| Revision as of 01:23, 11 December 2017 view sourceSir Sputnik (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators144,325 edits →SPI questions: ty← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 19:11, 19 January 2025 view source Lowercase sigmabot III (talk | contribs)Bots, Template editors2,310,014 editsm Archiving 2 discussion(s) to User talk:Bbb23/Archive 64) (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'm no longer on break, but I'm not sure about my activity level or how responsive I'll be to posts, requests, and pings.--] (]) 22:20, 29 November 2017 (UTC)}} | |||
| {{archive box|search=yes|auto=long}} | {{archive box|search=yes|auto=long}} | ||
| {{User:MiszaBot/config | {{User:MiszaBot/config | ||
| |maxarchivesize = 200K | |maxarchivesize = 200K | ||
| |counter = |
|counter = 64 | ||
| |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}} | ||
| == |
== StayCalmOnTrees == | ||
| You blocked the sock account ({{noping|Whoeverer}}), but not the account you listed as master ({{U|Whaterss}}). Did you intend to? You may wish to post results at ] after looking at this. ~ ]<sup style="margin-left:-1.0ex;">]</sup> 14:55, 26 November 2017 (UTC) | |||
| == Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet investigations/Richard Daft == | |||
| Thanks for doing the CU and for your help with this individual in the past. Could you please block User:Ontario Railway now because, take my word for it, he is definitely Daft. The IP is probably gone anyway. Thanks again. <b>] | <sup><i>]</i></sup></b> 19:12, 29 November 2017 (UTC) | |||
| :I normally leave the behavioral analysis to a clerk. I should also point out that you've provided no evidence implicating Ontario Railway other than to simply declare that it's a duck. That's insufficient. If I were you, I'd add some evidence in the form of diffs. Otherwise, the report may be closed without action.--] (]) 19:24, 29 November 2017 (UTC) | |||
| ::Yeah, okay. <b>] | <sup><i>]</i></sup></b> 19:29, 29 November 2017 (UTC) | |||
| == Winner winner chicken dinner! == | |||
| I knew you couldn't break up with us forever {{smiley}}. --]<sup>]</sup> 22:36, 29 November 2017 (UTC) | |||
| :Too many of my recent edits to talk pages have been "welcome back" or similar - can people please stop taking these breaks {{p|:P}} but indeed, good to see you're back -- ] <sup>(])</sup> 22:39, 29 November 2017 (UTC) | |||
| ::Yeah good to see you back :)--] (]) 22:41, 29 November 2017 (UTC) | |||
| :::Yes. Very happy to see you back :) ] (]) 00:31, 30 November 2017 (UTC) | |||
| Thanks folks. How are you cooking the chicken, {{U|Ponyo}}?--] (]) 01:37, 30 November 2017 (UTC) | |||
| :I left the chicken for another night and whipped up a lovely baked gnocchi with kale, mushrooms and tomatoes. It was divine! --]<sup>]</sup> 16:49, 30 November 2017 (UTC) | |||
| ::I'm now confused. Did I win the dinner or did you? Although I do like chicken, the gnocchi sound really great. And I wasn't invited because ...?--] (]) 19:01, 30 November 2017 (UTC) | |||
| :::There's a water-sealed package of leftovers merrily floating its way to you as we speak.--]<sup>]</sup> 22:44, 30 November 2017 (UTC) | |||
| ::::Better than a sealed package of leftover water, one supposes. ] (]) 01:13, 1 December 2017 (UTC) | |||
| :I'm hardly the first to say it, but it's great to see you around again. ]<sup>]</sup> 17:09, 30 November 2017 (UTC) | |||
| ::{{re|GeneralizationsAreBad}} My former trainee who became a big shot about two weeks before I went on break. You were great at SPI as a non-admin clerk. Your work there since becoming an admin has been even better. It's not just because you can take administrative actions on your own. You seem to have gained a greater degree of confidence and become more assertive. Sure helps out the lowly CUs like me and Miss Chicken Dinner.--] (]) 19:01, 30 November 2017 (UTC) | |||
| :::'''↑'''Truth'''↑''' --]<sup>]</sup> 22:45, 30 November 2017 (UTC) | |||
| == Hmmm == | |||
| * {{iplinks|190.226.154.234}} | |||
| * {{userlinks|Noellesch9}} | |||
| You say technically Unlikely. Fair enough, but reading the edit summaries I find the quacking near-deafening. What do you think? <b>]</b> <small>(])</small> 19:52, 30 November 2017 (UTC) | |||
| :No way of knowing, but my instincts ''in this case'' are they are separate people. Of course, they might know each other or know the professor. Is the guy really notable? It's a pretty nothing article.--] (]) 19:57, 30 November 2017 (UTC) | |||
| :: It's only a nothing article after the puffery was removed, but yes, I agree. <b>]</b> <small>(])</small> 22:07, 30 November 2017 (UTC) | |||
| == ANI Experiences survey == | |||
| The Wikimedia Foundation Community health initiative (led by the Safety and Support and Anti-Harassment Tools team) is conducting a survey for en.wikipedia contributors on their experience and satisfaction level with the Administrator’s Noticeboard/Incidents. This survey will be integral to gathering information about how this noticeboard works - which problems it deals with well, and which problems it struggles with. | |||
| The survey should take 10-20 minutes to answer, and your individual responses will not be made public. The survey is delivered through Google Forms. The privacy policy for the survey describes how and when Wikimedia collects, uses, and shares the information we receive from survey participants and can be found here: | |||
| *https://wikimediafoundation.org/2017_AN/Incidents_Survey_Privacy_Statement | |||
| If you would like to take this survey, please sign up on this page, and a link for the survey will be mailed to you via Special:Emailuser. | |||
| *] | |||
| Thank you on behalf of the Support & Safety and Anti-Harassment Tools Teams, ] ] 18:24, 1 December 2017 (UTC) | |||
| <!-- Message sent by User:PEarley (WMF)@metawiki using the list at https://meta.wikimedia.org/search/?title=User:PEarley_(WMF)/ANI_survey_massmessage_list&oldid=17496483 --> | |||
| == Administrators' newsletter – December 2017 == | |||
| ] from the past month (November 2017). | |||
| ] | |||
| ] '''Administrator changes''' | |||
| :] ] | |||
| :] ] | |||
| :] ] • ] • ] • ] • ] | |||
| ] '''Guideline and policy news''' | |||
| :* Following a ], a ] has been added to the username policy which disallows usernames containing emoji, emoticons or otherwise "decorative" usernames, and usernames that use any non-language symbols. Administrators should discuss issues related to these types of usernames before blocking. | |||
| ] '''Technical news''' | |||
| :* Wikimedians are now invited to vote on the proposals in the ] on Meta Wiki until 10 December 2017. In particular, there is a section of the survey regarding new tools for ] and for ]. | |||
| :* A ] is available to edit filter managers which can be used to store matches from regular expressions. | |||
| ] '''Arbitration''' | |||
| :* ] in the ] is open until Sunday 23:59, 10 December 2017 (UTC). There are ] running for 8 vacant seats. | |||
| ] '''Miscellaneous''' | |||
| :* Over the last few months, several users have reported ] that require administrator attention at ], with the most common backlogs showing up on ], ] and ]. It is requested that all administrators take some time during this month to help clear backlogs wherever possible. It should be noted that AIV reports are not always valid; however, they still need to be cleared, which may include needing to remind users on what qualifies as vandalism. | |||
| :* The ] is conducting a survey for English Misplaced Pages contributors on their experience and satisfaction level with ]. This survey will be integral to gathering information about how this noticeboard works (i.e. which problems it deals with well and which problems it struggles with). If you would like to take this survey, please ], and a link for the survey will be emailed to you via Special:EmailUser. | |||
| ---- | |||
| {{center|{{flatlist| | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| }}}} | |||
| <!-- | |||
| -->{{center|1=<small>Sent by ] (]) 20:57, 2 December 2017 (UTC)</small>}} | |||
| <!-- Message sent by User:Mz7@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Administrators%27_newsletter/Subscribe&oldid=812545335 --> | |||
| == ArbCom 2017 election voter message == | |||
| {{Ivmbox|Hello, Bbb23. Voting in the ''']''' is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. | |||
| The ] is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the ]. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose ], ], editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The ] describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. | |||
| If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review ] and submit your choices on the ''']'''. ] (]) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC) | |||
| |Scale of justice 2.svg|imagesize=40px}} | |||
| <!-- Message sent by User:Xaosflux@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Arbitration_Committee_Elections_December_2017/Coordination/MMS/02&oldid=813406680 --> | |||
| ==Sockpuppetry/Rochelimit== | |||
| Thanks for letting me now of ]--] (]) 00:13, 4 December 2017 (UTC) | |||
| *{{u|Bbb23}} this accusation is a new territory for me. Normally I edit slowly, but during the ] challenge, my talk page began to receive spams and accusations, perhaps because I am one of the highest contributors in the score. I ignored the spams, keeping them as a history on my talk page as I normally would do, but some accusation is a bit too much for me. I actually don't feel very comfortable editing in Misplaced Pages because of these. Unfortunately, this continues after the event, hence I'm kinda worried about what will happen after this one. Is it normal to be worried? Please help me on how to deal with this, if I need help I will ask your guidance, if it's okay.--] (]) 11:46, 4 December 2017 (UTC) | |||
| ::To be clear, the above is at least as disturbing to me as the SPI ''should be'' to Rochelimit, especially now that I have directly stated that I think a joe-job (which still merits a check, given that multiple accounts are apparently being operated by the same user). Bbb23, I'm pretty sure you can still see the deleted version of ], so ... well, I know what I'm talking about. | |||
| ::RL, please do not make bogus conflations ({{tq|my talk page began to receive spams and accusations}}) of my that you should not remove maintenance templates without fixing the problems with . Heck, even if you don't like the SPI, you should not equate a normal Misplaced Pages process (which was endorsed by a clerk, who had nothing whatsoever to do with WAM) to blatant racist trolling, as you did above with {{tq|I ignored the spams, keeping them as a history on my talk page as I normally would do,}} () and {{tq|this continues after the event}} (which could only refer to the current SPI). It's not clear why you are badmouthing me like this on an admin's talk page, but you really should stop it. (And while it's completely unrelated, normally if someone blanks an outrageously offensive remark that has no place anywhere on Misplaced Pages, even on ''your'' talk page, you should not reinstate it even if you want to "keep a record". I'm reiterating this here because you appear to have ignored on the topic.) | |||
| ::] (<small>]]</small>) 12:33, 4 December 2017 (UTC) | |||
| :::ok ok I delete the black part, sheesh.--] (]) 13:13, 4 December 2017 (UTC) | |||
| === Now I'm receiving ] === | |||
| Bbb23, you may not be willing to perform a CU to find out who is. I have legitimately never heard of Misplaced Pages "invit to edit ... article with possible typographical errors"; it may refer to the text of the template message I added, but that but that is only visible to people who happen to be reading the article, which is on an obscure enough topic that we didn't have an article on it until last month, and the editor claims not to be Indonesian themselves. | |||
| But would you mind blocking the account until it retracts the bit about how {{tq|I ... feel that goes against my first amendment rights against libel (which is a legit crime) and have grounds for a suit}}. I've really had enough of this whole mess; I don't even feel comfortable blanking the offending message because I suspect (per the above) that Rochelimit will just restore it without explanation. | |||
| ] (<small>]]</small>) 23:59, 4 December 2017 (UTC) | |||
| :The inviting language was bizarre. As for the libel stuff, it's borderline. I would probably just chalk it up to being angry because he was "unjustly" accused, sort of the way editors sometimes rant when they're blocked. However, I have no problem with your bringing it to ANI to see what other administrators think. In the meantime, I'll try to find out what he means by the inviting, but I have a feeling he won't answer.--] (]) 00:25, 5 December 2017 (UTC) | |||
| ::No, if I open an ANI thread in the near future it'll be about ''yet another'' string of weird SPAs at showed up after I tagged some articles on Indian topics that had nothing to do with Rochelimit. At this point it's almost enough to make me think someone is specifically trolling me, rather than trying to set Rochelimit or whoever up... ] (<small>]]</small>) 00:46, 5 December 2017 (UTC) | |||
| == Removal == | |||
| that was such a mess? Were they technical errors? I put a lot of work into finding all those diffs and would like to at least copy them. <sup>]]]</sup> 14:51, 6 December 2017 (UTC) | |||
| :You never open an SPI with an IP as the master if there are named accounts. You open it with the oldest-created named account and list the IP "master" as one of the suspected puppets. In this instance, {{user2|Kingshowman}} is a notorious sockmaster, and you should have reopened his case with your report. Also, on all the named accounts, you included "User" in the checkuser template, which screws it up; you should just use the username. You also listed a named account twice. All the named accounts were already blocked anyway, so your only real complaint was about the IP whom you named as the master as all the other IP edits were too old. So, in essence it was a simple reopen of Kingshowman listing one IP only and NOT requesting a CU because we don't publicly disclose the IP(s) of named accounts.--] (]) 14:58, 6 December 2017 (UTC) | |||
| ::Oh, ok - pardon me, I'm new to the sock game so please try to exercise a little patience. Where are the instructions for reopening a case, and is there a way I can simply recover the diffs I provided? <sup>]]]</sup> 15:04, 6 December 2017 (UTC) | |||
| :::{{re|Atsme}} You asked what you did that was wrong. I listed everything. It wasn't meant to be offensive, just a factual response. Even my speedy delete was polite - at least I thought so. :-) --] (]) 15:53, 6 December 2017 (UTC) | |||
| ::::] - thank you for helping. It is much appreciated. <sup>]]]</sup> 16:02, 6 December 2017 (UTC) | |||
| == ] == | |||
| I see you just blocked a SOCK of this farm and was hoping for some assistance. had two SPIs filed against them but it is clear they are not using the same IPs (I noted when filing that a CU would not likely find technical evidence since they are part of the StayCalmOnTrees sock farm). They also have filed under StayCalmOnTrees. I provided a ton of behavioral evidence but there didn't seem to be an appetite for it. After those were all closed, another admin mentioned that the account should be re-evaluated. Since you were the most recently involved with the StayCalmOnTrees SPI with the block of User:Beyond the Bond, I was hoping you would take another look. I have even more evidence (pages on a Word doc actually) to tie them together. You can see your revert of Beyond the Bond on ] for their edit on the 15th, Sunuraju editing on the 8th and 9th, and then your revert of another StayCalmOnTrees sock (Opnicarter) from the 5th which shows these socks are targeting the same pages. They also just moved ] to the mainspace, a draft that was originally started by another SOCK of StayCalmOnTrees that they are connected with through other editing. If I am overthinking this, let me know but it seems clear to me that they are UPE and part of this farm. ] (]) 19:21, 15 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| <s>This user, subject of , is continuing to create TV episode lists in their ]. Since you closed the SPI I thought you might want to know. --<span style="outline:1px dotted #d1bfa4;"><font color="#ffffff">|</font> ] | ] <font color="#ffffff">|</font></span> 18:36, 7 December 2017 (UTC)</s> | |||
| :I didn't block Beyond the Bond; {{U|Ivanvector}} did after I filed a report against the user and requested CU. I'm not the best person to sort out the mess you're referring to, sorry.--] (]) 19:25, 15 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| ::Ahh. Got it. I read it wrong. I think I give up at this point. Cheers! --] (]) 19:45, 15 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| :::Heh, I know the feeling.--] (]) 20:55, 15 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| ::::It's rather obvious that Hum TV is paying for their productions to be promoted here. Why else would anyone be so persistent and go to the lengths that Nauman335/SCOT has gone to just to write about this one particular TV channel's shows, with sourcing as weak as it always is, blocked as many times and their articles deleted as many times as they have been, if they didn't have a financial incentive to keep trying? And they're just one of the many sockfarms active promoting just this channel. This is far more persistent than can be explained by there being a lot of fans of Pakistani TV. If COIN hasn't investigated this, that's a failing on our part. But that being said, Sunuraju has not come up in any of the checks that I've done recently. ] (<sup>]</sup>/<sub>]</sub>) 12:55, 16 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| == Operaatio Arktis == | |||
| Please can you send me the draft text from the ] page that was deleted yesterday? I would like to edit and add to it before reposting ] (]) 12:12, 16 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| :I'm willing to move it to draft space if that's what you mean. Let me know.--] (]) 16:00, 16 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| ::Yes that would be great, thank you. And apologies if I've not followed correct procedure here, I'm still learning ] (]) 12:18, 17 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| :::Here it is: ]. You should use ] to develop it into an article. Good luck.--] (]) 13:54, 17 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| ::::Great, thanks! ] (]) 12:48, 18 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| == Sherzod Abduvaitov == | |||
| I'm an idiot. This is actually another user ({{U|User409229}}) that I should add to that SPI. Sorry. --<span style="outline:1px dotted #d1bfa4;"><font color="#ffffff">|</font> ] | ] <font color="#ffffff">|</font></span> 18:41, 7 December 2017 (UTC) | |||
| :{{re|Uncle Milty}} You don't have to reopen the SPI. I've taken care of the new account. Wonder why they skipped 26-28.--] (]) 19:19, 7 December 2017 (UTC) | |||
| Hi there! Thank you for reporting ]. He has created dozens of accounts and just will not stop. See ] for our local discussion. And ] is huge! Despite repeated warnings to stop creating new accounts, he has continued to do so. Local blocks have proven ineffective in addressing this issue. Is there any way to prevent this individual from creating new accounts? ] <sup>]</sup> 18:56, 16 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| == SPI questions == | |||
| :Sometimes there are ways, edit filters and IP blocks, but I can't help you with that.--] (]) 23:58, 16 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| == Clarify about declining speedy deletion == | |||
| Could you explain in a little more detail what gave you pause ]? To me this looks really obvious. This editor had no fewer than eight similarly named accounts on the go at once a few months ago, so I figured there's probably more of them out there now. ] (]) 20:48, 9 December 2017 (UTC) | |||
| :As I said, I almost never perform a one-account "sleeper" check, and this one didn't justify an exception. The ones blocked in July were ones Katie blocked on her own and were then reported for the record. Not the same as, for example, when someone reopens the SPI with two accounts, and a check turns up several more than just the two listed.--] (]) 21:01, 9 December 2017 (UTC) | |||
| ::I guess my question then is why do you not perform one-account sleeper checks? ] (]) 16:17, 10 December 2017 (UTC) | |||
| :::{{re|Sir Sputnik}} If you want an answer to your last question, please sign your question properly. I'm a bit neurotic about such things; unless comments are correctly signed, the archive bot won't archive threads.--] (]) 15:49, 10 December 2017 (UTC) | |||
| ::::I'm sorry. I didn't realize I hadn't. ] (]) 16:17, 10 December 2017 (UTC) | |||
| :::::It's okay - just one of my pet peeves. One-account sleeper checks are generally a waste of time as they rarely produce any other accounts. I also don't like the word "sleeper". Most editors use "sleeper" as shorthand for accounts that have no edits (true sleepers) and accounts that have edits but weren't uncovered. I'm much more comfortable blocking the latter than the former because, depending on the circumstances, blocking a true sleeper risks blocking an innocent account as you have no behavior to support the technical data. In this case, I didn't think a "sleeper" check was justified and normally would have declined it. (There's also a third category of sleeper, i.e., an account that edited a long time ago, stopped editing, and then started editing again during the CU data retention period; they slept for a while. Those sleepers, who I think are the rarest, are also easier to block than the no-edit accounts because you have behavior.)--] (]) 18:40, 10 December 2017 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::Thank you. It surprises that checking a single account would be so ineffective, but not checking them makes sense since that's case. For what it's worth, I don't much care the word sleeper myself, but it seems to be the widely accepted term, so I go with it in the interest being understood. ] (]) 01:20, 11 December 2017 (UTC) | |||
| with due respect, I would like to know the reason of declining G11 to my recent tags. I had put those tags after careful reading the article and gone through references. Plz clarify the reason so that i can improve in future. Thank you 🙏 ] (]) 17:05, 17 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| ==Help me, I don't know what to do!== | |||
| :If you're going to ask me about why I removed a tag from an article, please mention the article, which is ]. The references have nothing to do with ]. What matters is the language, and although it's a poorly written, poorly sourced article, the language is not unduly promotional.--] (]) 17:10, 17 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| Dear Bbb23. | |||
| ::Got it. Thank you. That means if article looks promotional by language does it qualify for speedy deletion? I mean promotional language alone is sufficient ? Can we apply this tag if we know it’s obvious that written by someone closely connected. I hope you will clarify and help me understand it in much better way. Thanks ] (]) 17:44, 17 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| :::If you think an article is being written by someone "closely connected", that doesn't mean it qualifies for G11. G11 applies, as I said, when the language of the article is promotional. However, how promotion it must be before tagging for G11 is a judgment call. It depends on how much of the language is promotional compared to the overall size of the article and how intense the promotion is. I'm not sure that you have sufficient experience to make that determination.--] (]) 17:49, 17 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| ::::I can understand the message in your reply. Thank you for response . It helped. ] (]) 01:21, 18 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| == If you could please permanently block my account that would be great. == | |||
| I don't know what to do. It began with an accusation of sock/meat/joe-job to me during the WAM 2017 in which the accuser believed that I was helped by family or friends. I explained that I don't know anything about strange users who appear out of nowhere and have no interest in investigating, but the accuser does not believe in my explanation (he said it quite explicitly that he doesn't believe me), so I chose to remain silent and let the case go.--] (]) 12:13, 10 December 2017 (UTC) | |||
| You guys are now attacking me because I reported what I thought wrong, now I know they have very specific criterias for what is vandalism, and that they don't remove peoples talk messages even if they are vandalism. I saw I was in the wrong and I said this on the thing, I'm not an expert on Misplaced Pages, and now I know better thanks to you guys. The only other thing I did was correct someone who was saying he didn't edit a closed AfD, which I discovered he did I told him this. Now I also know that is not a big deal either. But now you guys are insulting me. "SubhanAllah" means "Oh how perfect is God" or "All glory is due to God", and as Muslims we say this when we are surprised or shocked or something bad happens. I don't see the issue with saying this, or maybe there's a rule against that too. I also already said I didn't edit for months because I have other things to do. I just edit here sometimes if I want to correct something or fix something. If one of you guys could please permanently block my account that would be great, since you guys want to come after me now, and I don't want to be an editor here anymore. I don't have time to be here all the time you get me ] (]) 17:08, 17 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| Then I think I incited anger to the accuser when I tag one of his ] with this ]. The tagging has a guideline which requires me to place another tag on the user's talk page . This tag automatically produces a "text" whose language turns out to be quite extreme in my opinion, it said something about "your article is going to be deleted, etc.". I think this automated tag angered him, and so after reverting all the tags, he began to tag the articles I introduced during the WAM 2017 month for bad grammar and copyright violations. I quickly check and try to reduce perceived plagiarism if apparent, but then he began to ask questions and demand answers from me from something I have no idea what. He even raises the previous sock/meat/joe-job issue again. I felt like being investigated by a police tbh. | |||
| :If you don't want to edit Misplaced Pages anymmore, just stop editing.--] (]) 17:11, 17 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| == Request == | |||
| Then as I edit the ] following his remarks and save it, he decided to delete the entire section of the article. | |||
| @], nice to meet you, I am Nelson. I would like to request you to help remove and revdel the parts about what I am doing in real life, because Janessian somehow got clues of what I did and I never revealed it to him. I hope to have the content related to my personal stuff taken down and wish that it will truly be the end of the episode because I certainty do not want to be dragged into the mud for the matter itself (much less the legal part), which had been affecting me for the past few days. ] (]) 05:17, 18 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| I'm confused and felt quite scared because I try to do whatever he told me to as close as possible to his remarks, but he kept reverting and demanding me to answer questions, and now he deletes a section (for the first time) plus demanding me to answer questions. To be honest, I don't know what to do, because everything that I do or explain seems to be wrong in front of him. I'm very sorry, this is the first time I encounter such conflict after years of peaceful edit with a variety of wiki users that help, teach, and encourage to post lists, etc. I'm not very fluent in Misplaced Pages guideline. Please guide me through this :(. | |||
| :@], and I do not wish to be involved with this issue as much as I want to speak up. I just hope for the matter to be resolved as soon as possible. ] (]) 05:20, 18 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| :{{tpw}}--{{Re|Rochelimit}}-Whilst you have done a commendable job at WAM, your's usage of the translate-tag was definitely non-optimal esp. given that you and Hijri were already involved in a SPI and were not getting along very well.We use such tags in specific cases where the ''entire'' article or a ''considerable chunk'' of it is written in a language other than English.Also, in many of your articles, you seem to have straight-away copied and pasted certain statements from different sources.WP takes copyvio/plagiarism issues very seriously and IMO, it would be highly prudential to re-check all of your articles for such errors and fix them accordingly.Also, I would advise you to <u>double-verify</u> whether your sources support the cited statements, for anything to the contrary even executed with a deluge of ] often leads to a lot of problems, given WP's integral dependence on sources. ''Cheers !'' :) ]<sup>]</sup> 13:12, 10 December 2017 (UTC) | |||
| ::Nelson, assuming you're talking about ], such edits should be suppressed, not rev/deleted. Please follow the instructions at ] to have that done.--] (]) 14:40, 18 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| :::by the way, thank you for the help you rendered throughout this process. It is really a painful case going on here, and I sincerely hope it can end and I also wish to move on, @]. ] (]) 11:56, 19 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| {{re|NelsonLee20042020}} I will interject here and say: The information that particular user has about you is because that information is literally at the top of your talk page. You told another separate user publicly about what you were doing in real life and he's seen it there most likely. Perhaps in the future be a bit more cautious posting details about your personal life online. But I wouldn't worry about it anyway because it's extremely vague, but be aware of this going forward. ] (]) 14:45, 18 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| ::{{ping|Winged Blades of Godric}} Yes, sorry for not being able to reword the sentences good enough during the WAM sprint/marathon. I guess the intensity of the event makes me careless, to the point that when I thought I already reword the sentences to avoid copyvio, turns out it is not enough. I have to fix this bit by bit. I also try to avoid over-referencing articles with ref tags, but this probably come up as referencing the paragraph wrongly. I have to check this also. btw I already fix some articles as remarked by the accuser, but then as I edit the ] and save it, the accuser decided to delete the entire section titled "form" out of the article, including parts that have no issue. This left me to this point that I don't know what to do and I don't want to do anything to the naga morsarang article because I'm worried I would start edit-war of reverting, deleting, reverting, deleting, with the accuser. That's why now I'm confused and kinda scared of editing tbh {:( --] (]) 14:47, 10 December 2017 (UTC) | |||
| ::{{ping|Winged Blades of Godric}} oh yeah, for the translation, I followed the guideline in here ] which mentioned that the ] is used to ask translation for a specific passage. That is why I placed a label <nowiki>{{subst:Needtrans |pg=Template:Not English |Language=unknown |Comments= }}</nowiki> to the bottom of the section that needs translation, as provided by the guideline, and only that part.--] (]) 14:59, 10 December 2017 (UTC) | |||
| :::I posted a couple of responses to both RL and WBOG , but honestly I'd just prefer to see how this played out. I would, however, much prefer that RL reply to my questions (even just one of them) than go around clumsily attempting to "fix" his plagiarized articles, much of which comes across as his simply trying to cover his tracks. (See, for example , where he fixed the text I happened to have already tagged, but either didn't understand that he needed to fix everything or was hoping no one would notice that he didn't.) ] (<small>]]</small>) 22:21, 10 December 2017 (UTC) | |||
Latest revision as of 19:11, 19 January 2025
StayCalmOnTrees
I see you just blocked a SOCK of this farm and was hoping for some assistance. This user had two SPIs filed against them but it is clear they are not using the same IPs (I noted when filing that a CU would not likely find technical evidence since they are part of the StayCalmOnTrees sock farm). They also have two SPI cases filed under StayCalmOnTrees. I provided a ton of behavioral evidence but there didn't seem to be an appetite for it. After those were all closed, another admin mentioned at ANI that the account should be re-evaluated. Since you were the most recently involved with the StayCalmOnTrees SPI with the block of User:Beyond the Bond, I was hoping you would take another look. I have even more evidence (pages on a Word doc actually) to tie them together. You can see your revert of Beyond the Bond on List of Pakistani television series for their edit on the 15th, Sunuraju editing on the 8th and 9th, and then your revert of another StayCalmOnTrees sock (Opnicarter) from the 5th which shows these socks are targeting the same pages. They also just moved Tan Man Neel o Neel to the mainspace, a draft that was originally started by another SOCK of StayCalmOnTrees that they are connected with through other editing. If I am overthinking this, let me know but it seems clear to me that they are UPE and part of this farm. CNMall41 (talk) 19:21, 15 January 2025 (UTC)
- I didn't block Beyond the Bond; Ivanvector did after I filed a report against the user and requested CU. I'm not the best person to sort out the mess you're referring to, sorry.--Bbb23 (talk) 19:25, 15 January 2025 (UTC)
- Ahh. Got it. I read it wrong. I think I give up at this point. Cheers! --CNMall41 (talk) 19:45, 15 January 2025 (UTC)
- Heh, I know the feeling.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:55, 15 January 2025 (UTC)
- It's rather obvious that Hum TV is paying for their productions to be promoted here. Why else would anyone be so persistent and go to the lengths that Nauman335/SCOT has gone to just to write about this one particular TV channel's shows, with sourcing as weak as it always is, blocked as many times and their articles deleted as many times as they have been, if they didn't have a financial incentive to keep trying? And they're just one of the many sockfarms active promoting just this channel. This is far more persistent than can be explained by there being a lot of fans of Pakistani TV. If COIN hasn't investigated this, that's a failing on our part. But that being said, Sunuraju has not come up in any of the checks that I've done recently. Ivanvector (/Edits) 12:55, 16 January 2025 (UTC)
- Heh, I know the feeling.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:55, 15 January 2025 (UTC)
- Ahh. Got it. I read it wrong. I think I give up at this point. Cheers! --CNMall41 (talk) 19:45, 15 January 2025 (UTC)
Operaatio Arktis
Please can you send me the draft text from the Operaatio Arktis page that was deleted yesterday? I would like to edit and add to it before reposting Thisredrock (talk) 12:12, 16 January 2025 (UTC)
- I'm willing to move it to draft space if that's what you mean. Let me know.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:00, 16 January 2025 (UTC)
- Yes that would be great, thank you. And apologies if I've not followed correct procedure here, I'm still learning Thisredrock (talk) 12:18, 17 January 2025 (UTC)
- Here it is: Draft:Operaatio Arktis. You should use WP:AFC to develop it into an article. Good luck.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:54, 17 January 2025 (UTC)
- Great, thanks! Thisredrock (talk) 12:48, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
- Here it is: Draft:Operaatio Arktis. You should use WP:AFC to develop it into an article. Good luck.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:54, 17 January 2025 (UTC)
- Yes that would be great, thank you. And apologies if I've not followed correct procedure here, I'm still learning Thisredrock (talk) 12:18, 17 January 2025 (UTC)
Sherzod Abduvaitov
Hi there! Thank you for reporting this user. He has created dozens of accounts and just will not stop. See uz:Vikipediya:Administratorlar forumi#Abduvaitov_Sherzod for our local discussion. And this list is huge! Despite repeated warnings to stop creating new accounts, he has continued to do so. Local blocks have proven ineffective in addressing this issue. Is there any way to prevent this individual from creating new accounts? Nataev 18:56, 16 January 2025 (UTC)
- Sometimes there are ways, edit filters and IP blocks, but I can't help you with that.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:58, 16 January 2025 (UTC)
Clarify about declining speedy deletion
with due respect, I would like to know the reason of declining G11 to my recent tags. I had put those tags after careful reading the article and gone through references. Plz clarify the reason so that i can improve in future. Thank you 🙏 Rahmatula786 (talk) 17:05, 17 January 2025 (UTC)
- If you're going to ask me about why I removed a tag from an article, please mention the article, which is Universal Engineering & Science College. The references have nothing to do with WP:G11. What matters is the language, and although it's a poorly written, poorly sourced article, the language is not unduly promotional.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:10, 17 January 2025 (UTC)
- Got it. Thank you. That means if article looks promotional by language does it qualify for speedy deletion? I mean promotional language alone is sufficient ? Can we apply this tag if we know it’s obvious that written by someone closely connected. I hope you will clarify and help me understand it in much better way. Thanks Rahmatula786 (talk) 17:44, 17 January 2025 (UTC)
- If you think an article is being written by someone "closely connected", that doesn't mean it qualifies for G11. G11 applies, as I said, when the language of the article is promotional. However, how promotion it must be before tagging for G11 is a judgment call. It depends on how much of the language is promotional compared to the overall size of the article and how intense the promotion is. I'm not sure that you have sufficient experience to make that determination.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:49, 17 January 2025 (UTC)
- I can understand the message in your reply. Thank you for response . It helped. Rahmatula786 (talk) 01:21, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
- If you think an article is being written by someone "closely connected", that doesn't mean it qualifies for G11. G11 applies, as I said, when the language of the article is promotional. However, how promotion it must be before tagging for G11 is a judgment call. It depends on how much of the language is promotional compared to the overall size of the article and how intense the promotion is. I'm not sure that you have sufficient experience to make that determination.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:49, 17 January 2025 (UTC)
- Got it. Thank you. That means if article looks promotional by language does it qualify for speedy deletion? I mean promotional language alone is sufficient ? Can we apply this tag if we know it’s obvious that written by someone closely connected. I hope you will clarify and help me understand it in much better way. Thanks Rahmatula786 (talk) 17:44, 17 January 2025 (UTC)
If you could please permanently block my account that would be great.
You guys are now attacking me because I reported what I thought wrong, now I know they have very specific criterias for what is vandalism, and that they don't remove peoples talk messages even if they are vandalism. I saw I was in the wrong and I said this on the thing, I'm not an expert on Misplaced Pages, and now I know better thanks to you guys. The only other thing I did was correct someone who was saying he didn't edit a closed AfD, which I discovered he did I told him this. Now I also know that is not a big deal either. But now you guys are insulting me. "SubhanAllah" means "Oh how perfect is God" or "All glory is due to God", and as Muslims we say this when we are surprised or shocked or something bad happens. I don't see the issue with saying this, or maybe there's a rule against that too. I also already said I didn't edit for months because I have other things to do. I just edit here sometimes if I want to correct something or fix something. If one of you guys could please permanently block my account that would be great, since you guys want to come after me now, and I don't want to be an editor here anymore. I don't have time to be here all the time you get me TopVat19sEver (talk) 17:08, 17 January 2025 (UTC)
- If you don't want to edit Misplaced Pages anymmore, just stop editing.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:11, 17 January 2025 (UTC)
Request
@Bbb23, nice to meet you, I am Nelson. I would like to request you to help remove and revdel the parts about what I am doing in real life, because Janessian somehow got clues of what I did and I never revealed it to him. I hope to have the content related to my personal stuff taken down and wish that it will truly be the end of the episode because I certainty do not want to be dragged into the mud for the matter itself (much less the legal part), which had been affecting me for the past few days. NelsonLee20042020 (talk) 05:17, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
- @Bbb23, and I do not wish to be involved with this issue as much as I want to speak up. I just hope for the matter to be resolved as soon as possible. NelsonLee20042020 (talk) 05:20, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
- Nelson, assuming you're talking about WP:OUTING, such edits should be suppressed, not rev/deleted. Please follow the instructions at WP:OS to have that done.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:40, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
- by the way, thank you for the help you rendered throughout this process. It is really a painful case going on here, and I sincerely hope it can end and I also wish to move on, @Bbb23. NelsonLee20042020 (talk) 11:56, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
- Nelson, assuming you're talking about WP:OUTING, such edits should be suppressed, not rev/deleted. Please follow the instructions at WP:OS to have that done.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:40, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
@NelsonLee20042020: I will interject here and say: The information that particular user has about you is because that information is literally at the top of your talk page. You told another separate user publicly about what you were doing in real life and he's seen it there most likely. Perhaps in the future be a bit more cautious posting details about your personal life online. But I wouldn't worry about it anyway because it's extremely vague, but be aware of this going forward. Inexpiable (talk) 14:45, 18 January 2025 (UTC)