User talk:Bbb23

Archives

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

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

Blocked user Kingcutie under new sockpuppet HDClear

It appears that user Kingcutie is once again vandalizing his brother's wikipedia page under sockpuppet HDClear, for which he was previously banned by you.

It's not entirely clear to me how to proceed with bringing attention to this.

WIKI PAGE: Har Mar Superstar

OLD USER: User:Kingcutie

NEW USER: User talk:HDClear

Reverting Speedy Deletion of Sacks and Co.

Hello. I noticed that you reverted my wp:speedy recommendation for Sacks and Co. and I'd just like to understand why. The article has no inline citations as references. It is clearly promotional in that the only link is to the firm's website. Further, the article does not establish that the subjects meets wp:n. That is why I selected G11 and A7. If I am mistaken or unclear about this, please take a moment and let me know why. If you think it would be better suited for wp:prod, why would you not recommend that, rather than simply decline the edit? I look forward to your insight.Volcom95 (talk) 03:19, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The G11 was completely misplaced, but, as I stated in my edit summary, the WP:A7 was "borderline". You're welcome to take it to AfD. As an aside, sources - or the absence of them - are largely irrelevant to A7 ("The criterion does not apply to any article that makes any credible claim of significance or importance even if the claim is not supported by a reliable source or does not qualify on Wikipedia's notability guidelines.").--Bbb23 (talk) 13:25, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

BKFIP sock

You're gonna want to block this BKFIP: 31.94.62.180. Thanks. NoobThreePointOh (talk) 09:30, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:21, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

exasperated

or some similarly resonant synonym -

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents&action=edit&section=20

of the behaviour of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Gilberatalessandro054

It is a mystery as to why admins are avoiding the obvious here, not sure why... JarrahTree 10:59, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

JarrahTree Indeffed. Black Kite (talk) 12:24, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bbb23 apologies to have bothered, and Black Kite - thank you very much JarrahTree 12:26, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Could you take a look at this SPI

Hello @Bbb23! You had previously blocked TechnicianGB so I was wondering if you could check this [1]? I have been monitoring for behavioral evidence close to a year now and it's obvious to me that they are all the same person. Would you mind taking a deeper look? Thank you! Weatherextremes (talk) 14:21, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppet advice

Hi Bbb23, I would appreciate your advice on how to proceed with this issue:

It looks to me as though User:Cirt – a user who you permanently blocked – has created another sock-puppet: user:Polygnotus.

This user came to my attention with two posts on September 25th, 2023: [2] and this [3], claiming NPOV violations while demonstrating a clear personal POV on the subjects by describing Landmark as a "weird cult." Having a history of less than 100 days active editing at that point, Polygnotus demonstrated a sophisticated grasp of WP procedures and practices which it is not plausible to have acquired in that time. Also an extensive and very detailed knowledge of the editing on these subjects over the past 20 years, and of the editors involved.

The editing pattern prior to coming to prominence last September looks like an attempt to game the system by artificially building an appearance of significant involvement. Around 3,100 of those edits were done in a six-week period between September 8th and October 22nd, 2022, and are almost all 0, 1 or 2 letter edits, done in bursts of one to five hours per day at a rate of 6 - 10 edits per minute(!).. [4] Then the account was largely inactive over the next 10 months, with just 18 edits in that time, followed by about 200 during August and early September 2023.

Since then, I have observed tendentious editing on the Landmark and Werner Erhard articles, including extensive edit-warring. For instance, this deletion was repeated several times without any constructive discussion or explanation: [5]

The phrasing and style are strongly reminiscent of Cirt, especially when aggressively confronting other contributors or resorting to wikilawyering. In any case, the editing pattern is not at all normal for a new editor, regardless of whether the sockmaster is Cirt or any of the other editors who have been editing negatively on these pages over the years.

What actions do you recommend? Nwlaw63 (talk) 15:48, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If you think the user is a sock, file a report at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Cirt.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:00, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

thanks Nwlaw63 (talk) 16:35, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hm I remember Gilbertine goldmark (talk · contribs) who was also interested in boardgames and defending Landmark. Polygnotus (talk) 16:36, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Teenagers who never do anything useful and just sign each other's guestbooks all day

Do we really need to be indeffing them for it, though? It seems harmless, and some of them may become productive editors. jp×g 🗯️ 03:45, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sock

Hi Bbb23,

This user Jessephu edited an article on Ben Okri's book and left an edit summary saying, "edited #everybookitsreader". Probably was a new user. Here again, Olaasunbo edited that page I why same or almost edit summaries here and here. However, I don't think these same user has done bad with it or maybe didn't know the implication og shocking. I'll suggest giving them a warn or blocking the alternative. Regards. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 11:09, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@SafariScribe@Bbb23 i am sorry about this, i was logged out y the network over here, hence the mistake. will take note. Jessephu (talk) 11:14, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Jessephu, the thing there is that you have to disclose all other accounts you've created and list them here so that Bbb23 will help analyse them and block them as well (it is his decision). You will be left with one account to avoid socking. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 11:17, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Olaasunbo is a new account actually which does not belong to me , was taking the user on how to edit on Wikipedia Jessephu (talk) 11:21, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I will leave Bbb23 to see that. I have no talk here. I will also advise, if it belongs to you, disclose that. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 11:26, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@SafariScribe thanks for the advice tho I really appreciate Jessephu (talk) 11:29, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ekpa-SPI update

[6] Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 14:34, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I commented at the SPI.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:53, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Something fishy going on here!

Just found a cryptocurrency enthusiast article of Waqar Zaka. It looks promotional, and looks being updated by paid editors and being sued by some paid editors. Even after being two time AFD they saved it. Looks like this cryptocurrency enthusiast got another Article, and this one advertise him in different way. (This )

I only found this source reliable, but the content is just a short chit-chat interview. Other than that, not much was found. This seems old page which encourages COI culture. What do you think we should do?

Lkomdis (talk) 18:10, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What does this have to do with me?--Bbb23 (talk) 18:13, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

How we can discourage this type of COI editing, you have years of experience as an administrator!.

Lkomdis (talk) 18:29, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Enough years to know that I have no interest in these issues. I suppose you could take it to WP:COIN, although I didn't look enough to determine how much merit your allegations have.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:37, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, for your suggestion, I appreciate your reply. Lkomdis (talk) 18:41, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Does this need an SPI

Just looking for some advice, but I spotted a certain similarity between this pair of edits edits[7][8] and again with this pair.[9][10] -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested «@» °∆t° 19:29, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No SPI needed. Blocked and tagged. Good catch. Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 19:54, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Admin's Barnstar
	Thanks for all you do to improve this encyclopedia. Regards! Maliner (talk) 22:28, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

SPI

Hi Bbb23, hope you're doing well. Can you please look into this SPI? It has been up there for almost two months now. Sutyarashi (talk) 15:13, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The evidence you've provided are mobile links. Please provide non-mobile diffs.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:33, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]