Misplaced Pages

User talk:Bbb23: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 23:40, 20 July 2017 view sourceNightscream (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers169,341 edits →Cooper edits: Discussion.← Previous edit Latest revision as of 18:58, 5 January 2025 view source Lowercase sigmabot III (talk | contribs)Bots, Template editors2,299,782 editsm Archiving 1 discussion(s) to User talk:Bbb23/Archive 63) (bot 
Line 1: Line 1:
{{NOINDEX}} {{NOINDEX}}
<!-- {{Wikibreak|message=On vacation from October 15 to November 1. I'll be on-wiki much less than usual and possibly not at all. Certainly, don't expect a prompt response to any questions or requests.}} -->
<!-- {{Retired|date=June 22, 2020,|reason=due to ArbCom. I may edit once in a great while}} -->
<!--*After a protracted absence, I returned in the spring of this year, although I'm not sure exactly why. I'm still deeply disturbed by the governance at Misplaced Pages and the WMF, and I doubt that will ever change. I could say more but don't think it's appropriate. -->



<!-- {{Busy|I|because of RL constraints and may not be on-wiki as much as usual.}} -->
<!-- {{wikibreak|message=I'll be unavailable for a few days.}} -->
{{archive box|search=yes|auto=long}} {{archive box|search=yes|auto=long}}
{{User:MiszaBot/config {{User:MiszaBot/config
|maxarchivesize = 200K |maxarchivesize = 200K
|counter = 41 |counter = 63
|minthreadstoarchive = 1
|minthreadsleft = 10
|minthreadsleft = 0
|algo = old(7d)
|algo = old(5d)
|archive = User talk:Bbb23/Archive %(counter)d |archive = User talk:Bbb23/Archive %(counter)d
}} }}
<table class="messagebox standard-talk">
<tr><td>]
<td align="left" width="100%">
*Unless otherwise requested, I will respond on '''this page'''.
*Please include links to pertinent page(s).
*Click New section on the top right to start a new topic.
</table>
{{clear}} {{clear}}


== A barnstar for you! ==
==Why?!==
There was no reason to delete ] 4 times. Bring it back ''NOW'' or I'm suing you! ] 19:37, 29 June 2017 (EDT)


{| style="background-color: #fdffe7; border: 1px solid #fceb92;"
== IP block exemption check ==
|rowspan="2" style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 5px;" | ]
|style="font-size: x-large; padding: 3px 3px 0 3px; height: 1.5em;" | '''The Original Barnstar'''
|-
|style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 3px;" | Happy New Year, Bbb23! In 2024, other editors thanked you using the ] on the English Misplaced Pages. This made you the '''#8 most thanked Wikipedian in 2024'''. Congratulations and, well, ''thank you'' for all that you do for Misplaced Pages. Here's to 2025! ] (]) 19:32, 31 December 2024 (UTC)
|}
:Umm, I had no idea. I have notifications for Thanks turned off globally. I should also add that I'm surprised. I ''do'' appreciate your thanks, though, and a Happy New Year to you, too. Be safe tonight.--] (]) 19:43, 31 December 2024 (UTC)
::It only stops you from ''receiving'' thanks; it doesn't stop people from thanking you. But they won't know that you didn't see the thanks. See . --] &#x1F98C; (]) 01:27, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
:::I know that. I just don't think of myself as an editor who would get thanked a lot. I ''do'' have one question: is there any way to look now and see what edit an editor thanked me for? I don't see any way to do that on the thank log. I'm just curious.--] (]) 01:32, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
::::It's not in the thank log; it's only in the "in-tray" or "TV set" icon at the top (to the right of the bell icon). But that only shows the 25 most recent events that come within that icon; most will be thanks, but some will be other actions - such as when you ] somebody. So for myself, the list shows 25 events in the last 6 days of which 13 are mentions and 12 are where somebody else thanked me. If I click on one of those 12, I can see which edit (or loggable action, such as a block, delete or protection) that I was being thanked for, but once they are pushed out of the 25 by more recent events, the information is no longer retrievable. So checking out 1150 thanks is a long way from being possible. --] &#x1F98C; (]) 02:31, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
:::::Heh, I wasn't going to check all 1150 entries, god help me, just a few out of curiosity, but it looks to me like even the recent thanks listed in the log don't show up when I click on the TV set icon; maybe that works only if you have thanks notifications turned on.--] (]) 02:38, 1 January 2025 (UTC)


== Qubetics ==
Hi Bbb23! I was wondering if you could help me out with something - I have a student with WikiEd ({{noping|Umbereenbmirza}}) who is editing out of Turkey via a VPN. I helped her set up an account, but she hasn't been able to edit since her IP address is blocked. It wasn't for anything that she did, it just happens to be part of Redstation Limited, a web host provider or colocation provider. (If I understand all of that correctly.) She needs to have an IP block exemption, but I've never done one of those before and since I work with WikiEd (as {{noping|Shalor (Wiki Ed)}}), I didn't know if it would be inappropriate for me to do this myself. I saw that one of the things that is recommended is to get a CheckUser to verify the need, so I thought I'd ask if you could help with this.


Would you mind draftifying or moving the contents of the recently deleted ] article into my userspace? I'm not the original author, but started looking into it a bit when I encountered it on NPP. It doesn't seem to have notability yet, but I'd like to have it on my list to keep an eye on for the future. Thanks.] (]) 02:53, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
I didn't know if I would be able to do the IP block exemption thing myself since I work with WikiEd, as I wasn't sure if that would be a conflict of interest here. I don't think it would be super common and WikiEd deals predominantly with students located in the United States. We do have some students outside of the US, but they're in the minority for the most part so it wouldn't be something I would do more than a couple times a year, if that. My inclination is to allow others to do it, though - just so it's all on the up and up. ]] 21:45, 11 July 2017 (UTC)
:{{done}} - see ]. I retained the infobox and the refs but took out the promotional language.--] (]) 15:10, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
*I figured that you'd be a good person to ask since you're an admin and a checkuser. ]] 21:47, 11 July 2017 (UTC)
*:{{re|Tokyogirl79}} If I understand properly what I'm looking at, Umbereenbmirza, Shalor, and a large number of students are all using the same webhost (not Redstation Limited). They're using one IP in a range that is indeed blocked (globally by a steward), but it is soft-blocked, meaning she has been able to edit through it. So, I'm assuming it's a different IP she's talking about. Has she told you the address? It's not going to pop up on my check because attempts to use a hard-blocked IP aren't displayed unless she edits her own Talk page. Indeed, if you ask her to make a test edit to her Talk page, I should be able to see it.--] (]) 23:38, 11 July 2017 (UTC)
*I was able to get her an IP exemption, so hopefully it won't affect her too much. I'm not sure if she's editing under any other IP - she sent us an image and that IP was the one that came up. ]] 15:58, 12 July 2017 (UTC)


== {{U|Accopulocrat}} sock == == Lawrence bishnoi ==


Can I use the official chargesheets filed by ] against the Bishnoi for reference? like my sandbox ] (]) 14:52, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
I found a static IPsock of this guy that has edited since July 4 without a block - what general block duration would you advise? Thanks! ]<sup>]</sup> 21:41, 13 July 2017 (UTC)
:{{re|GeneralizationsAreBad}} A week or 10 days, whichever you prefer.--] (]) 21:43, 13 July 2017 (UTC) :The link to the report doesn't work.--] (]) 15:03, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
::{{Done}} - thanks. ]<sup>]</sup> 21:46, 13 July 2017 (UTC) ::and other reference mentioned along? ] (]) 15:04, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
:::Also nabbed {{user2|107.77.165.1}}. ]<sup>]</sup> 14:09, 14 July 2017 (UTC) ::Because 80% of Lawrence Bishnoi's references are like this. ] (]) 15:04, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
::::Knock yourself out. It's always a bit harder for me to block IPs.--] (]) 14:14, 14 July 2017 (UTC) :::The other ref works, but you can't add material based on a report without providing a working link to the report.--] (]) 15:05, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
::::okay thank you for your guidance i will keep that in mind ] (]) 15:06, 2 January 2025 (UTC)


== Request for protection == =="Best know for" IP==
Does {{noping|62.3.99.94}} look like the BKFIP, or is is just me? Looking at their edit summaries ("biased and really barely intelligible", "removed pointless waffling", "first paragraph was basically garbage, unintelligible due to poor language skills on the part of whoever added the text, and poor reading skills by everyone who edited it subsequently", etc) it certainly fits their ''modus operandi''. - ] (]) 16:52, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
:A bit, yes, but not enough for me to block. What do you think, {{U|Favonian}}?--] (]) 17:01, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
::Oh yes, that's him. Blocked for 3 days. Expect a fulminating unblock request, followed by a revocation talk page privileges. Happy New Year! ] (]) 17:05, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
:::The expert has spoken! --] (]) 17:06, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
:::Many thanks to you both. I was going to note that a few of their edits are removing things along the lines of 'best known for' phrasing, including , , and , but that seems a bit superfluous now! - ] (]) 17:07, 2 January 2025 (UTC)


== Joaquim Nero ==
Recently concluded TV series with persistent removal of reliably sourced content by IPs and newly-created accounts. https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=The_Emperor:_Owner_of_the_Mask&action=history ] (]) 02:25, 14 July 2017 (UTC)


Hello Bbb23, I have noticed you often resolve things when I post in ] so I thought I would tell you directly here. Please tell me if that is not okay and I won't do it again. I noticed this user ] after a page he created ] was added to ]. It looks like many articles he has created have problems. Could you take a look please? ]] 18:41, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
== July 2017 ==
:Pardon my barging in: just noticed the link from ] here, and am happy to point out ], closed a few minutes ago. ] (]) 19:03, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
::Hi Wikishovel, thank you for responding. Looks like I was right about the account. ]] 20:20, 2 January 2025 (UTC)


== Is all caps OK? ==
Hi mate, how do you deal with guys who put Sockpuppet tags on userpages without evidence? --] (]) 07:28, 14 July 2017 (UTC)
:I don't know if Bbb knows this SPI but I'm guessing {{U|Ponyo}}'s come across this one before, I just looked at a couple of places and couldn't find the link though. &mdash;]''']''' 07:36, 14 July 2017 (UTC)
::Which SPI? anyways thanks for removing the tags.. --] (]) 07:42, 14 July 2017 (UTC)
:::], Saqib. Your tagger is most likely from there. I was wrong, Bbb23 has blocked this farm too. &mdash;]''']''' 08:01, 14 July 2017 (UTC)
::::Indeed. Thanks, folks.--] (]) 14:02, 14 July 2017 (UTC)
:::::And just blocked ].--]<sup>]</sup> 18:49, 17 July 2017 (UTC)


? ] (]) 20:59, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
== New user HeyMate29 ==
:(laughing) It's fine.--] (]) 22:54, 3 January 2025 (UTC)


== You've got mail ==
Hi there; I have found a newly-created page ], which is a very large page for a newbie to have created. Its content seems rather familiar; investigating my deleted contribs I have turned up ]. The latter was created by {{noping|BlobBlob98}} who you blocked in March 2017 as a sock of {{noping|Marquis de la Eirron}}, and (this one included) under ]. A number of their deleted edits were to .


{{You've got mail|sig=] (]) 15:42, 5 January 2025 (UTC)}}
] was created yesterday by {{noping|HeyMate29}}, an account which was created the previous day: 21:03, 12 July 2017 (UTC). Their very first edit was to create {{cl|Zambian politicians convicted of crimes}}, a page which has not previously existed, but whose name fits the pattern of "Category:Fooian politicians convicted of crimes". Similarly for .


== Administrators' newsletter – January 2025 ==
Do you have an opinion on this new user? --] &#x1f339; (]) 07:38, 14 July 2017 (UTC)
:{{re|Redrose64}} Yup: {{confirmed}}, blocked, and tagged. Thanks.--] (]) 14:14, 14 July 2017 (UTC)
::{{ty}} --] &#x1f339; (]) 09:05, 15 July 2017 (UTC)


] from the past month (December 2024).
== ] ==


<div style="display: flex; flex-wrap: wrap">
I just revoked talk page access from this range due to one of the IP's leaving a . Just wanted to let you know since you're the blocking checkuser. Cheers -- ]<sup><small><b>] ]</b></small></sup> 18:22, 14 July 2017 (UTC)
<div style="flex: 1 0 20em">
:{{re|Oshwah}} Gosh, if he prevails at court, I'll have only $9B left. Globally locked several minutes after you revoked Talk page access. It's probably a nice sunny day where they are. Why can't they just go '''outside''' and play?--] (]) 18:35, 14 July 2017 (UTC)
::That's a lot of $ - wish I had $10B to play with (lol)! Someone needs to invent Misplaced Pages NLT insurance for us poor folk! Cool deal; I figured you wouldn't care but I wanted to leave you a message and give you a heads-up nonetheless, especially given that the block is a checkuser block. I obviously try not to touch those unless it's needed, and even so - I let them know ;-) ]<sup><small><b>] ]</b></small></sup> 18:45, 14 July 2017 (UTC)


] '''Administrator changes'''
== Right off a block, on ANI ==
:] ]
:] {{hlist|class=inline
|]
|]
}}
:] {{hlist|class=inline
|]
|]
|]
|]
|]
|]
|]
}}


] '''CheckUser changes'''
Would you mind taking a look at ] since the editor under discussion is fresh off a block you issued? Thanks. ] <small>(])</small> 06:48, 15 July 2017 (UTC)
:] {{hlist|class=inline
|]
|]
|]
|]
|]
}}
:] ]
:] ]


</div>
== Original Research Query ==
<div style="flex: 1 0 20em">
]


] '''Oversight changes'''
Hi, can you please provide guidance on the ] page. I am alleging that there is clear OR being done but author disagrees. ] (]) <!--Template:Undated--><small class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added 18:11, 16 July 2017 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:] {{hlist|class=inline
:I don't know why you're asking me (or at least one other administrator).--] (]) 18:17, 16 July 2017 (UTC)
|]
::Hi again. The user on the page agreed to delete the content if it was deemed OR. Since it now has been deemed as such (on the No Original Research Noticeboard), Could you please allow me to modify the page and to merge it to a legitimate one? Right now the page is blocked from any modifications. https://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:No_original_research/Noticeboard ] (]) 14:39, 17 July 2017 (UTC)
|]
:::I don't see one editor's opinion at the noticeboard as "deemed OR". If the other edit warrior, {{U|Jeine091}}, now accepts your wish to modify the article, I will unprotect it.--] (]) 15:32, 17 July 2017 (UTC)
|]
::::We now have 2 additional editors on the Talk part of the article's page who are saying it is also OR. What more do we need to merge or delete the page? ] (]) 16:39, 17 July 2017 (UTC)
|]

|]
== Your deletion of comments to unblock request ==
}}

:] ]
You again deleted my comment about the unblock request for ] on their talkpage. As ] clearly and simply states that ''Any user may comment on an unblock request'', I believe there was no reason to remove my comment. As the comment I made is allowable under ] (as any user may comment on an unblock request), and was not disruptive, but was in all good faith criticism of the block, then there is no basis for removal. You have mistaken criticism for disruption, however recall that editors are free to criticize administrator action. To try and resolve this though, rather than reverting you deletion (which I believe I have every right to do) can you please explain why you didn't note that it wasn't a slam dunk in either the block log or the user page. Or why you didn't make an entry at all in ]? Thanks! ] (]) 15:57, 17 July 2017 (UTC)
:I don't normally tutor users on how CheckUsers do their work, but with the hope that you'll understand my actions better and put these issues to rest, I'll make an exception. Generally, when there's a suspected sock, someone opens or reopens an SPI, and the report is evaluated. If I decide a CU is warranted, I run a check and post my findings. Those findings are along a spectrum of more certain to less certain. For example, the most certain is {{tallyho}}, then slightly less to {{confirmed}}, less to {{likely}}, and so on down to {{unrelated}}. If I believe a block is warranted, I block and it's my decision whether to make it a checkuseraccount block. The finding doesn't have to be confirmed or even likely for me to do so. If the blocked account is tagged (not all socks should be tagged, but that's a separate topic), the tag would normally reflect my finding. Thus, I wouldn't normally tag a sock as CU-confirmed unless my finding was confirmed or tallyho, although there are occasionally exceptions.
:Once a master has a case, not all socks go through the SPI process. I and all CheckUsers can block a sock outside of the SPI ''and'' not record it at the SPI. It's standard practice. We do it all the time. We may also choose to tag or not at our discretion. However, because such blocks have no SPI finding, unless the tag is very clear, other editors won't necessarily know the degree of certainty, but ''no one'' marks that in the block log.
:My comment at Moltenflesh's Talk page was intended to let the user know that they might be unblocked and to let other CheckUsers know that I would like their input before I make a final decision. Although casually couched ("slam dunk"), the purpose was to ''help'' the user. It's rare for me to comment on a sock-blocked Talk page, but in this case I thought it would be constructive.
:I didn't remove your comment because it was critical of me. I removed it because it betrayed your ignorance (no offense) of how the whole process works and because it distracted from the process of re-evaluating my block. I hope that addresses your concerns.--] (]) 16:48, 17 July 2017 (UTC)
::Thank you for the explanation and the transparency. I see now what you were doing, and I apologize for getting in the way of it. I'll try and avoid shooting first in the future. ] (]) 07:06, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

== Do you have trouble on Commons? ==

We have a strange request . Thanks for taking a peek. --] '''<sup>]</sup>''' 00:54, 18 July 2017 (UTC)
:{{re|Hedwig in Washington}} The IP who posted at Commons is a sock. What they say strikes me as incoherent, but perhaps you understand what they mean by "cyborbot/help".--] (]) 01:17, 18 July 2017 (UTC)
::I thought so. But before I block an IP that could be a fellow sysop, I rather ask. Had a feeling you didn't move to Botswana. Thanks for your fast reply! ] --] '''<sup>]</sup>''' 01:20, 18 July 2017 (UTC)
:::Is cyberbot the same as ? &mdash;]''']''' 03:57, 18 July 2017 (UTC)
::::I think he meant ], or there's always the much older ].--] (]) 15:26, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

== ] ==

I am inclined to give him the benefit of the doubt but to do that I need your agreement or checkuserblock removed. What are your thoughts, please? ] (]) 22:50, 18 July 2017 (UTC)
:{{re|Just Chilling}} You can see my comments at his Talk page. Sorry.--] (]) 23:37, 18 July 2017 (UTC)
::NP and thx for looking at the situation. ] (]) 23:17, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

== Rowingasia ==

Can I trouble you to have a look at the recent unblock request? Their claims to not have socked at all are a bit humorous if I can say so. ] (]) 15:28, 19 July 2017 (UTC)
:{{re|RickinBaltimore}} Sure. I revoked Talk page access. We have better ways of spending our time.--] (]) 15:42, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

== Cooper edits ==


</div>
All the information I cited was from the primary source. You may not have agreed with it but it's indisputible that Fletcher accuses Huff of deliberately sabotaging the hearings, and that Rymer went out of her way to ridicule Fletcher. All the other incidents (The fact that Roger Lang admitted the knife could have been different, the fact that the shoes weren't unique) were all matters of record. Making mention of it is entirely fair; declaring it impermissible seems a bit like a cowardly dodge unless there's something I'm missing <!-- Template:Unsigned IP --><small class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 03:35, 20 July 2017 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
</div>
:] prohibits an editor from using primary sources that require ''interpretation''. Legal decisions fall into that category. Therefore, a reliable secondary source that interprets the decision must be used.--] (]) 12:33, 20 July 2017 (UTC)


] '''Guideline and policy news'''
==Incivility from ]==
* Following ], ] was adopted as a ].
Hi. I seem to having some difficulty with a user that I see you have .
* A ] is open to discuss whether admins should be advised to warn users rather than issue no-warning blocks to those who have posted promotional content outside of article space.
] '''Technical news'''
* The Nuke feature also now ] to the userpage of the user whose pages were deleted, and to the pages which were not selected for deletion, after page deletions are queued. This enables easier follow-up admin-actions.


] '''Arbitration'''
My discussion with him is , though Freshacconci the last message, with the edit summary:
* Following the ], the following editors have been elected to the Arbitration Committee: {{noping|CaptainEek}}, {{noping|Daniel}}, {{noping|Elli}}, {{noping|KrakatoaKatie}}, {{noping|Liz}}, {{noping|Primefac}}, {{noping|ScottishFinnishRadish}}, {{noping|Theleekycauldron}}, {{noping|Worm That Turned}}.


] '''Miscellaneous'''
'''''"'Please learn these policies if you wish to continue editing here'? Who are you? Fuck you."'''''
* A ] is happening in January 2025 to reduce the number of unreviewed articles and redirects in the ]. ]


----
If you could inform/remind him of ], it would be appreciated. Thanks. ] (]) 23:40, 20 July 2017 (UTC)
{{center|{{flatlist|
* ]
* ]
* ]
}}}}
<!--
-->{{center|1=<small>Sent by ] (]) 15:46, 5 January 2025 (UTC)</small>}}
<!-- Message sent by User:DreamRimmer@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Administrators%27_newsletter/Subscribe&oldid=1266956718 -->

Latest revision as of 18:58, 5 January 2025


Archiving icon
Archives
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3
Archive 4Archive 5Archive 6
Archive 7Archive 8Archive 9
Archive 10Archive 11Archive 12
Archive 13Archive 14Archive 15
Archive 16Archive 17Archive 18
Archive 19Archive 20Archive 21
Archive 22Archive 23Archive 24
Archive 25Archive 26Archive 27
Archive 28Archive 29Archive 30
Archive 31Archive 32Archive 33
Archive 34Archive 35Archive 36
Archive 37Archive 38Archive 39
Archive 40Archive 41Archive 42
Archive 43Archive 44Archive 45
Archive 46Archive 47Archive 48
Archive 49Archive 50Archive 51
Archive 52Archive 53Archive 54
Archive 55Archive 56Archive 57
Archive 58Archive 59Archive 60
Archive 61Archive 62Archive 63

This page has archives. Sections older than 5 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III.

A barnstar for you!

The Original Barnstar
Happy New Year, Bbb23! In 2024, other editors thanked you 1150 times using the thanks tool on the English Misplaced Pages. This made you the #8 most thanked Wikipedian in 2024. Congratulations and, well, thank you for all that you do for Misplaced Pages. Here's to 2025! Mz7 (talk) 19:32, 31 December 2024 (UTC)
Umm, I had no idea. I have notifications for Thanks turned off globally. I should also add that I'm surprised. I do appreciate your thanks, though, and a Happy New Year to you, too. Be safe tonight.--Bbb23 (talk) 19:43, 31 December 2024 (UTC)
It only stops you from receiving thanks; it doesn't stop people from thanking you. But they won't know that you didn't see the thanks. See thanks log. --Redrose64 🦌 (talk) 01:27, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
I know that. I just don't think of myself as an editor who would get thanked a lot. I do have one question: is there any way to look now and see what edit an editor thanked me for? I don't see any way to do that on the thank log. I'm just curious.--Bbb23 (talk) 01:32, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
It's not in the thank log; it's only in the "in-tray" or "TV set" icon at the top (to the right of the bell icon). But that only shows the 25 most recent events that come within that icon; most will be thanks, but some will be other actions - such as when you WP:MENTION somebody. So for myself, the list shows 25 events in the last 6 days of which 13 are mentions and 12 are where somebody else thanked me. If I click on one of those 12, I can see which edit (or loggable action, such as a block, delete or protection) that I was being thanked for, but once they are pushed out of the 25 by more recent events, the information is no longer retrievable. So checking out 1150 thanks is a long way from being possible. --Redrose64 🦌 (talk) 02:31, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
Heh, I wasn't going to check all 1150 entries, god help me, just a few out of curiosity, but it looks to me like even the recent thanks listed in the log don't show up when I click on the TV set icon; maybe that works only if you have thanks notifications turned on.--Bbb23 (talk) 02:38, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

Qubetics

Would you mind draftifying or moving the contents of the recently deleted Qubetics article into my userspace? I'm not the original author, but started looking into it a bit when I encountered it on NPP. It doesn't seem to have notability yet, but I'd like to have it on my list to keep an eye on for the future. Thanks. -- Fyrael (talk) 02:53, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

 Done - see Draft:Qubetics. I retained the infobox and the refs but took out the promotional language.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:10, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

Lawrence bishnoi

Can I use the official chargesheets filed by NIA against the Bishnoi for reference? like my sandbox Jaspreetsingh6 (talk) 14:52, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

The link to the report doesn't work.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:03, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
and other reference mentioned along? Jaspreetsingh6 (talk) 15:04, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
Because 80% of Lawrence Bishnoi's references are like this. Jaspreetsingh6 (talk) 15:04, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
The other ref works, but you can't add material based on a report without providing a working link to the report.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:05, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
okay thank you for your guidance i will keep that in mind Jaspreetsingh6 (talk) 15:06, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

"Best know for" IP

Does 62.3.99.94 look like the BKFIP, or is is just me? Looking at their edit summaries ("biased and really barely intelligible", "removed pointless waffling", "first paragraph was basically garbage, unintelligible due to poor language skills on the part of whoever added the text, and poor reading skills by everyone who edited it subsequently", etc) it certainly fits their modus operandi. - SchroCat (talk) 16:52, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

A bit, yes, but not enough for me to block. What do you think, Favonian?--Bbb23 (talk) 17:01, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
Oh yes, that's him. Blocked for 3 days. Expect a fulminating unblock request, followed by a revocation talk page privileges. Happy New Year! Favonian (talk) 17:05, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
The expert has spoken! --Bbb23 (talk) 17:06, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
Many thanks to you both. I was going to note that a few of their edits are removing things along the lines of 'best known for' phrasing, including this, this, this and this, but that seems a bit superfluous now! - SchroCat (talk) 17:07, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

Joaquim Nero

Hello Bbb23, I have noticed you often resolve things when I post in Misplaced Pages:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard so I thought I would tell you directly here. Please tell me if that is not okay and I won't do it again. I noticed this user User:Joaquim Nero after a page he created Deebs Magazine was added to Category:Articles with a promotional tone from January 2025. It looks like many articles he has created have problems. Could you take a look please? 🄻🄰 18:41, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

Pardon my barging in: just noticed the link from Deebs Magazine here, and am happy to point out Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet investigations/3ydepartment, closed a few minutes ago. Wikishovel (talk) 19:03, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
Hi Wikishovel, thank you for responding. Looks like I was right about the account. 🄻🄰 20:20, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

Is all caps OK?

? Knitsey (talk) 20:59, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

(laughing) It's fine.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:54, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

You've got mail

Hello, Bbb23. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.— Skynxnex (talk) 15:42, 5 January 2025 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – January 2025

News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2024).

Administrator changes

added Sennecaster
readded
removed

CheckUser changes

added
readded Worm That Turned
removed Ferret

Oversight changes

added
readded Worm That Turned

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • The Nuke feature also now provides links to the userpage of the user whose pages were deleted, and to the pages which were not selected for deletion, after page deletions are queued. This enables easier follow-up admin-actions.

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:46, 5 January 2025 (UTC)