![]() |
Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/SPI/header is permanently
protected from editing because it is a page that should not be edited significantly for legal or other reasons. Substantial changes should first be proposed and discussed here on this page. If the proposal is uncontroversial or has been discussed and is supported by
consensus, editors may use {{
edit template-protected}} to notify an administrator or template editor to make the requested edit.
|
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
The shortcuts list of the main page is incomplete, listing only WP:SPI and WP:RfCU. However, there exists WP:SI, and that is not in the list. That should be added to the list. Gparyani ( talk) 20:36, 24 August 2014 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Hello- I have a suggestion for improving the text of the instructions for opening an SPI, but I don't have rights to edit here. Here is a link to my suggestion on the SPI talkpage (archive). Thanks in advance, and please ping me with any questions. Eric talk 16:07, 17 May 2016 (UTC) Eric talk 16:07, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
I'm not injecting myself into that dispute, but on the point of the substance of the changes that Izkala made, I believe the CU policy should be linked in the header. On the other hand, I think that "clear" should be removed. If behavioral evidence is WP:DUCK levels of clear, no CU is necessary unless a sleeper check is likely to uncover additional socks, so I think "clear behavioral evidence" is a tad misleading. What do you think of making that small change, Bbb23? ~ Rob Talk 20:36, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Add WP:SSP to the shortcuts, since it is mentioned by the following banner:
NasssaNser and his edits 10:38, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
it should be a SPI, not an SPI. --Brynda1231 [ Talk Page] [ Contribs] 19:55, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Change:
Evidence is required. When you open the investigation, you must immediately provide evidence that the suspected sock puppets are connected. The evidence will need to include diffs of edits that suggest the accounts are connected. (This requirement is waived if the edits in question are deleted; in this case just provide the names of the articles that both have been editing.)
to
Evidence is required. When you open the investigation, you must immediately provide evidence that the suspected sock puppets are connected. The evidence will need to include diffs of edits that suggest the accounts are connected. (This requirement is waived if the edits in question are deleted; in this case just provide the names of the pages that the accounts have been editing.)
Change articles to pages because not all sock edits are strictly within the mainspace.
Change that both have have been editing to that the accounts have been editing because both implies there are only two sockpuppets, when there could be more. Gamebuster (Talk)║ Contributions) 20:12, 5 January 2018 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Link "the CheckUser team" to Wikipedia:CheckUser#Contacting_a_CheckUser instead of functionaries. Check WT:SPI for context. qedk ( t 桜 c) 13:42, 6 May 2019 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please replace last three lines
[[Category:Wikipedia sock puppetry]] [[Category:Non-talk pages with subpages that are automatically signed]] [[Category:Wikipedia administration]]
with
<includeonly>[[Category:Wikipedia sock puppetry]] [[Category:Non-talk pages with subpages that are automatically signed]] [[Category:Wikipedia administration]]</includeonly><noinclude> [[Category:Sockpuppet templates]] </noinclude>
Per WP:CAT#T. — andrybak ( talk) 12:15, 28 March 2020 (UTC)
{{
edit template-protected}}
template.
P.I. Ellsworth
ed.
put'r there
19:17, 2 July 2020 (UTC)
<includeonly>...</includeonly>
around categorization wikitext have been there until 2013:
Special:Diff/568716746.
AGK, could you please clarify if removal of <includeonly>...</includeonly>
around categorization has been intentional? The transclusion tags at the top of the page have been restored in
Special:Diff/601005006 by
Callanecc and then adjusted further around {{
pp-template}} and {{
Floatinglink}} in
Special:Diff/934170094 by
JJMC89. —
andrybak (
talk)
09:22, 3 July 2020 (UTC)
Pages in this category should be moved to subcategories where applicable. And the two categorized pages in question are already categorized in such a subcategory, namely Category:Wikipedia sock puppetry.
seven-year implied consensusto remove these two pages from Category:Wikipedia administration
I've looked at Category:Wikipedia sock puppetry, which seems to include all subpages of Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations, so to a) incorporate the removal of Category:Wikipedia administration and b) keep categorization of /SPI/header as is, here's a new proposal:
[[Category:Wikipedia sock puppetry]]<includeonly> [[Category:Non-talk pages with subpages that are automatically signed]] </includeonly>
— andrybak ( talk) 21:35, 3 July 2020 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
The page has Linter error because it uses the obsolete html tag <tt>...</tt>
. Please replace all instances of <tt>...</tt>
with <samp>...</samp>
to get the same display without error.
ಮಲ್ನಾಡಾಚ್ ಕೊಂಕ್ಣೊ (
talk)
14:49, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
− | publicly | + | publicly available |
Per MOS:HYPHEN "Avoid using a hyphen after a standard -ly adverb". Hyphenation Expert ( talk) 14:53, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Change If you suspect sockpuppetry by an
administrator, or if you need to submit off-wiki evidence for some other reason, you must
email the checkuser team to open an investigation. to If you need to submit off-wiki evidence, you must
email the checkuser team to open an investigation.
The policy establishing this page,
WP:HSOCK, doesn't make any distinction between admins and non-admins; it merely says If you believe someone is using sockpuppets or meat puppets, you should create a report at
Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations.
This edit would align the instructions on this page with policy.
BilledMammal (
talk)
03:27, 12 September 2023 (UTC)
If you suspect sockpuppetry by an editor and you need to submit off-wiki evidence you must email the checkuser team to open an investigation. Private information, emails, logs, and other sensitive evidence must not be posted on Wikipedia. All evidence related to a sockpuppet investigation must otherwise be posted on the designated page.would be better? BilledMammal ( talk) 03:18, 14 September 2023 (UTC)
Mz7 ( talk) 21:28, 15 September 2023 (UTC)If you suspect sockpuppetry by an administrator, you should email the Arbitration Committee to open an investigation. If you need to submit off-wiki evidence for some other reason, you must contact the checkuser team privately to start an investigation. Private information, emails, logs, and other sensitive evidence must not be posted on Wikipedia. All evidence related to a sockpuppet investigation must otherwise be posted on the designated page.
![]() |
Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/SPI/header is permanently
protected from editing because it is a page that should not be edited significantly for legal or other reasons. Substantial changes should first be proposed and discussed here on this page. If the proposal is uncontroversial or has been discussed and is supported by
consensus, editors may use {{
edit template-protected}} to notify an administrator or template editor to make the requested edit.
|
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
The shortcuts list of the main page is incomplete, listing only WP:SPI and WP:RfCU. However, there exists WP:SI, and that is not in the list. That should be added to the list. Gparyani ( talk) 20:36, 24 August 2014 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Hello- I have a suggestion for improving the text of the instructions for opening an SPI, but I don't have rights to edit here. Here is a link to my suggestion on the SPI talkpage (archive). Thanks in advance, and please ping me with any questions. Eric talk 16:07, 17 May 2016 (UTC) Eric talk 16:07, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
I'm not injecting myself into that dispute, but on the point of the substance of the changes that Izkala made, I believe the CU policy should be linked in the header. On the other hand, I think that "clear" should be removed. If behavioral evidence is WP:DUCK levels of clear, no CU is necessary unless a sleeper check is likely to uncover additional socks, so I think "clear behavioral evidence" is a tad misleading. What do you think of making that small change, Bbb23? ~ Rob Talk 20:36, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Add WP:SSP to the shortcuts, since it is mentioned by the following banner:
NasssaNser and his edits 10:38, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
it should be a SPI, not an SPI. --Brynda1231 [ Talk Page] [ Contribs] 19:55, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Change:
Evidence is required. When you open the investigation, you must immediately provide evidence that the suspected sock puppets are connected. The evidence will need to include diffs of edits that suggest the accounts are connected. (This requirement is waived if the edits in question are deleted; in this case just provide the names of the articles that both have been editing.)
to
Evidence is required. When you open the investigation, you must immediately provide evidence that the suspected sock puppets are connected. The evidence will need to include diffs of edits that suggest the accounts are connected. (This requirement is waived if the edits in question are deleted; in this case just provide the names of the pages that the accounts have been editing.)
Change articles to pages because not all sock edits are strictly within the mainspace.
Change that both have have been editing to that the accounts have been editing because both implies there are only two sockpuppets, when there could be more. Gamebuster (Talk)║ Contributions) 20:12, 5 January 2018 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Link "the CheckUser team" to Wikipedia:CheckUser#Contacting_a_CheckUser instead of functionaries. Check WT:SPI for context. qedk ( t 桜 c) 13:42, 6 May 2019 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please replace last three lines
[[Category:Wikipedia sock puppetry]] [[Category:Non-talk pages with subpages that are automatically signed]] [[Category:Wikipedia administration]]
with
<includeonly>[[Category:Wikipedia sock puppetry]] [[Category:Non-talk pages with subpages that are automatically signed]] [[Category:Wikipedia administration]]</includeonly><noinclude> [[Category:Sockpuppet templates]] </noinclude>
Per WP:CAT#T. — andrybak ( talk) 12:15, 28 March 2020 (UTC)
{{
edit template-protected}}
template.
P.I. Ellsworth
ed.
put'r there
19:17, 2 July 2020 (UTC)
<includeonly>...</includeonly>
around categorization wikitext have been there until 2013:
Special:Diff/568716746.
AGK, could you please clarify if removal of <includeonly>...</includeonly>
around categorization has been intentional? The transclusion tags at the top of the page have been restored in
Special:Diff/601005006 by
Callanecc and then adjusted further around {{
pp-template}} and {{
Floatinglink}} in
Special:Diff/934170094 by
JJMC89. —
andrybak (
talk)
09:22, 3 July 2020 (UTC)
Pages in this category should be moved to subcategories where applicable. And the two categorized pages in question are already categorized in such a subcategory, namely Category:Wikipedia sock puppetry.
seven-year implied consensusto remove these two pages from Category:Wikipedia administration
I've looked at Category:Wikipedia sock puppetry, which seems to include all subpages of Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations, so to a) incorporate the removal of Category:Wikipedia administration and b) keep categorization of /SPI/header as is, here's a new proposal:
[[Category:Wikipedia sock puppetry]]<includeonly> [[Category:Non-talk pages with subpages that are automatically signed]] </includeonly>
— andrybak ( talk) 21:35, 3 July 2020 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
The page has Linter error because it uses the obsolete html tag <tt>...</tt>
. Please replace all instances of <tt>...</tt>
with <samp>...</samp>
to get the same display without error.
ಮಲ್ನಾಡಾಚ್ ಕೊಂಕ್ಣೊ (
talk)
14:49, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
− | publicly | + | publicly available |
Per MOS:HYPHEN "Avoid using a hyphen after a standard -ly adverb". Hyphenation Expert ( talk) 14:53, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Change If you suspect sockpuppetry by an
administrator, or if you need to submit off-wiki evidence for some other reason, you must
email the checkuser team to open an investigation. to If you need to submit off-wiki evidence, you must
email the checkuser team to open an investigation.
The policy establishing this page,
WP:HSOCK, doesn't make any distinction between admins and non-admins; it merely says If you believe someone is using sockpuppets or meat puppets, you should create a report at
Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations.
This edit would align the instructions on this page with policy.
BilledMammal (
talk)
03:27, 12 September 2023 (UTC)
If you suspect sockpuppetry by an editor and you need to submit off-wiki evidence you must email the checkuser team to open an investigation. Private information, emails, logs, and other sensitive evidence must not be posted on Wikipedia. All evidence related to a sockpuppet investigation must otherwise be posted on the designated page.would be better? BilledMammal ( talk) 03:18, 14 September 2023 (UTC)
Mz7 ( talk) 21:28, 15 September 2023 (UTC)If you suspect sockpuppetry by an administrator, you should email the Arbitration Committee to open an investigation. If you need to submit off-wiki evidence for some other reason, you must contact the checkuser team privately to start an investigation. Private information, emails, logs, and other sensitive evidence must not be posted on Wikipedia. All evidence related to a sockpuppet investigation must otherwise be posted on the designated page.