User talk:Blablubbs/Archive 29

Administrators' newsletter – December 2022
News and updates for administrators from the past month (November 2022).

Administrator changes
 * Gnome-colors-view-refresh.svg Eddie891 · Euryalus · TheresNoTime
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg Alex.muller · Excirial · RedWordSmith · Ron Ritzman · TheresNoTime · Stephen

Interface administrator changes
 * Gnome-colors-view-refresh.svg TheresNoTime
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg TheresNoTime

CheckUser changes
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg TheresNoTime

Oversight changes
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg TheresNoTime

Guideline and policy news
 * Consensus has been found in an RfC to automatically place RfAs on hold after one week.
 * The article creation at scale RfC has been closed.
 * An RfC on the banners for the December 2022 fundraising campaign has been closed.

Technical news
 * A new preference named "Enable limited width mode" has been added to the Vector 2022 skin. The preference is also shown as a toggle on every page if your monitor is 1600 pixels or wider. When disabled it removes the whitespace added by Vector 2022 on the left and right of the page content. Disabling this preference has the same effect as enabling the wide-vector-2022 gadget.

Arbitration
 * Eligible users are invited to vote on candidates for the Arbitration Committee until 23:59 December 12, 2022 (UTC). Candidate statements can be seen here.
 * The proposed decision for the 2021-22 review of the discretionary sanctions system is open.
 * The arbitration case Reversal and reinstatement of Athaenara's block has been closed.
 * The arbitration case Stephen has been opened and the proposed decision is expected 1 December 2022.
 * A motion has modified the procedures for contacting an admin facing Level 2 desysop.

Miscellaneous
 * Tech tip: A single IPv6 connection usually has access to a "subnet" of 18 quintillion IPs. Add  to the end of an IP in Special:Contributions to see all of a subnet's edits, and consider blocking the whole subnet rather than an IP that may change within a minute.

Discuss this newsletter

Subscribe

Archive Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:43, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

Sock
As the blocking admin for User:Sedentaire I would love to draw your attention this User who just came out of the blue to re-submit this Draft:Alexandre Arnault. Probably the same group of people trying to evade block. Worth another check. Jamiebuba (talk) 20:43, 5 December 2022 (UTC)


 * @Jamiebuba: This one has come up before, see User talk:Blablubbs/Archive 26 – they haven't edited since. I'm happy to take another look if they make any more related edits. --Blablubbs (talk) 21:04, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks and cheers. Jamiebuba (talk) 09:00, 6 December 2022 (UTC)

DevilBlack69
You know the drill. Active on es.wiki, created account here. ☆ Bri (talk) 05:06, 6 December 2022 (UTC)


 * . Blocked. --Blablubbs (talk) 09:23, 6 December 2022 (UTC)

Cheers ☆ Bri (talk) 01:59, 20 December 2022 (UTC)


 * ✅, blocked. No others seen. I'll ask for a lock. --Blablubbs (talk) 16:04, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

Happy new year! ☆ Bri (talk) 23:42, 8 January 2023 (UTC)


 * Handled, thanks. And to you as well! --Blablubbs (talk) 11:44, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

User:Kofi4495 and User:Evelynkwapong539
Hey. One thing I noticed while going through User:Kofi4495 and User:Evelynkwapong539 while I was blocked is that Evelyn’s socks have Kofi’s username in them. They haven’t socked in a while, according to behavioral evidence, but I believe based on their username’s that Kofi4495 is the master. Evelyn also created their account after the third and final User:Kof4456 the last sockpuppet from Kofi495 was blocked. I think their pages should be merged. Both masters have similar editing habits as well. Regardless, they’re blocked anyway, so it's up to you and other admins, but I think it's notable to merge their socks into one page. What do you think? Orange Mo (talk) 18:43, 6 December 2022 (UTC)
 * @Orange Mo: Seems like they are probably the same, but I haven't looked closely because none of the accounts in question have edited in over a year, and so I'm not convinced there's that much value in fiddling with the tags or moving the case around. At the end of the day, "sock genealogy" like that is just a means to the end of abuse prevention, and I'm not sure we'd achieve much in that respect. I'd leave the question aside and perhaps revisit if and when they ever resume activity. --Blablubbs (talk) 14:08, 8 December 2022 (UTC)
 * It's probably a good idea to merge them if they come back. I was just wanting to note that in case they do. They seem to be stale and probably could have given up socking for good. Orange Mo (talk) 21:40, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

What's the problem guys.. I didn't get what's going on Mrishtika (talk) 06:54, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Found hoax from 2009 (maybe)
I think I stumbled upon an individual with at least four accounts/personas who orchestrated a complex hoax back more than ten years ago. It's possible that the individual left the behavior behind but is still active under yet another account (on another Wikipedia site). The hoax was carried out in user space and didn't negatively affect any articles that I can see. On the other hand, it devastated some users emotionally. Please let me know if you think it's worth pursuing based on that, and I will email you with details. My main worry is reopening wounds for people who were affected, but the hoax was appalling. I will absolutely drop it and never mention it again depending on your thoughts. Thank you. Cerulean Depths (talk) 17:59, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

Sock of Eswaran Naveen returned
Seems sock of Eswaran Naveen returned as as Mrishtika removing content, awards and facts with sources at:

Cinema Express Award For Best Actress 

Rajeswari Kalyanam 

Nandi Award for Best Actress 

Filmfare Award for Best Female Debut Nehansaxan (talk) 23:28, 16 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Yup, that's them. Thanks. --Blablubbs (talk) 11:03, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Hi User:Blablubbs would like alert you that i suspect that User:Atsbi is a sock of blocked User:Solniun, they have similar writing styles: and  Banabakabiroshitha (talk) 11:47, 23 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks, blocked, along with some others. In the future, please create new sections on talk pages when raising an unrelated issue. Thanks! --Blablubbs (talk) 13:22, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

Sock
who is now banned is trying to return to the same subjects via IP editing --Maleschreiber (talk) 01:54, 17 December 2022 (UTC)


 * Albanian racists against Greeks like @Maleschreiber will never be left alone. <3 122.57.69.102 (talk) 02:00, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
 * After the block, could you please also semi-protect my talkpage and delete the IP's edits? I think that such reactions are interesting but they tend to get repetitive and I would prefer to have constructive discussions on my talkpage. Thanks--Maleschreiber (talk) 02:08, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
 * So why are you deleting your Talk page entries? Racism against Greeks by Albanians, like yourself, is a shame. @Maleschreiber 122.57.69.102 (talk) 02:11, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
 * It looks like Bbb23 has blocked the IP – I don't think this warrants anything beyond that at this point, but please let me know if it continues. --Blablubbs (talk) 11:30, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
 * They created a new account + IP use: .--Maleschreiber (talk) 21:05, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Rio0601‎
Just curious: what caused you to check for other accounts? As an aside, I'm at a loss as to why the master hasn't been reblocked at fr.wiki.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:30, 17 December 2022 (UTC)


 * @Bbb23: A few things: Special:Diff/1127962494 sounded like someone who has no intention of stopping, and might thus be stashing sleepers (or in need of an IP block); they used multiple accounts concurrently the first time around and I figured they might be doing so again; and the username gave me vague "sleeper farm" vibes. As for frwiki: So am I; then again, I'm consistently deeply confused by the way other projects handle (sock-)blocks (in the case of dewiki, I'm just confused in general), so that's par for the course. --Blablubbs (talk) 20:17, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Heh. Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:27, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

The block on my ip is nonsense
I have no contributions 2605:B100:1111:A676:1D3:7DCB:4CE5:9101 (talk) 20:14, 18 December 2022 (UTC)


 * Sorry, I'm not sure what IP you're referring to. --Blablubbs (talk) 20:18, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

CU
Hey, I need you take a look at this as I am not sure an SPI should be filed. disrupted the Vasojevići article. Since he got a block for that, several French IPs have tried to push the same POV (Boki used the French GoogleBooks .fr). Today such an IP appeared, and after being reverted, was created and started to push the same POV. Can a CU look at these accounts in this case? Ktrimi991 (talk) 16:29, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I do not want to be time-consuming. If an editor gets a temporary block for edit warring on an article, and then "retires" that account and uses IPs and a new account to continue the edit warring, is that in line with socking policies? Ktrimi991 (talk) 14:46, 23 December 2022 (UTC)
 * I can't comment on IPs, but these are ✅:
 * There isn't all that much page overlap between these, and use is partially sequential, but it's also not merely a situation where someone keeps forgetting passwords, and the frequent account switching smacks of evasion of scrutiny. I'd like a second opinion on the best course of action here; if one of the SPI regulars who watch my talk page could take a look, that would be much appreciated. --Blablubbs (talk) 12:00, 24 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the check. Krisitor was created to avoid scrutinity. Boki got a temporary block for edit warring. If Boki kept reverting again on the Vasojevici article after the block, a longer one could be applied. So they waited for some time, reverted with IPs and then created Krisifor to continue the edit war. This is against socking policy, IMO. On the other accounts I can't comment as I have never interacted with them. Thanks again. Ktrimi991 (talk) 14:49, 24 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Btw, while using the Krisitor account they stated that "Regarding my own edits, they were done first under an IP, then I created this account to continue working on the page". Their claim is not true, because before using the IPs and Krisitor, they used Boki to make the same changes on the Vasojevici article. Ktrimi991 (talk) 15:07, 24 December 2022 (UTC)
 * There isn't all that much page overlap between these, and use is partially sequential, but it's also not merely a situation where someone keeps forgetting passwords, and the frequent account switching smacks of evasion of scrutiny. I'd like a second opinion on the best course of action here; if one of the SPI regulars who watch my talk page could take a look, that would be much appreciated. --Blablubbs (talk) 12:00, 24 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the check. Krisitor was created to avoid scrutinity. Boki got a temporary block for edit warring. If Boki kept reverting again on the Vasojevici article after the block, a longer one could be applied. So they waited for some time, reverted with IPs and then created Krisifor to continue the edit war. This is against socking policy, IMO. On the other accounts I can't comment as I have never interacted with them. Thanks again. Ktrimi991 (talk) 14:49, 24 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Btw, while using the Krisitor account they stated that "Regarding my own edits, they were done first under an IP, then I created this account to continue working on the page". Their claim is not true, because before using the IPs and Krisitor, they used Boki to make the same changes on the Vasojevici article. Ktrimi991 (talk) 15:07, 24 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Btw, while using the Krisitor account they stated that "Regarding my own edits, they were done first under an IP, then I created this account to continue working on the page". Their claim is not true, because before using the IPs and Krisitor, they used Boki to make the same changes on the Vasojevici article. Ktrimi991 (talk) 15:07, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Just to give my own explanation: I retired as Boki becaude I got tired of the tag teaming behavior of some user in some specific pages and the lack of support. But as I still wanted to finish working a one specific page that nobody cares about, I created the Obodina account a few weeks later, to work on that specific page and tweak a few related ones, then I abandoned the account after a few last tweaks in November. The Leerlapse account was created to work on historical pages on my area of interest, but I avoided all pages controlled by the tag teaming users that I used to edit as Boki. I also abandoned this account in November. The one that I use now is the only one I use, but honestly, you can block it if you want, I don't care at all now that I observe the same lack of support after my legitimate edits of the Vasojevici page. Cheers, Kris Krisitor (talk) 15:38, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

Seasons Greetings

 * Thank you, @Donner60! Happy holidays to you and yours. --Blablubbs (talk) 12:02, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

Identical headings
Regarding this. Maybe you haven't noticed, but identical headings are not allowed because they misdirect and create confusion, sometimes with disastrous consequences. -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 19:18, 26 December 2022 (UTC)


 * Mediawiki already does the automatic numbering for links even if it's not explicitly specified – Sockpuppet investigations/Soibangla will send you to the second section called "suspected sockpuppets", for example. This format has been used at SPI for years, and I haven't ever encountered any problems; explicit numbering would also become fairly confusing in the archives of long-running cases. --Blablubbs (talk) 19:24, 26 December 2022 (UTC)
 * I trust you are right about the SPI page. On other talk pages, that is not the case. One can click on a heading in the TOC and end up at a very different section with the same heading. If one doesn't notice and just leaves a comment, all hell can break loose. That happened to me once, creating confusion, misunderstandings, and assumptions of bad faith. -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 19:38, 26 December 2022 (UTC)

My e-mail
Did you receive it?--Bbb23 (talk) 11:48, 27 December 2022 (UTC)


 * Yes, sorry – looks like I missed the notification. I'll get back to you as soon as I can. --Blablubbs (talk) 11:51, 27 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Responded. :) --Blablubbs (talk) 12:25, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

Storchy
Greetings. Can you give me any insight as to why this editor was blocked beyond the template on their talk page? I was taking them through NPP school, and did not notice anything, and was wondering if there is something I should be on the lookout for, or something that I should have spotted? Thanks.  Onel 5969  TT me 02:39, 28 December 2022 (UTC)


 * @Onel5969: I blocked Storchy as a good hand of WP:LTA/BKFIP after conferring with two other checkusers. I know this isn't a satisfying answer, but I don't think there is anything that you could (or should) have seen. --Blablubbs (talk) 02:47, 28 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Satisfactory or not, I thank you for your explanation. Learned a new term regarding the good hand/bad hand thing.  I'm just aggravated at the hours I spent on them in NPP school.  But thank you for the tedious work you do over at SPI, as well as all your other contributions.  Onel 5969  TT me 10:00, 28 December 2022 (UTC)
 * I was surprised by seeing this block as well so I came here. I don't see their name on the most recent SPI complaint when you scanned for sleepers. But I guess they drew your attention in some way. Liz Read! Talk! 07:37, 29 December 2022 (UTC)

Sockpuppet
Hello. I think I have found two sockpuppet accounts. 103.120.39.33 (talk) 05:15, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

Can you help me? 103.120.39.33 (talk) 14:55, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

I think User:RoboCric is a sock.103.120.39.33 (talk) 15:12, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

ACC #327754
Hi Blablubbs. It looks like you may have missed one of the two rangeblocks on the IP in ACC request #327754. There was a partial on /21, but a sitewide (anon. only, account creation disabled) on the /20. However, it seems like you only noticed the /21, and said to AGF on that basis. Can you please give this another look or confirm you were aware of the /20? Best, &mdash; Mdaniels5757 (talk &bull; contribs) 18:41, 29 December 2022 (UTC)


 * Responded via ACC, thanks. --Blablubbs (talk) 18:48, 29 December 2022 (UTC)