Misplaced Pages

User talk:Abecedare

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.

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Abecedare (talk | contribs) at 00:41, 18 July 2024 (→Sock/NOTHERE user: r). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 00:41, 18 July 2024 by Abecedare (talk | contribs) (→Sock/NOTHERE user: r)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Welcome to my talk page.
Please sign your messages by appending ~~~~ at the end.
Start a new talk topic.
Archiving icon
Archives

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10
11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20
21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26


This page has archives. Sections older than 21 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III.


Request for intervention

Hi Abecedare, hope you are fine. I would like to request you to have a look at this SPA (if not a caste warrior), RobertJudeson trying to push their POV with no intention of achieving consensus! The user is also engaged in edit warring in contentious caste articles in spite of being aware of the discretionary sanctions and even after warnings. Please check the revision history of the article on Karhade Brahmin and the user talk page! Moreover, it doesn't seem that they are a new user, rather they seem to be a sock from the sockfarm of User:Joshi punekar. Before I could file an SPI, another editor has already done so; you may check Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet investigations/Joshi punekar! Thanks & Regards. Ekdalian (talk) 18:08, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

For now, I have full protected Karhade Brahmin and left the editor a note. Should at least give everyone some breathing room to calmly discuss the content issues and deal with the suspected sockpuppetry (I may take a look at that later but no promises). Let me know if the edit-warring continues or spreads to other articles. Cheers. Abecedare (talk) 18:38, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
Thanks a lot. Regards. Ekdalian (talk) 18:44, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
@Ekdalian: Good call on the sockmaster! Btw in reverting the sock's edits at Saraswat Brahmin I noticed that they had cited a self-published book and they have misrepresented sources at other places (eg, this book in this edit; I had seen other examples but lost track of exactly where). Pinging @Fylindfotberserk: who I saw that the sock mentioned at ANI. Cheers. Abecedare (talk) 15:12, 29 June 2024 (UTC)
Thanks, Abecedare. You have done everything to protect these articles and revert to the last clean versions. I would like to thank you once again for being here; you truly represent an ideal admin! Regards. Ekdalian (talk) 17:05, 29 June 2024 (UTC)

Undiscussed page moves and hijacking attempts by TSJ/Bensebgli/Anujror sockfarms

I saw that you blocked the TSJ's range and protected the redirects. I'm wondering if it's possible to undo the damage they've done by moving these long standing redirects by renaming back to their original name or merging their histories or deleting them. I tried but I got a error that states "page of that name already exists". These are the redirects that I'm talking about.

These are the ones that I've encountered, I'm certain there are many more such redirects . Ratnahastin (talk) 06:52, 26 June 2024 (UTC)

Will take a look in the next 24h. Feel free to add to the list in the meantime. Cheers Abecedare (talk) 07:11, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
@Ratnahastin: Done except for Chokar Kalan / Chhokar because in that case I couldn't figure out where the article actually belongs and what its content (if anything) should be; several sockfarms seem to be involved; and, a few good-faith editors have weighed in (likely w/o being aware of the socking issues)making it ineligible for G5. I have protected the two pages so that non-sock knowledgeable editors can fix the content as they see fit.
Let me know if I missed something or erred somewhere in handling the above list. Cheers. Abecedare (talk) 01:01, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
Thanks, can you have a look at these redirect moves too?
These are from Anujror/Bensebgli/Johnbendenz sock group. 
Ratnahastin (talk) 06:51, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
Thanks. Will take a look as and when I am procrastinating from other tasks. :) Abecedare (talk) 17:13, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
I've cleaned up most of the first group of pages where a redirect was hijacked by an unrelated subject. I wonder if some title blacklist entries would be useful here, i.e .*koli.* <moveonly> would block any attempts to move a page to a title containing the word "koli" (case insensitive) by anyone who is not in the page mover, template editor or administrator groups. * Pppery * it has begun... 21:23, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
Much appreciated Pppery!
I have cleaned up our conversation a bit but thanks for setting up the title blacklist and if there is anything more that can be done, feel free to get in touch by email. Cheers. Abecedare (talk) 22:09, 5 July 2024 (UTC)

Nsibidi-related editing

Hey Abecedare, I want to bring the articles Nsibidi and Ekoi people back into a more neutral and fact-based shape, since CHI-Research has been spreading their POV there as well. Can you keep an eye on that and maybe lend a helping hand, if needed? Thanks, Gawaon (talk) 11:18, 30 June 2024 (UTC)

@Gawaon: I don't plan to edit those, or even the Igbo people article, myself but I have watchlisted Nsibidi and Ekoi people to keep an eye and provide talkpage input from a disinterested viewpoint, if needed. In case there is disruption on the pages that I miss, feel free to ping me or drop a note here. Happy editing! Abecedare (talk) 14:56, 30 June 2024 (UTC)

Publish this page, please.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/Draft:V._Balsara

Used genuine references from The Times of India, Telegraph India, Anandabazar Patrika, Ei Samay Sangbadpatra, and Internet Archive Wikifulness (talk) 01:57, 7 July 2024 (UTC)

@Wikifulness: I have submitted your draft for review so that an AFC regular can take a look, provide you feedback, and move it mainspace when ready. You can continue to make improvements to the draft in the meantime. For example, on a spot check not all the facts in each para seem to match up with the specific reference cited at the the the para's end. You should take another look and make sure that everything is verifiable and properly cited. Cheers. Abecedare (talk) 02:21, 7 July 2024 (UTC)

@Abecedare: Thanks for your kind attention. From Wikifulness — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikifulness (talk • contribs) 03:16, July 7, 2024 (UTC)

Biased user

Ratnahastin has an anti-BJP and pro-INC bias, and engage in edit war. Their edits are a mix of content removal (sourced), POV pushing, censoring, and misrepresentation of sources. Refer the edit history and talk page of Enforcement Directorate in early April this year, also check the edit warring in Katchatheevu from 31 March where the user tag-teamed with Rzvas for content removal without even providing a valid explanation. The problem in those articles still prevails.--27.63.235.6 (talk) 16:01, 7 July 2024 (UTC)

IP, at a quick glance the edits at the two articles you mentioned appear to be routine content disputes that can and should be settled through talkpage discussion or dispute resolution; I cannot determine if you have tried that approach while editing through another IP or account. If there is anything particular you are concerned about, you'll need to be more specific (ie, provide diffs etc), and WP:ANI or WP:AE may be a better venue to ensure a broader and more timely response. Pinging The Doom Patrol who was involved in both those disputes in case they wish to follow up on this complaint at those boards. Cheers. Abecedare (talk) 17:03, 7 July 2024 (UTC)

Regarding long ongoing vandalism in Maratha Confederacy article

Hi,

A user Padfoot is repeatedly removing sourced content (WP:RS) from Maratha Confederacy article without any valid reason. He is telling any editor to have a discussion or consensus if they wanna add any information in the article. Moreover he is not accepting the statement of reliable sources and when I am asking him to provide any sources for support of his statement or views he isn't (see this ). The article prior to my most recent edits has numerous failed sources and wrong information in the lead, when i am correcting it, he is reverting my edits, removing wrong information and changing it to correct information doesn't require consensus or discussion. I have even quoted from the sources so that other editors could easily verify it. Kindly see to it.

Regards Mohammad Umar Ali (talk) 01:56, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

@Mohammad Umar Ali and PadFoot2008: I don't know offhand which of your preferred version is superior or has consensus but I can second the advice Flemmish Nietzsche has offered several times on the page (eg and ) that edit-warring and arguing about what the article lede should state while the discussions are ongoing (or on hiatus) is unproductive. Until clear consensus is established, any "correction" you may make to the article is going to be unstable. So I would suggest that:
  1. Get back to the article talkpage, and use WP:DR if needed
  2. Break up the problem into addressable chunks because it is unlikely that you will be able to settle all the differences seen in this diff at one go.
  3. Also consider whether all that detail belongs in the article lede (again, as Flemmish Nietzsche suggested previously)
  4. Stop reverting each other in the meantime!
Note that if the current conduct continues, page protection or page blocks are likely. Hopefully, that won't be necessary though. Cheers. Abecedare (talk) 02:41, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
That discussion was just about one line and Flemmish didn't remove it after I added it see this but the rest of what I added see this is supported by reliable sources. While the previous version prior to my edit has wrong information, it's that sources say one this but lead contains entirely different information. I already had a discussion with him but he is providing no sources random statements of any user can't be included in the argument. The main problem is that he isn't accepting information stated by reliable sources nor he is giving any reliable sources for support of his claim. So please help me out. Mohammad Umar Ali (talk) 02:56, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
Also I wanted to point out one more thing, Padfoot often ignores the discussion once he revert my edits you could see this from the many discussions me and Padfoot had on article's talk page. Now as he has restored the previous version he will likely not answer or delay the discussion. Mohammad Umar Ali (talk) 03:11, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
@Mohammad Umar Ali: reading the discussions on the talkage, it is difficult for an outside observer to even determine what proposed addition or deletion is being argued over in which section. That is why I suggested the above steps. That way, even if you/PadFoot2008 cannot see eye to eye, you can point to the specific section where the particular edit was discussed and other discussants weighed in on one side. Abecedare (talk) 03:13, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
I have asked him three simple questions now, if he answers that well and fine but I am sure he can't so he will ignore my msg that's the problem. Just please ensure he discusses that specific points nothing else. Mohammad Umar Ali (talk) 03:19, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
The thing which started the whole situation was PadFoot's rewrite of the entire lead which many people did not receive well but PadFoot reverted and responded to with "the lead was too long", despite that a deletion of the last paragraph in the former lead, which was indisputably not necessary for the lead, would shorten it enough. MuA (Mohammad Umar Ali) has since fought over the inclusion of different areas of greatest extent of the Marathas' borders (farther south and north than the ones in the lead prior to PadFoot's rewrite), which have peculiarly gotten increasingly southward throughout this dispute first change, "Karnataka in the south" to most recent change, "Tamil Nadu in the south". There has also been disputes over the neutrality of PadFoots new lead, which has stayed (I personally don't really care either way, except for the border situation which I think it would be better just to stay what the stable borders were) as of now. The first talk page discussion on this dispute was this one "WP:RAJ claim misunderstood by Rawn3012"; and has continued in most of the following discussions. Flemmish Nietzsche (talk) 04:10, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
Thanks for the background, Flemish. I tried to read-through the changes that have been made since the page-move but the diff is hard to follow. Barring support for mass-revert, which I haven't seen so far, the best course forward may be to address any proposed changes on their merit without regarding the current version as necessarily having consensus behind it either. Cheers. Abecedare (talk) 02:21, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

Helping Birds

They seem like a sock of Thakor Sumantsinhji Jhala, for example see this edit war over a redirect hijacking between them and an IP , I think they were edit warring while logged out with themselves to create an illusion of them not being TSJ because they reverted the IP only a minute later.

Yup, they could have been edit-warring with themselves. There are so many LTAs in the caste, esp. Rajput, area that it is hard to be sure of who's who and what mental games they are trying. Blockworthy in any case. Abecedare (talk) 15:21, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
It seems my suspicions were correct , they indeed are a sock of TSJ. Ratnahastin (talk) 04:04, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Haribhakta10

Would you have a look at User:Haribhakta10? I'm thinking they are the return of User: Viratvini11 (sock of User:Vinayvinyill) who you blocked yesterday. Their account was created today and they have the same focus on Darshan, same interest in adding/improving photos, same habit of going to user's talk pages to ask them (while pinging others) for improvements to be made. Thanks, Zinnober9 (talk) 12:12, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

Iam not a sock, First time I create wiki , when I start to edit, first I see all users how they are contributing to article, so I add their reference, If any doubts me, investigate me I can clarify all your doubts.
Thanks Haribhakta10 (talk) 12:15, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
@Zinnober9: Thanks for spotting this/ Blocked as WP:DUCK. Abecedare (talk) 13:12, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
Thank you! Zinnober9 (talk) 16:15, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
Duck again. User:ದರ್ಶನ್ ಅಭಿಮಾನಿ Zinnober9 (talk) 15:34, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
 Blocked and tagged. Abecedare (talk) 15:44, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
Admitted socking for User:D boss worshipper. Sigh. Zinnober9 (talk) 13:47, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
Blocked. Abecedare (talk) 15:07, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Return of a sock

Hello wiki admin, i found the sock of User:Thakor Sumant Sinhji Jhala, User:Mulraj Jadav is pushing koli POV — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2409:4085:D46:1B42:D563:5D1A:960E:21A1 (talk) 11:59, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Thomas Matthew Crooks

Making the protection indefinite seems like overkill, Somehow i doubt this is going to be a controversial topic in a year Trade (talk) 20:32, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

@Trade: Indefinite does not mean forever. Things will hopefully settle down although it's too soon to know exactly when since there is so much real life uncertainty due to the unknowns of the case itself, the upcoming elections etc. If and when the on-wiki activity/disruption falls, the protection at this and related articles can be lowered by asking the admins who applied the protection or posting at WP:RFPP. Cheers. Abecedare (talk) 20:41, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Sock/NOTHERE user

Hi Abecedare, I hope you're doing well. I would like to request action against this user SantwinderSingh who is vandalizing various pages-, , . This user is also a sock of GuruRavidasPuttar; all these accounts are being operated by a user who for the past 2 years, has been a menace in various South Asian related pages, they've been vandalizing pages through IPs which geolocate to Italy, making random changes to census figures, aggrandizing their religion and the Punjabi language, and trying to engulf various sects as part of his religion. After this ANI report, where many of their ranges were blocked from the pages they often target, the user switched to using accounts. SantwinderSingh is clearly this user's sock account. Southasianhistorian8 (talk) 18:08, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

@Southasianhistorian8: Would you mind adding this to the GuruRavidasPuttar SPI so that there is a consolidated record of the sockmaster? Pinging Dreamy Jazz from there may also help, esp. if the new account is still editing from Italy. At a quick glance the edits to Dera Sach Khand look suspicious but will need to take a deeper look before I can act; will do so in the next day or so. Cheers. Abecedare (talk) 18:55, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
I'm sorry, I should have clarified, while I'm certain the account is a sock of GRP, the account is disruptive enough to warrant a NOTHERE block, so I don't think admins should go through the trouble of doing a sock investigation, or at least a behavioural evidence check, especially when this case involves hundreds of IPs over the course of 2 years. A block for persistent disruption was what I was hoping for. Southasianhistorian8 (talk) 19:37, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
A look through their edits makes me even more inclined to think that SantwinderSingh is indeed a sock of GuruRavidasPuttar but for now I have blocked them from article space to stop their disruption while leaving open the an opportunity for them to use talkpages to present sources and explanation for their future edits. Have also ECPed Ravidasia. Malerkotla State could use some more eyes. Abecedare (talk) 00:41, 18 July 2024 (UTC)