User talk:Girth Summit/Archive 22

Someone just broke all procedures and moved No queerphobes
Hi, Please help. The user @Serial Number 54129 just broke all procedures and just unilaterally moved the page. There was absolutely no consensus for their actions. Raladic (talk) 18:27, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Here for thirteen years and you think we have rules? "lol"   ——Serial Number 54129  18:29, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
 * There's quite a lot going on there. I'm not convinced that the closure of that discussion was legitimate either - the OP requested a close, but a lot of people had voiced an opinion. While it was far too early for a real consensus to have emerged, the majority of people who opined were in favour of deletion, redirection or moving. I would urge everyone to step back, take several deep breaths, and probably to start a discussion at a central venue where the advantages or otherwise of hosting that page can be properly thrashed out. I am involved, so if you are looking for an admin to take some sort of action, I can't help you. Girth Summit  (blether)  18:32, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
 * The result of this discussion (which whizzed by before I could even read it) was a procedural close, and not consensus to redirect. In the absence of consensus, I would politely ask to undo his move. I'm not sure how to interpret the actions of Serial Number or  in this situation, except as gaming the system.
 * I agree with Girth Summit that closure was inappropriate—and likewise the bizarre accusation of CANVASSING... for pinging substantial contributors to the essay. Per WP:WITHDRAWN, Early closure is inappropriate where it appears that the withdrawal is simply an attempt to short-circuit an ongoing discussion.. I politely ask to reopen the discussion and let it run its course.
 * Otherwise, editors interested in moving the essay out of the WP namespace should follow the proper procedures and open another discussion at MfD. –RoxySaunders 🏳️‍⚧️ (💬 • 📝) 18:47, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
 * NatGertler posted to my talk page and I've undone the close, my apologies to all. Schazjmd   (talk)  18:59, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Yes, even I just woke up and had no change to actually voice my opinion on the discussion before it was withdrawn and prematurely procedurally closed.
 * Even another editor was just writing their comment in the discussion right [] as someone actually closed it, but pointed out a slightly better title of WP:No Queerphobia, which I moved the page to now, as I believe it is a better more neutral title anyway.
 * But also I very much agree that the discussion should not have been closed as it runs afoul of the reason why we hold such discussions and it is normal due-course for a deletion discussion to notify the relevant Wikiprojects. Raladic (talk) 18:49, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
 * ^^Says two characters who were blatantly spammed to the discussion and unsurprisingly now want it re-opened (which should not do at such a bad-faith request, IMO). Ad Orientam was within his rights to ask for closure as the OP, and indeed, if he felt he was getting too emotionally involved, it was absolutely the right thing to do (something, in fact, that other parties to the discussion should probably do, however polite they think they are being). However, the Op does not control the discussion, and when such a procedurally flawed discussion is trending towards an obvious outcome, WP:IAR is fundamental.   ——Serial Number 54129  18:56, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Ok everyone, I'm making dinner, and my talk page is not the place to discuss this. Full disclosure: I disagree with Ad Orientem on a lot of stuff, mostly politics, but I agree with his call on this, I said so in the discussion and I am in no place to take any action because I am WP:INVOLVED. I consider Serial Number a wikifriend, and so am doubly involved. I think that we are in danger of wasting a huge amount of time, effort and screen space on this issue, and driving a wedge between otherwise like-minded people who ought to be doing something more productive. I would urge you all do leave this for the dust to settle and come back to it in a few days, but if you feel you have to do something about it now, please do it somewhere where someone can do something about it. Girth Summit  (blether)  19:07, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Now that the move has been undone and the MfD reopened, I have no need to discuss this particular matter any further, and I'm sorry to spam your talk-page with it. –RoxySaunders 🏳️‍⚧️ (💬 • 📝) 19:15, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
 * No worries - I just didn't want a massive discussion taking place here when I can do literally nothing about any of it. Cheers Girth Summit  (blether)  19:21, 28 April 2024 (UTC)

AfD vote stacking

 * Articles for deletion/Abdulla Bin Mohamed Bin Butti Al Hamed
 * Articles for deletion/Abdulla Bin Mohamed Bin Butti Al Hamed

Hi, this all starts with whose sole purpose in being here is to get the article deleted. Their communication skills are not good, so it appears sometimes that they are claiming to be the subject of the article and other times some representative of the subject. Eventually, an admin launched an AfD on their behalf (not something I would have done, but...). The community seems unanimous that the article should be kept, but two new accounts have voted delete, and. In addition, a much older account,, the author of the article with a declared COI, voted delete after not editing since 2019. This is either socking or meat puppetry, or a combination of the two. Can you check? Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:36, 30 April 2024 (UTC)


 * From a very cursory inspection, I'd say that the following are somewhere between very and ✅ to one another:, , , . I've only got a couple of mins free just now, please can you take whatever action you see fit?  Girth Summit  (blether)  15:31, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
 * All blocked and tagged as proven. Thanks very much.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:48, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

WikiProject Yorkshire Newsletter - May 2024
Delivered May 2024 by MediaWiki message delivery.

If you do not wish to receive the newsletter, please add an N to the column against your username on the Project Mainpage.

22:27, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

HaughtonBrit SPI
Hi there, would it be possible to run a check on this SPI. 4 different people (including the user who filed the previous SPI, myself, and 2 different admins) have expressed concerns that Historian2325 is a SPA of HaughtonBrit. This sockmaster is using many different sock/burner accounts to disrupt Wikipedia and steamroll their POV. Thanks in advance. Southasianhistorian8 (talk) 21:30, 29 April 2024 (UTC)


 * The short answer is that I'm not sure. That's a long SPI report, and my bouts of availability are frequent but short - I tend to look at simpler cases. I'm not saying that I won't look at it, but if I were to hazard a guess I say that reviewing all that and investigating would be a number of hours of work, so no promises. Girth Summit  (blether)  21:37, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I understand, I'll try to make a shorter version of the Historian2325 with much less diffs and link it on the SPI. Southasianhistorian8 (talk) 21:42, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
 * I made a somewhat abridged version of the Historian2325 section-. I know it's still a bit long but HB's sockpuppetry is so extensive that a greater amount of context is required than usual. Thanks. Southasianhistorian8 (talk) 01:57, 1 May 2024 (UTC)

IP sock contesting deletion
Hi, Girth. The account you blocked, User:Delta Global Solutions, is presumably evading their block through LOUTSOCKING using this IP to contest the deletion on their sandbox. Here's the IP: 188.113.206.32. NoobThreePointOh (talk) 13:08, 2 May 2024 (UTC)


 * Meh - if they're just doing it in their sandbox talkpage I'm not particularly bothered - they could do the same thing on their usertalk page while logged in if they wanted to. If they cause any trouble elsewhere let me know. Girth Summit  (blether)  13:10, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Will do. :P NoobThreePointOh (talk) 13:18, 2 May 2024 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – May 2024
News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2024).

Administrator changes
 * Gnome-colors-view-refresh.svg Nyttend
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg JohnOwens · Killiondude · MelanieN · Nihonjoe

Bureaucrat changes
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg Nihonjoe



CheckUser changes
 * Gnome-colors-view-refresh.svg Joe Roe

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

Guideline and policy news
 * Phase I of the 2024 requests for adminship review has concluded. Several proposals have passed outright and will proceed to implementation, including creating a discussion-only period (3b) and administrator elections (13) on a trial basis. Other successful proposals, such as creating a reminder of civility norms (2), will undergo further refinement in Phase II. Proposals passed on a trial basis will be discussed in Phase II, after their trials conclude. Further details on specific proposals can be found in the full report.

Technical news
 * Partial action blocks are now in effect on the English Wikipedia. This means that administrators have the ability to restrict users from certain actions, including uploading files, moving pages and files, creating new pages, and sending thanks. T280531

Arbitration
 * The arbitration case Conflict of interest management has been closed.

Miscellaneous
 * This may be a good time to reach out to potential nominees to ask if they would consider an RfA.
 * A New Pages Patrol backlog drive is happening in May 2024 to reduce the number of unreviewed articles in the new pages feed. Currently, there is a backlog of over 15,000 articles awaiting review. Sign up here to participate!
 * Voting for the Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) election is open until 9 May 2024. Read the voting page on Meta-Wiki and cast your vote here!

Discuss this newsletter

Subscribe

Archive Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:25, 2 May 2024 (UTC)

Reminder to vote now to select members of the first U4C

 * You can find this message translated into additional languages on Meta-wiki. 

Dear Wikimedian,

You are receiving this message because you previously participated in the UCoC process.

This is a reminder that the voting period for the Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) ends on May 9, 2024. Read the information on the voting page on Meta-wiki to learn more about voting and voter eligibility.

The Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) is a global group dedicated to providing an equitable and consistent implementation of the UCoC. Community members were invited to submit their applications for the U4C. For more information and the responsibilities of the U4C, please review the U4C Charter.

Please share this message with members of your community so they can participate as well.

On behalf of the UCoC project team,

RamzyM (WMF) 23:18, 2 May 2024 (UTC)

Sock is continuing
Hi Girth Summit, a couple of days ago you blocked. This user is (again) continuing under the name "A Crocodile in Bed" (e.g., to be seen at the history of the FC Barcelona page). Eem dik doun in toene (talk) 18:33, 5 May 2024 (UTC)


 * Looks like already dealt with this case.  Girth Summit  (blether)  12:48, 6 May 2024 (UTC)

Do you mind taking a look at this SPI?
Hello @Girth_Summit! I see you have a geology background which is not very far to climate etc. Would you mind taking a look at this ? I have spent around a year monitoring for SPI evidence for this case and I see it got no traction so far.

I hope I am not intruding and you are probably busy so I understand if you can't. Weatherextremes (talk) 06:29, 5 May 2024 (UTC)


 * Taking a look now. Girth Summit  (blether)  12:59, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Thank you so much! Weatherextremes (talk) 14:06, 6 May 2024 (UTC)

I need help
Hello, I need help I edited a wiki just today and I didn't know it would publicly reveal your IP Address. I been panicking about it. I tried contact oversight team but I couldn't send an email because it had said that I cannot email a wiki user which I don't understand. I now just made this account as well. I would be so grateful if you could help me, I really don't know what I'm doing. Hellohowareyou123K (talk) 14:23, 6 May 2024 (UTC)


 * If you edit without logging in, your IP address will always be shown since there is no account to link the edit to. Why are you worried about that, and what is it you would like me to do about it? Girth Summit  (blether)  14:28, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I had seen a post that had said to contact an administrator if you need help to suppress the IP which I don't know what that means. I'm worried about it because it scares me a lot and I'm only 16 I don't want my information out like that. I did create it without an account is that bad? Can it not go away anymore? I don't know how to contact oversight team either because I try to send an email and it won't let me I don't know why. Hellohowareyou123K (talk) 14:35, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I don't know why you're worried about your IP address being visible - unless the edit itself disclosed some personal information about yourself, I don't see any reason why you should be concerned. Girth Summit  (blether)  14:37, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Because I feel like it's something personal that's why I'm concerned I mean school always taught me to never share your address to anyone Hellohowareyou123K (talk) 14:40, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
 * It's only a problem if that information is somehow connected to you personally. Put it this way: anyone will be able to tell that someone edited a Wikipedia article from that IP address. Anyone can put that IP address into WHOIS or a similar service, and (provided the geolocation data is up to date) they will be able to tell that someone from your general geographic area edited that article. And... that's it. Provided you didn't write anything that would allow anyone to identify you as an individual, allowing them to connect you with that address and that edit, you're fine as far as I can work out. Girth Summit  (blether)  14:44, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Okay, thank you! That kind of makes me feel a little better but I'm still a bit scared. I really do appreciate the help a lot! I'll try to forget about it. Thank you so much for helping me understand a little bit better I'm grateful and grateful for your support!! Hellohowareyou123K (talk) 14:57, 6 May 2024 (UTC)

SPI question
Hello, after your results should the case status have been changed from "Relisted" back to "CU completed"? KhndzorUtogh (talk) 21:22, 7 May 2024 (UTC)


 * Not necessarily; I took a look, and saw nothing, but I'm not particularly familiar with the background. I've pinged a few of the admins who have looked at it in the past to ask them for their thoughts on next steps. Girth Summit  (blether)  09:50, 8 May 2024 (UTC)


 * Thank you for asking about a close, it was difficult to focus on editing while also having to keep an eye on this. --KhndzorUtogh (talk) 21:34, 8 May 2024 (UTC)

How can I contact an administrator?
Hello!

I want to thank you for checking this sockpuppet here. Any further investigation would be appreciated to clarify all the doubts of the user who reported it.

However, even after you said that I had nothing to do with it, he continues to accuse me of being the same person, asking another check user to see that sockpuppet. This is making me uncomfortable and I would like to contact an administrator to clarify everything about this. And I'm not the only one: the other user @WikiEditor1890 is also tired of the user continuing to accuse us of all being the same person. I know it's a complicated topic, but how can I contact with an administrator? I wanted to tell someone this, but I don't know how to get in touch with an administrator. I am contacting you, because you checked the sockpuppet.

Thank you very much and I apologize for any inconvenience! Farell37 (talk) 17:34, 9 May 2024 (UTC)


 * Hello, I agree and I want to do the same. Is there any kind of report abuse or harassment page for breaking personal attacks? I didn't even know what a "sockpuppet" was until I saw this today and turns out that user did it against me like 10 days ago.
 * You have said clearly me and Farell37 are not related and he keeps insisting we are the same person. The entirety of his claims is exactly what is he's doing and he is mad at us because we stop his fake Climate-Nationalist propaganda.
 * Without counting talk pages I don't even have 70 edits in 4 years, I have never done any harm to anyone, never did anything disruptive or never been blocked. Just to see some kind of Wish Sherlock Holmes says I am the same user as other 4 or 5 accounts? This is not possible and it has really annoyed me up. Why do we have to support his defamation? I want to report this together with and I really hope that old inactive account who he claims that is our "sockmaster" comes and takes action against this user's defamation as well. WikiEditor1890 (talk) 19:01, 9 May 2024 (UTC)

Please check your e-mail. Thanks
WikiEditor1890 (talk) 19:12, 9 May 2024 (UTC)

Wolfgang Diewerge
Hi Girth Summit, the article Wolfgang Diewerge is a translation of the German article de:Wolfgang Diewerge where I am main author. The translator referred me to you in order to give a correct attribution with complete history. He cannot do it himself since he is blocked in en. Could you help me there, please? Mautpreller (talk) 11:14, 10 May 2024 (UTC)


 * Hi . I'm sorry, but I'm probably not the best person to give you advice on that - I've never attempted to translate an article myself, so have never had to give attribution like that and I'd have to do some reading to give confident advice on how best to do it. Can I suggest that you ask at the WP:HELPDESK? Folk there are generally very responsive, and there is bound to be someone who knows better than me how to do it over there. Best wishes Girth Summit  (blether)  15:11, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I've added a translation tag. Hopefully that fulfills any attribution issue(s). --Kansas Bear (talk) 16:22, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

You've got mail
Weatherextremes (talk) 23:19, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

You've removed African-Americans from rock and roll and rock music
The good sourced content showing the African-American influences on rock music and rock and roll has been removed. You and other administrators have whitewashed rock music and rock and roll and completely deleted all the references to African-Americans. I hope you're all happy. The Beatles would be disgusted. 2A02:C7C:5C76:6200:DC0C:C7C0:8453:1B24 (talk) 12:39, 12 May 2024 (UTC)


 * I am enforcing the block that you are evading. I have not reviewed the edits you made - you are not permitted to make edits of any kind. Girth Summit  (blether)  12:56, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Again: I have not reviewed the edits you made. I appreciate that you're trying to upset me by calling me racist, but it is not going to work - I don't know what changes you were trying to make, and I don't have a view on whether or not they were correct. This isn't about your perspective, or whether you are right or wrong on the content, it's about the fact that you are evading indefinite blocks on multiple accounts. You are not permitted to edit here - when I come across accounts of yours, I will block them and revert their changes to enforce those blocks - that is all. I don't really care what the Beatles would have thought about that. Girth Summit <sub style="font-family:Segoe print;color:blue;"> (blether)  13:02, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
 * You know, persisting with this is fairly pointless. This page can be protected from IP editors (as has already happened with some of the pages you were targetting). I'd rather not do that, since other people might want to speak to me about something I've done or something they'd like me to do, but if you're going to keep coming back under new IP addresses that's what will end up happening, because you are not allowed to edit here at all. I get it - you think you are right about the content you changed, you think you were improving Wikipedia. I don't have a view on that, I just know that you're not permitted to edit here. I don't have a mandate to unilaterally decide what content goes into articles, but I do have a mandate to enforce blocks, and I do that regardless of how I feel about the content that blocked editors are adding. I harbour no ill will towards you, but I hope you will decide to go and do something more productive now.  Girth Summit <sub style="font-family:Segoe print;color:blue;"> (blether)  13:42, 12 May 2024 (UTC)

Sigh...
You may wish to block the IP which you previously blocked for socking: 172.59.208.242. Thanks. NoobThreePointOh (talk) 13:49, 12 May 2024 (UTC)


 * How tiresome. I've given them a few months off. Girth Summit <sub style="font-family:Segoe print;color:blue;"> (blether)  13:53, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Thanks again. What a relief. NoobThreePointOh (talk) 13:56, 12 May 2024 (UTC)

A break from Andy
I came across because of their blanking of. They created their account about two weeks ago. They've amassed 620 edits. After a handful of edits in the first week, they began - and have continued - counter-vandalism using Twinkle. They've posted to many administrative noticeboards. They've participated in WP:RFD and AfD. Their edits are very rapid. They've created an alternative account,. Finally, there's this discussion on my Talk page. Please note that they did not answer my question about other accounts.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:32, 12 May 2024 (UTC)


 * You're very kind! As far as I can see, they're ❌ to that account, and I don't see any other accounts of interest on the range they're using. Girth Summit <sub style="font-family:Segoe print;color:blue;"> (blether)  22:51, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Oops, sorry, guess I wasn't clear. I didn't think they were related to @I would be. It was just one more unusual thing they did and the way they came to my attention. Thanks for checking. Let's hear it for civility! --Bbb23 (talk) 23:14, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
 * All hail King Civility! Yeah, as far as I can see they're not related to anyone we know - I browsed cuwiki for a bit to see if the range in question threw up any flags, but drew a blank. Girth Summit <sub style="font-family:Segoe print;color:blue;"> (blether)  23:22, 12 May 2024 (UTC)

Any idea what this is?
Found gaming AC in their sandbox, then found  with identical vandalism on United States Numbered Highway System with an account created at the same time, finally checked for accounts with the prefix and found  which looks like a regular vandal but was created almost exactly 48hrs after the first two. Don't really want to file a SPI per DENY, but at the same time something just feels off that I'd like another person to have a look at. Pahunkat (talk) 19:41, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I'm on it. BTW "deny" doesn't suggest not starting an SPI. It's a school and I've already placed a few blocks. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 20:47, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
 * 10 is confirmed with 50, and 2 is also confirmed is 50. Moving right along--just kids. Drmies (talk) 20:56, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Thanks and noted Drmies. Pahunkat (talk) 21:08, 14 May 2024 (UTC)

IP Block Exemption
Hi Girth,

I am currently IP block exempt until 14 June. I have these rights because I live in China during holidays. I am returning on the 18th of June and I wish to edit during my time back, so I emailed the checkuser team two weeks ago to which I have gotten no response. Is it possible for me to get an extention on the rights? Thank you very much. <b style="color:white">Daftation</b> <b style="color:white">🗩</b> <b style="color:white">🖉</b> 11:19, 14 May 2024 (UTC)


 * Hi - I'm afraid I don't do IPBE stuff - I have the rights, technically, but it's not a process I'm familiar with. Try pinging another email perhaps if your first one slipped through the cracks? Girth Summit <sub style="font-family:Segoe print;color:blue;"> (blether)  12:00, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I asked GeneralNotability to look into it, because I can't get into VRT. Also pinging, . Drmies (talk) 20:39, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Thanks a lot Drmies! <b style="color:white">Daftation</b> <b style="color:white">🗩</b> <b style="color:white">🖉</b> 20:51, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
 * GN hasn't edited in a month, but if it was granted once, and there have been no problems, I'd be inclined to just extend it. I'm only a tiny bit scared of breaking a rule. Does that seem crazily rouge to anyone?  By the way, this same request has been posted on many talk pages; I'm hoping this is the most active one. Generally, Daftation, you only make a request one place at a time. Floquenbeam (talk) 20:58, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Hi Floquenbeam, thank you for your response, I’m sorry for posting it multiple times, I just hoped that I could get the right checkuser for my issue. I haven’t edited much recently because I am currently doing exams, but if I don’t get the rights before my return to China, I won’t even be able to request it on talk pages because I won’t be allowed to edit. I will become more active as soon as I return. <b style="color:white">Daftation</b> <b style="color:white">🗩</b> <b style="color:white">🖉</b> 21:01, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
 * It's 14 June, right? So there should be time to sort this out.  If Ponyo or Primefac respond to Drmies' ping, they're Checkusers, and they'll probably do it on their own. Floquenbeam (talk) 21:03, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Oh, good, I can ignore the one on my talk page then. I generally have a dim view of requests that get spammed like this, so I'm not feeling overly motivated to flip the switch myself, but if no one finds issue with the request on its merits, then I suppose... go for it. Primefac (talk) 08:04, 15 May 2024 (UTC)

Draft:S. S. Karthikeya
Hello GS. Quick question: how similar, please, is Draft:S. S. Karthikeya to the S. S. Karthikeya you G5'd on 10 April? Thanks, Wikishovel (talk) 16:23, 15 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Large quantities of that draft are directly copied and pasted from the G5'ed article (or they share the same root source). --Yamla (talk) 16:26, 15 May 2024 (UTC)

Entire IP range vandalizing and disrupting tons of Wikipedia pages.
This entire IP range is vandalizing several articles without hesitation and stop. Many of these accounts are sockpuppets that target the same articles, but not only that, it seems that just over the past 24 hours, the IP range has started to vandalize article's talk pages, user talk pages, personal user sandboxes, personal user archives and several Wikipedia articles as well, of course.

This IP range is already blocked from 2 articles, but I would suggest to block the entire IP range from editing anything in Wikipedia (anon-only) as the disruption will never start.

Here you can see just some of these examples. Affected pages just within the last 24 hours (except from the Croatian Kuna page, as the range was blocked from there 3 months ago):



He can be also related to a recent sockpuppet investigation where you made an intervention, as mentioned by the user but I won't go further into that as I didn't investigate anything. But it's really strange how these accounts from this IP range are targeting the same pages that were related to the SPI closed a week ago.

I have reported this to the Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents but if any admin can do something before this user makes more harm it would be grateful. This user also seems to break WP:NPA in their own talk page when asking to be unblocked from the partially blocked pages: Unblock me, if not, you are a Catalan separatist! WikiEditor1890 (talk) 19:49, 19 May 2024 (UTC)

Feedback request: History and geography request for comment
Your feedback is requested &#32;at Talk:Rafida&#32; on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out! You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name. Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) &#124; Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. &#124; Sent at 03:30, 20 May 2024 (UTC)

Editor merging discussion threads at Talk:Meat
I've noted on that page that the editor merged 2 separate threads on the talk page, in my view highly undesirably, and also against policy. Should we leave it, revert to the previous structure, or what? I see he's getting warnings on his talk page about other matters, so it might be necessary to go further. Chiswick Chap (talk) 13:06, 21 May 2024 (UTC)


 * I'd suggest hatting the massive wall of text - it's a barrier to discussion. Girth Summit <sub style="font-family:Segoe print;color:blue;"> (blether)  14:26, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Good idea, please do that. Chiswick Chap (talk) 14:36, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia policy regarding snippet view sources
Hi Girth Summit, hope you're doing well. Can you please tell whether or not snippet view sources from Google books (i.e those with no preview or full access available for either of the parties) can be used in case of content dispute? Thanks in advance. Sutyarashi (talk) 06:23, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I don't see how this would be any different than citing any other source – WP:PAYWALLed sources are perfectly acceptable, as are offline ones. See Reliable sources/Cost for further information.
 * I noticed that you say that the editors involved are only using Google Book snippets and none have full access to the text. I don't think that this is strictly nessecary given that what can be accessed is verifiable. There have been a few times where I've cited a page of a book this way. The only thing that immediately jumps to my mind as a possible issue is if there's reasonable concern that somehow this text in isolation is misleading or not providing adequate context. Clovermoss 🍀  (talk) 09:05, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Basically what said. The source isn't the snippet, it's the book - sources don't need to be available online. Generally, I'd expect the person citing the book to have access to it, and to have read more than what they can get at with a Google snippet - taking a tiny chunk of text stripped of any context would risk misrepresenting the author's intent, but without any further information I can't comment on any of the specifics.  Girth Summit <sub style="font-family:Segoe print;color:blue;"> (blether)  09:11, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Yeah, the quality of Google Snippets can vary dramatically. Some snippets will let you see pages while others will only show a paragraph. I'd find the latter situation more dubious. Clovermoss 🍀  (talk) 09:36, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I've sometimes seen ones that aren't even a whole paragraph - just literally like three lines of text. It all very much depends on the context - having sight of a snippet of text from an authoritative architectural guide might be enough to confirm that a particular building is of decorative gothic rather than perpendicular gothic design, but it would be very unlikely to be enough to confirm anything even uncontroversial about a BLP, or about biomedical effects of a particular chemical. Girth Summit <sub style="font-family:Segoe print;color:blue;"> (blether)  09:44, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Three lines? Wow. I suppose I've been lucky in that I usually come across a few pages at a time when it's been nessecary. I agree that context matters here. Clovermoss 🍀  (talk) 09:48, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Girth Summit @Clovermoss specifically I was talking about latter kind of sources (such as this), which allow only a few lines to be read. Are these really ok in case of a content dispute? Sutyarashi (talk) 16:10, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I don't see what that particular snippet could possible support - it looks like it's just part of the index of a book. The book itself might be a reliable source, I don't have a view on that, but I don't see how that particular bit of any book in and of itself could support any assertion. Girth Summit <sub style="font-family:Segoe print;color:blue;"> (blether)  17:35, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
 * It might be usable in a dispute over the spelling/romanization of a name, but wow, that provides even less context than I was imagining from “three lines”. At any rate, from the occasions on which I’ve tried to verify something and ended up at a snippet view, I guess there’s been sufficient context to satisfy me (one way or the other) in well under half of them.—Odysseus 1 4 7  9  20:15, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Not even for that - bereft of any context at all, and index wouldn't support the assertion that the spelling it is using is connected to the word you are trying to spell. If I tell you that the proper English translation of the French word 'merde' is 'toast', and linked to the index of a book about bread where it gives page numbers that mention toast, you would laugh in my face, and quite right too. If I told you that the correct spelling of the word 'advice' was 'advise', and did likewise... you see where I'm going. An index is a useful part of a book, but it is not a useful citation. Girth Summit <sub style="font-family:Segoe print;color:blue;"> (blether)  20:31, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I might argue that proper names are a bit different … but I won’t bother. ;) —Odysseus 1 4 7  9  20:45, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I missed the word 'name' in your last reply. Even then though, how would an index alone tell you that it's the name of the right person/thing, especially since there are often multiple ways that names can be spelled... Girth Summit <sub style="font-family:Segoe print;color:blue;"> (blether)  08:25, 24 May 2024 (UTC)

Notice of reliable sources noticeboard discussion
There is currently a discussion at Reliable sources/Noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is The Telegraph and trans issues. Thank you. I am informing you because you have commented on a prior RfC on a similar issue. Chess (talk) (please mention me on reply) 03:00, 27 May 2024 (UTC)


 * Thanks Chess. I'll try to find time to look in on it, but that is a hefty discussion. Girth Summit <sub style="font-family:Segoe print;color:blue;"> (blether)  16:10, 28 May 2024 (UTC)

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment
Your feedback is requested &#32;at Talk:FCSB&#32; on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out! You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name. Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) &#124; Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. &#124; Sent at 19:30, 28 May 2024 (UTC)

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment
Your feedback is requested &#32;at Talk:2024 United States presidential election&#32; on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out! You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name. Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) &#124; Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. &#124; Sent at 00:31, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

Sockpuppet investigations/Alia8910
Here are my comments on what they were doing. This was a strange subspecies of a strange species of conduct that we recently have seeing coprolites from at Miscellany for Deletion. What we see at MFD is that someone, at some time in the 2010s, created an account. Then they copied a web page into either their user page or their user sandbox. The web page may have been a Wikipedia article, or something else. Usually it is copied as a stupid copy, a copy-and-paste that captures the character content, but not the formatting, so that the copy is ugly, and difficult to read. The user then goes away. That is, all that they did was to create the stupid copy. We don't know why they do this. In April 2024 or May 2024, an editor discovers the stupid page via a report. Sometimes it can be tagged for U5, but if it is a copy of a Wikipedia page, there may not be any criterion for speedy deletion. It is a redundant fork, but that isn't a criterion for speedy deletion. So, over seven days, a few editors agree that it should be deleted. Creating a stupid copy is an occasional form of stupid conduct. This was different because the person doing the misconduct created multiple accounts, and did the same misconduct from each of them. This may have occasionally been done in 2015 or 2018, but the IP address records are not retained that long.

So this was someone creating stupid copies from multiple accounts. Now, if in six months we see stupid copies of the same web pages, we will be able to do an microscopic examination of the feathers.

This was a strange subspecies of a strange species of misconduct. I don't know why it is done, but MFD is the cleanup crew. That is a partial explanation. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:35, 30 May 2024 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the explanation - this all sounds like a pain in the bum. There really ought to be a G15 CSD along the lines of 'Stupid disruptive nonsense that somebody did one time and went away'. Come to think of it, that sounds like a somewhere between G2 and G3 - can you stick a G2.5 tag on them? Girth Summit <sub style="font-family:Segoe print;color:blue;"> (blether)  10:31, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

G5
Hello, You CSDed Yubin Shin because the creator was a blocked user. However, and as I am sure you know, G5 does not apply in the case of pages substantially edited by others. I edited substantially the page and it took me some time. I clearly mentioned this in the Afd you closed....So can I ask you to kindly restore the text of that page either in my User space or, more appropriately, in a DRAFT? Thank you very much.- My, oh my! (Mushy Yank)  13:21, 31 May 2024 (UTC)


 * You made two edits to that article, which I did not consider to be substantial. With that being said, if you want to work on it, I'll be happy to restore it as a draft, give me a minute. Be wary of any new accounts that show up and continue to work on it - the original author is a prolific cross-wiki abuser, and I will not be surprised if they return to continue working on it. Girth Summit <sub style="font-family:Segoe print;color:blue;"> (blether)  13:31, 31 May 2024 (UTC)
 * See Draft:Yubin Shin. Girth Summit <sub style="font-family:Segoe print;color:blue;"> (blether)  13:34, 31 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Thanks a lot! - My, oh my! (Mushy Yank)  13:59, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

Agreed
Nobody asked for your telephone ducttape opinion, you onion housekey. DMacks (talk) 16:57, 31 May 2024 (UTC)


 * Up yours, bookshelf auntie. Girth Summit <sub style="font-family:Segoe print;color:blue;"> (blether)  17:05, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

Filing SPI cases
Hi Girth Summit. Thanks for the CU earlier. Do you think there's room for clarifying the instructions in Sockpuppet investigations/SPI/Inputbox blank report for ordinary use to include updating the case status, when that should be done, by whom, and the best way to do that? (If not there, perhaps in the collapsed instructions on SPI?) The instructions at also make it sound like editing the case status is only done for cases already filed. If you'd prefer me to ask elsewhere, just let me know, but I wanted to ask someone familiar with SPI first. Thanks. Daniel Quinlan (talk) 03:40, 3 June 2024 (UTC)


 * I remember the first SPI I filed - I made an absolute mess of it, and a CU basically ticked me off told me to tidy up after myself. I'm not sure it's got any easier in the intervening years, so yes I think that the instructions could be improved upon. My own personal advice is to use Twinkle to file cases - go to the userpage of the proposed sockmaster, or the proposed puppet, and choose ARV from the drop-down menu. Amongst the options it gives you is to report a sockpuppet or a sockpuppeteer - you then just fill in a form. There's a checkbox where you can switch request for a CU on or off, which will set the flag for you. I wouldn't even attempt to file one manually, I think I'd still make a mess of it. Girth Summit <sub style="font-family:Segoe print;color:blue;"> (blether)  12:00, 3 June 2024 (UTC)
 * I wouldn't be surprised if I was that CU; I never understood why it was so hard - not that that gave me the right to be nasty, though. Even now, I file SPIs using the instructions on the SPI page, which isn't exactly "manually". Twinkle is fine unless you want to add to an existing report, and manually isn't hard at that point and creates less clutter than Twinkle, which AFAIK, always creates a new report whether you want to or not. I'm constantly trying to remove clutter from a naturally cluttered world.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:42, 3 June 2024 (UTC)
 * It wasn't you that I'm thinking of, but funnily enough... Sockpuppet_investigations/MichaelMiletic/Archive. It took my a while to find my SPI feet! Twinkle is fine for adding to an existing case - even if the case has an open report on it, it will just creates a new report with today's date. The only thing it won't do is add a new sock to an open report, but I can just about get my head around doing that manually. Girth Summit <sub style="font-family:Segoe print;color:blue;"> (blether)  14:11, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

WikiProject Yorkshire Newsletter - June 2024
Delivered June 2024 by MediaWiki message delivery.

If you do not wish to receive the newsletter, please add an N to the column against your username on the Project Mainpage.

18:34, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – June 2024
News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2024).

Administrator changes
 * Gnome-colors-view-refresh.svg Graham Beards
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg Deskana · Mets501 · Staxringold

Bureaucrat changes
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg Deskana · Warofdreams



Oversight changes
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg Dreamy Jazz

Guideline and policy news
 * Phase II of the 2024 RfA review has commenced to improve and refine the proposals passed in Phase I.

Technical news
 * The Nuke feature, which enables administrators to mass delete pages, will now correctly delete pages which were moved to another title. T43351

Arbitration
 * The arbitration case Venezuelan politics has been closed.
 * The Committee is seeking volunteers for various roles, including access to the conflict of interest VRT queue.

Miscellaneous
 * WikiProject Reliability's unsourced statements drive is happening in June 2024 to replace citation needed tags with references! Sign up here to participate!

Discuss this newsletter

Subscribe

Archive Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:44, 5 June 2024 (UTC)

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment
Your feedback is requested &#32;at Talk:Naseem Hamed/RFC on Ethnicity&#32; on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out! You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name. Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) &#124; Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. &#124; Sent at 19:32, 6 June 2024 (UTC)

NPOV RFK Jr
Hello, I am talking to you because of a discussion in the RFK Jr wiki talk page about neutral point of view. I have also said this on Largoplazo and Ian.Thompson’s talk page. I noticed you on Ian.Thompson’s and thought you would know more about it. Since I am not an expert I have decided to go out and contact the experts so they can make their decisions on it. Thank you. Logawinner (talk) 02:06, 13 June 2024 (UTC)


 * ian.thompson hasn't been around for years, unfortunately, so I don't think he'll be able to help. I have not particular knowledge of or interest in RFK Jr, and have no desire to enter into a discussion about our article about him. Rather than dropping notes on individual exitors' talk pages, you should go consider going to a noticeboard to make more uninvolved people aware of your concerns. WP:BLPN is where potential breaches of the biographies of living people policy, and WP:NPOVN is where to go to discuss articles that are not written from a neutral perspective. Girth Summit <sub style="font-family:Segoe print;color:blue;"> (blether)  07:10, 13 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Thank you. Logawinner (talk) 20:11, 13 June 2024 (UTC)

Potentially sockpuppet but no strong evidence
I'm uncertain about an editor who I suspect might be a sock puppet of Giubbotto non ortodosso. I've noticed that this editor appears to focus heavily on Chris Brown-related articles, much like Giubbotto non ortodosso did. In particular, they frequently edit the article on "Back to Love." Although it's just a gut feeling and I could be mistaken, I wanted to get your thoughts on this. <b style="color:black; font-family:Garamond">Btspurplegalaxy</b> <b style="color:blue">💬</b> <b style="color:#9D9E9E">🖊️</b> 11:06, 15 June 2024 (UTC)


 * I take it that was who you were talking about? Found a sleeper too. Girth Summit <sub style="font-family:Segoe print;color:blue;"> (blether)  11:18, 15 June 2024 (UTC)
 * That's correct. <b style="color:black; font-family:Garamond">Btspurplegalaxy</b> <b style="color:blue">💬</b> <b style="color:#9D9E9E">🖊️</b> 11:28, 15 June 2024 (UTC)
 * I regret to bring this up again, but it appears that the editor: is almost certainly Giubbotto non ortodosso. After the other account was blocked, they immediately began editing the article Hmmm. <b style="color:black; font-family:Garamond">Btspurplegalaxy</b> <b style="color:blue">💬</b> <b style="color:#9D9E9E">🖊️</b> 12:23, 15 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Yep. Girth Summit <sub style="font-family:Segoe print;color:blue;"> (blether)  12:31, 15 June 2024 (UTC)
 * I apologize if this is exhausting for you. They certainly do come back quickly. <b style="color:black; font-family:Garamond">Btspurplegalaxy</b> <b style="color:blue">💬</b> <b style="color:#9D9E9E">🖊️</b> 12:34, 15 June 2024 (UTC)
 * It's no big deal. I just peeked at their block log, since I wasn't sure why they were blocked in the first place - it was just a case of a temporary block for edit warring, and then block evasion. If they'd just waited out or appealed that block, they might still be editing legitimately. People make strange choices. Girth Summit <sub style="font-family:Segoe print;color:blue;"> (blether)  12:39, 15 June 2024 (UTC)
 * I discovered Giubbotto non ortodosso because the sock puppet Justinaintime mentioned that DollysOnMyMind was another alias for Giubbotto non ortodosso. This prompted me to investigate further, and I found that Giubbotto non ortodosso consistently identified MariaJaydHicky in various articles. My curiosity about Giubbotto non ortodosso grew, and my suspicions were ultimately confirmed. <b style="color:black; font-family:Garamond">Btspurplegalaxy</b> <b style="color:blue">💬</b> <b style="color:#9D9E9E">🖊️</b> 12:51, 15 June 2024 (UTC)
 * That's right, I'm doing the dirty job instead of you (who were caught helping them get their vandalisms into protected pages). You're welcome. I'm blocked because I'm catching people that are actually vandalizing the encyclopedia, while I'm also adding legitimate content. I find this more strange than "not appealing the block" to people who don't even care to actually look (instead of just quick-peek) at the contributions, but rather spend time bragging about being mentioned in small Nigerian articles nobody reads. I just want to ask you one question - in what way your today's contributions improved Wikipedia? What kind of harm did you just prevent? 5.90.234.239 (talk) 13:09, 15 June 2024 (UTC)
 * "You better catch that block-evading user that is doing his edits the right way, or he's going to warn us about another block-evading user that's actually vandalizing Wikipedia!! This absolutely must not happen!!" 5.90.234.239 (talk) 13:13, 15 June 2024 (UTC)
 * If you look a bit deeper than my userboxes, you'll see various ways I've improved the encyclopedia - I've written quite a few featured and good articles. Recently, admittedly, I've spent more of my time enforcing blocks than writing content, but I expect I'll bash out another couple of GAs this summer, and have been thinking about improving Second English Civil War and taking it to FAC.
 * Now, why do I enforce blocks? Because without them, this place would simply not work. There would be constant edit warring, constant abuse hurled back and forth, copyright violations galore, and an infinite number of crap articles about school football teams, web comics and people's mates' bands. If administrators block someone, other administrators need to be willing to enforce those blocks - which is what I do.
 * If you are willing to abide by your block and wait it out for six months, email arbcom and apply for an unblock under the WP:SO. Don't come complaining to me because I'm not willing to turn a blind eye to it. Girth Summit <sub style="font-family:Segoe print;color:blue;"> (blether)  13:18, 15 June 2024 (UTC)

GS, I'm pretty sure that User:Clapham Crew (CC) is another instance of MariaJaydHicky. Can you check/confirm? I think you know them better than me. Thanks! Drmies (talk) 16:45, 15 June 2024 (UTC)


 * Yep. Girth Summit <sub style="font-family:Segoe print;color:blue;"> (blether)  17:51, 15 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Thanks. How sad. Drmies (talk) 19:18, 15 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Yep. Girth Summit <sub style="font-family:Segoe print;color:blue;"> (blether)  19:52, 15 June 2024 (UTC)

Block evasion
Hello. After you blocked a sockpuppet Miagarciacs, an IP editor,, returned to the article to make the same edits.





Another IP address this person used,, is currently blocked for 3 months. NICHOLAS NEEDLEHAM (talk) 10:30, 16 June 2024 (UTC)


 * I've blocked the /64 and protected the page for a bit - ought to slow them down somewhat. Girth Summit <sub style="font-family:Segoe print;color:blue;"> (blether)  13:03, 16 June 2024 (UTC)

Manually reported sock
I was told to do it a way so it wouldn't be complicated, so I did it manually under the Sockpuppet investigations/MariaJaydHicky page, how would I go about reporting it on TW just in case for next time? <b style="color:black; font-family:Garamond">Btspurplegalaxy</b> <b style="color:blue">💬</b> <b style="color:#9D9E9E">🖊️</b> 06:07, 17 June 2024 (UTC)


 * If you use Twinkle, you should see 'ARV' as an option in the Twinkle drop down when you are on an account's userpage, talk page or contribs page. Amongst the options it gives you is Sockpuppet (SPI), or Sockpuppeteer (SPI). Choose the appropriate one, fill in the form, and Twinkle will to the rest. Girth Summit <sub style="font-family:Segoe print;color:blue;"> (blether)  07:26, 17 June 2024 (UTC)
 * I used Twinkle for the previous report of Justinaintime sock, I selected the Sockpuppet (SPI). So when I fill out the user for it, would I put the OG sock username? <b style="color:black; font-family:Garamond">Btspurplegalaxy</b> <b style="color:blue">💬</b> <b style="color:#9D9E9E">🖊️</b> 07:36, 17 June 2024 (UTC)
 * There are two ways you can do it. If you go to the sock's userpage/contribs, choose the 'Sockpuppet' option, and enter the Sockmaster's username into the form. Alternatively, go to the sockmaster's userpage/contribs, and choose 'sockpuppeteer', and then you need to enter the the usernames of the account/s you suspect of being socks. I normally do it the latter way, but it really doesn't matter which you choose. Make sure you type the names correctly though, there isn't any room for error - I usually copy/paste to be on the safe side. Girth Summit <sub style="font-family:Segoe print;color:blue;"> (blether)  08:29, 17 June 2024 (UTC)
 * I see. Thanks for telling me. <b style="color:black; font-family:Garamond">Btspurplegalaxy</b> <b style="color:blue">💬</b> <b style="color:#9D9E9E">🖊️</b> 08:51, 17 June 2024 (UTC)

DantheWikipedian socks
... are so obvious that I'm loathe to actually present evidence at SPI because I don't want to give them the opportunity to get any better at socking. Would it be alright if I just dropped a quick note on your talk page whenever I see said socks in action? — Callitropsis🌲&#91;talk · contribs&#93; 00:28, 17 June 2024 (UTC)


 * I'd prefer the case be raised at SPI - in terms of actually investigating, it's much easier for a CU or clerk to have recent cases available in the archive to compare against. Don't feel the need to go into enormous detail (and, as you say, train them in how not to be spotted) - you can be a bit vague, something like 'Same pattern of behaviour as X, Y and Z', or 'same as report in the archive from October 2023 or whatever. Cheers Girth Summit <sub style="font-family:Segoe print;color:blue;"> (blether)  06:02, 17 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Will do, thanks. — Callitropsis🌲&#91;talk · contribs&#93; 13:57, 17 June 2024 (UTC)

J.Williams
Hello! It seems there’s a copy of the same nonsense article on a different language Wikipedia page: https://zh-min-nan.wikipedia.org/wiki/J.Williams?wprov=sfti1

also, the sock came back, it seems this nonsense isn’t going to go away anytime soon. Warrenᚋᚐᚊᚔ 17:23, 17 June 2024 (UTC)


 * Nothing I can do about other language Wikis. Are you saying the sock is back on enwiki somewhere? Girth Summit <sub style="font-family:Segoe print;color:blue;"> (blether)  17:43, 17 June 2024 (UTC)
 * He is, but I tagged it on the sock investigation page at it seems he's already been blocked again, but I imagine it's not over yet. Warrenᚋᚐᚊᚔ 18:24, 17 June 2024 (UTC)

LTA Orchomen
Thanks for the CU block of Mizzion earlier. Unsurprisingly for this sock, they are having a strop and have been trolling my edits, reverting with a range of their usual IPs:


 * 
 * 
 * 
 * 
 * 

It is clearly Orchomen, and perhaps trickier to block the IPs as they seem to have various dynamic ranges to choose from. I'll just play wackamole for now, but it's a heads up in case there's anything you can do. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 19:06, 17 June 2024 (UTC)


 * I'm on mobile at the moment - please can you stick this in an AIV report? I haven't looked at your diffs, so no official comment on the IPs, but I probably shouldn't be the one to do any IP blocks given that I've publicly made comments about the accounts. Girth Summit <sub style="font-family:Segoe print;color:blue;"> (blether)  20:56, 17 June 2024 (UTC)

A funny thing happened on the way to the RfA
I noticed that, one of our new RfA clerks, properly struck 's vote because S wasn't an EC editor. Their account was created on May 4 (satisfying the 30 days requirement) but were a bit shy of 500 edits. Then in a conversation on the article Talk page about a related issue, Svampesky commented, at which point I took the opportunity to inform them that they are now EC, so they could reinstate their vote.

Meanwhile, I was suspicious of such a new account voting at RfA, and I reviewed their edits, which seem to involve a rather obscure agenda of de-orphaning articles. They added themself to the orphanage project on their 3rd live edit (their first was to create a Talk page). Other edits are unusual: (1) fairly early on they nominated an article for deletion (and it was deleted); (2) by May 13, they were Welcoming users; (3) warning users of COIs; (4) adding entries to Notable people who have edited Wikipedia with an edit summary in which they cite WP:SELFOUT (personally, I was unaware of article and unaware of the selfout link); and (5) that's enough for now.

They were renamed from User:BlueSharkLagoon, and it's quite interesting to look at early iterations of their userpage where they discuss other accounts and their shared IP addresses (VPNs).

IMO, there is enough oddness here to warrant a check. What do you think?--Bbb23 (talk) 15:25, 18 June 2024 (UTC)


 * Sounds odd, but I'd want to take a look through their contribs to be confident that a check was warranted. Anything suspicious that you noticed - are there any other recently blocked orphanage project (I didn't know that was a thing) members? Or overlap with any blocked accounts on the articles they're editing? I'd be hesitant to run a check if I don't have someone to compare against, and I can't put my finger on what it is I think they're up to. Girth Summit <sub style="font-family:Segoe print;color:blue;"> (blether)  12:46, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
 * If I had another account to check against, I would have said so. I just took another look at the user's contributions, and the oddness, for me, sticks out even more, but I don't think further analysis of why would change your mind, so I'll let it go. Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:09, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
 * I'm not saying no, I'm just saying I'll need to do a review myself to satisfy myself that there's cause (and inviting any pointers as to which rocks to look under). Will try to get a chance shortly. Girth Summit <sub style="font-family:Segoe print;color:blue;"> (blether)  14:24, 19 June 2024 (UTC)

I don't know how helpful it will be, but all I can do is highlight more areas of editing that are unusual for a new editor: --Bbb23 (talk) 14:46, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Creates lots of user subpages, e.g., User:Svampesky/Toolbelt
 * Weird fixation the Signpost, e.g., Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2024-06-08/Deletion report, Kalloor, which is all somehow related to hoaxes, e.g., Wikipedia talk:List of hoaxes on Wikipedia
 * Trump-related pages, including Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Donald Trump
 * Changing archives, e.g., Neutral point of view/Noticeboard/Archive 65 with the edit summary ("changed link but preserved text, as I have changed the destination of the shortcut") - did this in MANY archives, including Trump stuff like Talk:Donald Trump/Archive 97