Serge's 33rd iteration of his own personal
WP:AIV and
WP:RFPP. Feel free to report anything you feel may need admin intervention.
Sergecross73msg me 21:20, 30 December 2023 (UTC)reply
Looks like he's on the verge of needing something, but I don't think he's messed up again since ferret gave him the warning of being indeffed if he adds any more unsourced content?
Sergecross73msg me 11:52, 10 January 2024 (UTC)reply
I've been waffling on whether they've crossed the line or not. --
ferret (
talk) 15:11, 10 January 2024 (UTC)reply
To me it looked like they do the same things some other problematic editors who refuse to use sources do instead of changing - simply make minor tweaks that don't require sources. Which usually isn't sustainable and leads to unsourced editing again when they think no one is looking anymore. So a block will probably be needed...eventually. Unless they turn it around.
Sergecross73msg me 15:15, 10 January 2024 (UTC)reply
He created a second account
User:Jalos92 which was blocked indefinitely and he was warned.
Timur9008 (
talk) 16:09, 10 January 2024 (UTC)reply
I gave them a final warning, and a bit of an explanation, as I'm not sure all the templated responses necessarily conveyed the issues. But there's little room for confusion now. Let me know if it happens further. Thanks.
Sergecross73msg me 17:25, 10 January 2024 (UTC)reply
Its not a competence issue instead of engaing in the talk page your reverting my edits even when clearly the other user was at fault.
Inteqaam (
talk) 11:24, 28 January 2024 (UTC)reply
Thanks anyway! Different question: what do you make of
SomeWeb (
talk·contribs)? Here for four and half years, 19 edits, all related to pornography, including adding inappropriate external links. They received several warnings.
WP:NOTHERE?
soetermans.
↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 18:10, 28 January 2024 (UTC)reply
Hey Sergecross73, did you see my previous message? If no action is needed I understand, but at the same time I feel that if an editor would do those kind of edits in a very short they would be indeffed quickly. Thoughts?
soetermans.
↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 11:09, 2 February 2024 (UTC)reply
Yes, sorry, I did miss this. It looks like it came through around the same time as a bunch of other messages.
I gave the guy a more comprehensive warning about sources, but since his damage to the project is fairly minimal (he edits pretty infrequently) I didn't think it was time to jump to a block yet.
Sergecross73msg me 12:24, 2 February 2024 (UTC)reply
JustYourImaginaryGuy(
talk·contribs·deleted contribs·nuke contribs·logs·filter log·block user·block log) This guy is completely robotically obsessed with ruining images and getting reverted, sometimes by himself. They're almost all replacing photos with no problems, or just blatantly downgraded in quality, with the subject's face obscured, or from past years
for no reason. Just needlessly disruptive, even of Good articles like
Steve Jobs. Check the Talk page of endless blatant pointless violations. All falsely marked
WP:MINOR for no reason at all and with no
WP:EDITSUMMARY. He even already got blocked for spamming page protection requests and still did it repeatedly after, like
this. It's a completely disruptive and unresponsive nuisance. Thank you. — Smuckola(talk) 06:31, 17 February 2024 (UTC)reply
As I sadly predicted, he carried right on. He replaced three photos using no edit summary and falsely flagged as minor, including one without updating the caption
[1]. And of course no response to anybody on Talk. — Smuckola(talk) 21:59, 19 February 2024 (UTC)reply
He kept ignoring me despite another shot too, so he's is blocked.
Sergecross73msg me 13:17, 20 February 2024 (UTC)reply
Sam Willard (
talk·contribs) This guy is
WP:MEATBOT spamming
WP:OR about supposed census data with no sources and with
WP:LEAD violation. Maybe it's AGF of the lowest order of
WP:CIR but I believe he will never stop or acknowledge without a block. Is there a mass revert function? Thanks. — Smuckola(talk) 10:26, 18 February 2024 (UTC)reply
Blocked. While I'd be more sympathetic if it was simply someone trying to learn the website still, some of the edits were just blatant vandalism that there's no reason to believe anyone would think are okay, whether you understood the website or not. I did give them a path to being unblocked though. We'll see if they engage or not.
Sergecross73msg me 17:32, 18 February 2024 (UTC)reply
Ok thanks. It is an unreal scam, that Wikipedia has a corporate prime directive to honeypot everybody on the planet into editing this site and officially uses every lie that we desperately need them and their every contribution, without requiring or even offering any qualifications or training or reputation, and barely even an automated attempt to scan for or report blatant rulebreaking. Or even track abuse once we dig it up! The
toxic positivity culture mandates that we coddle the abusers and blame the victims for being needlessly angered or for reacting responsibly, and nobody ever implicates or even mentions the corrupt governance, or even ensures the cleanup. This just cheaply hides behind Internet anonymity, and no physical system could ever survive this culture of abuse akin to American gun laws where pages like this one are our "thoughts and prayers". I don't even know where in WMF to track and vote on such policies. So anyway, is there any mass-revert function for this guy's meatbot spam? He injected alleged 2020 numbers in articles that have no 2020 sources! — Smuckola(talk) 21:46, 19 February 2024 (UTC)reply
I don't know of any mass-revert options outside of
WP:ROLLBACK rights, which I'd probably less than what you're looking for.
Sergecross73msg me 00:29, 20 February 2024 (UTC)reply
ComputerUserUser (
talk·contribs) This is a
WP:TENDENTIOUS problem user who is 100% aggressively and hatefully combative and edit warring as you can see on his Talk page. If you disagree, you're wrong. If you help, you're wrong. Never an
WP:EDITSUMMARY, tons of needlessly spammed micro-edits per article, and tons of needless edits among some good edits. Lots of
WP:OR because he is absolutely
WP:NOTHERE and this is his nostalgic toy. He
WP:OWNs this site, and is at the point of vindictiveness against correction. This and the last two editors I reported here have aggressively obliterated countless hours of my time (and of others) just reviewing and often reverting, I state every bit of help and I state my goal of enhancing their efforts and preventing them from being blocked, they are hateful, there are more in the swamp that I just can't even bring myself to report because I doubt anybody will do anything, and it super sucks. — Smuckola(talk) 21:03, 19 February 2024 (UTC)reply
Smuckola appears to be feeling upset due to his difficulty in managing situations where others exhibit behavior similar to his own.
ComputerUserUser (
talk) 23:33, 19 February 2024 (UTC)reply
This is too vague to take action on. I'd need difs. And context too. It's easy for me to take action when people make blatant falsehoods like "
Nintendo created
Mario in 1864". I can't just eyeball issues related to tweaks on things like fluorescent lamps and LCD screens.
Sergecross73msg me 00:28, 20 February 2024 (UTC)reply
Ok sorry bro, but for starters did ya check his exhaustive Talk page and his preposterously abusive responses that disavow the existence of any and all policy because he
WP:OWNs the world? He's explicitly anti
WP:EDITSUMMARY and anti
MOS:TENSE and such, way more than all the others lately. Thanks for listening and trying. I can also dig up diffs from the timeframe of those warnings on his Talk page. He has a
WP:TENDENTIOUS pattern of spitefully vindictive edit warring like
this latest one, where he arbitrarily reverts a perfectly correct edit simply because I am the one who made it. Regarding his
above comment, I had to read it several times because it's so nonsensically twisted with spite, but he's simply taunting us for even questioning any of his edits on this site that he
WP:OWNs. I'll try to look for more but I've been so wrecked by endless abusers for so long, including two problem editors who also happen to be admins, one of whom I emailed you extensively about and mentioned here twice a few months ago. I haven't made any new content forever and I see countless others give up and leave Wikipedia. — Smuckola(talk) 01:46, 20 February 2024 (UTC)reply
Jimthing (
talk·contribs) is exactly the same, except only
WP:OR or garbage citations. He cites mainly nothing at all, secondly tech support notes or forum posts, and occasionally a lot of anti-
WP:RS like Daily Mail which are so bad that the system flagged a warning and NikkiMaria has auto-deleted them. But no
WP:RS ever, and he aggressively combats the very notion of
WP:RS as you can see on
Apple community,
Shazam (app), and their talk pages, especially
here where he edit warred and generally combated an admin who was severely remiss in not blocking him. He always instantly deleted all my warnings and my exhaustive attempts to help on his Talk page, without response, or gave an insult once and deleted.
WP:IDIDNTHEARTHAT. With ComputerUserUser and Jimthing (and countless others), I gave very unsolicited tutoring and encouragement, reviewed all their edit history, dutifully (often reluctantly) clicked "thank" on each good one, but received only spite. He
WP:OWNs this site. At the very least, you could engage them please. — Smuckola(talk) 21:12, 19 February 2024 (UTC)reply
You have a history of overstating and misrepresenting facts, don't you. As per my response to your previous cherry-picking my edits and hysterics
here.
Jimthing (
talk) 11:54, 20 February 2024 (UTC)reply
Smuckola makes a few good points - generally speaking, it looks like you should revert less and discuss more, and probably be a bit more careful with the sources you use. But that aside, I'm confused as to why you were reported on Feb 19, when you had been inactive for 3 days. This one is also too vague to act on. I don't see how this would have escalated to a block yet, let alone after 3 days of not editing at all.
Sergecross73msg me 12:10, 20 February 2024 (UTC)reply
Sorry, I missed this one. Looks like they've all went inactive since 2/19 though, so I don't think there's anything to be done unless you catch them at another IP.
Sergecross73msg me 15:49, 23 February 2024 (UTC)reply
They seem to be quick to change, so I don't see a block helping much, and I'm having a hard time seeing where page protection would be helpful either. Reverting the unhelpful edits may be the best approach on this one...
Sergecross73msg me 20:17, 2 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Oh good, glad to hear it. I don't know how to do range blocks, so I couldn't have done that one.
Sergecross73msg me 13:51, 5 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Hey Serge, might you be able to protect
Bbno$? An IP from Vietnam has been blanking content, removing formatting and reverting constructive edits
[2][3][4]. Ss112 15:33, 27 February 2024 (UTC)reply
Hello. So, the edit warring and lack of edit summaries or discussion is of course problematic...but I feel like some of their edits have merit. I'm blanking on the Wiki alphabet soup link, but retail/distribution/storefront links like that generally shouldn't be used as sources on
WP:PROMOTIONal grounds. All those
Apple Music links really ought to go...
Sergecross73msg me 16:24, 27 February 2024 (UTC)reply
The editor is now blocked for blanking sections of another article. To clarify: I didn't add the sources. I don't really care whether they're there or not, but to note, the entries are unsourced without them. I am aware of
WP:AFFILIATE, I cite it all the time myself and I do not personally source content to Apple Music or Spotify. I haven't worked extensively on this article and only came across the edit by chance, but this is indisputably disruptive behaviour. Reverting six intermediate constructive edits of mine for nothing and edit warring to retain the edits makes me overlook any apparent "merit" their edit(s) may have. I still think the article should be protected. Ss112 21:15, 27 February 2024 (UTC)reply
I didn't mean to suggest that you did anything wrong or didn't know any of that, I just meant to say that there seemed to be some salvageable aspects to their otherwise disruptive edits.
Sergecross73msg me 21:20, 27 February 2024 (UTC)reply
2600:8804:A80:60C0:20A5:8BDC:C2BB:B2F0(
talk·contribs·WHOIS) This guy has apparently sockpuppeted three IP addresses in two days (
here and
here) to spam many Apple related pages with "about" templates that are redundant to the legitimate existing "about" template, and full of junk. Plus edit warring about it. — Smuckola(talk) 19:56, 2 March 2024 (UTC)reply
This is not sockpuppetry. Users have no control over the rotation of their IPv6 /64. --
ferret (
talk) 20:05, 2 March 2024 (UTC)reply
And the edits, while not necessary, weren't really that damaging, and were pretty quickly and easily reverted. I don't really see much need for action...
Sergecross73msg me 20:21, 2 March 2024 (UTC)reply
As I said, he already blockably violated
WP:EW. Even if you're going to skip acting on that, yes most were reverted but only at my own risk of
WP:3RR so therefore I need help reverting, like
here. It didnt stop. — Smuckola(talk) 20:42, 2 March 2024 (UTC)reply
I agree that the notices are unneeded...but they're not really vandalism. This should really be handled more like a content dispute. (Talk page discussion, contacting Wikiprojects for input if necessary, etc.) Protection or blocking should only be if they continue even after there's a talk page consensus established.
Sergecross73msg me 22:39, 2 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Protected, encouraged discussion on talk page.
Sergecross73msg me 13:50, 5 March 2024 (UTC)reply
This user made a handful of edits throughout February and March that removed quality information.
Panini!•🥪 16:54, 6 March 2024 (UTC)reply
I think that's another one that I'd say I don't agree with their edits, but I can see how they could be making them in good faith. Probably better handled through reverting, discussion, etc.
Sergecross73msg me 01:47, 7 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Thank you for bringing this to my attention. I cant believe after all their blocks and warnings, they still refuse to stop...
Sergecross73msg me 12:06, 19 March 2024 (UTC)reply
And thank you for the assist. I can't believe it either; those policy violations are just clear as day. After five years, 7k edits, and two blocks (now a third), I'm not sure there's any more
WP:ROPE left to offer.
Left guide (
talk) 12:28, 19 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Thank you for seemingly keeping an eye on editors I'm not keeping an eye on. I've blocked him, with the condition that I'll unblock if he finally starts addressing these issues. Thank you!
Sergecross73msg me 13:56, 24 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Final warned. Which is probably more lenient than they deserve. But blocks are meant to be preventative, and their edits in recent days (probably by luck) aren't as bad.
Sergecross73msg me 00:01, 26 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Definitely gotta keep an eye on this editor; even small seemingly innocuous ones like
thesetwo are problematic since every single other location mentioned in that sentence has an inline citation directly attached to it; originally looked like this:
Many parrots, especially monk parakeets, have been introduced to areas with temperate climates, and have established stable populations in parts of the United States (including New York City),[1] the United Kingdom,[1] Belgium,[1] Spain,[1][1] and Greece.[1]
It truly baffles me how someone can add unsourced entries to a list or series where every single existing entry is already directly supported by an inline citation. Anyways, thanks again for helping out.
Left guide (
talk) 01:39, 26 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Looks like someone beat me to it. They did the same thing I would have though, so it all worked out.
Sergecross73msg me 17:25, 27 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Obvious sockpuppet of Pjesnik21
Hi Serge.
User:Pjesnik21 has re-registered with the account Drolq. You might remember this user is clearly based in the Balkans somewhere as they primarily edit articles of people from that area, pop music articles in general, and they couldn't stop habitually overlinking. The biggest giveaway: Pjesnik21 created
List of number-one singles of 2023 (Croatia), and Drolq has created
List of number-one singles of 2024 (Croatia). You protected the 2023 list so socks couldn't edit for a while, but it expired. Also:
As for the overlinking, look no further than Drolq doing this:
[18].
All seems pretty obvious to me. Ss112 00:54, 18 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Btw Pjesnik21 is continuing to evade their block. @
Ferret and
Ad Orientem: in case it warrants further analysis (I personally don't think it does). Ss112 23:32, 19 March 2024 (UTC)reply
I welcome additional input. I'm stuck at "possible, but is it probable?"
Sergecross73msg me 00:12, 20 March 2024 (UTC)reply
@
Ss112 Confirmed, Blocked and tagged, go forth and
WP:BANREVERT. You should probably be on the look out for more. --
ferret (
talk) 01:53, 20 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Wild 9
Why did you revert the composer on
Wild 9? Dikiciyan is credited as Additional Music with his alias "Sonic Mayhem".
[19] You don't have to add citation on every staff who worked on the game when the info is readily available.
Emiya Mulzomdao (
talk) 11:44, 19 March 2024 (UTC)reply
You need to follow
WP:V, and we're talking about an obscure 25 year old game stuck on the PS1 - that info is not in-fact "readily available" - we must follow
WP:YOUTUBE as well.
Sergecross73msg me 11:53, 19 March 2024 (UTC)reply
That timestamp I linked is an in-game staff roll, which is about as accurate as it can get. What's the template for citing that source?
Emiya Mulzomdao (
talk) 12:01, 19 March 2024 (UTC)reply
No, I'm not talking the YouTube video; I'm trying to cite the staff roll that can be accessed within the video game. I merely posted the YouTube link to show what it looks like.
Emiya Mulzomdao (
talk) 12:11, 19 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Regarding Greenish Pickle!
Greenish Pickle! is continuously removing stuff he/she don't like in the articles even if it's sourced and have engaged in arguments with me and other Wikipedians in the past. Can you please talk to them and warn them. Thanks.
Kazama16 (
talk) 11:28, 23 March 2024 (UTC)reply
The user gave me hate speech (kinda) here
[20] there are more hate speeches directed to me in the past months. But actually we are fine now since the user ended the dispute.
[21]Kazama16 (
talk) 13:30, 23 March 2024 (UTC)reply
I think you both could stand to be a bit nicer to each other, but that's about it. Wikipedia is a collaborative project, especially when you're working on high profile, popular pages like Mario or Link. Disagreements are bound to happen. Just start up discussions on the talk page when that happens, and work towards finding a
WP:CONSENSUS. I watch over the Mario article and can add Link to my
WP:WATCHLIST too.
Sergecross73msg me 14:31, 23 March 2024 (UTC)reply
How about we shouldn't let him edit a highly visible articles like Link and Mario yet? Look at this
[22].
GreenishPickle! (
🔔) 07:18, 24 March 2024 (UTC)reply
I'm really confused, are you jealous of me or something? because you only see negativities in me. How about
[23] and
[24] and also I removed Anime News Network encyclopedic articles because they are unreliable and can be edited by anyone, I also gave this template
[25] in the edit summary but you still reverted my edit. See my friend I don't want any arguments with you and wish the best for you ❤️
Kazama16 (
talk) 14:16, 24 March 2024 (UTC)reply
The heck, why would I get jealous over a naive person with zero achievement?🤡 Also, with that Anime News Network stuff, I self-reverted myself.
GreenishPickle! (
🔔) 22:11, 24 March 2024 (UTC)reply
This same user discussed here also made accusations toward me in
the AfD discussion for Charlie Morningstar and
here, which I do not agree with. AfDs can sometimes get too contentious, so I'll probably lean toward staying away from them in the future. In any case, I will work to be better with commenting in the future.
Historyday01 (
talk) 12:50, 28 March 2024 (UTC)reply
That ones actually not on my watchlist, so I hadn't noticed. Yes, it could be
WP:SOCK or
WP:MEAT violations. Or it could just be a bunch of buddies who joined at the same time or something, and they're all equally unaware of how Wikipedia works. To me, its really only an issue if they're they become disruptive or appear to be
WP:CANVASSing with one another to get their way. Not opposed to others doing a CU if they believe otherwise though, but I'd just work on trying to get them up to speed first.
Sergecross73msg me 17:24, 27 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Hello! Just want to make some clarifications and provide some background into the suspicious influx of multiple likeminded accounts on
Elden Ring. Myself,
Phlogistonatorspam (
talk·contribs),
RoyBokChoy (
talk·contribs), and
IAintReadingALLThat (
talk·contribs) are all University of Minnesota undergraduate students studying social computing. One of our projects involves making edits to Wikipedia pages of interest and documenting the process. We all pair up in groups and contribute in some way to a page we find interesting. Elden Ring happened to be a page of interest for a couple groups in this class. Apologies for any violations of community norms... I am very new to this and have yet to learn the standards of making Wiki edits. But yeah... no
WP:SOCK or
WP:MEAT issues here :)
Bellbearinghunter (
talk) 18:57, 27 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Okay, no worries. This sort of thing happens. You haven't done anything wrong, it's just that long-term editors see a lot of people try to abuse Wikipedia and wish to be quick to address it, and sometimes there are false-positives. As long as you four dont go around teaming up in every discussion together to get your way in debates, you should be fine.
It may be a bit overwhelming, but there is all sorts of guidance at
MOS:VG on what to include or exclude on video game related Wikipedia articles.
WT:VG is a good place to ask questions too. There's plenty of editors, myself included, who you can ask questions too.
Sergecross73msg me 19:28, 27 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Thank you
Sergecross73for providing some guidance on what to include on video game related Wikipedia articles. As
Phlogistonatorspam said, we are new to the Wikipedia editing process, but overall we just want to improve the wiki. I was actually unaware that other people from our class chose to do editing on Elden Ring, haha. Please provide us with any suggestions or comments with the edits that we propose. I will look over the two articles you provided in order to gain a better understanding of what is relevant for video game articles. Nice to meet you all.
RoyBokChoy (
talk) 19:39, 27 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Serge's 33rd iteration of his own personal
WP:AIV and
WP:RFPP. Feel free to report anything you feel may need admin intervention.
Sergecross73msg me 21:20, 30 December 2023 (UTC)reply
Looks like he's on the verge of needing something, but I don't think he's messed up again since ferret gave him the warning of being indeffed if he adds any more unsourced content?
Sergecross73msg me 11:52, 10 January 2024 (UTC)reply
I've been waffling on whether they've crossed the line or not. --
ferret (
talk) 15:11, 10 January 2024 (UTC)reply
To me it looked like they do the same things some other problematic editors who refuse to use sources do instead of changing - simply make minor tweaks that don't require sources. Which usually isn't sustainable and leads to unsourced editing again when they think no one is looking anymore. So a block will probably be needed...eventually. Unless they turn it around.
Sergecross73msg me 15:15, 10 January 2024 (UTC)reply
He created a second account
User:Jalos92 which was blocked indefinitely and he was warned.
Timur9008 (
talk) 16:09, 10 January 2024 (UTC)reply
I gave them a final warning, and a bit of an explanation, as I'm not sure all the templated responses necessarily conveyed the issues. But there's little room for confusion now. Let me know if it happens further. Thanks.
Sergecross73msg me 17:25, 10 January 2024 (UTC)reply
Its not a competence issue instead of engaing in the talk page your reverting my edits even when clearly the other user was at fault.
Inteqaam (
talk) 11:24, 28 January 2024 (UTC)reply
Thanks anyway! Different question: what do you make of
SomeWeb (
talk·contribs)? Here for four and half years, 19 edits, all related to pornography, including adding inappropriate external links. They received several warnings.
WP:NOTHERE?
soetermans.
↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 18:10, 28 January 2024 (UTC)reply
Hey Sergecross73, did you see my previous message? If no action is needed I understand, but at the same time I feel that if an editor would do those kind of edits in a very short they would be indeffed quickly. Thoughts?
soetermans.
↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 11:09, 2 February 2024 (UTC)reply
Yes, sorry, I did miss this. It looks like it came through around the same time as a bunch of other messages.
I gave the guy a more comprehensive warning about sources, but since his damage to the project is fairly minimal (he edits pretty infrequently) I didn't think it was time to jump to a block yet.
Sergecross73msg me 12:24, 2 February 2024 (UTC)reply
JustYourImaginaryGuy(
talk·contribs·deleted contribs·nuke contribs·logs·filter log·block user·block log) This guy is completely robotically obsessed with ruining images and getting reverted, sometimes by himself. They're almost all replacing photos with no problems, or just blatantly downgraded in quality, with the subject's face obscured, or from past years
for no reason. Just needlessly disruptive, even of Good articles like
Steve Jobs. Check the Talk page of endless blatant pointless violations. All falsely marked
WP:MINOR for no reason at all and with no
WP:EDITSUMMARY. He even already got blocked for spamming page protection requests and still did it repeatedly after, like
this. It's a completely disruptive and unresponsive nuisance. Thank you. — Smuckola(talk) 06:31, 17 February 2024 (UTC)reply
As I sadly predicted, he carried right on. He replaced three photos using no edit summary and falsely flagged as minor, including one without updating the caption
[1]. And of course no response to anybody on Talk. — Smuckola(talk) 21:59, 19 February 2024 (UTC)reply
He kept ignoring me despite another shot too, so he's is blocked.
Sergecross73msg me 13:17, 20 February 2024 (UTC)reply
Sam Willard (
talk·contribs) This guy is
WP:MEATBOT spamming
WP:OR about supposed census data with no sources and with
WP:LEAD violation. Maybe it's AGF of the lowest order of
WP:CIR but I believe he will never stop or acknowledge without a block. Is there a mass revert function? Thanks. — Smuckola(talk) 10:26, 18 February 2024 (UTC)reply
Blocked. While I'd be more sympathetic if it was simply someone trying to learn the website still, some of the edits were just blatant vandalism that there's no reason to believe anyone would think are okay, whether you understood the website or not. I did give them a path to being unblocked though. We'll see if they engage or not.
Sergecross73msg me 17:32, 18 February 2024 (UTC)reply
Ok thanks. It is an unreal scam, that Wikipedia has a corporate prime directive to honeypot everybody on the planet into editing this site and officially uses every lie that we desperately need them and their every contribution, without requiring or even offering any qualifications or training or reputation, and barely even an automated attempt to scan for or report blatant rulebreaking. Or even track abuse once we dig it up! The
toxic positivity culture mandates that we coddle the abusers and blame the victims for being needlessly angered or for reacting responsibly, and nobody ever implicates or even mentions the corrupt governance, or even ensures the cleanup. This just cheaply hides behind Internet anonymity, and no physical system could ever survive this culture of abuse akin to American gun laws where pages like this one are our "thoughts and prayers". I don't even know where in WMF to track and vote on such policies. So anyway, is there any mass-revert function for this guy's meatbot spam? He injected alleged 2020 numbers in articles that have no 2020 sources! — Smuckola(talk) 21:46, 19 February 2024 (UTC)reply
I don't know of any mass-revert options outside of
WP:ROLLBACK rights, which I'd probably less than what you're looking for.
Sergecross73msg me 00:29, 20 February 2024 (UTC)reply
ComputerUserUser (
talk·contribs) This is a
WP:TENDENTIOUS problem user who is 100% aggressively and hatefully combative and edit warring as you can see on his Talk page. If you disagree, you're wrong. If you help, you're wrong. Never an
WP:EDITSUMMARY, tons of needlessly spammed micro-edits per article, and tons of needless edits among some good edits. Lots of
WP:OR because he is absolutely
WP:NOTHERE and this is his nostalgic toy. He
WP:OWNs this site, and is at the point of vindictiveness against correction. This and the last two editors I reported here have aggressively obliterated countless hours of my time (and of others) just reviewing and often reverting, I state every bit of help and I state my goal of enhancing their efforts and preventing them from being blocked, they are hateful, there are more in the swamp that I just can't even bring myself to report because I doubt anybody will do anything, and it super sucks. — Smuckola(talk) 21:03, 19 February 2024 (UTC)reply
Smuckola appears to be feeling upset due to his difficulty in managing situations where others exhibit behavior similar to his own.
ComputerUserUser (
talk) 23:33, 19 February 2024 (UTC)reply
This is too vague to take action on. I'd need difs. And context too. It's easy for me to take action when people make blatant falsehoods like "
Nintendo created
Mario in 1864". I can't just eyeball issues related to tweaks on things like fluorescent lamps and LCD screens.
Sergecross73msg me 00:28, 20 February 2024 (UTC)reply
Ok sorry bro, but for starters did ya check his exhaustive Talk page and his preposterously abusive responses that disavow the existence of any and all policy because he
WP:OWNs the world? He's explicitly anti
WP:EDITSUMMARY and anti
MOS:TENSE and such, way more than all the others lately. Thanks for listening and trying. I can also dig up diffs from the timeframe of those warnings on his Talk page. He has a
WP:TENDENTIOUS pattern of spitefully vindictive edit warring like
this latest one, where he arbitrarily reverts a perfectly correct edit simply because I am the one who made it. Regarding his
above comment, I had to read it several times because it's so nonsensically twisted with spite, but he's simply taunting us for even questioning any of his edits on this site that he
WP:OWNs. I'll try to look for more but I've been so wrecked by endless abusers for so long, including two problem editors who also happen to be admins, one of whom I emailed you extensively about and mentioned here twice a few months ago. I haven't made any new content forever and I see countless others give up and leave Wikipedia. — Smuckola(talk) 01:46, 20 February 2024 (UTC)reply
Jimthing (
talk·contribs) is exactly the same, except only
WP:OR or garbage citations. He cites mainly nothing at all, secondly tech support notes or forum posts, and occasionally a lot of anti-
WP:RS like Daily Mail which are so bad that the system flagged a warning and NikkiMaria has auto-deleted them. But no
WP:RS ever, and he aggressively combats the very notion of
WP:RS as you can see on
Apple community,
Shazam (app), and their talk pages, especially
here where he edit warred and generally combated an admin who was severely remiss in not blocking him. He always instantly deleted all my warnings and my exhaustive attempts to help on his Talk page, without response, or gave an insult once and deleted.
WP:IDIDNTHEARTHAT. With ComputerUserUser and Jimthing (and countless others), I gave very unsolicited tutoring and encouragement, reviewed all their edit history, dutifully (often reluctantly) clicked "thank" on each good one, but received only spite. He
WP:OWNs this site. At the very least, you could engage them please. — Smuckola(talk) 21:12, 19 February 2024 (UTC)reply
You have a history of overstating and misrepresenting facts, don't you. As per my response to your previous cherry-picking my edits and hysterics
here.
Jimthing (
talk) 11:54, 20 February 2024 (UTC)reply
Smuckola makes a few good points - generally speaking, it looks like you should revert less and discuss more, and probably be a bit more careful with the sources you use. But that aside, I'm confused as to why you were reported on Feb 19, when you had been inactive for 3 days. This one is also too vague to act on. I don't see how this would have escalated to a block yet, let alone after 3 days of not editing at all.
Sergecross73msg me 12:10, 20 February 2024 (UTC)reply
Sorry, I missed this one. Looks like they've all went inactive since 2/19 though, so I don't think there's anything to be done unless you catch them at another IP.
Sergecross73msg me 15:49, 23 February 2024 (UTC)reply
They seem to be quick to change, so I don't see a block helping much, and I'm having a hard time seeing where page protection would be helpful either. Reverting the unhelpful edits may be the best approach on this one...
Sergecross73msg me 20:17, 2 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Oh good, glad to hear it. I don't know how to do range blocks, so I couldn't have done that one.
Sergecross73msg me 13:51, 5 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Hey Serge, might you be able to protect
Bbno$? An IP from Vietnam has been blanking content, removing formatting and reverting constructive edits
[2][3][4]. Ss112 15:33, 27 February 2024 (UTC)reply
Hello. So, the edit warring and lack of edit summaries or discussion is of course problematic...but I feel like some of their edits have merit. I'm blanking on the Wiki alphabet soup link, but retail/distribution/storefront links like that generally shouldn't be used as sources on
WP:PROMOTIONal grounds. All those
Apple Music links really ought to go...
Sergecross73msg me 16:24, 27 February 2024 (UTC)reply
The editor is now blocked for blanking sections of another article. To clarify: I didn't add the sources. I don't really care whether they're there or not, but to note, the entries are unsourced without them. I am aware of
WP:AFFILIATE, I cite it all the time myself and I do not personally source content to Apple Music or Spotify. I haven't worked extensively on this article and only came across the edit by chance, but this is indisputably disruptive behaviour. Reverting six intermediate constructive edits of mine for nothing and edit warring to retain the edits makes me overlook any apparent "merit" their edit(s) may have. I still think the article should be protected. Ss112 21:15, 27 February 2024 (UTC)reply
I didn't mean to suggest that you did anything wrong or didn't know any of that, I just meant to say that there seemed to be some salvageable aspects to their otherwise disruptive edits.
Sergecross73msg me 21:20, 27 February 2024 (UTC)reply
2600:8804:A80:60C0:20A5:8BDC:C2BB:B2F0(
talk·contribs·WHOIS) This guy has apparently sockpuppeted three IP addresses in two days (
here and
here) to spam many Apple related pages with "about" templates that are redundant to the legitimate existing "about" template, and full of junk. Plus edit warring about it. — Smuckola(talk) 19:56, 2 March 2024 (UTC)reply
This is not sockpuppetry. Users have no control over the rotation of their IPv6 /64. --
ferret (
talk) 20:05, 2 March 2024 (UTC)reply
And the edits, while not necessary, weren't really that damaging, and were pretty quickly and easily reverted. I don't really see much need for action...
Sergecross73msg me 20:21, 2 March 2024 (UTC)reply
As I said, he already blockably violated
WP:EW. Even if you're going to skip acting on that, yes most were reverted but only at my own risk of
WP:3RR so therefore I need help reverting, like
here. It didnt stop. — Smuckola(talk) 20:42, 2 March 2024 (UTC)reply
I agree that the notices are unneeded...but they're not really vandalism. This should really be handled more like a content dispute. (Talk page discussion, contacting Wikiprojects for input if necessary, etc.) Protection or blocking should only be if they continue even after there's a talk page consensus established.
Sergecross73msg me 22:39, 2 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Protected, encouraged discussion on talk page.
Sergecross73msg me 13:50, 5 March 2024 (UTC)reply
This user made a handful of edits throughout February and March that removed quality information.
Panini!•🥪 16:54, 6 March 2024 (UTC)reply
I think that's another one that I'd say I don't agree with their edits, but I can see how they could be making them in good faith. Probably better handled through reverting, discussion, etc.
Sergecross73msg me 01:47, 7 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Thank you for bringing this to my attention. I cant believe after all their blocks and warnings, they still refuse to stop...
Sergecross73msg me 12:06, 19 March 2024 (UTC)reply
And thank you for the assist. I can't believe it either; those policy violations are just clear as day. After five years, 7k edits, and two blocks (now a third), I'm not sure there's any more
WP:ROPE left to offer.
Left guide (
talk) 12:28, 19 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Thank you for seemingly keeping an eye on editors I'm not keeping an eye on. I've blocked him, with the condition that I'll unblock if he finally starts addressing these issues. Thank you!
Sergecross73msg me 13:56, 24 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Final warned. Which is probably more lenient than they deserve. But blocks are meant to be preventative, and their edits in recent days (probably by luck) aren't as bad.
Sergecross73msg me 00:01, 26 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Definitely gotta keep an eye on this editor; even small seemingly innocuous ones like
thesetwo are problematic since every single other location mentioned in that sentence has an inline citation directly attached to it; originally looked like this:
Many parrots, especially monk parakeets, have been introduced to areas with temperate climates, and have established stable populations in parts of the United States (including New York City),[1] the United Kingdom,[1] Belgium,[1] Spain,[1][1] and Greece.[1]
It truly baffles me how someone can add unsourced entries to a list or series where every single existing entry is already directly supported by an inline citation. Anyways, thanks again for helping out.
Left guide (
talk) 01:39, 26 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Looks like someone beat me to it. They did the same thing I would have though, so it all worked out.
Sergecross73msg me 17:25, 27 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Obvious sockpuppet of Pjesnik21
Hi Serge.
User:Pjesnik21 has re-registered with the account Drolq. You might remember this user is clearly based in the Balkans somewhere as they primarily edit articles of people from that area, pop music articles in general, and they couldn't stop habitually overlinking. The biggest giveaway: Pjesnik21 created
List of number-one singles of 2023 (Croatia), and Drolq has created
List of number-one singles of 2024 (Croatia). You protected the 2023 list so socks couldn't edit for a while, but it expired. Also:
As for the overlinking, look no further than Drolq doing this:
[18].
All seems pretty obvious to me. Ss112 00:54, 18 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Btw Pjesnik21 is continuing to evade their block. @
Ferret and
Ad Orientem: in case it warrants further analysis (I personally don't think it does). Ss112 23:32, 19 March 2024 (UTC)reply
I welcome additional input. I'm stuck at "possible, but is it probable?"
Sergecross73msg me 00:12, 20 March 2024 (UTC)reply
@
Ss112 Confirmed, Blocked and tagged, go forth and
WP:BANREVERT. You should probably be on the look out for more. --
ferret (
talk) 01:53, 20 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Wild 9
Why did you revert the composer on
Wild 9? Dikiciyan is credited as Additional Music with his alias "Sonic Mayhem".
[19] You don't have to add citation on every staff who worked on the game when the info is readily available.
Emiya Mulzomdao (
talk) 11:44, 19 March 2024 (UTC)reply
You need to follow
WP:V, and we're talking about an obscure 25 year old game stuck on the PS1 - that info is not in-fact "readily available" - we must follow
WP:YOUTUBE as well.
Sergecross73msg me 11:53, 19 March 2024 (UTC)reply
That timestamp I linked is an in-game staff roll, which is about as accurate as it can get. What's the template for citing that source?
Emiya Mulzomdao (
talk) 12:01, 19 March 2024 (UTC)reply
No, I'm not talking the YouTube video; I'm trying to cite the staff roll that can be accessed within the video game. I merely posted the YouTube link to show what it looks like.
Emiya Mulzomdao (
talk) 12:11, 19 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Regarding Greenish Pickle!
Greenish Pickle! is continuously removing stuff he/she don't like in the articles even if it's sourced and have engaged in arguments with me and other Wikipedians in the past. Can you please talk to them and warn them. Thanks.
Kazama16 (
talk) 11:28, 23 March 2024 (UTC)reply
The user gave me hate speech (kinda) here
[20] there are more hate speeches directed to me in the past months. But actually we are fine now since the user ended the dispute.
[21]Kazama16 (
talk) 13:30, 23 March 2024 (UTC)reply
I think you both could stand to be a bit nicer to each other, but that's about it. Wikipedia is a collaborative project, especially when you're working on high profile, popular pages like Mario or Link. Disagreements are bound to happen. Just start up discussions on the talk page when that happens, and work towards finding a
WP:CONSENSUS. I watch over the Mario article and can add Link to my
WP:WATCHLIST too.
Sergecross73msg me 14:31, 23 March 2024 (UTC)reply
How about we shouldn't let him edit a highly visible articles like Link and Mario yet? Look at this
[22].
GreenishPickle! (
🔔) 07:18, 24 March 2024 (UTC)reply
I'm really confused, are you jealous of me or something? because you only see negativities in me. How about
[23] and
[24] and also I removed Anime News Network encyclopedic articles because they are unreliable and can be edited by anyone, I also gave this template
[25] in the edit summary but you still reverted my edit. See my friend I don't want any arguments with you and wish the best for you ❤️
Kazama16 (
talk) 14:16, 24 March 2024 (UTC)reply
The heck, why would I get jealous over a naive person with zero achievement?🤡 Also, with that Anime News Network stuff, I self-reverted myself.
GreenishPickle! (
🔔) 22:11, 24 March 2024 (UTC)reply
This same user discussed here also made accusations toward me in
the AfD discussion for Charlie Morningstar and
here, which I do not agree with. AfDs can sometimes get too contentious, so I'll probably lean toward staying away from them in the future. In any case, I will work to be better with commenting in the future.
Historyday01 (
talk) 12:50, 28 March 2024 (UTC)reply
That ones actually not on my watchlist, so I hadn't noticed. Yes, it could be
WP:SOCK or
WP:MEAT violations. Or it could just be a bunch of buddies who joined at the same time or something, and they're all equally unaware of how Wikipedia works. To me, its really only an issue if they're they become disruptive or appear to be
WP:CANVASSing with one another to get their way. Not opposed to others doing a CU if they believe otherwise though, but I'd just work on trying to get them up to speed first.
Sergecross73msg me 17:24, 27 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Hello! Just want to make some clarifications and provide some background into the suspicious influx of multiple likeminded accounts on
Elden Ring. Myself,
Phlogistonatorspam (
talk·contribs),
RoyBokChoy (
talk·contribs), and
IAintReadingALLThat (
talk·contribs) are all University of Minnesota undergraduate students studying social computing. One of our projects involves making edits to Wikipedia pages of interest and documenting the process. We all pair up in groups and contribute in some way to a page we find interesting. Elden Ring happened to be a page of interest for a couple groups in this class. Apologies for any violations of community norms... I am very new to this and have yet to learn the standards of making Wiki edits. But yeah... no
WP:SOCK or
WP:MEAT issues here :)
Bellbearinghunter (
talk) 18:57, 27 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Okay, no worries. This sort of thing happens. You haven't done anything wrong, it's just that long-term editors see a lot of people try to abuse Wikipedia and wish to be quick to address it, and sometimes there are false-positives. As long as you four dont go around teaming up in every discussion together to get your way in debates, you should be fine.
It may be a bit overwhelming, but there is all sorts of guidance at
MOS:VG on what to include or exclude on video game related Wikipedia articles.
WT:VG is a good place to ask questions too. There's plenty of editors, myself included, who you can ask questions too.
Sergecross73msg me 19:28, 27 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Thank you
Sergecross73for providing some guidance on what to include on video game related Wikipedia articles. As
Phlogistonatorspam said, we are new to the Wikipedia editing process, but overall we just want to improve the wiki. I was actually unaware that other people from our class chose to do editing on Elden Ring, haha. Please provide us with any suggestions or comments with the edits that we propose. I will look over the two articles you provided in order to gain a better understanding of what is relevant for video game articles. Nice to meet you all.
RoyBokChoy (
talk) 19:39, 27 March 2024 (UTC)reply