This is an archive of past discussions with User:RoySmith. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Hi Roy - Thanks for your comment. Unfortunately, with exception of the article referred to on the draft page, there is no in depth information on the heretidary palace of Dessau. I have contacted the local archive and local history club, who confirmed. The sites you can find on Google are either Postcards or short texts saying that the palace stood on the location where is now the Stadtpark.

15:36, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

The first article I created for Wikipedia that you approved was flagged for speedy deletion incorrectly. You noted that there was copyright infringement from articles that were created AFTER my article was published on Wikipedia in February 2019. So, my article was not a copyright infringement. They copied my article. Here were the two pages noted: https://www.pri-med.com/globals/faculty/s/stanford-fatima%20cody and https://advances.massgeneral.org/contributors/contributor.aspx?id=1316

How do I get this page reinstated?

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sebdubois77 (talk • contribs) 07:31, 17 November 2020 (UTC)

Roy, fyi - I got the same message (also without links) and have responded at User talk:Cabayi#Deleted page "Fatima Cody Stanford" deleted in error. Cabayi (talk) 10:00, 17 November 2020 (UTC)

Hello again. You say the whack-a-mole at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Hopeful2014 is pointless, which I'm inclined to agree with, but what should I be doing in these situations instead? Is it fine to just make the call myself and mass-revert any IP that I suspect of being this user, and only take it to SPI if they continue to edit and/or deny being the user? I was assuming that the SPI system was there to discourage a non-admin from appointing themselves judge, jury and executioner like that, but maybe I'm approaching this wrongly. --Lord Belbury (talk) 10:31, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

Lord Belbury, Yeah, I wish I had a good answer for you. I think opening the SPI is fine. If the IP is still active, they can get blocked. And if not (as was the case here) at least it gets it on record what the IP was and if a pattern eventually emerges, a range block might be possible. Being more aggressive about reverting bad edits sounds like a good plan to me. If we could identify a particular set of pages that are targeted often, they could be protected, but from what I've seen in the past, there's so many pages, I don't think that would be practical. -- RoySmith (talk) 15:37, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

Alright, thanks for the advice. If these SPIs tend towards the stale, I think reverting might be the way to go. There have been cases before where the SPI has run for weeks before being closed, making it harder to unpick the IP editor's damage afterwards. If the IP stays active after I start reverting and warning, I'll play it by ear from there. --Lord Belbury (talk) 16:04, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

Lord Belbury, Reverting and opening an SPI are not mutually exclusive. Another possibility is Wikipedia:Requests for page protection. As you've observed, SPI is a ponderous process and often badly backed up. RFP tends to get quicker results. -- RoySmith (talk) 16:12, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

October 18, 7pm: ONLINE WikiWednesday Salon NYC

You are invited to join the Wikimedia NYC community for our monthly "WikiWednesday" evening salon (7-8pm) and knowledge-sharing workshop. To join the meeting from your computer or smartphone, just visit this link. More information about how to connect is available on the meetup page. We look forward to seeing local Wikimedians, but would also like to invite folks from the greater New York metropolitan area (and beyond!) who might not typically be able to join us in person! This month we've invited the creators of instagram accounts @depthsofwikipedia and @wikipediapictures to chat with us about their Wiki* appreciation accounts. If there's a project you'd like to share or a question you'd like answered, just let us know by adding it to the agenda or responding to this message. Wednesday November 18 WikiWednesday Salon and Skill-Share NYC (optional RSVP on-wiki). 7:00pm - 8:00 pm online via Zoom (optional breakout rooms from 8:00-8:30) Editathons this coming Saturday You are also invited to join thse two editathon on Saturday November 21: NYC COVID-19: Environmental Justice in Public Health Edit-a-thon - Sat Nov 21, 11am-1pm Wikipedia Asia Month Edit-a-thon on Exhibition Histories - Sat Nov 21, 12pm-5pm

(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

--Wikimedia New York City Team 17:57, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

Hi! Thanks for offering to help out. I have written both bot tasks and Toolforge tools in Python; I would say the tools are probably in worse shape, as several of the tools in the list I linked don't work. Some of it is that libraries they depended on (like mwclient or MySQLdb) were removed from Toolforge. I'd say (without any data) PERM Archive and CatTrack are the most-missed tools, so if you had any ideas on fixing those that would be appreciated. They use CGI scripts instead of the more advanced technology you have over at the SPI tools, sadly :) Enterprisey (talk!) 09:32, 11 November 2020 (UTC)

Enterprisey, What's the issue with CatTrack? I've never used it before, but from what I can see, it's working fine. https://apersonbot.toolforge.org/cat-track/view.py?category=All+accuracy+disputes gives me a nice graph.

As far as depending on libraries in Toolforge, I try to depend as little as possible on the stock environments. All the third-party libraries I use (including mwclient), I download into a virtualenv. That's the only way to stay sane. I even went so far as to build my own Python from source so I could have the same version everywhere. -- RoySmith (talk) 15:03, 11 November 2020 (UTC)

Enterprisey, Any specific thoughts on how I can help out here? -- RoySmith (talk) 16:00, 13 November 2020 (UTC) -- RoySmith (talk) 16:00, 13 November 2020 (UTC)

The advice to use a venv is excellent; I wish I had used them when I set up the tools. CatTrack's scraper is broken; it has no data more recent than March 15th of this year. I suspect library dependency issues, as usual.

For specific things you could help with, fixing those Toolforge tools that currently appear broken would be nice. If I can also ask, what Python libraries would you use to make SQL queries to the toolforge replicas? I think they removed the one I used from the stock environment. Enterprisey (talk!) 02:38, 14 November 2020 (UTC)

Enterprisey, OK, I'll take a look around and see what I can figure out. As for SQL, I've been using toolforge, which is a thin wrapper around pymysql. You can find some sample usages in github and/or /mnt/nfs/labstore-secondary-tools-home/roysmith/sock-classifier. -- RoySmith (talk) 18:03, 14 November 2020 (UTC)

• Enterprisey, Regarding /home/aperson, I was just trying to figure out where CatTrack is installed and how it runs. But, now I see, it's under /data/project/apersonbot, so I'll pick up the hunt from there. -- RoySmith (talk) 22:18, 17 November 2020 (UTC)

Enterprisey, I've gotten as far as /data/project/apersonbot/bot/cat-track/generate.sh. What runs that? I assume there's a crontab entry somewhere? -- RoySmith (talk) 22:56, 17 November 2020 (UTC)

Yeah, it's a crontab that runs on the first and fifteenth of every month. Enterprisey (talk!) 03:47, 19 November 2020 (UTC)

Hi,

I found the page in the subject a good source of information. link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_the_longest_gaps_between_film_sequels?oldid=751435531

Is it not possible to open it again?

I'd like to organize the page, use sources where I can to make this a useful and helpful list.

Kind regards,

Steven

173.248.237.165 (talk) 10:32, 19 November 2020 (UTC)

• I've restored this to Draft:List of the longest gaps between film sequels. Please read over the afd and make sure your new version fixes the problems that were pointed out there. -- RoySmith (talk) 16:55, 19 November 2020 (UTC)

Hello RoySmith, while reading this article I noticed that the article had large amount of POV with the intention to lead readers into the impression that Chinese women in Korea as mostly prostitutes.

For example, in the line "The South Korean newspaper “The Dong-a Ilbo” reveals that sex workers in the so-called “휴게텔” are all composed of Chinese women (Han Chinese and Ethnic Korean Chinese) except “Gangnam” area" when the source clearly does not state this.

Also, the line: "As of 2018, female students from China staying in South Korea reach 41,957[42] and many of them are caught by the press and reported as sexual workers", while the figure for female Chinese exchange students in Korea is true, two reports of total less than 30 arrested for hostesses at drinking establishments hardly qualifies as "many of them are caught and reported as sexual workers".

Upon further inspection, I found that the original person who edited this (Bablos939) have other sockets puppets (Marryhence) including some which have been banned. A request to investigate this act has been opened here: sockhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Bablos939

There are other evidences that the same person is adding similar racist narrative (that Chinese nationals in foreign countries are prostitutes) into edits here: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Prostitution_in_Sri_Lanka&diff=prev&oldid=945218988#cite_note-14 and here: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Prostitution_in_Malaysia&diff=prev&oldid=945026534

Can you please look into this and revert the sections to the state before the vandalization?

Thank you

Hzzzzzz3 (talk) 21:04, 20 November 2020 (UTC)

Hzzzzzz3, That's a content issue. It needs to be sorted out by editors talking to each other on the talk page and building consensus. -- RoySmith (talk) 21:59, 20 November 2020 (UTC)

HI RoySmith, besides the content, can you please also consider the likelihood that Marryhence is a socket puppet, Single purpose Account. This type of behavior by itself should not be allowed regardless of the nature of the content. I think you have reverted beskotuyam's edits because that user was also a sockpuppet regardless of the content. You have also reverted rajmaan's socks. If you can please check Marryhence and then decide for yourself that would be great.

thanks, Hzzzzzz3 (talk) 02:37, 21 November 2020 (UTC)

The page Krunker.io was deleted , reasoned that, it didn't meet notability guidelines and its citations were to blogs and not reputable websites, which I agree with, but upon further research, using the Situational Sources of Video Games engine I found several references, which could qualify, and make the page pass the notability requirements, furthermore the initial page was poorly edited and not maintained.

I am an editor in the Krunker.io Wiki and I would like to appeal the draft protection so that I can make a proper draft and get it approved. I understand that you have received drafts, which violated rules relating to advertisement and spam before, but I can assure you that I don't have any COI with Krunker or its affiliations and will make an unbiased page.

Jytesh (talk) 15:08, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

Jytesh, I'm curious, for somebody who has a single wikipedia edit, you seem to know a lot about our processes. Would you, by any chance, have any other wikipedia accounts that you've used in the past? -- RoySmith (talk) 15:53, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

Malcolmxl5, you closed the AfD in question, so pinging you. My inclination is to restore this to draft, but figured I run it past you first. -- RoySmith (talk) 15:57, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

Also, @Victor Schmidt:, who also had a hand in this, i.e. moving Krunker.io to Draft:Krunker.io (2). -- RoySmith (talk) 16:02, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

No problem as far as I’m concerned though obviously the sourcing issues identified at the AfD have to be addressed. Note that there is an earlier draft at draft:Krunker. --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 16:14, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for the notification. I dont have an opinion on the draft, it yust should not end up undersourced in mainspace. The "(2)" suffix appears because the regular title was (and is still) taken. Victor Schmidt (talk) 16:32, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

RoySmith, Nope, i did my fair share of reading about wikpedia processes, but I do have a Fandom Account, I am new to wikipedia and this will be my second edit. Jytesh (talk) 05:15, 19 November 2020 (UTC)

Jytesh, OK, this was a bit of an adventure sorting out, but I've undeleted Krunker.io and userfied it, which means it's now at User:Jytesh/Krunker.io. I've also deleted under WP:G6 the existing Draft:Krunker.io (2), since it didn't have any content of value anyway (a single short sentence). And, just for fun, Draft:Krunker became WP:G13 eligible today; I saved it from that.

So, the bottom line is, you can work on Draft:Krunker. You can also use User:Jytesh/Krunker.io for reference, but if you decide to copy-paste any text out of it, please see WP:COPYWITHIN for how to comply with our licensing requirements. If you want to start from scratch, what you should do is go to Draft:Krunker, remove all the current content (what we call "blanking"), and start from there. -- RoySmith (talk) 14:34, 19 November 2020 (UTC)

RoySmith, thank you, I will get started on it!

RoySmith, how do I submit the article as a draft, move it from Draft to article?

Click the blue "Resubmit" button. Be aware that the queue to get re-reviewed is backed up. It might not happen for a few weeks . RoySmith-Mobile (talk) 14:15, 21 November 2020 (UTC)*

• https://www.gamasutra.com/view/pressreleases/371517/krunkerio_over_150_million_players.php
• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Criteria_for_speedy_deletion#G11._Unambiguous_advertising_or_promotion
• https://cse.google.com/cse?cx=003516479746865699832:qdq1uk9p1ua

Following-up on Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Pmmp1234, see the latest edits by 69.113.64.54 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) on the same articles. Page protection may be useful at this point. — MarkH₂₁^talk 21:13, 21 November 2020 (UTC)

17:17, 23 November 2020 (UTC)

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:18, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Ppoopoow2333. There is a suspected GHBH that a CheckUser check has not given conclusive results. Best regards, 4thfile4thrank {talk} :? 03:46, 25 November 2020 (UTC)

4thfile4thrank, Thanks for the note, but it looks like it's been taken care of already. -- RoySmith (talk) 13:43, 25 November 2020 (UTC)

Hi Roy. Please see my proposal at the bottom of Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/95.122.136.229. Some of these accounts are most likely socks of Filologo2. So I'd like there to be a WP:Sockpuppet investigations/Filologo2.

If you look over WP:Sockpuppet investigations/Azerti83, I think that guy had different interests from Filologo2. If we just go ahead and do SPI blocks with the usual script, the accounts will get tagged for Azerti83 which could be misleading. And the case is currently named for an IP which is very transitory. Can you let me know if this change is practical? Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 17:53, 25 November 2020 (UTC)

EdJohnston, I'm taking a look at it now. Can't promise I'll make heads or tails out of it :-) -- RoySmith (talk) 19:56, 25 November 2020 (UTC)

EdJohnston, I'm not 100% sure what your request was. If it's just to do with the mechanics of setting up a new SPI case for Filologo2 and moving some of the suspects there, sure, that's straight-forward. Confirm that's what you had in mind, and I'll take care of it. -- RoySmith (talk) 20:59, 25 November 2020 (UTC)

Yes please. I believe that the master is Filologo2 (talk · contribs) (at least, that is the oldest account I could find that argues about use of the term 'genocide' regarding Spanish colonization of North America). I think that Php2000 and Frijolesconqueso are socks of Filologo2, plus several others currently listed in Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/95.122.136.229. Any connection with Filologo2 is only on behavior, but the others are recent enough to be checked. All these editors speak English well. EdJohnston (talk) 21:21, 25 November 2020 (UTC)

EdJohnston, OK, I've gone ahead and done that, but let's pick up the conversation on the respective SPI case pages. -- RoySmith (talk) 21:58, 25 November 2020 (UTC)

Hi, could you kindly take a look at this discussion[6]. I persuaded two editors, currently falsely accused of being socks, that they should not be discouraged from being contributing members on Wikipedia and then ended up being called a sock-puppet(for having an opinion) of a banned editor who was already active on this site when I was still in middle school. Regardless of where your opinion will land on this matter, the page needs an uninvolved admin presence. --GoldenDragonHorn (talk) 01:10, 26 November 2020 (UTC)

GoldenDragonHorn, I'll take a look. -- RoySmith (talk) 01:11, 26 November 2020 (UTC)

Thanks. ----GoldenDragonHorn (talk) 01:13, 26 November 2020 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Bringlights. Is the behavioral evidence enough or not? Best regards, 4thfile4thrank {talk} :? 04:17, 26 November 2020 (UTC)

Hi RoySmith,

Thanks for cleaning up this user's 2nd SPI case. I am not fully sure what the standard block policy is here, but they were 2-week blocked for the first incident. Do you think extending it to indefinite due to the second socking issue is worthwhile? Etzedek24 ^{(I'll talk at ya) (Check my track record)} 05:46, 27 November 2020 (UTC)

Etzedek24, Thanks for the note, I'll respond on the SPI page. -- RoySmith (talk) 14:24, 27 November 2020 (UTC)

Hi. I saw your comments somewhere about DS. Like you, I had never been able to figure out how it worked and if indeed it was effective, so as an admin it was an area I stayed away from. Anyway, my focus was on other policies, one of which was UPE and I fully concur with "The whole concept of being paid to edit Wikipedia on behalf of a client or employer is an inherent COI and should be banned outright." It's a shame I'm no longer an active contributor to content and governance - having had some modest success as a mover-and-shaker in some related areas, this and COI are topics I would have been totally committed to. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 21:03, 28 November 2020 (UTC)

Kudpung, Thanks for your note. BTW, I read all the ArbCom candidate statements, and there's several who mention DS as something needing an overhaul, so maybe there's hope. -- RoySmith (talk) 21:55, 28 November 2020 (UTC)

Not only is DS needing an overthaul, but there are users who argue that the Arbcom itself needs even more than an refurbishment - perhaps even deprecating and replacing with a totally new concept in Wikipedia governance. The line up of candidates every year is generally unimpressive but they are so few that some of them will get a seat whether they are actually suited for the job or not. I wrote a detailed voter guide before most of the questions and discussion even began.

Despite their campaign statements, DS/AE is not something sitting Arbs can change. The new members are in for a big surprise at what the work entails and as usual some will even bail out before their term is finished. Any reforms will need to come as a community initiative but unless they are on the receiving end of sanctions not enough users are genuinely concerned about back office stuff - that's why there are also so few bids for the mop. As a once long-time mover-and-shaker I've generally lost interest now in the routine governance of Wikipedia and when the election is over I will be diving back under my blanket. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 22:29, 28 November 2020 (UTC)

"No response to the request for more info" - but I did respond? And 82.1.219.198 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) is active right now, they edited yesterday. I brought up the others because I know it tends to be helpful, so I'm kind of dismayed that my attempts to track down socks of this incredibly prolific, obvious, and currently active sockmaster seem to have weakened my report. Please consider reopening. –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 23:04, 28 November 2020 (UTC)

Roscelese, Hmmm. Yeah, I see that you did. I'm not sure what I was looking at. I'll take another look. Thanks for alerting me. -- RoySmith (talk) 23:22, 28 November 2020 (UTC)

Thanks! –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 23:31, 28 November 2020 (UTC)

I take it that promotion of Angelique Rockas or projects related to her such as the Internationalist Theatre is the common feature of all these IPs. On that basis a two-month block of 82.1.219.198 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) could be justified. EdJohnston (talk) 23:45, 28 November 2020 (UTC)

EdJohnston, My usual practice on static IPs which are clearly dedicated to socking is to see how long they've been active and block them for that same amount of time. In this case, this was the first edit on that IP in a year. Hence my 2 month block. -- RoySmith (talk) 23:51, 28 November 2020 (UTC)

Sounds good. EdJohnston (talk) 23:54, 28 November 2020 (UTC)

17:44, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

This SPI got archived before I could respond. I tend to use {{bwt}} when I deliberately choose not to tag socks for WP:DENY reasons. There's another template, {{Sblock}}, that reads "Blocked but awaiting tags" that's better if I want a clerk to do the tagging after a merge, for example. In this particular SPI, I thought tagging might not be needed, but admittedly I think it could go either way, since the master is relatively obscure and the tags do provide an informational benefit to allow future socks to be reported. Mz7 (talk) 17:58, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

Mz7, Thanks for the explanation. -- RoySmith (talk) 18:29, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

News and updates for administrators from the past month (November 2020).

Administrator changes

Andrwsc • Anetode • GoldenRing • JzG • LinguistAtLarge • Nehrams2020

Interface administrator changes

Izno

Guideline and policy news

• There is a request for comment in progress to either remove T3 (duplicated and hardcoded instances) as a speedy deletion criterion or eliminate its seven-day waiting period.

Technical news

• Voting for proposals in the 2021 Community Wishlist Survey, which determines what software the Wikimedia Foundation's Community Tech team will work on next year, will take place from 8 December through 21 December. In particular, there are sections regarding administrators and anti-harassment.

Arbitration

• Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee Elections is open to eligible editors until Monday 23:59, 7 December 2020 UTC. Please review the candidates and, if you wish to do so, submit your choices on the voting page.

Hi RoySmith. Would you mind taking a look at 365Chess.com. It was previously deleted by you per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/365Chess.com and might be eligible for CSD per WP:G4 if it's basically a recreation of the prior version. If not, then it might need to go to AfD since it's already been there once before and WP:A7 may not be applicable. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:12, 3 December 2020 (UTC)

Update: as you've probably noticed the article has been speedily deleted by another admin; so, there's probably nothing more that needs to be done here unless the article is re-created again. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:44, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

Marchjuly, Yup, thanks. -- RoySmith (talk) 01:26, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

This editor now claims that the person who originally registered the account has died, and the account is now operated by a friend. I've reported the issue to WP:ANI#Compromised account?. Since you expressed concerns that there might be more than one person behind this account recently, you may want to weigh in. Sir Sputnik (talk) 23:42, 5 December 2020 (UTC)

Sir Sputnik, Interesting, thanks. -- RoySmith (talk) 00:02, 6 December 2020 (UTC)

16:14, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

Should this be merged into this? davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 🎄 03:17, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

Davidwr, My general philosophy is if it got lost behind the dryer, it's become a cat toy. But I'll take a look. -- RoySmith (talk) 03:20, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

Davidwr, I don't have time to really dig into this right now, but at first glance, yeah, it looks like they should be merged. @Dreamy Jazz: who worked on both of these. -- RoySmith (talk) 03:27, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

Oh yeah. I'll move the archived case. Dreamy Jazz ^{talk to me | my contributions} 09:27, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

Hello, RoySmith. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template. SportingFlyer T·C 19:22, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

21:33, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

December 16, 7pm: ONLINE WikiWednesday Salon NYC

You are invited to join the Wikimedia NYC community for our monthly "WikiWednesday" evening salon (7-8pm) and knowledge-sharing workshop. To join the meeting from your computer or smartphone, just visit this link. More information about how to connect is available on the meetup page. We look forward to seeing local Wikimedians, but would also like to invite folks from the greater New York metropolitan area (and beyond!) who might not typically be able to join us in person! This month will include a discussion of the sixth annual Community Wishlist Survey, an opportunity for editors and other community members to submit proposals for fixes and features you'd like the Wikimedia Foundation's tech team to address. As always, it's the agenda anyone can edit, so please feel free to add any projects you'd like to share. Wednesday December 16 WikiWednesday Salon and Skill-Share NYC (optional RSVP on-wiki). 7:00pm - 8:00 pm online via Zoom (optional breakout rooms from 8:00-8:30)

(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

--Wikimedia New York City Team 01:55, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

20:53, 21 December 2020 (UTC)

Hi. User Arthur Brum (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Arthur_Brum)/[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Arthur_Brum/Archive) created another sockpuppet: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/RealityIllusion. Please check. 177.142.41.77 (talk) 20:36, 22 December 2020 (UTC)

Certainly I remember, and it is notes like yours that keep me going here, I do not forget the actual people from the editathons, though I cannot always match up the usernames. The inability to continue having them has been a great loss to me; they don't work on zoom, at least for me, and we haven't found any equivalent. Looking forward to 2022. DGG ( talk ) 02:06, 23 December 2020 (UTC)

This is spreading Vandalism by ip user multiple account. 2405:204:A702:AFA0:0:0:1EBB:40A5 and 2405:204:A5AD:3DAA:0:0:1219:C0B0 Dam222 🌋 (talk) 10:22, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

	The Original Barnstar
	Hello Roy Smith Thank you for your work and this gift from me. Dam222 🌋 (talk) 10:38, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

Could the problem be caused by the socks' usernames containing &s ? Cabayi (talk) 22:03, 21 December 2020 (UTC)

Cabayi, Yeah, for while, I thought that was it, but it doesn't seem to be. I'm now thinking the pattern I use to locate the template in the parsoid output was just too specific, and something changed out from under me. I'm looking at it now. -- RoySmith (talk) 23:43, 21 December 2020 (UTC)

Cabayi, I uploaded a new version that fixes this. It was indeed the TfD template, or rather parsoid's bizarre way of dealing with it combined with my over-specific pattern for template finding. -- RoySmith (talk) 13:51, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

Hello , Roysmith Hope you have a great day ! I saw Shahoodu has been blocked. Why he was blocked ?? He was a major contributor in wikiproject indian football . And also was improving lots of articles in english wikipedia. Awaiting your reply. BestwishesPoppified (talk) 08:46, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Sulshanamoodhi (or Shahoodu as you know him) used multiple accounts here and on Commons. He was given a short block for it in May yet continued to use multiple accounts. The userpages of both users link to the investigation where you can check for yourself. Cabayi (talk) 08:56, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

Now I'm puzzled - Poppified had already seen, and edited, the archives of the case when they asked why. Cabayi (talk) 10:04, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

@Cabayi I didn't understand final verdict.So I was trying to hear out what went wrong.And also sorry for the trouble. BestwishesPoppified (talk) 10:38, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

Poppified, One person is (with very limited exceptions) allowed to have only one account. Using multiple accounts is called sockpuppetry, which is explained in WP:Sockpuppetry. There was ample evidence that Shahoodu had repeatedly violated this rule, and continue to do so after being warned. -- RoySmith (talk) 13:31, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

RoySmith , Thanks for your reply.Sorry for the trouble.BestwishesPoppified (talk) 13:38, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

Poppified, Not a problem. I appreciate your enquiry. -- RoySmith (talk) 13:57, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

Happy New Year!

RoySmith,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
Fylindfotberserk (talk) 15:39, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

   Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

I am just sticking with one account. Kepler-1229b talk — Preceding undated comment added 17:03, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

Kepler-1229b good plan, thanks. -- RoySmith (talk) 17:12, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

Hey,

Given what happened with User:DarkGlow yesterday, I'm just wondering if this needs changed back to being admin-only creation again?-- 5 albert square (talk) 18:30, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

@5 albert square: If it was me, I'd redirect it to List of Emmerdale characters (2010)#Jacob Gallagher and fully protect it indefinitely – since that's his notable role, it may be a useful landing target. – DarkGlow (✉) 18:39, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

5 albert square, That's certainly possible. I wasn't going to bother, but would have no objection if you wanted to. -- RoySmith (talk) 21:14, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

Thanks. I've actually taken into consideration DarkGlow's suggestion and I've allowed it on as a redirect plus fully protected the redirect to stop it being taken off that. Thanks for the suggestion DG :)-- 5 albert square (talk) 23:47, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

@5 albert square: I have my suspicions about Messinwithbruce (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) being another account of ZestyLemonz, they edit the same pages as that user does. Obviously, I could be wrong (like people were about me), but it seems too familiar/similar to me, idk. – DarkGlow (✉) 02:14, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

DarkGlow hey! I've had a quick look at the edits, I wouldn't feel comfortable blocking on that. They're editing similar articles yes but that could be coincidence. It's not quacking loudly enough. If I were you, I'd raise a sockpuppet investigation and request CheckUser. Either that or contact a CheckUser-- 5 albert square (talk) 03:29, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

Out of several thousand DYK hooks featured on the Main Page during 2020, your hook for The Lincoln Project ranked as the No. 19 hook of the year with 1,665 DYK views per hour. A list of the 25 most viewed hooks of the year can be viewed at "Top hooks of 2020". Congratulations on your hook's remarkable showing, and keep up the great work! Cbl62 (talk) 10:28, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

Please don't miss the sock Jijubahubali, who is into Thiyya topics most probably Adithya Kiran Chekavar. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 157.44.178.234 (talk) 09:41, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

Please open an SPI, thanks. -- RoySmith (talk) 14:29, 4 January 2021 (UTC)

I’m curious about the Miki Filigranski case I was following. Crovata has been inactive. Miki uses one account and made large positive contributions to Wikipedia. Why are they considered sockpuppeting with just one account active. They have shown to be productive. Seems unfare. What are your thoughts? Can one be banned for life from Wikipedia forever for sockpuppeting years ago? Just wondering how the rules go as it seems only one account was used recently. They do seem to be the same people I agree. I don’t doubt that. OyMosby (talk) 02:25, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

OyMosby, That's a fair question. Crovata hasn't exactly been "inactive"; they were blocked, a couple weeks before the Miki Filigranski account was created. But, to more directly answer your question, no, being blocked for socking is not being banned for life. There is a process for people to ask to be unblocked. In general, if you give people some reasonable expectation that you understand what you did wrong and will be productive in the future, you can get unblocked. See, for example, Wikipedia:Standard offer. Things get more complicated when you just continue to sock. "I didn't get caught for two years, so you should forgive me" doesn't go over too well.

You might also be interested in the comments I made at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Codyfinke about a week ago. -- RoySmith (talk) 03:41, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

Gotcha and thanks for explaining. Though how does one appeal with they are blocked from editing? Also really appreciate you breaking things down. I myself was almost permanently banned for having multiple accounts meant for different areas. Stupidly I forgot which ones I was logged in and used them on the same page. Now I stick to only one since it makes it easy for admins to keep track of 3RR and so on of a person. Learned my lesson. Though on my page I had an appeal link. Do some not get one? OyMosby (talk) 04:01, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

OyMosby, Every blocked user should get a templatized message on their talk page explaining why they were blocked and instructions on how to appeal. If that's not the case, the full instructions are at Wikipedia:Appealing a block. -- RoySmith (talk) 14:33, 4 January 2021 (UTC)

News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2020).

Administrator changes Hammersoft Andres • Brion VIBBER • Rkitko • Thatcher

CheckUser changes Barkeep49 • BDD • CaptainEek • Primefac Oversight changes Barkeep49 • BDD • CaptainEek Joe Roe

Guideline and policy news

• Speedy deletion criterion T3 (duplication and hardcoded instances) has been repealed following a request for comment.

Technical news

• You can now put pages on your watchlist for a limited period of time.

Arbitration

• By motion, standard discretionary sanctions have been temporarily authorized for all pages relating to the Horn of Africa (defined as including Ethiopia, Somalia, Eritrea, Djibouti, and adjoining areas if involved in related disputes). The effectiveness of the discretionary sanctions can be evaluated on the request by any editor after March 1, 2021 (or sooner if for a good reason).
• Following the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections, the following editors have been appointed to the Arbitration Committee: Barkeep49, BDD, Bradv, CaptainEek, L235, Maxim, Primefac.

• DxRxXxZx (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Hello Roy. I've blocked this user indef as a sock of User:Vyaiskaya per CU findings, and also indeffed Vyaiskaya as the master. The two accounts came to my attention when someone suggested there was socking going on, and then I looked at the edit history of Westernization and found the users making similar edits. Is it normal to open an SPI, or is the best option to apply tags to the user pages? Vyaiskaya was created on 2 August, 2017 and DxRxXxZz on 23 December, 2020. Thanks for any advice. EdJohnston (talk) 20:51, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

EdJohnston, From my vantage point as a clerk, I think what's most important is that there's a clear historical record. What I've done on occasion (and I've seen others do) is open a SPI, note that it's pro-forma because everybody's already blocked, and then close it myself. That gets it into archives for future investigators to reference. Applying tags helps too, for the same reason. I hope that helps. -- RoySmith (talk) 21:21, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

Now filed at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Vyaiskaya. Status marked as 'closed' but I assume this allows somebody who knows the tagging policies to do whatever is needed. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 22:09, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

EdJohnston, BTW, on their talk page, they keep mentioning "my sn". I have no idea what that means. Do you? -- RoySmith (talk) 13:25, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

Could it mean their username? EdJohnston (talk) 15:58, 7 January 2021 (UTC)