User talk:Sro23/Archive 5

Hey
Working on the sources now. — Preceding unsigned comment added by WaterFlower8 (talk • contribs) 02:23, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

Chappie 2
How come you keep on reverting my edits about Chappie 2? 2601:646:8103:881E:D856:5964:CCA5:908D (talk) 12:26, 29 March 2017 (UTC)
 * You have made no edits on Chappie 2. An article for Chappie 2 does not even exist. Thank you. --- ‖ Ebyabe talk - Attract and Repel  ‖ 18:03, 29 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Wasn't there someone obsessed with this non-existent sequel a couple years ago? I seem to remember us having to revert their edits again and again. MarnetteD&#124;Talk 18:43, 29 March 2017 (UTC)


 * Yup. See the IPs other edit. - BilCat (talk) 20:02, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

DRN case closed
This message template was placed here by Yashovardhan Dhanania, a volunteer at the Dispute Resolution Noticeboard. You recently filed a request or were a major party in the DRN case titled "Talk:Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer#Semi-protected edit request on_3_March_2017". The case is now closed: no relevant discussion found at article talk page. Please discuss at talk page before filing DRN. If you are unsatisfied with this outcome, you may refile the DRN request or open a thread on another noticeboard as appropriate. If you have any questions please feel free to contact this volunteer at his/ her talk page or at the DRN talk page. Thank you! --Yashovardhan (talk) 21:52, 30 March 2017 (UTC)


 * Additional comments by volunteer: if discussion has reached other forums, DRN can't take this case.

Check your email!

 * I second the contents of the email. --  Dane talk  03:56, 31 March 2017 (UTC)
 * I got it. Hope you don't mind if I respond right here, since I hate writing emails, even small ones. IRC isn't really my thing. Thanks but sorry. Sro23 (talk) 03:59, 31 March 2017 (UTC)
 * AWW BUMMER! It would be cool to chat and say hi to you, but it's your choice and that's totally cool. If you (hopefully... lol) change your mind down the line, come join! You'd fit right in and I think you'd like hanging around. Keep up the ridiculously great reverting work, by the way. I'm keeping an eye on the smoke signals, so I'll be standing by to block and take care of this spew of disruption ;-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   04:04, 31 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Also, I so appreciate the gesture, but do you think you could remove protection from User:Sro23. The vandal already was extended confirmed, it was a one-time thing, and I just don't think it is necessary. Even semi-protection is not needed, given Special:AbuseFilter/803 which prevents IP's/new users from editing other editor's userpages. Thank you. Sro23 (talk) 04:24, 31 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Sro23 - Can do! What protection (if any) would you like set?  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   04:25, 31 March 2017 (UTC)
 * I'm a moron. You already said to remove all protection... lol. ✅.  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   04:26, 31 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks! Sro23 (talk) 04:35, 31 March 2017 (UTC)

That's because it's wrong.
He's not emirati. There are no sources saying he is and plenty saying he's British. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Broombroom (talk • contribs) 14:49, 2 April 2017 (UTC)

How much do you wanna bet...
That is another rapid attempt at hitting 500? CHRISSY MAD ❯❯❯  ¯\_(ツ)_/¯  16:55, 2 April 2017 (UTC)
 * it wouldn't surprise me if this turns out to be someone's sock but of Cat creek, I'm not so sure. The large amount of dummy edits to their userspace is always suspicious, but CCCC socks are normally much older, whereas this account was registered today. Sro23 (talk) 17:45, 2 April 2017 (UTC)
 * They're following all the of the  now ...  CHRISSY MAD  ❯❯❯  ¯\_(ツ)_/¯  18:28, 2 April 2017 (UTC)

Warner Bros
Did the IP ever have a registered account? --Neil N  talk to me 23:20, 3 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Yes, see Sockpuppet investigations/Nate Speed. Sro23 (talk) 23:22, 3 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks. --Neil N  talk to me 23:34, 3 April 2017 (UTC)
 * And another... already blocked but just noting it (they created that Dawg article) CHRISSY MAD  ❯❯❯  ¯\_(ツ)_/¯  00:23, 4 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Draft is now also deleted as a G5. Might want to keep an eye on Draft:Dawgtown. --Neil N  talk to me 00:45, 4 April 2017 (UTC)

STOP DESTROYING EAST ASIA PAGE
According to the "United Nations General Assembly Resolution 2758", the People's Republic of China is the only legitimate representative of China, there is no 2nd China called "Republic of China". According to ISO 3166-2 used by Wikipedia, Taiwan (TWN/TW) is a province of China (CHN/CH) There is no Country existed in this world recognizes Taiwan as a Country, and only 21 countries recognize the "Republic of China" as the solo legitimate representative of entire China. Taiwan is just one of eight provinces under "Republic of China"'s division system. Stop misleading Wiki users, and stop destroying other people's works immediately, or I will have to report u. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Miaoxingrenren (talk • contribs) 02:01, 4 April 2017 (UTC)

My talk page
Thanks! Cullen328  Let's discuss it  02:14, 4 April 2017 (UTC)

User:Nubailo
Dealt with see Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.--Moxy (talk) 01:07, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

April 2017
Hello. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia.

Please be sure to provide a summary of every edit you make, even if you write only the briefest of summaries. The summaries are very helpful to people browsing an article's history.

Edit summary content is visible in:


 * User contributions
 * Recent changes
 * Watchlists
 * Revision differences
 * IRC channels
 * Related changes
 * New pages list
 * Article editing history

Please use the edit summary to explain your reasoning for the edit, or a summary of what the edit changes. You can give yourself a reminder to add an edit summary by setting. Thanks! I'm tired of you reverting edits without giving an explanation. Hawkeye75  (talk)  00:00, 9 April 2017 (UTC)
 * There's no need to template me like a common vandal. You can feel free to talk to me, I don't bite (most of the time). I was simply undoing edits made by a blocked sock, apologies for not explaining that in the edit summary field. That's fine if you take responsibility for those edits in good faith. But I also note you've neglected to use edit summaries on the same page, other than Twinkle's standard vandal rollback summary, . Sro23 (talk) 00:28, 9 April 2017 (UTC)
 * So you're saying you reverted edits without knowing if they were against Wiki's policies or not? Hawkeye75   (talk)  00:30, 9 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Please see WP:BE. I did check before reverting, but the edits in question honestly didn't seem to be improvements, so in that case I decided it would be better not to let them stick. Sro23 (talk) 00:34, 9 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Which edits are you concerned about? Sam Walton (talk) 00:44, 9 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Very minor, but these ones. Hawkeye75   (talk)  00:46, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

Waring edits
Please do not redirect the page: King David Zilly Aggrey Michaelgodstimeake (talk) 20:25, 9 April 2017 (UTC)
 * No. You can't just reverse the decision made on AFD for the article you created. Revert one more time and I'm reporting you. Otherwise your only other option is WP:DELREV. Sro23 (talk) 20:29, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

Catcreekcitycouncil SPI
It's a good idea to request CheckUser evidence when filing an SPI because they are known to have sleepers. The last one that was vandalizing nine hours ago was created in November 2016. —MRD2014 📞 contribs 12:38, 13 April 2017 (UTC)

not trolling
hi, it is not trolling to request recall on an admins talkpage that they are perfectly able to edit, thanks Govindaharihari (talk) 14:34, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Wow, two of these in one day. I don't deserve it. Sro23 (talk) 21:44, 15 April 2017 (UTC)
 * You are being contentious. {:>{)>
 * You did deserve it. And probably many times before that have gone unsung.  In the broadest sense, we Wikipedians fail to recognize, and positively reinforce, your (and other's) helpful behavior.  Unfortunately, we tend toward brickbats, not strokes.  Cheers.  7&amp;6=thirteen</b> (<b style="color:#000">☎</b>) 21:54, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

Answer
No Nimzo321 (talk) 00:01, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

Hello, I'm Quenhitran. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions —the one you made with this edit to Identity Evropa— because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. — ALittle Que nhi  ( talk to me ) 03:15, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
 * I was reverting a disruptive IP edit-warrior. Was this message intended for User talk:108.6.166.60? Sro23 (talk) 03:28, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

A kitten for you!
Because I appreciate your helping with the IP issues on my Talk Page and everyone deserves a kitten for dealing with their trolling.

PanydThe muffin is not subtle 09:25, 21 April 2017 (UTC) <br style="clear: both;"/>

"It honestly did not seem like an improvement to me"
Fair enough, but once you actually read the cite, you'll feel differently. I'll help you out.

"Kula Shaker, whom most people – other than Kula Shaker themselves, granted – considered a joke band..."

absolutely does not translate to:

...The Observer's Simon Price describing them in 2014 as a "joke band".

Price is not describing the band at all. He is noting the widespread opinion of them. Even if you don't want to use my prose, at least do the right thing for the sake of Wikipedia's integrity. The project is bigger than both you and I, and deserves article content that actually adheres to the supporting references rather than presenting imaginary WP:OR. Cheers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 159.148.89.251 (talk) 19:09, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
 * I understand that the project is bigger than us, believe me. I wouldn't damage the encyclopedia just for the sake of WP:BANREVERT. Your proposed change is so minor that it doesn't seem to be that much of an improvement. Note how in my edit summary I say that anyone else is allowed to restore your edit in good faith. But if you truly cared about Wikipedia, you would stop evading your ban. Sro23 (talk) 23:17, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
 * "if you truly cared about Wikipedia, you would stop evading your ban."
 * You seem like an intelligent editor, so I find it's impossible for you not to have realised that I'm a constructive editor who has been ostracised from the community for (fairly trivial) past mistakes. It would appear that you and I are destined to butt heads forever, which is unfortunate. 159.148.89.78 (talk) 01:32, 26 April 2017 (UTC)
 * No, you were banned for legitimate reasons. It's not fair that everyone else follows the rules while you ignore them whenever you please. Sro23 (talk) 01:38, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

Girkar
Why did you revert my edits?--Mr. Guye (talk) 19:42, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
 * I was fixing the categorization. I know reverts without summaries seem kind of aggressive, but that's not what I intended. Sorry about that. Sro23 (talk) 23:18, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

Reverted Edits to Mavelikkara
I have reverted some of your edits to Mavelikkara town article, I put some edits to the "About tag" and you reverted it, but I undid your edits again because adding Alappuzha the name of the town is not needed, instead adding the district name is needed.

106.76.241.185 (talk) 16:11, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

Long term abuse
Sorry I missed out on the community ban !vote, have you considered making an entry at Long-term abuse/List?LM2000 (talk) 07:10, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
 * And I'm sorry for not notifying you. Sure, I think TAWT would qualify for WP:LTA at this point, and I'm actually surprised there is no entry on him yet. One of the reasons his socks are so easy to identify is that they pretty consistently will stick to editing just pro-wrestling or British pop culture articles for at least 8 years now. He's also claimed he has brothers who are a part of TAWT (?) It's weird. Sro23 (talk) 08:34, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Sorry about the talk page abuse, I wouldn't have posted that here if I had checked the history first. He makes no effort to conceal his identity, it's easy enough for him to just get a new account. My favorite reoccurring feature is the busy notices he has been putting on userpages since the beginning.LM2000 (talk) 09:03, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
 * No, it's fine. Yeah, I wonder why his socks always have to do that. Sro23 (talk) 09:06, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for requesting the extended confirmed, probably have to find an Admin who knows the history as others who don't know will decline because the sock was blocked. Thanks anyway though for trying. <b style="color:Red">Chris "WarMachineWildThing" </b> Talk to me 00:24, 29 April 2017 (UTC)
 * More than one sock now. Unfortunately WP:RFPP reports always seem to take a at least a couple hours to process. Well, at least I tried. Sro23 (talk) 01:22, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

<b style="color:Red">Chris "WarMachineWildThing" </b> Talk to me 02:24, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

Thoughts??
Thoughts?? <b style="color:Red">Chris "WarMachineWildThing" </b> Talk to me 08:10, 30 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Added to the SPI. This person needs to get a different hobby. Sro23 (talk) 08:44, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

Where in WP policy and guidelines
...does it state that one cannot edit from both an IP, and logged in, if clearly identifying oneself as the same editor? Let's take this scenario. I am waiting to board a flight, and I have been editing for some time, but my sec features have logged me off WP, and I discover this when my boarding group is called, and I have to rush to save and leave. On approaching the save, and discovering I am logged out, I face the following choice—try quickly to cut and paste the edits, from the IP workspace, into the Leprof_7272 workspace, without losing them or making a mistake, despite being under intense time pressure. Or, I wait and do the save later, but if autopowered down, maybe lose the edits entirely. In these cases, I save the edits under the IP, signing the same as I do when logged (Le Prof in edit summary, or some such). Where is this prohibited? And again, as stated in the long response to the Noticeboard accusations, I utterly refute and reject the insinuations of deception that have been leveled (thankfully, by those who know me the least, and have least done their homework). Cheers, RSVP here, thanks. Leprof 7272 (talk) 09:24, 30 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Here is the link to my full response to the tagging Noticeboard matter. Despite the added diversion below, I still would ask an answer,, to the IP vs logged policy guideline question. Thanks. Le Prof Leprof 7272 (talk) 10:18, 30 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Well. Since WP:YANI, I would suggest that particular edit need not be made. And particularly not now, when such edits may be under- what, extra scrutiny, shall we say? On a lighter note, see what I did there: replied to a single point in less than a thousand words :) consider it, perhaps, an exercise in precision. Cheers, &mdash;  O Fortuna   semper crescis, aut decrescis  09:55, 30 April 2017 (UTC)
 * It is never a challenge to be brief, while being completely unhelpful. But with regard to replaceability, thanks for the further encouragement to do my critiques from without, rather than from within. Cheers. Le Prof Leprof 7272 (talk) 10:18, 30 April 2017 (UTC)


 * WP:SOCKING policy reads: Sock puppetry can take on several different forms [including]: Logging out to make problematic edits as an IP address. ... Editors ... who edit as an IP address editor separate from their account, should carefully avoid any crossover on articles or topics, because even innocuous activities such as copy editing, wikifying, or linking might be considered sock puppetry in some cases and innocuous intentions will not usually serve as an excuse. (emphasis mine) See also: Template:Uw-login. You have very frequently edited articles both logged in and logged out. You never identify your logged out edits as Leprof except on talk pages. This is clearly against WP:SOCK. You have been notified and warned about this numerous times. Softlavender (talk) 10:38, 30 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Note there's a (somewhat) centralized discussion here. Primefac (talk) 15:32, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

Vandal
Who exactly is this IP user targeting the soap opera character pages and making attacks against you? I'm guessing they are already blocked based on their actions. 331dot (talk) 12:54, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Long-term abuse/Cebr1979. Sro23 (talk) 18:08, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
 * I'm going to go in to work for some overtime in a bit. Unlike our friend, I actually have a job. I'll be back this evening, so hold down the fort. Cheers! :) -- ‖ Ebyabe talk -  Repel All Boarders  ‖ 18:54, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
 * So, not User:Nate Speed? I'm so confused. :) -- ‖ Ebyabe talk -  Welfare State  ‖ 01:54, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
 * This is one of Cebr's IP's. This, for example, is Nate Speed. Two different vandals, but both like to IP hop. Sro23 (talk) 01:57, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

YGM
Jim1138 (talk) 07:14, 8 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks, looks like that's all been taken care of now. Sro23 (talk) 22:45, 8 May 2017 (UTC)

RFC notification
Due to your editorial involvement in I thought you might want to participate in the RFC at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Templates.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 04:41, 11 May 2017 (UTC)

I don't think you're an admin, are you?
Because they sure like to complain about you here like you are one. I just think the whole thing is amusing. If they spent half the effort they do griping by doing something productive, like creating their own version of Wikipedia... Oh, that would require work. Those who can, do. Those who can't, whine and complain. Continue the good work you do. Most of us appreciate it. :) -- ‖ Ebyabe talk -  Health and Welfare  ‖ 05:57, 14 May 2017 (UTC)


 * I didn't even get an honorable mention... Jim1138 (talk) 08:23, 14 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Oh, that. The thing is, I know that most of the people there are banned users, but I can't help but worry there is some truth to their complaints. If you catch me doing something wrong, feel free to drop me a line, so that I can learn. Clearly I'm not perfect. And for the record, no I am not an admin. I'm not going to even try so long as that RFA process remains as grueling as it currently is. Sro23 (talk) 21:17, 14 May 2017 (UTC)
 * There may be some truth, but it's hard to find it amongst all the wailing and gnashing of teeth. And hey, I'm not perfect either. I've debated about putting myself into the admin ring for a while. But I agree about the process. If I did, I'd probably not answer most of the questions. Judge me by my history, I say. If I didn't get in, no loss. I can still do what I do. Anyhoo, cheerio, and thanks for the barnstar! -- ‖ Ebyabe talk - Attract and Repel  ‖ 04:47, 15 May 2017 (UTC)
 * It's also fun that one of the worst offenders uses, I think, their real name on that blog. Never ceases to amaze. -- ‖ Ebyabe talk - Repel All Boarders  ‖ 19:01, 29 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Weird, this website, which I read this morning, was just thrown at me here. I told the editor (one I just blocked), then if they really thought that explains how Wikipedia works that just increased my concerns about their editing. Doug Weller  talk 15:46, 9 August 2017 (UTC)

Nickelodeon Article
Why do you keep restoring the red link? 83.136.45.201 (talk) 00:04, 15 May 2017 (UTC)
 * . Block Evasion obviously. --  Dane talk  00:22, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

Draft:Deadpool (TV series)
I see that has edited this draft that was created by an IP. Am I correct to assume the IP is probably the same as well? Home Lander (talk) 19:44, 15 May 2017 (UTC)
 * That's would I would suspect, otherwise it's a massive coincidence. -- ‖ Ebyabe talk - General Health  ‖ 20:23, 15 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Tagged the draft for deletion. Home Lander (talk) 20:38, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

Your UAA reports
All taken care of. If you receive any more threatening emails or harassment from more sock accounts, let me know and I'll make sure it's handled.  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   03:33, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

RFC/N discussion of the username "WikiVirusC"
A request for comment has been filed concerning the username of. You are invited to comment on the discussion here. Linguist talk&#124; contribs 20:11, 28 May 2017 (UTC)

Is Ash Ketchum dispute an edit war or disruption being dealt with?
Hey Sro23, I have noticed you seem to be in some sort of content dispute with a Boston IP (currently I don't believe the IP hopping is intended to deceive, AGF and all). However, I cannot find any sign of discussion on any talk page. I also am unfamiliar with the content, so don't know whether this a content dispute in full or a v/rvv case. If the IP is vandalizing then sorry for bothering you. An edit summary from the latest IP edit was ''Go and criticize Sro23 for causing that issue, he's the one that basically started the issue in the first place! Besides, the info is already sourced.'' I haven't reverted the IP yet, and I see has asked for SEMI on RFPP, so I'm not going to ask for full protection. Thanks,  d.g. L3X1  (distænt write)   )evidence(  02:21, 29 May 2017 (UTC)
 * It's not a content dispute. The rotating IP's belong to User:Bigshowandkane64. Sro23 (talk) 02:30, 29 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Ok, thank you. I wanted to make sure.  d.g. L3X1  (distænt write)   )evidence(  02:34, 29 May 2017 (UTC)

Young adult (psychology)
Hi Sro23, I've blocked indefinitely on the basis of WP:DUCK per Sockpuppet investigations/Unkownzero. I'm afraid, however, that the sock puppet has a point with respect to this edit, which hasn't been reverted yet. The link takes us to a section of an article that's only tangentially related, i.e. not helpful to the reader. I'm thinking the link should stay removed, but I wanted to ask what you think about it. Thanks, Mz7 (talk) 20:29, 1 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Yes, I think it's fine if we let the edit stick. This is the same troll who has been sending me death threats so forgive me if I'm a little revert-happy. Sro23 (talk) 22:42, 1 June 2017 (UTC)

Your talk page
On 'that page' (you know, the anti-admin one located off-Wiki), they've announced that the block on your talk page expired. Probably why you're getting the new trolling. Thought you might wanna know. -- ‖ Ebyabe talk - Border Town  ‖ 04:41, 6 June 2017 (UTC)

Discussion at Talk:Timeline of computer security hacker history
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Timeline of computer security hacker history. John1234ou812 (talk) 04:50, 6 June 2017 (UTC)

Clean start
As an experienced editor dealing with plenty of socks, can you comment on please ? I think this is undermining all other WP sanctions and should be limited. 92.63.109.253 (talk) 13:29, 7 June 2017 (UTC)

HI
Hello! How are you actually visiting that tumblr? I did not lie! The account is still showing signs of posting after her death! That is not Miss Lam herself! aa7778273Aa7778273 (talk) 07:19, 18 June 2017 (UTC)

sorry!
I'm so sorry! I did not notice it! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aa7778273 (talk • contribs) 07:39, 18 June 2017 (UTC)

Thank you!
Thanks for your help with that vandal on my talk page! <b style="border:1px solid #000; color:#000; background-color:#CBD4E4; padding: 0px 2px;">Marianna251</b><b style="padding:2px; font-size:80%;">TALK</b> 17:03, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

Hey, Sro!
Why are you such a popular target for sockpuppets, anyway? Amaury ( talk &#124; contribs ) 03:19, 28 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Well, haters gonna hate, I guess. But really I think it's because I do not tolerate sockpuppetry, plus I actively look out for socks. I'm not really anyone special, and discovering socks is sometimes hard, most of the time not all that difficult. I think most people either don't know about this policy or don't care/simply don't have the time to peruse page histories hunting for sockpuppets. Sro23 (talk) 11:54, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

Hi S
I wanted to let you know that you forgot to sign this edit. BTW I think your assessment of the situation is sound. As ever thanks for your vigilance and enjoy the rest of your Sunday!! MarnetteD&#124;Talk 17:28, 2 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Oops, thanks for letting me know Sro23 (talk) 17:30, 2 July 2017 (UTC)
 * You are most welcome :-) MarnetteD&#124;Talk 17:31, 2 July 2017 (UTC)

Sock
Thanks. Too late for a CU, but I'm checking with one of the Admins who has been involved. I'm pretty sure you are right - well, I'm sure you're right, but want another confirmation. Doug Weller talk 18:21, 2 July 2017 (UTC)
 * He's blocked along with JohnfromLondon. Thanks. Cleanup needed now. Doug Weller  talk 05:07, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

Clerk training
I've created User:Sro23/Clerking and left you an assignment. Please keep that page on your watchlist so you can see when I update it.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:47, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

RPP
The power of having your talk page on my watchlist. Remove if you don't want your talk page to be protected. Callmemirela  🍁 talk 02:53, 18 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Thank you. I get the feeling that's what the vandal wants though. Sro23 (talk) 03:03, 18 July 2017 (UTC)
 * You can't make everybody happy. What made you victim of trolling anyways? All I see is the rollback being used.  Callmemirela   &#127809; talk 03:11, 18 July 2017 (UTC)
 * That's all I did-rollback the vandalism. Sro23 (talk) 03:17, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

You've got mail!
Callmemirela  🍁 talk 17:00, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

Brain freeze
Hi S and congrats on your becoming a clerk for SPI's. When you have a moment would you check on this. They are claiming to be FrozenFan2 (who was actually ) but this edit is more likely to be a name that is escaping me at the moment (jared something or other I think) - I just don't want to file an my SPI at the wrong spot. Cheers. MarnetteD&#124;Talk 19:16, 22 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Hi, it's User:Jaredgk2008. Sro23 (talk) 19:19, 22 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Ding ding ding. Thanks S. Zzuuzz has already taken care of the block and R/D so it is back to editing articles :-) Enjoy the rest of your weekend. MarnetteD&#124;Talk 19:31, 22 July 2017 (UTC)

The Voice (U.S. season 12)
As I have explained on the article talk page, the controversies section has several deficiencies. Please do not add it back without significant changes, including sources which indicate this is an actual controversy related to this season of the show and not just a writer expressing an opinion that they do not like one aspect of the show. Thank you. Knope7 (talk) 22:57, 5 August 2017 (UTC)

Reverting "canvassing"
Other people's talk pages are not yours to censor. among others. Toddst1 (talk) 02:16, 8 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Funny thing about that. Remember that edit warrior from last year, User:Who R U?? The IP's I reverted are him. Sorry for not making that more clear. Sro23 (talk) 02:23, 8 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the reply. That was not at all clear.   An SPI or a friendly nod to a CU should do the trick.   Toddst1 (talk) 13:07, 8 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Congratulations Todd on making a trivial situation worse. WTF were you thinking? Andy Dingley (talk) 09:35, 8 August 2017 (UTC)

YGM
Doug Weller talk 19:47, 8 August 2017 (UTC)
 * I sent you a response. Sro23 (talk) 01:24, 9 August 2017 (UTC)

Wittgenstein123
Hello Sro23. I noticed that Sockpuppet_investigations/Wittgenstein123 was closed. What should I do if I suspect that (noping link) should also be included? Thanks, — Paleo Neonate  – 03:47, 9 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Someone else already opened a new case, Sockpuppet_investigations/Mooters_1563. — Paleo  Neonate  – 18:22, 9 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks for letting me know. Sro23 (talk) 18:36, 9 August 2017 (UTC)

Clerk At Work
Hey Sro23, could I ask you to remove User:Sro23/ClerkAtWork once you've completed your work, such as this? This would help any reviewing CU or clerk know you've completed your task and okay to proceed. Thanks! <span style="color:black;text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px white, -4px -4px 15px white">Mkdw  <span style="color: #0B0080;text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px white, -4px -4px 15px white">talk 02:50, 29 August 2017 (UTC)
 * I use that template so that it's known I'm not a full clerk. I don't want to mislead anyone. Sro23 (talk) 17:20, 29 August 2017 (UTC)

Just when I thought the coast was clear...
This happens. I was actually considering having my ECU Protection lifted but apparently I am still not "forgotten". Is this User:Hamish Ross? What I did to trigger this obsessive behavior is beyond me. By the way, has anyone ever approached you with the idea of adminship? With all the experience you accumulated dealing with vandals, LTAs, and the whole works, seeing you go through a RfA and passing would really make my day. Obviously, you'd have at least one support vote, coming from me.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 06:30, 29 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Yeah, it looks like Hamish Ross, still weirdly obsessed. And thanks dude, but just thinking about that rfa process gives me anxiety. I don't think I could ever do it. Sro23 (talk) 17:14, 29 August 2017 (UTC)
 * I get that - it's definitely not a fun time, never has been, and probably never will be. Nevertheless, I think it's something to consider. More clerking, some article work (have you ever done WP:GOCE?), and with a bit of luck, you'll have a good shot at it. WP:ORCP is always an option, too. GABgab 18:59, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
 * You think so? To be honest, I'm not even sure I would be a good fit for the job. There are times where I feel like I could really use the tools, but it's usually for really basic, uncontroversial stuff like blocking vandals. Sro23 (talk) 22:10, 31 August 2017 (UTC)

Ongoing investigation
I utilised the arbitration mechanism available and investigations are currently in process for the handling of the suspension of EU_explained's account, particularly with regard to proportionally and the conduct of certain administrators in poor handling of the situation. I was given this account by Dane in the interim.


 * Sro23 it looks like this is trolling. There is no arbcase that I can find. The fact that I can't find any edits by Dane about this situation and I distinctly hear the sound of QUACKING. Cheers. MarnetteD&#124;Talk 20:54, 1 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Dane created the account (Special:Log/Dane). I'm not buying the roommate excuse at all. My guess is they since they sent an email to arbcom, they think now it's okay to resume socking. When you're blocked for sockpuppetry, creating more sockpuppets generally isn't the best idea. Sro23 (talk) 21:00, 1 September 2017 (UTC)
 * This is the same person who just yesterday did this. I'm sorry, but I have little sympathy for people who do things like that. Sro23 (talk) 21:06, 1 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Ah I was unaware of that. Thanks for pointing out my error! Could be that Dane did not really investigate things :-( The log makes it look like a whole batch were created in a short period of time. Who knows if some of them may also be from the same drawer of socks. IMO the arbcase claims are still fishy but we will see. Thanks again. MarnetteD&#124;Talk 21:08, 1 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Yep your second link shows a complete WP:NOTHERE mentality. MarnetteD&#124;Talk 21:09, 1 September 2017 (UTC)

Tom and Jerry, dispute
Hi, don't know where to start, but I figured that instead of starting an endless edit war, maybe its better to discuss edits and cuts in Yankee Doodle Mouse  before we go further, its well know that the flower pot sequence/black face gag was edited out on TV, but I must admit I have never seen that particular edit since I never actually saw the cartoon on TV. only on VHS and the DVD. When TV prints are created they are made from the original theatrical or backup theatrical masters. Edits happens on TV print, meaning that the original version exist somewhere as backup and thus when black face gags and other racial gags are edited for TV it means that the original print exist in vault and thus finding its way on to home theater such like VHS or DVD. This however is unrelated to the edit that happens with the flour-smokescreen/second war communique sequence, this edit pre-dates cartoons TV and home video debut. If you didn't know most MGM cartoons from the 1940s (Tom and Jerry, and Droop mainly) were reissued in theaters in 1950s and in 1950s some war related gags were demanded outdated and there for cut form the cartoons when reissued to theaters. Meaning some alternation to the original masters or to the backup theatrical masters. Unfortunately MGM had warehouse fire in 1967 meaning the original masters were destroyed so only the backup theatrical prints exist. Meaning all backup prints that were altered when reissued are the only existing version of the cartoons as they were seen last time in theaters not how they were originally screened when they were first released. Thus any documentation of long lost sequences are notable, and source given is valid as cartoonresearch.com is news site similar to cartoonbrew.com and animationscoop.com. SO removing all referance to the Yankee Doodle Mouse is missing sequence is not right thing to do. However the grammar can be fixed without removing entry section if its badly written. If we removed bad gramar every time we see it on wikipedia then im pretty sure there would be very little content left on wikipedia. DoctorHver (talk) 21:54, 1 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Please don't take this the wrong way, but I was mainly reverting your additions because your English is bad. It's like...I can understand maybe half of what you're trying to say here, and the other half is nonsense. Could you please clean up your grammar? Sro23 (talk) 22:37, 1 September 2017 (UTC)
 * First question then where are you from? (This could be case on how we use english differently). Second question have you ever bothered to read the source given with the edit? http://cartoonresearch.com/index.php/mgms-the-yankee-doodle-mouse-1942/, if the answer is yes, then i don't think you have much legit reasoning as i would rather like you to fix the grammar rather than removing valid content altogether. If the answer is no, then maybe you should read the article, its informative beside the point and you might better understand my POV here,here as you probably know you cannot copy and paste from elsewhere because that copyright in fragment  DoctorHver (talk) 23:34, 1 September 2017 (UTC)

Woops
Thanks for catching that - miss-hit rollback! Garchy (talk) 22:17, 1 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Hi Garchy, I get what you're trying to do. Just be sure when reverting sockpuppets, you're not restoring typos or vandalism. Unfortunately for that particular sock, a lot of their contributions were vandalism reverts. So I would leave the edits be. Sro23 (talk) 22:19, 1 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks, you're right, and especially not on a mobile phone! I was trying to focus on the edits the sock had made with contentious edit summaries but erred there. Thanks again! Garchy (talk) 22:25, 1 September 2017 (UTC)

??
Do I know you lol?? User talk:GoodDay ... Talk:List of people who have opened the Olympic Games ... I'm like the fifth person to have done that. Ivar the Boneful (talk) 06:10, 3 September 2017 (UTC)

HaggisHeadS!
If you look into my posting history, you will see that the new Wikipedia user calling himself "HaggisHeadS" registered specifically to vandalize pages about Sylvester Stallone that I edited (with evidence), because he is a cross-site troll who has been bothering me now at multiple websites for 2 months, using names such as Limpy, Slackjaw, and Toilet. He harassed me recently at lots of message boards, and got my friend's address from a video we shot in his house and on his street. I've since made that film private. One of the forums he harasses me on is not moderated that frequently, and he post bombs abuse on a near daily basis now, naming my parents, talking about my sexuality, legal issues, and more. The members there are also sick of the hassle.PeterMan844 (talk) 12:05, 3 September 2017 (UTC)

Follow up remark...

Sorry. It was actually User:Walterarchivist who edited the pages first, but then HaggisHeadS appeared soon thereafter; I've had issues with him abusing me on several forums this week.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Walterarchivist

PeterMan844 (talk) 12:17, 3 September 2017 (UTC)
 * I've filed Sockpuppet investigations/Escapement, hopefully that will help. But please stop the cut-and paste moves. If you think The Sidelong Glances of a Pigeon Kicker should be moved to Pigeons (film), you'll have to request a move. Sro23 (talk) 13:42, 3 September 2017 (UTC)

OK. Just so you know, the film is listed as Pigeons at the Internet Movie Database. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0067576/

Similarly, another film Sylvester Stallone was in called The Party at Kitty and Stud's goes by its reissued name on Wikipedia and IMDb.com as well. Thanks for the support! PeterMan844 (talk) 13:50, 3 September 2017 (UTC)

86.134.94.43
Which block do you believe the user to be evading? I don't see any abuse log hits for an LTA - to me it looks like just plain vandalism. Pillowfluffyhead (talk) 19:18, 3 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Sockpuppet investigations/Iniced. Sro23 (talk) 19:25, 3 September 2017 (UTC)

User:Therecordkeepers
User:Therecordkeepers is an alt of User:HaggisHeadS. He is ban evading, and he yet again vandalized The Sidelong Glances of a Pigeon Kicker article.PeterMan844 (talk) 23:24, 4 September 2017 (UTC)

You can read all about his abuse of me here. http://bluelight.org/vb/threads/830158-There-s-this-creep-bugging-me-online-who-keeps-harassing-me-and-others! PeterMan844 (talk) 23:24, 4 September 2017 (UTC)

I hope that helps!PeterMan844 (talk) 23:24, 4 September 2017 (UTC)
 * I know. I've added the account to Sockpuppet investigations/Escapement. PeterMan844, by posting that link you've basically confirmed that you are banned User:Grace Saunders. No one deserves to be harassed, not even banned sockpuppeteers, and I feel very sorry for what's happened to you. But hopefully you understand this puts me in an awkward position. Sro23 (talk) 23:33, 4 September 2017 (UTC)

Hello.

That's a very old account, by the way. But I see your point. I don't post as Grace Saunders any more, because of all the people following me around online giving me grief, but it's the name of a character in Alone in the Dark 2 and I'm a fan of survival horror games. When I used that Wikipedia account to contribute to articles on here, I did not disturb anybody's peace, and I never spammed either. My banning was a "work" perpetrated by trolls. It was because a corrupt moderator (who has since been banned), created a dubious sock puppet investigation that was largely fabricated to make them look good. He contributed to a page about me on Encyclopedia Dramatica which looks like Wikipedia, but is actually very abusive. So technically, my banning was instigated by them making attention seeking sock puppet investigation posts, and my ban was not widely warranted. PeterMan844 (talk) 23:48, 4 September 2017 (UTC)

I understand if you have to ban me, as I was already banned. I've added sock puppet tags to his suspected alts. I hope that is allowed.PeterMan844 (talk) 00:29, 5 September 2017 (UTC) Type "Grace Saunders" on Google. It has a link to Encyclopedia Dramatica on a Russian server, because they are forced to relocate over and over again.

As you can see from the editing history both there and here on Wikipedia, User:Snaisybelle and User:Michaeldsuarez made a huge stink about me to get me banned, and the administrators fell for it. The people on that site are criminals, and they've been harassing me for nearly 10 years. It's hard to find out who their hosting provider is as well, as they pay a site to obscure their details on the sites that tell you who is running what site on certain databases.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Grace_Saunders/Archive

PeterMan844 (talk) 00:51, 4 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Again, that sucks you're being harassed, but just because it's been a few years or you don't think your ban was warranted, doesn't negate the fact that you are banned. Sro23 (talk) 00:07, 5 September 2017 (UTC)

SPLC edit
Why did you revert my edit --2001:8003:4B8D:2C00:353D:99EA:8C8D:518E (talk) 04:17, 5 September 2017 (UTC)

SPI
Hello. I see from a note at SPI that you are handling this case.

A comment of mine at this SPI has been hatted by OP, who apparently doesn't like what I said. I don't know what the protocol is for this kind of thing, but hatting another user's comment about this complaint doesn't seem appropriate to me. Perhaps you can unhat it? It is here where I expressed concern that this SPI complaint was being used for a battleground content dispute with the other editor. OP's extraordinary walls of accusation seem to confirm that. SPECIFICO talk  13:57, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
 * It is a bit off-topic in an already too long SPI, but the decision to refactor or collapse content really should be left up to the clerks. Sro23 (talk) 14:18, 5 September 2017 (UTC)

Wikia?
How do you add a sockpuppet tag to a user who has multiple accounts on Wikia? It seems the tags there are different.PeterMan844 (talk) 12:57, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
 * You don't. I mean, sometimes over the course of a sockpuppet investigation, the knowledge that someone has abused multiple accounts on other wikis can be helpful, but I believe each project has its own rules regarding sockpuppetry. Accounts aren't blocked just because they are blocked on other wikis; there has to be evidence the user is socking on the English Wikipedia. Sro23 (talk) 21:35, 8 September 2017 (UTC)

Can you lock Escapement's user page on here? He keeps deleting his tag? The guy stalks me at Wikia now too.PeterMan844 (talk) 22:48, 8 September 2017 (UTC)

Re: your comment about me
It's not worth "defending". That's a claim that's been thrown around since the beginning of my time on the site, and it likely will continue forever. See my RfA, for instance. ~ Rob 13 <sup style="margin-left:-1.0ex;">Talk 01:35, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
 * I know. I normally try to avoid feeding the trolls, but this person, who (1. is from the same area as a banned editor 2. defends said banned editor and 3. refuses to log in to their account) complains when they are accused of socking, and yet also has the chutzpah to cry sock at you because...you know how to navigate AFD? It really upset me. Sro23 (talk) 01:56, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
 * I can actually see why I may look suspicious; my first edits were at TfD. But there's simply no editor in the history of Wikipedia with my collection of interests. Someone find me any account other than my own that creates Canadian football bios, is a copyright expert, and is involved in templates, and I'll buy that person a beer. (Not to mention that multiple arbitrators have been sent emails from an address that is well-connected to my real-life identity.) I've given up on those who are coming at my history from a frequentist approach. Bayes is better anyway. ~ Rob 13 <sup style="margin-left:-1.0ex;">Talk 02:42, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Exactly. You weren't 100% clueless like me, so therefore the only possible explanation is SOCK. I remember the first time someone opened an SPI against me. The editor they were accusing me of being a sock of I highly respected, so it was actually kind of an honor. Sro23 (talk) 02:54, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
 * It's funny, since a different set of editors opposed my RfA because I was too clueless and made many mistakes when I first started out. There's no winning. Sadly, my privacy was violated through a check based purely on my competency shortly after I joined the site. (But we really should figure out why we have low editor retention, shouldn't we?) ~ Rob 13 <sup style="margin-left:-1.0ex;">Talk 09:15, 9 September 2017 (UTC)

You've got mail
Doug Weller talk 20:57, 9 September 2017 (UTC)

Institute of Political Studies in Belgrade
The name of that director seems to be correct; there is no point in reverting such correct edits even if they are made by a blocked editor. That's not giving in to them, or editing by proxy, it's simply article improvement. I blocked the editor, BTW, for assholery, and semi-protected the page. Drmies (talk) 03:13, 10 September 2017 (UTC)

Escoperloit
I think this user is new sock of banned Escoperloit. 145.239.201.129 (talk) 08:24, 10 September 2017 (UTC)

Edit conflicts
Hey Sro23, just now we both wanted to undo the blanking edit made by Chickenhero. However, there seems to be kind of edit conflicts for we both undid his/her edit. --123.161.169.118 (talk) 04:24, 12 September 2017 (UTC)

I know it's violating the Wiki policy to remove warning on talk page, but I have undid this blanking edit, your edit which undid that edit as well seems to restore it to the previous version rather than reverting blanking, --123.161.169.118 (talk) 05:06, 12 September 2017 (UTC)
 * When an editor removes something from their talk, it's assumed that the message has been read. So please stop restoring it. This is all explained in WP:BLANKING. Sro23 (talk) 05:08, 12 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Thank you for articulating that part to me. I didn't actually take notice of it. Sorry for bothering you. --123.161.169.118 (talk) 05:12, 12 September 2017 (UTC)

Sockpuppet template
Hello there Sro23. Hope this is fine for you. Cheers.--Jetstreamer $Talk$ 19:20, 12 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Hi Jetstreamer, I'm sure you mean well, but since it's not your responsibility to add socktags, I wouldn't worry about it. In fact, there are some cases where we purposefully avoid tagging users, per WP:DENY. Sro23 (talk) 22:09, 12 September 2017 (UTC)

User talk:107.77.205.140
Any chance you'd block this asshole for harassment? This particular IP along with others, has changed my username to schlong on multiple talk pages over the past few days. This ip is the most frequent offender, but others have included IPs registered to University of Michigan (a few of which are now school blocked), the University of Idaho, and dynamic mobile IPs that serve the cities those schools are located in. The one registered user involved, now blocked was, who was a BLP violating SPA on Skyline High School (Idaho). There has also been schlong related vandalism on Jackson High School (Michigan) that started soon after a sock of the very annoying now indeff'd SPA was blocked. I'm sure this is all somehow related but I'll be dammed if I can figure out how. Anyway, thanks for whatever you can do. I'm asking you cause I'm sick of typing schlong and I'm sure as hell not gonna do it at ANI. You've reverted more than a few of these harassing edits and are known to be quite skilled at sock related matters. John from Idegon (talk) 03:24, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
 * I can't block anyone. If you're not comfortable raising the issue at ANI, I would email/message an admin about it, or try the SPI again, which is a little less public/not as highly watched as ANI itself. Otherwise you can simply report the IP's as they show up to AIV. Sro23 (talk) 03:44, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for correcting my mistake on the oldest account. It's early morning and I didn't realize the mistake until almost finishing... Anyway, regards! Alex ShihTalk 00:49, 15 September 2017 (UTC)
 * The best part is, there's an even older account now (User:Flatoncsi), so all socks will have to be re-tagged again. Sro23 (talk) 00:51, 15 September 2017 (UTC)
 * O M F G how did I miss that. I see. It was added just now. Flatoncsi is currently being dealt with and of course I missed the first very username on the CU report. I am going to smash my head against the wall now. So sorry. Alex ShihTalk 00:54, 15 September 2017 (UTC)
 * These big sockfarms are always such a joy to tag, but it's all finished now. Just wait till next week when it's discovered there's an even older sockmaster behind this. Sro23 (talk) 01:00, 15 September 2017 (UTC)

115.248.26.61
Hi, I pinged you re:the 115.248.26.61 SPI, but I did so via the Twinkle interface and I wasn't sure if pings worked there. Anyhow, please take a look as these are not stale IPs and there are now registered socks as well. Thanks.—Cpt.a.haddock (talk) (please ping when replying) 10:54, 15 September 2017 (UTC)

You're better at this than me
But this user is creating pages that were previously created by a banned user - a pretty obvious WP:DUCK, except I can't find out the sock masters name because all the previous page histories are not visible to me! I figured you may already be familiar with this one? Thanks! Garchy (talk) 17:27, 15 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Do you mean Sockpuppet investigations/Nayanhalder57? Sro23 (talk) 23:25, 15 September 2017 (UTC)
 * That's the one - do you think it's worth an SPI? Garchy (talk) 00:53, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Definitely, it sure looks like block evasion to me. Sro23 (talk) 01:31, 16 September 2017 (UTC)

Sockpuppet Question
I tried to do a report, but twinkle filled out an SPI, which I don't have enough info for. is busy acting like an expert at WP:ACTRIAL and is very clearly not a new editor. I'm not sure if anything can be done or should be done about this undisclosed alternative account. Legacypac (talk) 22:44, 17 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Yeah, it does seem like a returning user, and per WP:ILLEGIT, "undisclosed alternative accounts are not to be used in discussions internal to the project". However, it's not like the user is being super disruptive, and who knows, maybe they were an IP editor in the past and that's why they don't seem new. We are supposed to assume good faith. You can try starting a thread at WP:ANI, or if you don't want to do that, notifying an individual admin. Sro23 (talk) 23:05, 17 September 2017 (UTC)