User talk:Bobjörk
May 2021
[edit]
Please do not add defamatory content to Wikipedia, as you did to Frank Walker (Jersey politician), especially if it involves living persons. All information in biographies of living persons MUST, non-negotiably, be sourced to reliable sources, particularly if it involves accusations of criminal behaviour. RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 23:52, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
I have Changed my password. Dont know how someone could Edit on English Wikipedia with my swedish wikipedia user. Bobjörk (talk) 00:12, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
How do I remove the reply not written by me? Bobjörk (talk) 00:13, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
"Hacked"
[edit]Its not really a correct word. Someone used my swedish account to edit here. I noticed it because of the e-mail sent. Not really hacked as I had a way to simple password. Changed it to a looong one. Dont even know who that dude is. Bobjörk (talk) 00:17, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
- In any case if that is true this account will likely need to be blocked (I've put in a request for someone else's opinion at WP:ANI). See WP:GOTHACKED. RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 03:17, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
Ive had this swedish one for like 15 years and made many edits. I hope it will not be blocked just because of this. I have changed password on this account. It might be someone i know but I don't know who the man in the edited article is though. Bobjörk (talk) 05:46, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
But if its possible to block it on the English only im fine with it. Never use this here as I d know you could. Bobjörk (talk) 05:55, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
- I didnt even know Bobjörk (talk) 05:55, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
- It's possible to block an account from the English Wikipedia only but that won't solve the problem here. If your account is WP:compromised that means it could be use to edit any Wikimedia project using WP:SUL including the Swedish Wikipedia. For that reason, WP:Compromised accounts will generally have to be WP:globally locked until we can be sure the original owner is back in control. En.wikipedia blocking is only used when the problem is local such as inappropriate editing here. Nil Einne (talk) 06:06, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
Well how do I prove that im back in control again. And since im now accused of trying to claim my brother did it when Im not blocked for the inappropriate editing made here. In that case someone conpromising you would mean your account is blocked forever? So basically it would have been better if i said I did the edits and got blocked here even if that isnt true? Bobjörk (talk) 06:12, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
- It would've been better for you, yes. Would it have been better for Wikipedia? Not really; we want to know what's going on. Do you hold any advanced permissions on the Swedish Wikipedia? 78.28.55.108 (talk) 10:38, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
- Mr Anonomous IP-adress: It would be good for Wikipedia as well. If they could actually tell if someone got it back. Because otherwise it leads to what I was saying: Its better to lie than telling the truth or you'll get punished with a harder punishment than if you had said you did the edits you didn't (which in this case probably would have led to either nothing or a ban on English Wiki). Its about having a user with my name (shared only by FOUR people in the world ALL related to me. A user that have been editing for 15 years. Its not about wether I have advanced permissions or not. Its also about being honest. If that is punished by a Global ban, then its bad for Wikipedia. Bobjörk (talk) 11:10, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
- No one ever suggested punishing you. Everyone has been clear that if we lock your account, it would be to protect our projects, such as the Swedish Wikipedia. If you had advanced permissions, it would be significantly more acute that this account needed to be globally locked instantly until we were sure you were back in control since those advanced permissions would likely be an attractive target. Even if you make thousands of edits on the Swedish Wikipedia every day, locking your account for a few days while we make sure you have it properly under control would cause very little harm compared to the harm from your account being further misused. If you had chosen to hide that your account was compromised, that would be unfortunate but while I don't know the policies of the Swedish Wikipedia, I suspect once someone figured it out, it would mean you would lose any advanced permissions and would likely find it difficult to get them back since you wouldn't be someone who could be trusted with such permissions. Also, if you actually cared about the Swedish Wikipedia, you would be more concerned about ensuring your account was not misused than losing access to it for a few days. We naturally assume editors actually care about the projects they work on so are not going to lie for such foolish reasons. If you don't care, that is unfortunate. However considering you've made maybe about 20 edits there in the past 10 years, and less then 500 since you created your account, I'm guessing you don't have advanced permissions. The fact you edit so rarely further mystifies me why you care so much about the possibility of losing access to your account for a few days that you'd be willing to lie and risk harm to the project you chose to work on just to avoid the possibility of a short term loss of access, but whatever, that's your business. Indeed the fact it's associated with your very uncommon name means your comments are even more mystifying. Why care so much about losing access for a few days compared to ensuring your very uncommon name isn't the cause of havoc on the Swedish Wikipedia because your account is still compromised? Sorry your comments just make little sense to me since if I were in your shoes, I'd be doing everything I could to ensure I was properly back in control of my account and my main concern would be this rather than so worried about the possibility of a short term loss of access while the process plays out which seems to be your only concern instead of where it should be i.e. the fact your account was, and for all we know could still be compromised. Nil Einne (talk) 13:06, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
- I care about it because noone had said anything about loosing it for a few days. What is said here and in the report is that I should be blocked not because of the edits but because of "My brother did it" which does NOT lead to "a few days" but permanent band, what I can see. Its also about whats right. You might NOT see it as a punishment. I do however since the report is about me saying I was hacked (or rather someone logged in to my account and made strange edits) and that I therefore had to be blocked. So, if I just changed my password (like I did as soon as I saw the comment here about edits I did not make), then everything would have been fine. Except my users only posts being defamatory. Since I have control, the content is not risked neither here, nor on Swedish Wikipedia. If im blocked, how am I supposed to show that I'm in control of the user again? How am I going to claim my user again? Thats right, if I'm blocked for "my brother did it" I cant. So, the truth still is: If I just had changed my password, like I did, we would not have this conversation. And there is NO logic whatsoever in saying that that would lead to spam on Swedish Wikipedia since I have changed many passwords, not just this one. And you are right, it would be foolish of me to lie for such foolish reason as some edits. But it would have cause no hassle for me to say I did it and just changed my password, even if THAT would be lying. That would also have lead to less work for all of us as it would just have been a reverted edit and no threaths of lifetime bans. THATS why I care about the user. Because it is MY name and I dont want it to be blocked for mu honesty as I know it is not compromised. But Im not allowed to prove it
- I have said to you every single time I replied that your account may need to be globally locked until we can be sure the original owner is back in control. There is no logical reason why it will take more than a few days to verify the original owner is back in control unless it is impossible to do so. If that's the case, so be it, you will have to make a new account. But I see no reason to think that would be the case especially since you say the account is associated with your very rare name. So in all likelihood it will only be a few days. If your account is globally locked, you will be able to communicate with stewards via email. You're acting as if this is something that has never happened before. It happens all the time and so there are procedures in place to deal with it, and those who deal with it know what they're doing. I trust them. I don't trust you since you keep talking nonsense. Globally locking your account is obviously not going to stop you proving you are back in control. Again stewards know what they're doing and the procedures in places are able to deal with all sorts of issues. As I said at ANI, AFAICT no one involved so far has the ability to look into anything you are saying. Maybe the original account owner is back in control maybe not. If the edits were made with the same IP and user agent, this means if your account is compromised changing your password will not help. It's compromised because your computer is compromised or something similar and so is still at risk. No one ever mentioned the possibility of a lifetime ban other than you. I mentioned the possibility of an indefinite block on the English Wikipedia only for reasons unrelated to a compromised account. An indefinite block is also very far from a lifetime ban. I also mentioned in this comment, for the first time, the possibility your account may need to be global locked for ever. As I said, I find it very unlikely. But if it does happen, it will explicitly not be a lifetime ban. You will be fully entitled to create a new account. Let me repeat for the last time, if you care about the Swedish Wikipedia, why are you so afraid to prove the original account owner is back in control of your account, something which will surely only take a few days at most, just because it means you can't use your account for a few days? Why are you making up stuff like lifetime bans, something no one has ever suggested? Surely the possibility of harm to the Swedish Wikipedia from your account which could still be compromised for all anyone of us knows, is a risk your care enough about that you're willing to forgo access to your account for a few days while you go through the procedures to deal with a compromised account? Nil Einne (talk) 14:51, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
- So a checkuser has commented and confirmed my (and I think everyone's) suspicion. There is zero evidence someone else used your account. So either someone is using your computer (well I think phone or tablet) to make edits about 15 minutes before you, in which case your account is still compromised and you yourself should be asking for it to be globally locked until you can fix your device security. Or it was never compromised, which would explain why you're so unhappy about people looking in to it. It sounds like, especially given the circumstances, no one particularly believes there's need for further action. As I said, this is hardly the first time and yeah this applies also to someone claiming their account is compromised when there is no sign of that too, why WP:Compromised deals with it. Indeed such claims came about before genuinely compromised accounts were really much of a concern. The alternative as I said, if you really did not make the edits, you now know someone is using your device to make edits. Since you never mentioned someone else having access to your device, this must mean there's something seriously wrong with your device security that you need to look into. In the meantime, you should personally ask stewards to globally lock your account since you've said you care about the Swedish Wikipedia and you now know somehow someone is using your account from your device to edit the English one so they may very well edit the Swedish one next. As I said, I don't think anyone else thinks it worth it. (Please don't tell us you suddenly realised your child/sibling/spouse/roommate/whatever is using your account. Such statements are even more boring than compromised account statements.) Nil Einne (talk) 15:18, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
- Its true that all the edits I've made since I changed passwords are from the same IP since its made from the same device. Thats what I think he mean, proving that I'm not compromised ANYMORE. Since I discovered the edits made almost directly after they were made, I managed to change passwords. That could be why it might look like it never was compromised. Anyway. I asked HOW i could confirm that I was no longer compromised while you talked about blocking and now you changed that into that I did not want anyone to look into it?
- So a checkuser has commented and confirmed my (and I think everyone's) suspicion. There is zero evidence someone else used your account. So either someone is using your computer (well I think phone or tablet) to make edits about 15 minutes before you, in which case your account is still compromised and you yourself should be asking for it to be globally locked until you can fix your device security. Or it was never compromised, which would explain why you're so unhappy about people looking in to it. It sounds like, especially given the circumstances, no one particularly believes there's need for further action. As I said, this is hardly the first time and yeah this applies also to someone claiming their account is compromised when there is no sign of that too, why WP:Compromised deals with it. Indeed such claims came about before genuinely compromised accounts were really much of a concern. The alternative as I said, if you really did not make the edits, you now know someone is using your device to make edits. Since you never mentioned someone else having access to your device, this must mean there's something seriously wrong with your device security that you need to look into. In the meantime, you should personally ask stewards to globally lock your account since you've said you care about the Swedish Wikipedia and you now know somehow someone is using your account from your device to edit the English one so they may very well edit the Swedish one next. As I said, I don't think anyone else thinks it worth it. (Please don't tell us you suddenly realised your child/sibling/spouse/roommate/whatever is using your account. Such statements are even more boring than compromised account statements.) Nil Einne (talk) 15:18, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
- I have said to you every single time I replied that your account may need to be globally locked until we can be sure the original owner is back in control. There is no logical reason why it will take more than a few days to verify the original owner is back in control unless it is impossible to do so. If that's the case, so be it, you will have to make a new account. But I see no reason to think that would be the case especially since you say the account is associated with your very rare name. So in all likelihood it will only be a few days. If your account is globally locked, you will be able to communicate with stewards via email. You're acting as if this is something that has never happened before. It happens all the time and so there are procedures in place to deal with it, and those who deal with it know what they're doing. I trust them. I don't trust you since you keep talking nonsense. Globally locking your account is obviously not going to stop you proving you are back in control. Again stewards know what they're doing and the procedures in places are able to deal with all sorts of issues. As I said at ANI, AFAICT no one involved so far has the ability to look into anything you are saying. Maybe the original account owner is back in control maybe not. If the edits were made with the same IP and user agent, this means if your account is compromised changing your password will not help. It's compromised because your computer is compromised or something similar and so is still at risk. No one ever mentioned the possibility of a lifetime ban other than you. I mentioned the possibility of an indefinite block on the English Wikipedia only for reasons unrelated to a compromised account. An indefinite block is also very far from a lifetime ban. I also mentioned in this comment, for the first time, the possibility your account may need to be global locked for ever. As I said, I find it very unlikely. But if it does happen, it will explicitly not be a lifetime ban. You will be fully entitled to create a new account. Let me repeat for the last time, if you care about the Swedish Wikipedia, why are you so afraid to prove the original account owner is back in control of your account, something which will surely only take a few days at most, just because it means you can't use your account for a few days? Why are you making up stuff like lifetime bans, something no one has ever suggested? Surely the possibility of harm to the Swedish Wikipedia from your account which could still be compromised for all anyone of us knows, is a risk your care enough about that you're willing to forgo access to your account for a few days while you go through the procedures to deal with a compromised account? Nil Einne (talk) 14:51, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
- I care about it because noone had said anything about loosing it for a few days. What is said here and in the report is that I should be blocked not because of the edits but because of "My brother did it" which does NOT lead to "a few days" but permanent band, what I can see. Its also about whats right. You might NOT see it as a punishment. I do however since the report is about me saying I was hacked (or rather someone logged in to my account and made strange edits) and that I therefore had to be blocked. So, if I just changed my password (like I did as soon as I saw the comment here about edits I did not make), then everything would have been fine. Except my users only posts being defamatory. Since I have control, the content is not risked neither here, nor on Swedish Wikipedia. If im blocked, how am I supposed to show that I'm in control of the user again? How am I going to claim my user again? Thats right, if I'm blocked for "my brother did it" I cant. So, the truth still is: If I just had changed my password, like I did, we would not have this conversation. And there is NO logic whatsoever in saying that that would lead to spam on Swedish Wikipedia since I have changed many passwords, not just this one. And you are right, it would be foolish of me to lie for such foolish reason as some edits. But it would have cause no hassle for me to say I did it and just changed my password, even if THAT would be lying. That would also have lead to less work for all of us as it would just have been a reverted edit and no threaths of lifetime bans. THATS why I care about the user. Because it is MY name and I dont want it to be blocked for mu honesty as I know it is not compromised. But Im not allowed to prove it
- No one ever suggested punishing you. Everyone has been clear that if we lock your account, it would be to protect our projects, such as the Swedish Wikipedia. If you had advanced permissions, it would be significantly more acute that this account needed to be globally locked instantly until we were sure you were back in control since those advanced permissions would likely be an attractive target. Even if you make thousands of edits on the Swedish Wikipedia every day, locking your account for a few days while we make sure you have it properly under control would cause very little harm compared to the harm from your account being further misused. If you had chosen to hide that your account was compromised, that would be unfortunate but while I don't know the policies of the Swedish Wikipedia, I suspect once someone figured it out, it would mean you would lose any advanced permissions and would likely find it difficult to get them back since you wouldn't be someone who could be trusted with such permissions. Also, if you actually cared about the Swedish Wikipedia, you would be more concerned about ensuring your account was not misused than losing access to it for a few days. We naturally assume editors actually care about the projects they work on so are not going to lie for such foolish reasons. If you don't care, that is unfortunate. However considering you've made maybe about 20 edits there in the past 10 years, and less then 500 since you created your account, I'm guessing you don't have advanced permissions. The fact you edit so rarely further mystifies me why you care so much about the possibility of losing access to your account for a few days that you'd be willing to lie and risk harm to the project you chose to work on just to avoid the possibility of a short term loss of access, but whatever, that's your business. Indeed the fact it's associated with your very uncommon name means your comments are even more mystifying. Why care so much about losing access for a few days compared to ensuring your very uncommon name isn't the cause of havoc on the Swedish Wikipedia because your account is still compromised? Sorry your comments just make little sense to me since if I were in your shoes, I'd be doing everything I could to ensure I was properly back in control of my account and my main concern would be this rather than so worried about the possibility of a short term loss of access while the process plays out which seems to be your only concern instead of where it should be i.e. the fact your account was, and for all we know could still be compromised. Nil Einne (talk) 13:06, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
- Mr Anonomous IP-adress: It would be good for Wikipedia as well. If they could actually tell if someone got it back. Because otherwise it leads to what I was saying: Its better to lie than telling the truth or you'll get punished with a harder punishment than if you had said you did the edits you didn't (which in this case probably would have led to either nothing or a ban on English Wiki). Its about having a user with my name (shared only by FOUR people in the world ALL related to me. A user that have been editing for 15 years. Its not about wether I have advanced permissions or not. Its also about being honest. If that is punished by a Global ban, then its bad for Wikipedia. Bobjörk (talk) 11:10, 9 May 2021 (UTC)