Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Category:Wikipedia sockpuppets of 118 alex

 __NOINDEX__
 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the miscellaneous page below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the discussion was: keep. Quasi-procedural.The best place for these type of discussions is WT:SPI. (non-admin closure) Winged Blades Godric  15:07, 17 November 2017 (UTC)

Category:Wikipedia sockpuppets of 118 alex


From what told me on his talk page, the sockmaster himself seems to enjoy tagging accounts as his own sockpuppets. I don't think we should let this slide considering how this is disruptive and bringing undue attention to him. Blake Gripling (talk) 06:17, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Comment: This pretty much includes every single userspace page under the category. Blake Gripling (talk) 06:18, 15 November 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep, subject to a checkuser or SPI clerk, coming here and explaining their reason for seeking consensus. Normal, these things are archived, or if needing deletion, a checkuser or admin SPI clerk will do the deletion without flagging the matter at places like this.  Blake Gripling, what are your interests with ?  You are not an SPI clerk?  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 06:54, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
 * I've noticed something odd about the anon just recently, as I was trolling around my watchlist. Brought this to Sro's attention, and as it turns out this is a rather eccentric or outright bizarre habit of Alex to tag himself en masse, presumably as a way to solicit (unwanted) recognition not unlike MascotGuy. Blake Gripling (talk) 07:22, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
 * I recommend taking this to the attention of User:Sro23 and User:Berean Hunter, who recently closed and archived the case, and leaving actions to them. SPI pages do not really belong at MfD, SPI is a self-managing area of experts.  Also, categories don't come to MfD, but I don't want to suggest that you take it to CfD either.  The clerks and checkusers can handle it.  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 07:27, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
 * I already did leave a message on Sro's talk page. He says he doesn't mind purging the pages off, but I do need further approval on this. Blake Gripling (talk) 07:33, 15 November 2017 (UTC)

— Berean Hunter   (talk)  12:24, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Notice posted at WT:SPI and in general, I would say that should be a standard when it comes to nominating SPI-related pages/cats for deletion. I would say this isn't the way to go about what you are trying to achieve. This should have started as a discussion at WT:SPI and a conclusion might be reached there.
 * There is precedent for such deletions, but as a CheckUser, I do not like them. It makes it more difficult to track these things. ~ Rob 13 Talk 12:49, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
 * I do agree with you Rob, but since the sockmaster does revel in soliciting attention through tagging, having a trail of sockpuppet accounts with tag templates added by the sockmaster himself is moot. We could keep a record of said socks through SPI in case cross-referencing is needed, but I am not sure if that would cut it. Imho the disruption seems obvious (bizarre usernames, unwanted behaviour) that a simple case of RBI is enough, and leaving a paper trail is tantamount to feeding a troll. I'm just basing this from my experiences with SGK and Malusia22, amongst others. Blake Gripling (talk) 13:34, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Most socks, especially socks from this guy, don't make it to SPI. They're found in the account creation log or via various other means that I won't go into and swiftly blocked/locked and tagged. If we manage to go three months with no actual filings at SPI and we're not tracking these via tags, it becomes possibly difficult for CUs to find a non-stale sock to compare new accounts to. This isn't a hypothetical; there actually hasn't been an SPI report filed for this guy in over three months. ~ Rob 13 Talk 16:37, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
 * I'm inclined to say Delete for several reasons. First, this sock clearly sees this as a hall of fame of a sort, given that he makes no move to disguise himself and often will come by from proxies to add the category to his previous socks, detected or otherwise. See:, , , , for a sampling. Secondly, my non-cu understanding of these types of categories is that they help establish a recognizable pattern, as Rob says. But with this sock there's never any doubt, and given that most of them don't make it to SPI, there doesn't seem to be a need for this category. CU is typically of no use anyway, given where he edits through. So mostly per DENY I think this should go. Not to make more work for CU's but the patterns he's using could be recorded in a general form elsewhere if there was ever any doubt and a reference was needed.  Crow  Caw  21:21, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
 * It's not the pattern we need, which can be recorded elsewhere. It's the technical data. We need to be able to find non-stale socks to compare against. ~ Rob 13 Talk 22:40, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Ref the 5 sample links above, they're all proxies, which is what this guy uses. That's why rangeblocks don't work and all his blocks have been Ducky. UA alone is probably not enough to block on in absence of anything else... Crow  Caw  00:20, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
 * To clarify, I'm certainly not in a position to tell a CU what they need or don't need to do their job. Perhaps delete those pages that a CU did not tag, or those over 90d, etc? This is just so blatant a badge for the lta.. reminds me of another lta that created socks with names demanding an lta page be set up. Some people get their kicks in odd ways I suppose...  Crow  Caw  00:33, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
 * As what I was thinking. It's screaming "I'M MR. MEESEEKS! LOOK AT ME!" or something. To be honest, I think the sock tag should be reserved for those subtle or niche cases, e.g. hoaxers like Bertrand101, and since I mentioned a vandal based in the Philippines, those others that are from other countries or focus their misdeeds on obscure or regional subjects. Anyone who's trying to be blatant should be blocked and forgotten, no questions asked. Blake Gripling (talk) 01:34, 16 November 2017 (UTC)


 * As someone seriously supports deletion: Close, Wrong forum, go to WP:CfD.  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 22:46, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
 * I listed this category primarily as it concerns userspace pages under the category; not necessarily the category itself. I did it so that one can view all the pages in question in one click, and not go through the trouble of having to link to some other page. Blake Gripling (talk) 00:23, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
 * If I understand correctly, most of the pages can be deleted by an SPI admin under WP:CSD. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 01:41, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Defer to WT:SPI. Or discuss these in IRC; the less visibility the better. See also Streisand effect. VQuakr (talk) 04:53, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.