Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 06:26, 17 July 2013

Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet investigations/Rob.HUN/Archive

No sanction on the sock master? RashersTierney (talk) 20:24, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

No. Blocks are meant to be preventative, not punitive. Since it was June 23 already and the socking occurred most recently on June 11, the standard one-week block that should have been levied on the master would have already expired. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 01:00, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Punitive my arse! No socking record? Fuck all response for dishonest editing. What a waste of my time. RashersTierney (talk) 01:12, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

The record is the SPI itself. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 01:14, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

No. A record would be a sanction on the sock master. RashersTierney (talk) 01:17, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

What benefit is there? How would a 1-week block now prevent any disruption from him? -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 01:19, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

It would be recorded in their block log. They would be on warning not to sock again. Is this really how we now address sock puppetry? RashersTierney (talk) 01:23, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

It's far from ideal, but it's a logical consequence of a backlog. When it takes this long to deal with the case, the closing admin gets left with a bad choice: let the bad behaviour appear to have no consequences, or put a block in place that it's hard to describe as preventative. A reasonable compromise might be to put a one minute block on the account with a pointer to the SPI in order to make sure that future admins are aware of this if there's a recurrence of any kind of disruption.—Kww(talk) 01:31, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

I suppose that's not a bad idea.  Done King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 01:34, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Thank you. And perhaps forgive the expression of exasperation above? RashersTierney (talk) 01:42, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

All is forgiven. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 00:27, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

Two more socks

I've got two innocent-sounding unblock requests from User_talk:FoolMeOnce2Times and User talk:CamelBaks, both tagged and blocked as socks of User:MooshiePorkFace as per Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet investigations/Morning277/Archive. The trick is that I can't find either name on that SPI. Is there a different archive I might check? Or should I leave these for another checkuser to confirm? Thanks. UltraExactZZ ~ Did 12:56, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

Having a CU look at it would be a good idea. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 00:27, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

Tech news: 2013-27

Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please inform other users about these changes. Translations are available.

Recent software changes

(Not all changes will affect you.)

• The latest version of MediaWiki (1.22/wmf9) was added to test wikis on June 27. It will be enabled on non–Misplaced Pages sites on July 8, and on all Wikipedias on July 11.
• On Wikisource, the canonical names of the "Index" and "Page" namespaces in the Proofread Page extension are no longer localized (bug #47596). Please check scripts that depend on $wgCanonicalNamespace.
• A JavaScript problem caused the "View history" and "New section" tabs in the Vector skin to be moved into the drop-down menu on right-to-left wikis. The issue is now fixed and links are visible as before (bug #50196).
• There was a short site outage on June 28.
• The automated Category:Pages with missing files now includes broken file links inserted inside the <gallery /> tag (bug #50119).
• The Nearby feature is now enabled on Commons and shows images in a user's area.
• There is now a special page listing disambiguation pages for wikis that use the Disambiguator extension (bug #44040).
• The old version of the Article feedback tool (version 4) was removed from wikis that still used it.
• VisualEditor news:
  • Many bugs that caused text to be removed or damaged have been fixed, including one related to copy-paste (bug #49816).
  • VisualEditor now offers a visual interface to edit references.
  • In preparation for enabling the VisualEditor on a wider scale, new documentation has been created, including a list of frequently-asked questions and a user guide with many images. Please help with translations.
  • Several problems related to overlapping of elements with the VisualEditor toolbar have been fixed (bug #50096, #50159, #50324).
  • TemplateData information is now displayed for templates that are added to a page (bug #49778).
  • Section edit links now show links to both VisualEditor and the old (source) editor (bug #49666).
  • Images are now loaded securely when using HTTPS (bug #43015).

Future software changes

• VisualEditor will be enabled for all logged-in English Misplaced Pages users on July 1, and for all users on July 8.
• From July 8, it will be possible to upload WAV and native FLAC files to Commons, and use them directly on wiki pages (]).
• The Universal Language Selector will be added to the English Misplaced Pages on July 2, and to remaining wikis on July 9.

Erratum

• Tech news #26 incorrectly reported that audio transcoding was added to TimedMediaHandler; it was actually statistics about audio transcoding that were added.

Tech news prepared by tech ambassadors and posted by Global message delivery • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

14:19, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

Captain Correcto

Hi King of Hearts, you closed Captain Correcto SPI last week. The IP was mainly editing the Better together page. Well today CC has turned up and started editing on it. WP:3rr brech included. Your call dude, will I report him or do you want to have a chat with him? Cheers bud. Murry1975 (talk) 16:29, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

Please file a report at SPI if sockpuppetry is involved, or an ordinary AN3 if not. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 00:00, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

Dick1968

You recently unblocked Dick1968 pending a CHU and with their promise not to make further COI contributions. COI is in fact exactly what they have been doing since that time at the Vijay Goel article, attempting to use it as a means of political campaigning. Please could you review? - Sitush (talk) 08:43, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

CHU request is here but the entire situation of naming is confusing me. They seem to be contributing as Amaratechnofutures (talk · contribs) but User talk:Dick1968 suggests they had requested Dineshjatjjn (talk · contribs) and the CHU refers to Admindcdelhi9 (talk · contribs)}, while another request also exists for another name. A case of "I used to be indecisive but now I'm not so sure", perhaps? - Sitush (talk) 08:54, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

I am becoming very confused regarding what is going on but am pretty sure that Delhidc1986dc (talk · contribs), Rritu (talk · contribs), Vamindian (talk · contribs) and Tkimtg (talk · contribs) are also the same person. - Sitush (talk) 09:00, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

Hello friends, I just want to updat emore information, with picture only, I am new on Misplaced Pages, So i just send request for change name. Rritu (talk · contribs), Vamindian (talk · contribs) and Tkimtg (talk · contribs) these are not me .

You've just sent me an email that pretty much passes the duck test for one of the above prior usages. I'd take this to WP:SPI if only I could work out which is the master account. - Sitush (talk) 09:14, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

Filing an SPI is the best idea here. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 01:00, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

Well, it would be if I could work out what name came first and whether any of the others were CHU cases, along with the ones I've already found. I mean, Dick1968 appears to have no contributions but was blocked for POV pushing? I think this needs an admin to sort it out because they have access to historic views that I do not. - Sitush (talk) 05:06, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

Take a look at my response here :) ·addshore· 08:32, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

Closure of sockpuppet investigation

You've essentially ignored WP:DUCK. GotGlue's behavior suggests that he's probably a sockpuppet of somebody. I think you were wrong to close it without a check pbp 03:04, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

 CheckUser is not for fishing King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 03:07, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

You've gotta be kidding me! I can't believe you're defending that user! He's clearly a disruptive account pbp 03:27, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

Innocent until proven guilty. In general, a single edit would only be sufficient for a check or WP:DUCK if there is a match in the editing pattern, as opposed to merely having the same opinion as another user. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 21:52, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

Wikipediocracy

I hadn't counted the number of reverts and wasn't sure if it was a BLP or not. However at the same time you blocked User:Mathsci I fully protected the Wikipediocracy page. CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 03:25, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

IMO, protection should be used when multiple users on both sides are revert warring with each other. However, in this case, Mathsci has been the only editor on that side since Dougweller unprotected yesterday, so I believe blocking is preferable to protection. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 03:49, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

Normally I would agree but in this case there was a claim of BLP. If it was then it was then protecting the article would work to allow the editors to discuss it. CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 05:45, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

Hi KoH. Per your note on Mathsci's talk page and his agreement to leave the article alone while ArbCom looks into how to deal with it, I have unblocked him. 28bytes (talk) 05:03, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

Seems sensible to me. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 21:54, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Admin's Barnstar
	For acting against Celeste6566 and her sockpuppets. Robert McClenon (talk) 23:29, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

Thanks! King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 01:31, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Deneuve15

You probably want to deny his appeal of my block as well. It's kind of strange to have him appealing my block when you've blocked on top of it.—Kww(talk) 00:50, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

 Done King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 01:31, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Some info

I'm guessing your comments at AN/editwarring were due to a lack of info.

This is merely the case where several editors with a declared bias, didn't like a close, are trying to interpret it in a way to support their POV, and are edit warring over it and then trying to accuse the closer (me) of edit warring with them.

Reverting a close, especially while a follow up discussion (which I asked for) is ongoing, is, as I'm sure you'd agree, disruptive.

(See also: User_talk:Good_Olfactory#3po.)

Anyway, since she's now run to AN/I with accusations, I guess I need to comment there next.

Happy editing. - jc37 08:34, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

I still don't know everything that's going on, so maybe I could have looked at it more carefully. Though in a similar case what I'd personally do (and have done in the past) when my close of a discussion is challenged is to revert once or twice (or never in the case of an admin action) and if they insist, wait for others to defend my close. This has two advantages: 1) you are not edit warring yourself and no one can accuse you of such, and 2) if your close was actually rubbish then you will quickly find that out by the lack of defenders, instead of escalating the problem further (I'm sure I've avoided being dragged to ANI on at least one occasion by this principle). -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 13:37, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Fair points all around.

While this wasn't a concern before, I'm now concerned that such a tack rewards the idea that bullying a closer trying to implement a close is acceptable and appropriate. There's just a lot of stuff I'm seeing here that seems so contrary to the consensus process and the "wiki-way".

I realise we see examples of this all too often at AN/I, but I guess I just really would like to think (my own AGF) that editors, should want come together and discuss. But I guess maybe I'm too old school, and "whoever can bully the best" is the way of Misplaced Pages now. But I'd like to hope not, and that we'd all step up and try to prevent that. dunno. But then, I'm merely one editor...

In the meantime, I fully expect I'll be repeatedly cudgeled by them with your block comment. (And I suppose I should note, that one of the 4 of then has once again reverted the close.) Part of me just wants to walk away. This is utter nonsense, about something I honestly could care less about. But I just don't like the precedent. Closers shouldn't be treated this way. And if we don't stand up to this nonsense, every future closer will likely have to deal with this. - jc37 05:36, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

I've noted your accusations of bullying at AN/I. Doing it on a page that you didn't expect me to be watching instead of saying it to me straight doesn't impress me much either. For King of Hearts's information, I was not part of or even aware of the CfD, I have never encountered Fayenatic London before, I have had occasional dealings with BHG, and I've been on the same side as her about 50% of the time, and I don't even know who the fourth member of this "cabal" is. Scolaire (talk) 17:27, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet investigations/Shadowthedog

When you move a case to a different sockmaster, you need to also update the "User compare report". Not sure if anyone had told you or if it just slipped your mind. I went ahead and updated it. Also, we normally make the move without a redirect unless there is a specific reason, but I noticed . Again, not sure if that was on purpose or you didn't know. If that was a mistake, you can just G6 it. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 17:10, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Sorry, I was never told this before. I'll keep in mind in the future. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 19:07, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

No problem at all, just wanting to help. Even though I'm still labelled a trainee, I've actually been there over a year, so pretty familiar with procedure. You can ask anytime you have a question. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 22:06, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Dennis Brown: I'm still not quite sure on the specific rules for this. There are three ways to move something: 1) leave no redirect; 2) leave a redirect; or 3) leave a piped {{SPIarchive notice}}. When do you do each? For example, why did you do (3) on Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet investigations/MatthewBarclay (a very recent case) but (1) on Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet investigations/IranitGreenberg (which has been the name of the case for a long time and is hence likely to be referred to)? -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 15:52, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

I'm off-wiki for the most part right now, so you might need to ask Reaper some of this. Of all the clerks, he is the most knowledgeable when it comes to the paperwork (and arguably, everything else there). He did correct me one point. If there was a CU done on the OLD name, then you leave the redirect so the CU log isn't a redlink (I've corrected my mistake above). As for the template, most of the time those are generated automatically when you archive. I've not ever added one manually. I suppose there may be a circumstance when ignoring all rules and using one to point somewhere else makes sense, I just can't think of one. Another thing, if someone creates a bogus or bad faith SPI report on a known good user, we will often delete them via G6 technical once it is obvious that there is no possible linkage, as a way to remove the mud that was slung. Obviously, the summary/log entry needs to be crystal clear on why you are CSDing it, and this should be used except in very obvious cases. Better details can be found in this rough draft . Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 18:58, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 03 July 2013

• In the media: Jimmy Wales is not an Internet billionaire; a mass shooter's alleged Misplaced Pages editing

• Featured content: Queen of France

• WikiProject report: Puppies!

• News and notes: Misplaced Pages's medical collaborations gathering pace

• Discussion report: Snuggle, mainpage link to Wikinews, 3RR, and more

• Technology report: VisualEditor in midst of game-changing deployment series

• Traffic report: Yahoo! crushes the competition ... in Misplaced Pages views

• Arbitration report: Tea Party movement reopened, new AUSC appointments

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• EdwardsBot (talk) 00:41, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet investigations/Wran

Hello. If I am not mistaken the CU request was eventually declined on this one. However, the CU request was, in my opinion, fairly substantiated. CU has already been run once on this editor before and the results were 'Inconclusive' rather than 'Unrelated'. I think it should have been done again if only to clear Wran. Wran's only response was yet another personal attack against me ("this is clearly an accusation in 'bad faith' to prevent his own incompetent and abusive editing being examined"), for which they received a warning by another editor. --Omnipaedista (talk) 07:19, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Seeking Advice

Hi KoH-

I recently published a comprehensive list of fatal aircraft-related occurrences and nominated it at FLC. I seem to be having an issue with members of the Aviation Portal. Based on the fact that my communication has been monitored, let me be clear I am not asking for your participation at AfD. Rather, based on the writing on the wall, I am curious if there is an appeals process post-AfD? I have spent considerable time and effort to create a comprehensive reference list that takes advantage of descriptive statistics while not crossing the line into original research. It draws on some material already on Misplaced Pages, incorporates new information, but goes significantly farther in terms of detail, organization, and functionality. It would seem that there is an effort to dismantle this new list, even if it survives AfD. Given the lacking level of detail, organization, and referencing of the comparison lists, as the new one is accused of being a duplicate of (1 & 2), I must assume there are other motives for the AfD. As an uninvolved admin, could you let me know if there any steps/options I am not aware of? Thank you in advance.--Godot13 (talk) 23:13, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Views Needed, Parikipandla Narahari

The article which you deleted in past was strongly notable(http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2013-01-18/bhopal/36414703_1_facebook-and-twitter-gwalior-followers, http://www.hindustantimes.com/India-news/MadhyaPradesh/Got-a-complaint-Poke-Gwalior-collector-on-Facebook/Article1-945195.aspx and http://www.tehelka.com/gwaliors-game-changer/). I was to rewrite that article due to copyright violation, but I was banned till 5th July, so I wasn't available to rewrite it. And in between the article got deleted.

You restored this article earlier after reading http://www.tehelka.com/gwaliors-game-changer, but under second nomination it again got deleted with lack of notability. I am confused what people are upto.

Please tell me how was that possible? or was your review of restoring the article lacked somewhere? Your views will highly catch the drift. Shobhit Gosain (talk) 12:49, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Tech news: 2013-28

Latest ] from the Wikimedia technical community. Please inform other users about these changes. ] are available.

Recent software changes (Not all changes will affect you.)

• VisualEditor news:
  • VisualEditor deployment has been delayed by a week. It is now planned to enable the editor for logged–in editors on chosen Wikipedias on July 22, and on all Wikipedias on July 29.
  • A bug that made it impossible to save VisualEditor edits that triggered a CAPTCHA has been fixed.
  • Several bugs that occurred on right–to–left wikis have been fixed last week (bug #49416, bug #49613, bug #50543).
• Uploading files has been restricted on Meta Wiki to administrators and the newly created uploader group. An exemption doctrine policy is being developed (bug #50287).
• Emergency priority CentralNotice banners will always be shown unless users have hidden them, ignoring cookies set for lower priority banners.

Future software changes

• MediaWiki will allow choosing a specific page of a PDF document or a thumbnail of a video file to show up inside the

• It will now be possible to create empty MediaWiki: messages, for instance in order to disable them (bug #50124).
• The Nearby feature will soon be enabled on Wikivoyage wikis again.
• The Notifications extension messages will now include a direct link to diffs on wiki as well as in notification e-mails (bug #48183).
• Table of contents will now use the HTML element instead of , fixing a nine–year–old bug #658.
• First mock–ups of a mobile Wikidata application have been published by Pragun Bhutani as part of his Google Summer of Code project.
• A discussion on minimum documentation practices in MediaWiki code has been started and awaits comments from the community.

Tech news prepared by tech ambassadors and posted by Global message delivery • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

18:30, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Michael Johns (policy analyst)

Hi King of Hearts,

It looks like you were watching the page for Michael Johns and I wanted to inform you that I was going to move it to Michael Johns (business executive). Let me know if this causes any problems for you. Josiah2013 (talk) 23:39, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 10 July 2013

• Op-ed: It's time to stop pretending the English-language Wikinews is a viable project
• WikiProject report: Not Jimbo: WikiProject Wales
• Traffic report: Inflated view counts here, there, and everywhere
• News and notes: Wikimedia Foundation Board appoints world expert in women's issues, global south
• Dispatches: Infoboxes: time for a fresh look?
• Featured content: The week of the birds
• Discussion report: Featured article process governance, signature templates, and more
• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• EdwardsBot (talk) 10:07, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

Tech News: 2013-29

Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please inform other users about these changes. Translations are available.

Recent software changes (Not all changes will affect you.)

• The latest version of MediaWiki (1.22/wmf10) was added to test wikis on July 11. It will be enabled on non–Misplaced Pages sites on July 15, and on all Wikipedias on July 18.
• The Disambiguator extension was enabled on all Wikimedia wikis on July 9 (bug #50174). To use it, add the __DISAMBIG__ code to disambiguation templates (see example).
• The Universal Language Selector was added to all remaining wikis on July 9, finishing the process of replacing the Narayam and WebFonts extensions.
• The CommonsDelinker bot is now on-line and operating again, after a password problem was fixed (bug #51016).
• VisualEditor news:
  • According to the schedule, VisualEditor will be available to all users on the English Misplaced Pages on July 15.
  • Users should add TemplateData to templates to prepare for VisualEditor. A tutorial is available.
  • Parameters marked as "required" in TemplateData are now auto-added when you add a template (bug #50747).
  • Warnings are now displayed in VisualEditor when users edit pages that are protected or have edit notices (bug #50415).
  • Many other bugs have been fixed in VisualEditor during the past two weeks.
• The Wikimedia technical report for June has been published, with a summary that can be translated.

Future software changes

• A new version of the Single User Login system for global accounts will be enabled on July 17. Users will now automatically go back to the previous page instead of seeing the "Login success" page with logos.
• The software that resizes images on all wikis will change on July 18. Resizing of big images will be faster and more reliable, and the resolution limit for GIF, PNG and TIFF files (currently set at 50 megapixels) will be removed.
• Edit tags (mostly used by AbuseFilter) will now also be on diff pages. They include a link to Special:Tags before the edit summary. Wikis that use links in tag messages should remove them.
• Global edit filters are currently in testing and will be added to wikis later.
• Wikivoyage wikis will start to use Wikidata for interwiki links on July 22.
• A new image gallery design has been proposed by Brian Wolff; comments and feedback are welcome.
• An IRC discussion about Bugzilla is planned for July 16, at 16:00 (UTC) on the IRC channel #wikimedia-office on Freenode (time conversion).

Tech news prepared by tech ambassadors and posted by Global message delivery • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

17:29, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

Premature close

The sanction removal at WP:AN#Request for sanction removal was in my view closed pre-maturely before anyone has had sufficient opportunity to voice an opinion that is factually based. It is not possible, in my view to factually oppose the sanction removal. Opposing the sanction removal for deliberately misspelling a word as an example of words being misspelled is not a valid reason to oppose, nor can I see any valid oppose votes. In deciding sanctions the question is do the sanctions benefit Misplaced Pages, and I do not see any possible yes answers to that question. Would you be willing to allow the request to run at least seven days or until there have been no new comments for 36 hours? (archiving is set to 48 hours) Apteva (talk) 06:26, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

• Misplaced Pages administrators