? Or could that wait until your idea takes shape. TSventon ( talk) 16:45, 25 July 2021 (UTC)
Thanks Blablubbs and Jules*. Probably an English language noticeboard for a Wikipedia like Chinese will work better than a machine translation. TSventon ( talk) 10:39, 28 July 2021 (UTC)
Hello Blablubbs, for us non technical editors, reading some technical related polices and guidelines still go over our heads. I have read WP:Committed identity/ Commitment scheme but still cannot understand it, can you give me a detailed explanation(if you can’t due to time ) can you in summary tell me what it’s about? Celestina007 ( talk) 18:01, 25 July 2021 (UTC)
test
, you get ee26b0dd4af7e749aa1a8ee3c10ae9923f618980772e473f8819a5d4940e0db27ac185f8a0e1d5f84f88bc887fd67b143732c304cc5fa9ad8e6f57f50028a8ff
. If you use the same algorithm on testtest
, you get 125d6d03b32c84d492747f79cf0bf6e179d287f341384eb5d6d3197525ad6be8e6df0116032935698f99a09e265073d1d6c32c274591bf1d0a20ad67cba921bc
etc. Really minor changes in the input string will produce massive differences in the output hash.It's not important how they work exactly on a mathematical level (I don't understand that either), but a good hash function has two properties that are of interest to us: First, that it's
deterministic, which means that if you run the same algorithm on the same string, you always get the same result, and second that it's irreversible, meaning that it's extremely hard (basically impossible) to get the original string by looking at its hashed value. This means, for example, that while putting test
into SHA-512sum will always give you ee26b0dd4af7e...
, you can't use ee26b0dd4af7e...
to deduce what was originally encoded.One common use of these functions is to store passwords. Any website operator worth their money won't be storing passwords in plain text, they will be storing the hashes of these passwords. The database won't know that your password is test
, it will only know that your password's hash is ee26b0dd4af7e...
. If the database gets stolen, the security impact is mitigated because nobody actually knows your password, they only know its irreversible hash, which is pretty useless on its own if you use a strong and unique password (and not something like "test", which is extremely easy to guess).For committed identity schemes, we essentially do the same thing. In cases of account compromise, one crucial step is to be able to verify whether or not one is speaking to the original account holder. Say I hash the string Name: Bla Blubber, Tel: +49 123 438 23 43, 23 Example Lane, Somevillage, Examplistan
, I get the hash 51e5a09f00428659030ef9d9cd3a7b54cbd10ef411aeea1450cd43f759e7721261e6dc4a43391ba2968872bab747bbb618a63205ed12b9f12006cb763c5d8696
and can put that on my userpage. I don't tell anyone what my secret string is, but I do make a note of it somewhere. If my account gets compromised and I go knocking at WMF T&S, they will probably ask how they can be sure that they are actually speaking to Blablubbs and not an imposter. I can then provide them the input string Name: Bla Blubber, Tel: +49 123 438 23 43, 23 Example Lane, Somevillage, Examplistan
and they can hash it for themselves, thereby proving that my identity is clearly linked with the committed identity on my userpage, and take it from there – they could even call me to make sure that the person contacting them is actually the person operating that phone number. However, nobody will be able to tell what my name, phone number and address is just from looking at my userpage because the hashing process is irreversible (assuming you use a good algorithm).Does that make sense? --
Blablubbs (
talk) 08:36, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
Hi,
You might recall I contacted you some time back, thanking you for your excellent work on Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/VentureKit.
Well, this is a never-ending job; I watch some of the articles on leaders of Gulf area; the problem is that they use millions of dollars (literally!) on so-called "reputation management". Lots of these leaders (who are virtually all deeply undemocratic, with absolutely dismal human rights records) tend to end up haveing very pretty biographies on wp.
I noticed the VentureKit-socks on Yousef Al Otaiba; I didn't keep my eye on it for about a year, and all what the socks tried to remove (with no support from WP:BLP-board) magically disappeared.
Ah well; I am not a very good sock-hunter, but someone should look into it?
This is a Sisyphean work, I'm afraid,
Cheers, Huldra ( talk) 23:51, 25 July 2021 (UTC)
This account? It is obviously not a new user. They copied this user page at some point, but I think they just used it as template, though the description on their user page do not jive with their contributions (ignoring their user pages and multiple Wiki project registrations, is rapid fire reverts of anonymous IP editors only).-- Eostrix ( 🦉 hoot hoot🦉) 09:22, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
![]() |
Bruh, socks are a thing? Find those stinky socks and sock them! I swear to thee I shall never be a sock around these here parts. Gyofh ( talk) 11:26, 27 July 2021 (UTC) |
Hi Blablubbs - hope you are well. Thank you for your excellent work with this SPI case. If you don't mind, I have a technical question for you! As you know the editor jumps from IP range to IP range, going back-and-fourth from the 103.74.xxx.xxx range to the 117.228.xxx.xxx range. Is this a choice by the editor, or is the IP address decided by the host ISP at the point the user logs on? More for my own curiosity than anything else. Thanks. Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 17:01, 27 July 2021 (UTC)
BSNL-GSM-westZone
;
GSM stands for "Global System for Mobile Communications"). Fortunately, both ISPs appear to have sensible assignment patterns (i.e. users stay on a single, relatively narrow range for extended periods of time), which isn't a given considering the country. I hope this helps, please let me know if you have any other questions. --
Blablubbs (
talk) 09:47, 28 July 2021 (UTC)Hello Blablubbs,
I hope you are well.
There is this user named "Accidental-usurpation" that I am almost certain is a sockpuppet of an indefinitely blocked user named "BaxçeyêReş". The account was created a day after BaxçeyêReş was banned, and the types of edits "Accidental-usurpation" makes are extremely similar to the ones BaxçeyêReş made, like removing Azerbaijani names/translations from the article introductions, changing the language in the templates, and etc.
The kind of language "Accidental-usurpation" uses also seems extremely similar to that of BaxçeyêReş. I mean maybe you yourself would notice, both use archaic, kind of "exaggerated", overly formal language, such as "Thank you so much for your swift and lucid response" here, you can check other examples from BaxçeyêReş's account where he writes, the style seems very very similar, if not identical.
Both users also claim to be "neutral" like on BaxçeyêReş's main page, "Both Azerbaijan and Armenia" kind of deal, but then similarly to the blocked account, the new account only edits on Azerbaijan-related pages.
Also, the new account very quickly went on the talk-page of the banning administrator and started naming all these experienced users that stick to Armenia/Azerbaijan pages i.e "WimpyDood, BaxceyeRes, Parishan, NMW03, Brandmeister, Grandmaster, KhndzorUtogh", which is unusual for a new user to know the editors. The user also started indirectly defending BaxçeyêReş with what-aboutism, "Azerbaijani users do it, it's not fair!" sort of thing here
I have several other concerns I could write about, but basically it's a long list of similarities that I simply don't believe are coincidences. You yourself I think got slighly suspicious here, similarly to this user here who created an account immideatly after BaxçeyêReş was banned and started a sockpuppet investigation into me here. Also both "Accidental-usurpation" and "PuhPaayYuh" both claim to have been IP spectators. Now I don't know how many "ip spectators" there are on Wikipedia that never edit but simply observe the editing environment, but I imagine not many.
I want to file for Sockpuppet Investigation basically. Just wanted to ask your personal thoughts on this as a person who deal with this kind of stuff?
Thank you in advance for your response, - WimpyDood ( talk) 07:26, 28 July 2021 (UTC)
How is anyone to know what's going on with an unblock request when the only record of what's going on is in a deleted SPI? --jpgordon 𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇 20:55, 29 July 2021 (UTC)
Regarding this: you know what it means when people start to mistake you for an admin, right? You'd have my support! ☿ Apaugasma ( talk ☉) 15:04, 31 July 2021 (UTC)
I put the template on User talk:Chesterwhy, but I don't see it listed in the SPI table. My memory is that CU needed pages are listed. Did that change?-- Bbb23 ( talk) 19:48, 1 August 2021 (UTC)
I've just blocked:
for likely UPE. I'm sure I've seen this particular abuse pattern and its distinctive feature before, but where? MER-C 19:21, 2 August 2021 (UTC)
{{DEFAULTSORT}}
thing a lot, but they aren't really consistent behaviourally outside of that. Maybe a friendly talk page watcher knows? --
Blablubbs (
talk) 21:54, 2 August 2021 (UTC)Celestina007 ( talk) 16:32, 3 August 2021 (UTC)
Hello Blablubbs, I noticed your comment on Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Hums4r and thought of a fifth group, Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Thamesinfotech (which likely does UPE contribs here as well). On reflection, I think two of the groups could be related - could you drop by the Thamesinfotech SPI to see may later remarks and give your opinion? Pahunkat ( talk) 15:18, 4 August 2021 (UTC)
I've run into this in a few cases, where I've made reports and the users end up getting CU blocked interdependently of the case (or the case isn't updated by the blocker). In a case like this one (I created it, and all users and now blocked for socking, potentially the only loose end is a global lock requests), can I tag it closed by myself? Or is that only for clerks?-- Eostrix ( 🦉 hoot hoot🦉) 08:33, 5 August 2021 (UTC)
Something bad happened to me at the Wikimedia commons Administrator's thread that led to a one week ban. The user Noncreativephotographer was spitting my name everywhere and keep abusing me as a vandal, asking each and every admin to block me by pointing an anonymous IP address. These guys along with an anonymous IP are hell bend in creating allegations against me on Wikipedia projects as I saw the very recent SPI investigation against me. R.C Outlander07@talk 14:14, 5 August 2021 (UTC)
Hey, saw your comment at
User_talk:Orlaw66#Unblock_request, any chance you could throw together an SPI for the accounts I mentioned there? Be interesting to find the oldest one/see if y'all know which farm they're from? In my books, they're all Technically indistinguishable ~
TNT (she/her •
talk) 17:55, 6 August 2021 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
Wolfdietrich Schnurre you nominated for
GA-status according to the
criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
PinkElixir --
PinkElixir (
talk) 13:20, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
Hello Blablubbs,
I hope you are well. Perhaps you might remember the ClassicYoghurt/BaxçeyêReş sockpuppeting case? well judging by what I've gathered the banned sockpuppeteer might be back and I opened a new case [9]. It is possible I am wrong but frankly seems clear as day to me personally. I just wanted to bring your attention to it, maybe if you have time you could check it out and let me know what you think? you were involved in the original case so I was thinking I would ask you. - WimpyDood ( talk) 16:55, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
Is there a different way I should be reporting obvious IP socks? ScottishFinnishRadish ( talk) 23:02, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
Hi! I blocked both of the /24 ranges that you requested. But what is the extra meaning of reinforcing the global block with a local hardblock. Isn't the global block on Special:Contributions/185.217.117.0/24 already a hardblock? Thanks, EdJohnston ( talk) 20:54, 14 August 2021 (UTC)
Hello Blablubbs, I hope all is well. I am here requesting your opinion if that's fine - this user right here [10] seems like someone's sockpuppet given the complexity of their edits and given how suddenly they began editing starting the 3rd of August, but I'm not entirely sure.
Seems like a high possibility of it being ClassicYoghurt given they were banned on 28th July, and then the 3rd of August is only a couple of days after, that the possible sleeper started working. They don't leave edit summaries so can't really go off of those. Even if it's not ClassicYoghurt, seems like a high possibility it's a sock of someone else.
What do you think about this? Should I add this case to the ClassicYoghurt SPI page?
p.s. they edit almost exclusively on Azerbaijan-related pages like ClassicYoghurt, and ClassicYoghurt had made similar template edits in the past to this account.
Thank you - WimpyDood ( talk) 22:34, 14 August 2021 (UTC)
Yeah, I did notice that. I was tempted to just blow the report off, but the sockiness was clear. I'm sure the deeper one digs on this one, the more badness one will discover. -- RoySmith (talk) 21:06, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
Do you recall when I asked you if someone in (for example Nigeria or any nation) can make their IP address appear as though they were in a different country/continent? I’m pretty sure you must have laughed real hard at how “not tech savvy” i was, This month, in order to successfully track down a particular editor and an a particular organization allegedly contracting out undisclosed paid jobs for “Wikipedia editors for hire on Twitter” I've been experimenting with VPN trial versions and now I know you literally can make yourself look as though you are in a different continent altogether. Even though the VPN has helped me track down the editor in question I honestly don’t think it’s necessarily a good thing, and honestly, I believe it should be scrapped or editors using it to edit Wikipedia be indef blocked, I mean, how on earth could SPI clerks like yourself carry out your duties effectively and efficiently with the existential nature of VPN's? Especially when an SPI is opened? Oh boy , I don’t envy you clerks your duties are as arduous and tedious as they come. I just realized that I do not necessarily need to see what’s happening on Twitter or Upwork anymore and Luckily for the collaborative project I can perfectly analyze Nigerian sources and if I see any dubious Nigerian articles, I’d perform a source analysis an send to AFD or draftify the article like I did here. I copied you in an email, did it reach you? Did you see it? Celestina007 ( talk) 23:03, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
![]() | This 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. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | → | Archive 9 |
![]() | This 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. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | → | Archive 9 |
Hi Blablubbs, I found this through my Watchlist because the image is on the Divya S. Iyer article, and then noticed the image was originally uploaded by an editor at the Commons with the same name as one of the Phoenix man socks, so I figured I should let you know: Commons:Deletion requests/File:Divya s iyer.jpg. Thank you, Beccaynr ( talk) 04:36, 4 May 2021 (UTC)
Hello, and thank you for helping me create my account. I requested a user name of 'klaberte', but was assigned 'Klaberte'. I was going to ask if I can change that (as klaberte has been my handle since the mid-1990s), but then noticed most other users have a capital letter to start their user names. Is this a common practice, or a hard rule, to start usernames with a capital letter? Also, it seems that a new section uses the markup with four equal signs. I didn't see that as an option in the Wiki markup in the editor. Is there some other shortcut for this, or do you actually have to type it? Klaberte ( talk) 17:36, 4 May 2021 (UTC)
Hi here. I found a Zenmate proxy 146.70.13.0/16, but because disruption from it is still nonexistent yet, anon-blocking would be better at the moment. 146.70.13.8 ( talk) 09:46, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
Hi! SPI isn't an area where I'm familiar but trying to learn it as I keep running into it with my work in UAA, among other areas. Noticed your actions re: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Terago marketing (and agree it was blatant) but when I reported a similar scenario at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Depeterz/Archive, Sir Sputnik said that isn't socking. The follow up ( Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Depeterz) wasn't actioned so I didn't report Terago beyond letting Deepfriedokra know their warning should probably go elsewhere. Should I have? Thanks for any insight. StarM 17:02, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
Hello, Blablubbs,
I have asked another, more experienced administrator and been told that if another editor wanted to "take responsibility" for an article created by a sockpuppet, it would be okay to restore a page deleted for CSD G5 reasons or remove a CSD G5 tag. Proxying only applies if edits are being done at the direction of a blocked editor. I know that there is disagreement among administrators on this subject and I wasn't sure if would be okay which is why I asked another admin. Perhaps this matter is worthy of a RfC or a discussion on Village Pump. Liz Read! Talk! 03:43, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
Good day! Can you look into Dave Vincent C. Rafio? I have reason to suspect that he is another one of Ajhenson21's wikipedia sockupuppets. The pages that Ajhenson21 used to edit were protected in order to dissuade sock creation from him, and as I've noticed in the subject's edits, he first edited random pages in order to be autoconfirmed and after that started exclusively editing the pages that Ajhenson21 used to edit. Hoping for a positive response on this regard. Thank you and warmest regards. Gardo Versace ( talk) 07:07, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
Can you or RoySmith reopen Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Wareon?
I was about to publish my reply but it got archived. It is essential. Wareon ( talk) 14:45, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
I noticed this reverted by Liz. Just FYI. VV 06:31, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
How do I add the latest confirmed socks? Do I need to open a new SPI (even though they are already blocked)? Thanks. M.Bitton ( talk) 14:56, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
![]() |
Actually I need it now, due to weakness and headache i developed in last two days. Going for a short break. Hope, you people will see rest two cases which are opened. Heba Aisha ( talk) 12:50, 13 May 2021 (UTC) |
What's your evidence that I'm a proxy? 24.204.150.197 ( talk) 08:37, 14 May 2021 (UTC)
@ Blablubbs: my account has been hacked this morning as someone removed me from my email. Can you suggest to check the IP connection of Owlf with any check user? I'm mailed stewards to block the account. To find the fact of last three edits and removal I've also requested in WP:ANI but as i know you're CU helper so can you please proceed it? 103.10.31.47 ( talk) 10:13, 15 May 2021 (UTC)
Hello Blablubbs,
Thank you for your welcome message. This is my first time and I have a newbie question. I do understand how to edit pages and insert new information on the existing pages. I just don't know how to translate pages from English to my local language? Do I need to create new pages if it doesn't exist? Or can you please point me to a tutorial for a beginner? Thanks in advance. - Shah ahmadyusof ( talk) 17:23, 16 May 2021 (UTC)
I don't know much about the case at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Alvalade XXI, but is 213.141.15.42 ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) them due to the same edit at Gerda Schmidt-Panknin ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)? FDW777 ( talk) 13:02, 17 May 2021 (UTC)
Hi Blablubbs, my name is Sarah and I'm the Group Head of Public Relations at Henley & Partners. I'm writing to you because of your involvement in my company's article and related articles, as well as in the investigation surrounding the undisclosed paid editing on those pages. In short, the agency that had been editing Wikipedia on H&P's behalf was not forthcoming with us regarding the extent to which they were violating Wikipedia's guidelines. H&P is no longer working with that agency, and we are now being advised by a company that is helping me interact with the Wikipedia community transparently and follow the proper avenues for proposing changes to articles for which I have a conflict of interest.
Practically, I want to do all I can to help get the articles in question to the point where they no longer require the "undisclosed paid" notice. I would be more than happy to suggest new, drastically shorter versions of the articles where all promotional-sounding content is removed, or if you have a different suggestion, I would be eager to hear it. The bottom line is that I would like to do whatever it takes to make this situation right, and would love to work constructively with you to that end. Thank you, Sarah Nicklin ( talk) 09:43, 19 May 2021 (UTC)
I was going to mention this on IRC, but as freenode has forcibly changed hands to a for-profit via lawyers and I can't get the replacement run by the ex-freenode staff working, I'll mention it here. Just to note that your closures are not being reflected in the case status. For example, in this diff you say you tagged the sock and closed the case, but the close wasn't noted in the status. I've seen a number of other cases where this has happened, and I've then changed it to close for you. Dreamy Jazz talk to me | my contributions 14:17, 19 May 2021 (UTC)
I just sent you a very sensitive email. Celestina007 ( talk) 14:44, 20 May 2021 (UTC)
I didn't know spihelper could do this. Where's that hiding? -- RoySmith (talk) 14:30, 23 May 2021 (UTC)
All Sections
in the case selection dropdown and then click Change SPI options
. :) --
Blablubbs|
talk 14:32, 23 May 2021 (UTC)
Saw what happened on the SPI page earlier- unfortunate that the filer ended up being a sock themself. However, even though it was a discussion with a sock, my point still remains from these comments. Could it be possible that Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Zjholder and Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Caidin-Johnson are the same and cases should be merged ('evidence' to support this is in the 'these comments' link above). Magitroopa ( talk) 00:04, 24 May 2021 (UTC)
Sigh. this caused this. Fortunately, should be pretty easy to fix. -- RoySmith (talk) 17:05, 24 May 2021 (UTC)
Hello Blablubbs, thanks for your contribution in this SP investigation however the first IP is once again editing (reverting version BTW). here. Hope a warning or a 24 hour block could be made? Mr.User200 ( talk) 01:29, 26 May 2021 (UTC)
Alokechatterjee3 has been blocked as per your admin request at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Mysuperradishfinger. Thank you Run n Fly ( talk) 08:41, 27 May 2021 (UTC)
{{
Sockpuppet}}
remains to be tagged.
Run n Fly (
talk) 08:44, 27 May 2021 (UTC)
Hello Blablubbs, seems another Anon IP from the blocked IP ave returned to restore edits made by SP IP. I reopened the case could you request a Admin action, once again?? Mr.User200 ( talk) 17:03, 28 May 2021 (UTC)
Can you please tell me where we are discouraged from appropriately placing the {{ IPsock}} template? There is no such admonition in its documentation. I use it regularly when sockpuppets use IP addresses to avoid scrutiny. It helps everyone to track who's who. Elizium23 ( talk) 18:36, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
Only blocked accounts should be tagged as Category:Suspected Wikipedia sockpuppets and only upon sufficient evidence that would stand up to scrutiny.For the IPsock and {{ sockpuppet}} templates, the "an editor has expressed a concern" version does exist, but its use is not in line with policy (or at least its spirit) – it has been removed from the documentation of the latter and probably should be for the former. Outright removal from the code is unfortunately hard to implement technically.The second is that non-admin tags can pose an issue for clerks because they are sometimes placed incorrectly or despite us consciously electing not to tag socks per WP:DENY. Additionally, the "expressed a concern" version also leads to IPs and accounts being categorised as suspected sockpuppets, along with accounts that were actually examined at SPI and blocked on behaviour, which makes it harder to navigate our categories.Finally, tagging IP addresses has limited usefulness and potential negative effects because most (though by far not all) IPs nowadays are highly dynamic and sometimes shared. Chances are that by the time someone tags, they will never be used again or have been reassigned to a different, innocent user – if they are static enough to be reactivated at some point in time, then the IPs should be blocked. I concur that there is some potential merit to the tags, but the negatives outweigh the (potential) benefits; the template as a whole seems to be mostly a relic of the past; relevant ranges can always be noted at SPI. For what it's worth, I have never placed a tag like it or seen another clerk place one. -- Blablubbs| talk 18:56, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
Hi. You may look into this case as you are a SPI clerk. Thanks. — A.A Prinon Leave a dialogue 15:57, 2 June 2021 (UTC)
Sorry, I though the comment should have been put. So I did. Apologies. — A.A Prinon Leave a dialogue 16:52, 2 June 2021 (UTC)
Is it bad form to tack on to another user's SPI report? I made edits on Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/MPSCL, but I wanted to make sure this is something that is OK to do without filing a separate report. — Mikehawk10 ( talk) 05:35, 3 June 2021 (UTC)
Hi, was this the intended result? Heymid being a sock to himself looks wierd. Isn't there a different template to use for the sockmaster? EstrellaSuecia ( talk) 09:45, 3 June 2021 (UTC)
![]() |
The No Spam Barnstar |
For all your valiant effort against undisclosed paid editing. It’s only a handful of us remaining. Celestina007 ( talk) 00:20, 4 June 2021 (UTC) |
I created both Wikipedia:Not Omniscient and Wikipedia:Anti Spam Identity Conceal today and forgot to include the “WP” before the shortcuts as you would observe in both essays, in other not to muddy things up, I thought it wise to meet someone far more experienced than myself in page moving to handle this for me, could you please make the shortcourt in a manner that “WP” is included in each shortcut title? For example can you move SHAPESHIFT to WP:SHAPESHIFT and do the same for all? I think I have muddied things and don’t want accidentally muddy it more. Celestina007 ( talk) 00:37, 4 June 2021 (UTC)
Good day User:Blablubbs! I come to you for help again because I noticed a user who is possibly another sockpuppet of Ajhenson21. The user in question is one Garette24. I looked into when the account was created and it was around the same time that the last sockpuppet of Ajhenson21 was blocked. The user edits the same set of pages, with particular emphasis on Ang Probinsyano and its related pages. The editing behavior is likewise similar as the user focuses on updating episodes of Ang Probinsyano and other primetime shows broadcast by ABS-CBN and/or its partners. Can we run a CU on the said user? Thank you and warmest regards Gardo Versace ( talk) 06:41, 4 June 2021 (UTC)
TW
button. In the dropdown menu, select ARV
, and then choose Sockpuppet (WP:SPI)
in the dropdown menu. In the sockpuppeteer
field, type Ajhenson21
, and present your evidence in the box below, ideally using
diffs that clearly show similarities between Ajhenson (and/or their previous socks) and the account that you're reporting. To request CU, simply tick the checkbox, and then click Submit Query
. If you don't want to use twinkle, you can navigate to
WP:SPI, hit the "show" button for the "How to open an investigation:" box and then use the wizard below. --
Blablubbs|
talk 11:44, 4 June 2021 (UTC)
Hi I was trying to figure out why my username was implicated as well and came across this thread. I suddenly received several wiki emails about this user joelani sacdalan claiming my username as one of his accounts. I have not been active lately due to other activities taking me away from Wikipedia editing. I hope this guy gets blocked, and am concerned that he used my username. I am not associated with this guy. Thanks! Pipamidalton ( talk)
Thank you for responding quickly and acting on this swiftly. These type of folks are a nuisance and should be blocked. Their actions frustrate editors who have put in so much effort in improving wiki pages. More power to all you do to protect pages from vandals. Pipamidalton ( talk) 20:04, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
Case in point: User:Anisur365 which uses {{ blockedsock}}, which I don't parse correctly because when I wrote my parsing code, I didn't even know it existed. -- RoySmith (talk) 15:09, 4 June 2021 (UTC)
{{
blocked sockpuppet}}
will be gone soon, at least. My main concern is how some of the templates work by default; {{
sock|Example|suspected}}
and {{
sock|Example}}
produce "An editor has expressed a concern that this account may be a sockpuppet of Example", which is an issue since
WP:HSOCK mandates only blocked socks be tagged and it's pretty counterintuitive for the person doing the tagging.
ToBeFree has removed it from the documentation, but it still exists and is still used (sometimes by admins who don't realise that using the template with no parameters doesn't mark accounts as blocked, sometimes by editors who think the tag should be placed because the template variant does exist after all – I'd be in favour of prohibiting non-clerk/admin tagging altogether, but that's an entirely different discussion). I wrote some more about this
here, but unfortunately it hasn't generated much discussion – in short, fixing that would need a bot job. {{
sockpuppeteer|checked=yes}}
should probably also not exist. Another gripe of mine is {{
IPsock}}
, which also violates HSOCK by default and is often misused (see also
this thread above); I think that one should be deprecated entirely. I think simplifying and correcting the templates and redirects is one thing (I could probably figure out how to do that by just stealing code from elsewhere until things start working), but actually making it work would require a bot job to tweak or remove many existing templates since they're all transclusions. I'd try to work on it, but my programming knowledge is limited to running some statistical tests in R, and I wouldn't even know where to begin. --
Blablubbs|
talk 15:26, 4 June 2021 (UTC)Hi Blablubbs, I'm the alleged sockpuppet of MPSCL, [4] sorry if I come to disturb you here. I just wanted to point out that the user who reported me is using that SPI, in addition to making me ashamed in front of other users, to block an entire RFC. [5] I'm not going to say "hurry" but... at least now you know the situation.-- Mhorg ( talk) 17:36, 4 June 2021 (UTC)
You know better than I do, so i thought it wise to ask, are usage of VPN's allowed here? I’m sure there’s a policy or an essay regarding that I haven’t the time (right now) to begin digging, and if yes? Isn’t that going to be a major problem for CheckUsers? Celestina007 ( talk) 18:54, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
Hi, if you haven't already, please take a look at the above case, the tug-of-war between Jesse Rafe and me, and the post I made to Jesse's page a few moments ago, trying to explain why he should let go and what he can do in the future.
I know you can't merge the case because you're not an admin, but as a clerk, you can justifiably control the comments by other users. If I let Jesse comment, then I have to let Sucker for All defend himself, not to mention another user you'll see in the mix who has also demonstrated his desire to argue about what's happening, and none of that is useful given the unusual circumstances; it will only clutter the whole thing.
I wish an admin clerk would take care of the merge, but I don't know how to make that happen other than what I've already done.-- Bbb23 ( talk) 20:23, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
Celestina007 ( talk) 01:04, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
Regarding this, I've no problem not putting in the extra work for the boring VOAs. Generally, I think two things may be useful to keep in the archives: enough documention of particular behaviour (here, it's probably the pages on battles), and, enough fresh socks for a CU or behavioural comparison. Disclaimer: I am not known for my clerking skills. -- zzuuzz (talk) 06:36, 9 June 2021 (UTC)
Sock |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
Can you please deal with Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Adventurehqdubai? Sainthbabu is continuing to spam today like the blocked Adventurehqdubai did. v. Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Volunteer Marek, it has become a shitstorm and is beyond what I can wrap my little mind around. I lodged this because they said ( here and here) that they edited the article first, before me, and because they reintroduced the blocked vandal's edit (Masdafizdo). I found All for Poland diff diving through the recent editing and saw the similarities, but that's all I know about that one. I was also suspicious because the Volunteer made many references to new accounts and socking and I thought that was a sign of a guilty conscience. But it is too complicated, and there is too much history there, I won't post there again unless there are questions for me. VikingDrummer ( talk) 19:44, 9 June 2021 (UTC) |
Thank you for welcoming me. I had a question for you about my first edit. I'm trying to find out why my dates at Tim Lucas put up error messages. I tried to figure it out myself but there are about a thousand pages of Wikipedia instructions. Are you the right person to ask? TheHorror TheHorror ( talk) 15:20, 10 June 2021 (UTC)
Never mind. An editor named User:Keith D went in and wrote the names of the months out. I guess that was it. Where would I have gone to find this out in the instructions? Thank you. TheHorror TheHorror ( talk) 15:22, 10 June 2021 (UTC)
Hello, regarding your diff here, why did you choose to restore (remove from hat) two edits which do nothing but cast aspersions, call for unjustified admin intervention and provide no proof, but remove my edit which contained a cross-reference between past emails of Marek and this sockpuppet? I understand some of my comments could come off as having a "personal attack" tone, but I believe the information is relevant and of use. CPCEnjoyer ( talk) 16:20, 10 June 2021 (UTC)
I have a general question. Checkuser made a comment: "Inconclusive W.R.T. [user name] due to proxy use (they have ip block exempt)" What does it mean? I assume checkuser means they can not make any conclusion, so that a sockpuppetry can be established based only on behavior evidence? Hence this still can be a sockpuppet account? More important, does it mean that any named user who uses proxies is immune to the SP investigations? That would be strange. If anything, the editing by a named account through proxy should indicate the intention to evade an SP investigation. Thank you. My very best wishes ( talk) 14:20, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
{{
possible}}
– CU doesn't prove or disprove anything in cases like this. It does not mean that anyone on proxy is immune from
WP:SOCK. --
Blablubbs|
talk 15:11, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
![]() |
Whack! You've been whacked with a wet trout. Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know that you did something silly. |
For doing so much high-quality administrative work but not running for adminship. I will be the first to support you. Scorpions13256 ( talk) 00:12, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
Proxy hopper: [6]. I think this is master account. But unfortunately, I made a misprint in their name while submitting the SPI case. My very best wishes ( talk) 17:40, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
Hello Blablubbs, FYI I attempted to add another account at the SPI but got into an edit conflict with you - you may want to review the case in the event that it changes the endorsement. Thanks, Pahunkat ( talk) 16:50, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
Hi, Blablubbs. Thank you for your help the other day. I'm slowly trying to read all the many, many rules and I think this one paragraph at Tim Lucas violates a couple:
One of Lucas' film scripts, The Man with Kaleidoscope Eyes (co-written with Charlie Largent), a comedy about the filming of Roger Corman's 1967 film The Trip is currently optioned by Metaluna Productions for director Joe Dante. In October 2016, the script was the subject of a live table reading at the Vista Theater in Los Angeles, promoted as "The Best Film Never Made." The performance starred Bill Hader as Corman, Roger Corman himself as Roger Today, Ethan Embry as Jack Nicholson, and Claudia O'Doherty as Corman's longtime assistant Frances Doel. [1] Lucas has reportedly since adapted the script as a novel, but no release has yet been announced.
If I /info/en/?search=Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Dates_and_numbers#Statements_likely_to_become_outdated correctly, "terms such as now, currently, to date, so far, soon, and recently should usually be avoided in favor of phrases such as during the 2010s, since 2010, and in August 2020." So we should just say "is optioned as of (whatever date I can find to cite this)"? I think that applies to "no release has yet been announced" also?
And second, and I don't remember where I saw it, but are we supposed to use the word "reportedly"? Something doesn't feel right with that. TheHorror TheHorror ( talk) 21:51, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
Oh, I did remove this sentence since it read like /info/en/?search=Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view#Describing_aesthetic_opinions_and_reputations "Describing aesthetic opinions" without a footnote: "The novel was generally overlooked upon publication but can be seen in hindsight as the point of origin for the " mash-up" horror novels that rose to commercial prominence at the end of the decade, for its incorporation of approximately 50 pages of Stoker's novel into the weave of its original narrative." Was I right to do that or should I have put a "citation needed" by it? I can put it back. I'm still learning. TheHorror TheHorror ( talk) 21:57, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
References
I saw T280844 and thought of you. I wouldn't be surprised if this is some kind of malware using that page as an innocent-looking probe for network connectivity. -- RoySmith (talk) 14:24, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
Hi. Please see this thread at ANI that you have been involved in. Thanks. Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 16:45, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
prior sending you an email, this text pops up: Hello! Before you email me, please note that: Unless a matter is private, I prefer to be contacted via my talk page, as this gives better transparency. If extra security is needed, please encrypt your email using my PGP public key, which you can find here. I reserve the right to forward or publish any or all of the email contents at my discretion. I will not do so except in exceptional circumstances (that is, cases where partial or full disclosure is necessary to protect the integrity and safety of the project or the health and safety of its members). How in Gods name did you pull that off? Can you teach me? Celestina007 ( talk) 18:14, 19 June 2021 (UTC)
Hi Blablubbs, you are good with IP stuff. What do you make of 213.172.123.242 ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) WHOIS information (myHome?)? S0091 ( talk) 21:59, 19 June 2021 (UTC)
This is pertaining to security. Celestina007 ( talk) 18:28, 23 June 2021 (UTC)
Oops! Should I have just added the report to the main casepage and then just had a clerk archive it, then? I figured that would have been a pain in the ass. jp× g 20:23, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
![]() |
The Barnstar of Diligence |
For your hard work at SPI, thank you. We're better off as an encyclopedia because of you. KevinL (aka L235 · t · c) 06:17, 27 June 2021 (UTC) |
First, using the spi helper script, is there a way to block/tag and close at the same time? Second, I just disposed of Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Starboyedits, and I swear I checked the box that puts a block notice on the master's Talk page, but it didn't happen. I slapped a standard notice on Starboy's Talk page for socking with Twinkle, but it didn't refer back to the SPI, which would have been helpful. Third, and last, is the fact that the "Editor interaction utility" link doesn't work correctly known? Very annoying. Thanks.-- Bbb23 ( talk) 23:30, 29 June 2021 (UTC)
Block/tag socks
and Close SPI
, the script will do both in one go. I unfortunately can't help with the second question because that part of the script doesn't show without the sysop flag; paging
GeneralNotability who may be able to help. The editorinteract thing is a known issue. As far as I can tell, the link gets filled for filings that are made using the main SPI page, but not for ones done with Twinkle (compare e.g. the editorinteract bit in
this Twinkle filing with the one in
this non-twinkle one; the link works for the former, but not the latter). I personally use
https://spi-tools.toolforge.org/ for editorinteract – type in the SPI name (there's a list of current cases, you can type in the full name and it will work with archived ones as well) and hit "Interactions", that should take you to a properly filled EIA. It might be worth bringing this up with the Twinkle maintainers for a "proper" fix. I hope this helps. Best,
Blablubbs|
talk 23:49, 29 June 2021 (UTC)
Oh man, talk about good cop, bad cop :-) -- RoySmith (talk) 18:26, 30 June 2021 (UTC)
I just wanted to show you that I've learned how to cite books! See "Origins" at Fangoria! The Horror, The Horror ( talk) 14:57, 2 July 2021 (UTC)
Hi RoySmith and Blablubbs. Archiving of UAK went wrong due to renaming the archive. I'm not sure how to fix it, perhaps you could look into it? (Posting on both of your user talk pages.) Trijnstel talk 13:50, 4 July 2021 (UTC)
You don't get it. It's fine to have two pages. But please remove the redirect then (on the top of the page). Trijnstel talk 13:56, 4 July 2021 (UTC)
Hi Blablubbs, As you are the page mover . I request to move this article List of districts of Nepal to List of districts in Nepal.Which you can see detail information of talk page of that article.( Fade258 ( talk) 14:41, 7 July 2021 (UTC))
I think you misread one of the two IPs (69.158.90.121 and 69.156.107.94) as the /16 range you mentioned is not possible. I don't normally favor editing archives, but I would delete your comment in this instance.-- Bbb23 ( talk) 13:22, 13 July 2021 (UTC)
![]() |
Thanks for filling in some key details I left out on my SPI report. Keep up the great work! Yeeno ( talk) 🍁 03:59, 15 July 2021 (UTC) |
Given User talk:Doug Weller#I amediting wiki and the post above, I'd think the blocks could be changed now to reflect probable socking. What say you? Doug Weller talk 14:21, 20 July 2021 (UTC)
( edit conflict)I'd forgotten about the lack of edit summaries for one account, although I noticed it at the time. Hadn't thought of a joe-job. I'm happy with the status quo now. Thanks. Doug Weller talk 15:11, 20 July 2021 (UTC)
See Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Myers Court, as an example, but this has happened before. I blocked the puppet without tags, but it asks me for the name of the master. Why?-- Bbb23 ( talk) 21:03, 21 July 2021 (UTC)
![]() |
The Barnstar of Diligence |
Need I say what this is for? Ah! Okay, for your tireless efforts at SPI. Celestina007 ( talk) 19:50, 22 July 2021 (UTC) |
Hi, Re. Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Vikhyat Dubey Virat Brothers/Archive, User:Vikhyat Dubey is certainly the oldest account and thus the master. It would be consistent to move the SPI to master, will you agree? Cheers, — kashmīrī TALK 11:41, 24 July 2021 (UTC)
Hi Blablubbs, but also @ Possibly and TSventon:.
Yeasterday, Bédévore (who works on fr-wp, like me, on SPI and, moreover, promotion/COI/UPE) and I had an idea, following en:Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/MARdF (thanks for the ping, btw). When we discover, on a specific wiki, abuses like promotion/UPE/COI that are cross-wiki, it's not always easy to know how to alert other wikis. Here, you pinged me because we already cooperated in the past, but for example, TSventon asked if we did know trusted users on es, hu and pt... and as for me, no.
So here is the idea: create a hub (a page, in fact) on metawiki with volunteer referents/contacts for as many wikis as possible, and a talk page for coordination on big cross-wiki cases. The volunteer referents/contacts would be wikipedians used to SPI, fighting promotion and UPE; if they have a role (sysop, CU, this could be indicated, along with the languages spoken). For example, in our case, we could have reached contacts/referents listed on this page and/or use the talk page as a way to coordinate.
To create such a hub would request, obviously, to look for other people invested in fighting UPE, promotion, etc., and to make some publicity for this new hub on other wikis. This would be an occasion to create a bit of an international coordination against UPE and more broadly uses of Wikipedia for promotion. On fr-wp, we have a fr:Projet:Antipub, but not that much contacts with collegues from other wikis.
What do you think about it?
Best regards, Jules* ( talk) 10:43, 25 July 2021 (UTC)
Hi @
Giraffer,
TSventon,
Blablubbs, and
MER-C:. Before reaching out other wikis, we are going to create a draft of this coordination page on Metawiki. Do you have an idea for the name/title in English (it will be translated in other languages, obviously)? "Anti-advertising coordination"? "Cross-wiki anti-advertising group"? My English level is basic, so you may find something better
. (I would like to avoid names with "ambassadors", as this page may be used to coordinate investigations too, beyond the list of users willing to help.) —
Jules*
Talk 15:27, 29 July 2021 (UTC)
Thank you for your help with this. Now all the users have been blocked, what action is needed on removing non notable content in other Wikipedias? Will SPI checkers already be on the case? Or could that wait until your idea takes shape. TSventon ( talk) 16:45, 25 July 2021 (UTC)
Thanks Blablubbs and Jules*. Probably an English language noticeboard for a Wikipedia like Chinese will work better than a machine translation. TSventon ( talk) 10:39, 28 July 2021 (UTC)
Hello Blablubbs, for us non technical editors, reading some technical related polices and guidelines still go over our heads. I have read WP:Committed identity/ Commitment scheme but still cannot understand it, can you give me a detailed explanation(if you can’t due to time ) can you in summary tell me what it’s about? Celestina007 ( talk) 18:01, 25 July 2021 (UTC)
test
, you get ee26b0dd4af7e749aa1a8ee3c10ae9923f618980772e473f8819a5d4940e0db27ac185f8a0e1d5f84f88bc887fd67b143732c304cc5fa9ad8e6f57f50028a8ff
. If you use the same algorithm on testtest
, you get 125d6d03b32c84d492747f79cf0bf6e179d287f341384eb5d6d3197525ad6be8e6df0116032935698f99a09e265073d1d6c32c274591bf1d0a20ad67cba921bc
etc. Really minor changes in the input string will produce massive differences in the output hash.It's not important how they work exactly on a mathematical level (I don't understand that either), but a good hash function has two properties that are of interest to us: First, that it's
deterministic, which means that if you run the same algorithm on the same string, you always get the same result, and second that it's irreversible, meaning that it's extremely hard (basically impossible) to get the original string by looking at its hashed value. This means, for example, that while putting test
into SHA-512sum will always give you ee26b0dd4af7e...
, you can't use ee26b0dd4af7e...
to deduce what was originally encoded.One common use of these functions is to store passwords. Any website operator worth their money won't be storing passwords in plain text, they will be storing the hashes of these passwords. The database won't know that your password is test
, it will only know that your password's hash is ee26b0dd4af7e...
. If the database gets stolen, the security impact is mitigated because nobody actually knows your password, they only know its irreversible hash, which is pretty useless on its own if you use a strong and unique password (and not something like "test", which is extremely easy to guess).For committed identity schemes, we essentially do the same thing. In cases of account compromise, one crucial step is to be able to verify whether or not one is speaking to the original account holder. Say I hash the string Name: Bla Blubber, Tel: +49 123 438 23 43, 23 Example Lane, Somevillage, Examplistan
, I get the hash 51e5a09f00428659030ef9d9cd3a7b54cbd10ef411aeea1450cd43f759e7721261e6dc4a43391ba2968872bab747bbb618a63205ed12b9f12006cb763c5d8696
and can put that on my userpage. I don't tell anyone what my secret string is, but I do make a note of it somewhere. If my account gets compromised and I go knocking at WMF T&S, they will probably ask how they can be sure that they are actually speaking to Blablubbs and not an imposter. I can then provide them the input string Name: Bla Blubber, Tel: +49 123 438 23 43, 23 Example Lane, Somevillage, Examplistan
and they can hash it for themselves, thereby proving that my identity is clearly linked with the committed identity on my userpage, and take it from there – they could even call me to make sure that the person contacting them is actually the person operating that phone number. However, nobody will be able to tell what my name, phone number and address is just from looking at my userpage because the hashing process is irreversible (assuming you use a good algorithm).Does that make sense? --
Blablubbs (
talk) 08:36, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
Hi,
You might recall I contacted you some time back, thanking you for your excellent work on Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/VentureKit.
Well, this is a never-ending job; I watch some of the articles on leaders of Gulf area; the problem is that they use millions of dollars (literally!) on so-called "reputation management". Lots of these leaders (who are virtually all deeply undemocratic, with absolutely dismal human rights records) tend to end up haveing very pretty biographies on wp.
I noticed the VentureKit-socks on Yousef Al Otaiba; I didn't keep my eye on it for about a year, and all what the socks tried to remove (with no support from WP:BLP-board) magically disappeared.
Ah well; I am not a very good sock-hunter, but someone should look into it?
This is a Sisyphean work, I'm afraid,
Cheers, Huldra ( talk) 23:51, 25 July 2021 (UTC)
This account? It is obviously not a new user. They copied this user page at some point, but I think they just used it as template, though the description on their user page do not jive with their contributions (ignoring their user pages and multiple Wiki project registrations, is rapid fire reverts of anonymous IP editors only).-- Eostrix ( 🦉 hoot hoot🦉) 09:22, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
![]() |
Bruh, socks are a thing? Find those stinky socks and sock them! I swear to thee I shall never be a sock around these here parts. Gyofh ( talk) 11:26, 27 July 2021 (UTC) |
Hi Blablubbs - hope you are well. Thank you for your excellent work with this SPI case. If you don't mind, I have a technical question for you! As you know the editor jumps from IP range to IP range, going back-and-fourth from the 103.74.xxx.xxx range to the 117.228.xxx.xxx range. Is this a choice by the editor, or is the IP address decided by the host ISP at the point the user logs on? More for my own curiosity than anything else. Thanks. Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 17:01, 27 July 2021 (UTC)
BSNL-GSM-westZone
;
GSM stands for "Global System for Mobile Communications"). Fortunately, both ISPs appear to have sensible assignment patterns (i.e. users stay on a single, relatively narrow range for extended periods of time), which isn't a given considering the country. I hope this helps, please let me know if you have any other questions. --
Blablubbs (
talk) 09:47, 28 July 2021 (UTC)Hello Blablubbs,
I hope you are well.
There is this user named "Accidental-usurpation" that I am almost certain is a sockpuppet of an indefinitely blocked user named "BaxçeyêReş". The account was created a day after BaxçeyêReş was banned, and the types of edits "Accidental-usurpation" makes are extremely similar to the ones BaxçeyêReş made, like removing Azerbaijani names/translations from the article introductions, changing the language in the templates, and etc.
The kind of language "Accidental-usurpation" uses also seems extremely similar to that of BaxçeyêReş. I mean maybe you yourself would notice, both use archaic, kind of "exaggerated", overly formal language, such as "Thank you so much for your swift and lucid response" here, you can check other examples from BaxçeyêReş's account where he writes, the style seems very very similar, if not identical.
Both users also claim to be "neutral" like on BaxçeyêReş's main page, "Both Azerbaijan and Armenia" kind of deal, but then similarly to the blocked account, the new account only edits on Azerbaijan-related pages.
Also, the new account very quickly went on the talk-page of the banning administrator and started naming all these experienced users that stick to Armenia/Azerbaijan pages i.e "WimpyDood, BaxceyeRes, Parishan, NMW03, Brandmeister, Grandmaster, KhndzorUtogh", which is unusual for a new user to know the editors. The user also started indirectly defending BaxçeyêReş with what-aboutism, "Azerbaijani users do it, it's not fair!" sort of thing here
I have several other concerns I could write about, but basically it's a long list of similarities that I simply don't believe are coincidences. You yourself I think got slighly suspicious here, similarly to this user here who created an account immideatly after BaxçeyêReş was banned and started a sockpuppet investigation into me here. Also both "Accidental-usurpation" and "PuhPaayYuh" both claim to have been IP spectators. Now I don't know how many "ip spectators" there are on Wikipedia that never edit but simply observe the editing environment, but I imagine not many.
I want to file for Sockpuppet Investigation basically. Just wanted to ask your personal thoughts on this as a person who deal with this kind of stuff?
Thank you in advance for your response, - WimpyDood ( talk) 07:26, 28 July 2021 (UTC)
How is anyone to know what's going on with an unblock request when the only record of what's going on is in a deleted SPI? --jpgordon 𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇 20:55, 29 July 2021 (UTC)
Regarding this: you know what it means when people start to mistake you for an admin, right? You'd have my support! ☿ Apaugasma ( talk ☉) 15:04, 31 July 2021 (UTC)
I put the template on User talk:Chesterwhy, but I don't see it listed in the SPI table. My memory is that CU needed pages are listed. Did that change?-- Bbb23 ( talk) 19:48, 1 August 2021 (UTC)
I've just blocked:
for likely UPE. I'm sure I've seen this particular abuse pattern and its distinctive feature before, but where? MER-C 19:21, 2 August 2021 (UTC)
{{DEFAULTSORT}}
thing a lot, but they aren't really consistent behaviourally outside of that. Maybe a friendly talk page watcher knows? --
Blablubbs (
talk) 21:54, 2 August 2021 (UTC)Celestina007 ( talk) 16:32, 3 August 2021 (UTC)
Hello Blablubbs, I noticed your comment on Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Hums4r and thought of a fifth group, Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Thamesinfotech (which likely does UPE contribs here as well). On reflection, I think two of the groups could be related - could you drop by the Thamesinfotech SPI to see may later remarks and give your opinion? Pahunkat ( talk) 15:18, 4 August 2021 (UTC)
I've run into this in a few cases, where I've made reports and the users end up getting CU blocked interdependently of the case (or the case isn't updated by the blocker). In a case like this one (I created it, and all users and now blocked for socking, potentially the only loose end is a global lock requests), can I tag it closed by myself? Or is that only for clerks?-- Eostrix ( 🦉 hoot hoot🦉) 08:33, 5 August 2021 (UTC)
Something bad happened to me at the Wikimedia commons Administrator's thread that led to a one week ban. The user Noncreativephotographer was spitting my name everywhere and keep abusing me as a vandal, asking each and every admin to block me by pointing an anonymous IP address. These guys along with an anonymous IP are hell bend in creating allegations against me on Wikipedia projects as I saw the very recent SPI investigation against me. R.C Outlander07@talk 14:14, 5 August 2021 (UTC)
Hey, saw your comment at
User_talk:Orlaw66#Unblock_request, any chance you could throw together an SPI for the accounts I mentioned there? Be interesting to find the oldest one/see if y'all know which farm they're from? In my books, they're all Technically indistinguishable ~
TNT (she/her •
talk) 17:55, 6 August 2021 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
Wolfdietrich Schnurre you nominated for
GA-status according to the
criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
PinkElixir --
PinkElixir (
talk) 13:20, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
Hello Blablubbs,
I hope you are well. Perhaps you might remember the ClassicYoghurt/BaxçeyêReş sockpuppeting case? well judging by what I've gathered the banned sockpuppeteer might be back and I opened a new case [9]. It is possible I am wrong but frankly seems clear as day to me personally. I just wanted to bring your attention to it, maybe if you have time you could check it out and let me know what you think? you were involved in the original case so I was thinking I would ask you. - WimpyDood ( talk) 16:55, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
Is there a different way I should be reporting obvious IP socks? ScottishFinnishRadish ( talk) 23:02, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
Hi! I blocked both of the /24 ranges that you requested. But what is the extra meaning of reinforcing the global block with a local hardblock. Isn't the global block on Special:Contributions/185.217.117.0/24 already a hardblock? Thanks, EdJohnston ( talk) 20:54, 14 August 2021 (UTC)
Hello Blablubbs, I hope all is well. I am here requesting your opinion if that's fine - this user right here [10] seems like someone's sockpuppet given the complexity of their edits and given how suddenly they began editing starting the 3rd of August, but I'm not entirely sure.
Seems like a high possibility of it being ClassicYoghurt given they were banned on 28th July, and then the 3rd of August is only a couple of days after, that the possible sleeper started working. They don't leave edit summaries so can't really go off of those. Even if it's not ClassicYoghurt, seems like a high possibility it's a sock of someone else.
What do you think about this? Should I add this case to the ClassicYoghurt SPI page?
p.s. they edit almost exclusively on Azerbaijan-related pages like ClassicYoghurt, and ClassicYoghurt had made similar template edits in the past to this account.
Thank you - WimpyDood ( talk) 22:34, 14 August 2021 (UTC)
Yeah, I did notice that. I was tempted to just blow the report off, but the sockiness was clear. I'm sure the deeper one digs on this one, the more badness one will discover. -- RoySmith (talk) 21:06, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
Do you recall when I asked you if someone in (for example Nigeria or any nation) can make their IP address appear as though they were in a different country/continent? I’m pretty sure you must have laughed real hard at how “not tech savvy” i was, This month, in order to successfully track down a particular editor and an a particular organization allegedly contracting out undisclosed paid jobs for “Wikipedia editors for hire on Twitter” I've been experimenting with VPN trial versions and now I know you literally can make yourself look as though you are in a different continent altogether. Even though the VPN has helped me track down the editor in question I honestly don’t think it’s necessarily a good thing, and honestly, I believe it should be scrapped or editors using it to edit Wikipedia be indef blocked, I mean, how on earth could SPI clerks like yourself carry out your duties effectively and efficiently with the existential nature of VPN's? Especially when an SPI is opened? Oh boy , I don’t envy you clerks your duties are as arduous and tedious as they come. I just realized that I do not necessarily need to see what’s happening on Twitter or Upwork anymore and Luckily for the collaborative project I can perfectly analyze Nigerian sources and if I see any dubious Nigerian articles, I’d perform a source analysis an send to AFD or draftify the article like I did here. I copied you in an email, did it reach you? Did you see it? Celestina007 ( talk) 23:03, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
![]() | This 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. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | → | Archive 9 |