Jump to content

User talk:Girth Summit/Archive 20

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 15←Archive 18Archive 19Archive 20Archive 21Archive 22

Spur

You mentioned this at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Pauldereck. I assume it's a tool that identifies proxies? Do non-CUs have access to it? If so, where is it? Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 12:54, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

It's a website - here. I don't use the website directly though - I access it through Bullseye, which gives you a bunch of information, including what Spur has to say about it. I use User:GeneralNotability/ip-ext-info.js to get to Bullseye - if you install that, you will get a little link that looks like a globe next to IP addresses in article histories, which takes you directly to the Bullseye page for the IP. Really useful - don't know how I'd manage without it. Girth Summit (blether) 13:06, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
I installed it and used it on the contribution history of Spellbound (Paula Abdul album) (using a thread above from this page) and Special:contributions/2A02:C7C:7B4E:AE00:D0ED:6E24:9789:AB11, the /64 range of which you blocked. No Spur information. I assume I will see such information only if Spur identifies it as a proxy? Maybe you have a contribution history an IP proxy that I could try? A couple of side notes. Seems odd that I can't look directly at the IP's contributions and go from there, although I just noticed that if I click on a diff in an IP history, I get the globe, and I also just noticed that my link to the contribution history of the IPv6 has a globe. In your experience, how reliable is Spur?--Bbb23 (talk) 13:24, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
Take a look at this one - it's a Nord VPN proxy. As for going to the IP's contribs from Bullseye, I normally go in the other direction, it's never occurred to me to go back from there (I open a new tab each time). Reliability? It seems pretty good, although I'm sure it's not infallible, and I think it sometimes misses proxies; I'll ping GeneralNotability and Blablubbs to see if they have any thoughts on that. Girth Summit (blether) 13:29, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
Sorry, maybe I wasn't clear. I didn't want to go to the IP contribs from Bullseye - I wanted to see the globe when I look at the IP contribs on en.wiki. I noticed on the VPN proxy you provided that it doesn't say anything about Spur but refers to IPCheck. Isn't that the same IPCheck that SQL used to maintain? I still use it, despite the disclaimer that it's no longer maintained, because I don't really have anything else. Is the version used in Bullseye more recent?--Bbb23 (talk) 13:44, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
Spur is very good, but using it (well) requires some background knowledge and experience to judge which bits of the information it provides are relevant to assessing a given situation. This gets BEANSy fairly quickly, but happy to email if you want a more detailed take. Spur is not the same thing as IPCheck; Bullseye grabs data from both – among other sources – what exactly people see is indeed permission-gated. --Blablubbs (talk) 16:44, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
Thanks Blablubbs - I can't speak for Bbb23, but I'd certainly appreciate an e-mail with as much or as little as you are prepared to write out, I think you're a lot more knowledgeable than I am about proxies and the like. When you say 'permission-gated', do you mean Wikimedia account permissions (cu versus admin), and do you know whether there is a whitelist one can apply to be put on to bypass that? I can see a case why it would be useful for clerks and SPI-active admins have that info. Girth Summit (blether) 17:02, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
Ah, hang on, misunderstood you there, my fault, I wasn't reading properly. I guess that would be useful, but it's only one extra click to go from the contribs page to the history of any article they've edited, so I don't find it much of a hindrance.
I'm a bit confused about you not seeing Spur into at that link - I just clicked on it again and it's giving me the stuff from Spur. Are you sure it's not collapsed? Maybe it gives different results depending on whether you've got the CU flag - although, I think I was using it before I got that flag, and I don't remember it changing. Same goes for the IPCheck stuff - not sure where that comes from, GN could tell you. Girth Summit (blether) 13:49, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
My view has all these collapsed sections underneath the pretty map, each section with a name and an arrow to uncollapse it. They are in order: Wikimedia Blocks (global block, enwiki hardblock); WHOIS; Maxmind Geolocation; IPCheck (proxy (proxycheck)); Shodan; and BPGView.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:00, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
Hmm. I see a Spur section in between IPCheck and Shodan, saying 'Spur (VPN, callback proxy), and when I uncollapse it I get:
VPN/Proxy activity: True
Estimated number of devices: 1
VPNs: NORD_VPN
Other proxies: NETNUT_PROXY (RESIDENTIAL), LUMINATI_PROXY (RESIDENTIAL)
Infrastructure:
alongside a link to go to the Spur website for that IP. I'm guessing that it's either a CU thing, or maybe there's a list of users who get Spur information. I don't know whether there's any documentation for the tool - I've only got my own experience to draw on, we'll need to wait for GN to comment. Girth Summit (blether) 14:08, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
That's fine, I just wish I didn't feel like such an idiot when it comes to these sorts of things.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:56, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
Spur is restricted by default to a handful of groups (CU, stew, WMF staff, account creator) due to the limited number of queries we get per month - though I should probably re-evaluate that and see whether we're anywhere near the query limit these days, I might be able to expand that to admins. Bbb23, I've manually granted you access to Spur data now. My one caution when dealing with Spur is to not make proxy blocks just because an IP has data under "other proxies" - those are usually on dynamic IP addresses and aren't safe to hardblock for a long time in the same way that a NordVPN exit point is. GeneralNotability (talk) 01:03, 24 August 2023 (UTC)
Thanks, GeneralNotability. Are you saying that I shouldn't block IPs as identified by Spur or that I shouldn't hardblock those IPs? Just so you know, I never hardblock IPs.--Bbb23 (talk) 01:10, 24 August 2023 (UTC)
Bbb23, basically don't block an IP soley because it has some proxy service or other listed under "Other proxies" (it's fine to make normal blocks against them for behavior or whatever). GeneralNotability (talk) 01:13, 24 August 2023 (UTC)
Understood, thanks for clarifying. I may impose on you in the future if I have questions.--Bbb23 (talk) 01:18, 24 August 2023 (UTC)
Happy to assist in whatever way I can. GeneralNotability (talk) 01:19, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

WP:ANI#User:Gorebath

You forgot to sign your close.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:10, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

Thanks. That discussion closer script seems to be the only one I use that doesn't automatically add a signature when you use it - it's not the first time I've forgotten. Girth Summit (blether) 13:14, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

Sockpuppet

Hi you had previously blocked user @Takhidlioop: but I believe they’re once again creating another sock account using @Shellylovesshopping: [1] — they continuously keep genre warring on Head over Heels and Spellbound. I also believe the recent IP addresses on both pages are also coming from the same sock as you can see they’re continuously adding the same genres, I would advise blocking them as well. Pillowdelight (talk) 22:46, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

Another IP has once again added back the genres on both album pages [2] [3] — the IP has been blocked seven different times within the last 4 years. Pillowdelight (talk) 04:32, 24 August 2023 (UTC)
Blocked again. Girth Summit (blether) 06:21, 24 August 2023 (UTC)
A new user @Quitzza: has again added back the genres — is this common that you’ll constantly see a sock create a new account after every block? Pillowdelight (talk) 14:43, 24 August 2023 (UTC)
Not always, but with this particular sockmaster - yes, they're very persistent. I don't know why they bother, it's not like we're not going to notice, but socks gonna sock. Girth Summit (blether) 14:56, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

Feedback request: History and geography request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Vikings on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 20:30, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

Talkpage access

Hi, Girth Summit. Migsmigss did it again, in case you want to carry out what you said here. Or maybe give them one more chance? Up to you. Bishonen | tålk 16:08, 25 August 2023 (UTC).

In fairness to them, I think they may have misinterpreted what I said in the preceding diff. (Not sure why Nil Einne thought it mattered, but they were correct on the matter of policy so, meh.) Girth Summit (blether) 16:11, 25 August 2023 (UTC)

Requesting help and 2 more suspect account

Hi @Girth Summit, shockingly I found 2 more accounts acting similarly. I have replied to your comment there.


Also requesting information on how to remove the Bill page of the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 as the author like mentioned in the investigation is removing the templates. Also can you do it as I'm fairly new to this stuff.


Thank you Thewikizoomer (talk) 14:26, 26 August 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for your action on the Bill page. Also why is the page isn't removed as it is already the time past after 07:05, 25 August 2023 (UTC) as mentioned in the template? Thewikizoomer (talk) 14:29, 26 August 2023 (UTC)
Copyright investigations aren't really my area of expertise - I just reinstated the improperly removed tag, and protected the article while we figure out what is going on. Pinging Moneytrees and Diannaa, two admins very well acquainted with copyvio issues, who may be willing to help: could one of you take a look at The Digital Personal Data Protection Bill, 2022 - I reinstated a tag that was removed twice by a couple of new accounts, and applied ECP protection - is there anything more needing doing to get the page investigated? (Additional context at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/TechGenWikinator03.) Girth Summit (blether) 14:33, 26 August 2023 (UTC)
Thank you @Girth Summit.
As you have pinged @Moneytrees and @Diannaa. Will just wait and see now. Thewikizoomer (talk) 14:35, 26 August 2023 (UTC)
The probleim is that we have very few people that specialize (fewer than ten) in copyright cleanup. Right now there appear to be only two people working the cases listed at WP:CP. Please be patient; the case will get investigated, perhaps not a rapidly as you would wish, but it will get investigated. — Diannaa (talk) 15:33, 26 August 2023 (UTC)
Oh if course - sorry, we've got our own backlog at SPI so I know the feeling, I wasn't wanting to jump the queue. I just wanted to make sure that the template is in order of if there's anything else I need to do (I just reverted its removal). Girth Summit (blether) 16:30, 26 August 2023 (UTC)
Because the case is listed at Wikipedia:Copyright problems/2023 August 18, it will get examined whether the template is intact or not. — Diannaa (talk) 16:41, 26 August 2023 (UTC)

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Rebel Moon on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 08:30, 27 August 2023 (UTC)

Coincidence?

Hi @Girth Summit. Am I being paranoid, or does this and this remind you of someone too? -- DeFacto (talk). 12:12, 27 August 2023 (UTC)

One can never be entirely certain, but I'd call that one pretty  Unlikely, based on a number of different factors (behavioural and technical). If it was a low traffic page I might be more suspicious, but Dorries is in a news a lot at the moment, that article is bound to attract attention. Girth Summit (blether) 15:54, 27 August 2023 (UTC)

Block request

@Girth Summit I am an aspirant for NEET 2024. From now, I have decided focus only to the exam with full force without any distraction. So can you please block my account upto May 2024? XYZ 250706 (talk) 14:01, 29 August 2023 (UTC)

I don't know what NEET is, but I wish you luck in the exams. I am prepared to block your account; if you change your mind, read WP:GAB, post an unblock request and link to this comment. Girth Summit (blether) 15:03, 29 August 2023 (UTC)

If you get a spare moment (Ha!) (and again Haha!)

Would you please take a look at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Princek2019? I have suspicions as you can see. What you cannot see is that I have offered to look at the alleged sock's current draft once they look at the referencing. It would be helpful if a verdict could be reached before then, please. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 12:54, 29 August 2023 (UTC)

 Done. I don't know for sure if it's Princek2019, but it's definitely a sock, and they were messing around while logged out in an AfD that was full of other socks. Blocked as suspected. Girth Summit (blether) 13:11, 29 August 2023 (UTC)
Thank you They made my antennae twitch. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 13:15, 29 August 2023 (UTC)
Good lord, "he" is back! No urgency about this now, but I've opened a newSPI 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 15:42, 29 August 2023 (UTC)

English schools

This post has nothing to do with Wikipedia. I'm trying to understand a little more how the English school system works. The last year of secondary education in the US is the senior year (12th grade) in high school, after which is university. A typical American student normally graduates high school when they are about 18 years old. How does it work in England? And perhaps you could address how Sixth form fits into "graduation" and the transition from secondary education to university? I've read some of the article, and as is so often the case at Wikipedia, it has a lot of detail but never seems to answer the questions I care about. Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 12:16, 29 August 2023 (UTC)

It's complicated, and although I'm a teacher I'm primary-trained (5-11yo), so my knowledge of the older end of things is sketchy. In the state sector, kids go to primary school until they're 11, then they head off to secondary school. There they do three years (forms 1 - 3) of general learning stuff, before selecting the subjects they want to spend two years (forms 4 and 5) doing GCSEs, which they will complete when they're 16. In years gone by they were allowed to leave school at that point if they wanted, but these days they need to stay in some sort of education or training until aged 18, so some will go off and do vocational training; if you want to go to university however, you will have to do your A levels, which means staying on for 'sixth form'. It is a stupid name because it lasts for two years - it really ought to be 'sixth form' and 'seventh form', but they call it 'lower sixth' and 'upper sixth', I have no idea why. I think that most secondary schools do A levels in-house, but there are also 'sixth form colleges'; if you want to go to one of them, you leave the school where you did your GCSEs and go off to your A levels somewhere else. A levels would be completed aged 18, then off you go to uni for three years to do your undergraduate degree.
How does it fit into graduation? Not sure. I guess some sixth form colleges (maybe most, maybe all - I dunno) may have some sort of event that they call graduation when you get your A levels and leave the college; personally, I associate the word only with getting a university degree. I should say though that I grew up in Scotland, which has an entirely different education system from England. (We spend less time in secondary school, more time at university, we don't do GCSEs or A levels - it really is entirely different). I certainly didn't have any kind of 'graduation' ceremony when I left secondary school - as far as I can recall, we just got booted out to make way for the next lot. Girth Summit (blether) 12:39, 29 August 2023 (UTC)
That's very helpful, thanks. I'm surprised that English university is only three years (American are four). The part about Scotland is funny. I get a kick how Brits call groups of people "lots".--Bbb23 (talk) 12:54, 29 August 2023 (UTC)
@Bbb23 (talk page watcher) I recall a discussion about the number of teaching days in the US school year being substantially fewer than much of the rest of the world. If still so,this might account for a need to catch up during the first year at university? 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 12:56, 29 August 2023 (UTC)
I have no idea how the number of days in American schools compares to the rest of the world, either now or historically, but I'd be surprised if the sytem is designed so that university compensates for the "lack" in earlier schooling.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:13, 29 August 2023 (UTC)
In the United States, there are typically 160-180 school days in a year
School[s....] follow a standard pattern, with a school year of 190 days of teaching
Both from Academic year. Over an number of years the difference is significant. But is the additional university year a result, or simply "an additional year"? To answer that one needs to know what is taught and when. My own UK university course was for three years, all of which were studying the degree subject in detail. The first year added in additional subjects additional to the school subjects studied before attending university which were dropped in year two 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 13:23, 29 August 2023 (UTC)
Three or four years is fairly typical across Europe. Some places three, some four. I don't think it's 'designed' to do anything in particular, each country's standards and traditions have just evolved over time. Girth Summit (blether) 13:28, 29 August 2023 (UTC)
Honestly, although I know reasonably well how the American education system worked when I went to school, I don't know how it works now. Plus the US is fragmanted because most pre-university education - and to some extent universities themselves - is controlled by the individual states. That said, my biggest beef with education in the US has nothing to do with what we're discussing but the class divide between public and private schools. My views on private schools is rather radical, and I rarely articulate them to anyone except close friends who share them.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:41, 29 August 2023 (UTC)
Assuming your view is what I think it is, you'd probably find a lot of people agree with you over on this side of the pond where the centre of the political divide is a lot further to the left. My own view isn't simple. I believe in equity of opportunity, which cannot be achieved when some parents are able to buy their way out of the system that everyone else has to go through; on the other hand, I think that our state sector is weighed down with bureaucracy, busywork and constant pointless tick-box assessment, taking much of the joy out of teaching for everyone concerned. : / Girth Summit (blether) 14:07, 29 August 2023 (UTC)
In the UK we have a tradition of private schools. They can be accused with some merit of having the aim "beating" (it used bilaterally) the independent spirit out of pupils - mostly boys - and moulding them into obedient individuals capable of being middle aspiration middle managers of the Empire we no longer have.
I went to one. If you get the chance watch the movie If..... You'll find it on Youtube. It is a documentary up to the café scene; mine was just like it.
We also have state funded schools.
Both are broadly equivalent in the quality of education provided. There are exceptions.
The complex thing is that parents who send their kids to private schools also pay for state education for other kids through taxes. If private schools were to be abolished it would be hard to find the money to pay for extra burden of educating the many tens of thousands of kids from the private sector, plus those in the state sector subsidised by fee paying parents.
I'm not sure whether I am in favour of or against private schools. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 15:21, 29 August 2023 (UTC)
I went to a state-maintained Catholic school in Glasgow - it wasn't particularly religious, but it was obligatory to support Celtic. I've taught in state and private schools in England. I'm not sure about 'broadly equivalent' - yes, the content of the teaching you get is pretty similar, but the class sizes in private schools tend to be much smaller (like, half the size or less, in my experience), so the kids get more individual attention. Plus the facilities, especially for sport, tend to be significantly better. The real difference though is the expectation that gets imparted to kids at private schools. If you go to a school that has a swimming pool, enormous playing fields, luxurious lunches, trips to the Alps during the summer term, etc., and your teacher says to you 'You can be anything you want to be', there's a good chance that you might believe him. If, on the other hand, your view out of the classroom window is a street filled with plastic bags and broken glass, and your walk home from school is an exercise in dodging beatings from gangs of Rangers fans who recognise your uniform, it's harder to get kids to hold onto those aspirations.
I take the point about parents of children at private schools contributing towards the education of everyone else; that's the same argument as for private healthcare, private dentistry, etc. It's true, but it doesn't address the point that while an alternative system exists for the wealthy, those who would have the money to ensure that the default system is of an acceptable standard have little motivation to do so. But then again, if we were to ban private schools, private healthcare etc., I guess it would just be offshored - there are plenty of good boarding schools in <insert name of country easily accessible from the UK here>. Meh. Girth Summit (blether) 15:42, 29 August 2023 (UTC)
Generally speaking, Europe is far more socialist than the US in almost every sphere, perhaps the UK being less so but still to the left of the US. With regard to education only, the principal problem is that money is diverted from public schools and funneled into private schools. Here at least there is no doubt that kids attending private schools get a better education and, similar to what GS said, do so in a far more attractive environment. In addition, teachers are diverted into private schools because of better salaries and better working conditions. Finally, the problem is getting worse. It used to be that only the rich sent their kids to private schools; now the middle class does as well. I remember a conversation I had with a colleague once who sent her kids to private schools. In general, she was progressive politically, but when it came to her kids, like many parents, her beliefs went out the window. When I told her I thought private schools should be abolished, she said something like "I will not sacrifice my children for a principle."--Bbb23 (talk) 15:55, 29 August 2023 (UTC)
The UK has moved, lurched, to the right over the past (insert number here) years. The current ruling party is substantially to the right ofwhereit was when it started to govern.
It used to be that the US Democrats were the broad equivalent of our Conservative party. No longer true, that.
Class sizes I do not dispute.Quality of teacher, though,I feel to be equal or thereabouts.
I do not want private education, etc, but I have had the advantages and disadvantages it gave me. I believe I would have been better in the state system, and happier. I value the UK's NHS, but have had to go private on occasions. The service was quicker, undelivered by the same staff in a different hospital!
There was a point I was making, but it has drifted away from me. The benefits of age! "Have I had my tea?" 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 16:08, 29 August 2023 (UTC)
(smiling).--Bbb23 (talk) 16:21, 29 August 2023 (UTC)
I am also suffering from Autocarrot. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 16:25, 29 August 2023 (UTC)
Quality of teacher is indeed there or thereabouts I'd say - it's the same people, for the most part, teachers tend to move back ad forth between the two. In my experience teachers in private school - at least in prep schools, don't know about senior schools - are lower than in the state sector. Disclosure - I'm currently in the private sector (not planned - moved to a new town to follow my partner's career and had to take the first job I could get), and I think I'm earning about £3K a year less than I would be if I'd stayed in the state sector. On the plus side, there are vastly fewer books to mark, fewer people looking over my shoulder all the time to ensure all my paperwork has been correctly filed in triplicate, and a generally greater degree of professional freedom to do what I think works for the kids in my care. Plus, I can take my dog to work - she sits under my desk for the most part while I'm teaching, and the kids throw balls for her on our enormous playing fields at break times. I simply can't imagine that ever being allowed in the state system. Girth Summit (blether) 16:46, 29 August 2023 (UTC)
UK Preparatory Schools are, or were, awkward places. Mine was staffed by PTSD suffering WW2 veterans. Mine was boys only. Some of the staff were less than suitable to be in education, let alone with 7-13 y/o boys.
BUT I was taught there, and taught well, with notable exceptions.
There have been changes since 1958-1965, most for the better. Inspections, dreaded by staff for good reason, have made them morally healthier places, but they still attract strange staff. I think a smaller proportion than when I was a kid! 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 16:54, 29 August 2023 (UTC)
I think there have been a lot of changes since then! There aren't many 'boys only' ones left, and while there is still a greater male:female ratio amongst the staff than there is in state schools, that's probably healthy - it's roughly 1:1 at my school, whereas I think the national average in the state sector is about 1:6, and when I was a nipper the only men you'd meet were the head and the janny (and the occasional priest having a fag behind the bike shed).
Inspections are (probably, on balance, with caveats) a Good Thing, for the reasons you point towards. They are 'lighter touch' in the private sector, thank God. I have seen talented, solid, competent teachers made physically sick by the news of an unexpected Ofsted inspection. Bad times. Girth Summit (blether) 17:12, 29 August 2023 (UTC)
We can agree on Ofsted Over-reach with ease. I have often wondered why they enter a school to find fault rather than to praise. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 17:19, 29 August 2023 (UTC)
and the occasional priest having a fag behind the bike shed. Careful, many Americans would read that as quite different from what you intended.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:48, 29 August 2023 (UTC)
You're probably right! Girth Summit (blether) 17:58, 29 August 2023 (UTC)
Hi Bbb23
I just happened to be in the neighbourhood, and happened to be schooled in England too, so thought I'd throw in some observations that may help.
The same basic age structure applies here (England). As the school year starts in the fall (that is to say autumn), running from September till Christmas (what some primary schools used to call the Michaelmas term), the age groups are delineated so those in the yeargroup will turn 18 somewhere between the starting September and the September after they've left. A leaver may still be 17 upon leaving if born between June & September, unless they stay on a year at primary school to grow up a bit. School leavers in England don't graduate; we don't consider it a graduation at English secondary school, and we certainly don't have a "prom" or anything like that. Undergraduates, and so on, at university will graduate. They'll typically get a photo of themselves wearing a funny hat as you may be familiar with.
Preparation for university happens during schooling with the dubious help of an organisation called UCAS. Around the turn of the millennium there was a political push for education (repeated three times in much the same manner as one does when casting spells), and this both bumped up the number of university attendees (including those the first from their families to go to university), and introduced new challenges for the financing of further education. It ultimately resulted in the introduction of debt-based financing of tuition costs by adapting an earlier system, designed for supporting students with their living costs, toward the financing of new "tuition fees".
In that respect, and with reference to the above discussion, schools and universities encountered similar problems. As it happens, I myself went to a private school, which confusingly in England we call a "Public" school. (The term "public" originates in the fact that traditional education was provided to children by dedicated tutors who'd attend the family home. Only later came educational institutions available to anyone, hence public (cf: public house). Of course, that education came with a significant fee.) In my day, 25 years ago, the schools had already begun importing international students as a means of bolstering income. Even with the invention of tuition fees the universities faced the same problem. Often they even lost money putting a student through, so had to licence research, partner with corporations, and seek income from local property they happened to own—they therefore started welcoming international students too. Technically all English students are part-subsidised, but these international students aren't, so they became handy cash cows. Along GS's line of thought, there will always be a contingent who's willing to pay for advantage, and in stable systems of civilisation, that ever-seductive leviathan we call the 'social hierarchy' always rears its ugly head above the waves sooner or later. In England, we tend to hear American cries of the American Dream, melting pots, free-market capitalism, etc., but see instead a latent class system in all but name. Consider your famous Kensington Avenue, Pennsylvania, for example. If you err on that side of the argument, I'd say you have your work cut out for you because that American Dream is so valuable a sales pitch that to admit it doesn't add up would be a step too far for legislators. It's ironic that the class-based Old World (which had more time to experience "the poor") was able to introduce a welfare state that would be begrudged by your New World as incompatible with the mindset of those who'd "got on", worked hard, and had the knack. To introduce such a welfare state would logically preclude the presumed transit rights of those huddled masses yearning to breathe free. As you folks say, you can't square that circle. So, the equitable society had to invite class to meet the expectations of the nation-state.
England has taken a curious compromise. I guess we were of the view that the poor will always be with us, and it would be reckless to squander an advantage we already had. With such a pedigree in education it was a no-brainer to market the sector as a world leader. Yet we also suffered some conciliatory coercion to narrow the gap between rich and poor. For example, any public school worth its salt will be a registered charity. This means that any old boys/girls (your alumni/alumnae) can donate to the cause, or leave sizeable endowments in their wills. From time to time a threat is made to withdraw charitable status from these schools unless they agree to share facilities, like theatres, football (soccer) pitches, rugby (football) pitches, and so on. There are clearly advantages though, and if there weren't the schools wouldn't exist, and this applies to teachers too. In my time a senior teacher at a public school would earn more than an Oxbridge don, apparently.
I always felt the objective of the authoritarian treatment was to prepare one for future PoW camp attendance. Fiddle Faddle is bang on when it comes to "if....". If you want a look at the cultural mindset I'd also recommend The Guinea Pig (1948), and for a rather exaggerated yet entertaining representation of the spirit of the beast definitely check out Young Sherlock Holmes (1985). I'm convinced that J. K. Rowling ripped that one off, or was at least heavily influenced by it. Check out Watson's glasses!
J
We do four years in Scotland too, but we tend to go at an earlier age than in England - I went at 17, after six years in secondary school, and it's not uncommon to go at 16 after just five years at secondary. Girth Summit (blether) 12:58, 29 August 2023 (UTC)

Re your email

In answer to your query re 'approval', it should have been sorted out now. As for the other stuff, still scratching around, discuss there maybe? AndyTheGrump (talk) 21:00, 29 August 2023 (UTC)

Cadbury Dairy Milk Pantone

Hi Girth

Could I ask where you get 2865C from? There are many websites that incorrectly list it, such as yougov.co.uk, but I suspect many themselves pulled this from Wikipedia, seeing as the value has been here for almost ten years.

If you check the official Pantone website [4] you'll be able to confirm that 2685C is correct. Additionally, I have Pantone colour swaps that list it, and no 2865C. Finally, the very Guardian article referenced even mentions 2685C, so I suggest your source is wrong.

Please confirm

Thanks

J — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.126.221.243 (talk) 18:02, 26 August 2023 (UTC)

Hi J. Hmm - you're right, the Guardian does have 2685. I checked the Beeb source (currently listed as Number 11 in the article), and it said 2865, so I assumed you were one of these people who come along and change little facts like that for fun, hoping nobody will notice - apologies for not digging deeper. I'll revert myself for now, but will look into it in a bit more detail tomorrow to see if I can find a few more contemporaneous sources (that won't have been affected by any errors in our article) to make sure - after all, the Grauniad is notorious for typos... Girth Summit (blether) 18:24, 26 August 2023 (UTC)


Hi Girth. That's perfectly alright. May I also say I'm quite impressed with the mere three-minute delay with which the reversion came! Sometimes our Wikipedian overseers seem more reminiscent of robot Squids from The Matrix. It's curious such minor vandals exist though, isn't it? Interesting to consider their motives. Indeed, I wonder whether the "Wikipedia dream" would even hold up, under entropy's patient scrutiny, without the likes of you. Perhaps it's fallacy; perhaps the centre cannot hold. Personally I think the easier the act of publishing, the more sloppy the work, which explains your Beeb article.
May I recommend the horse's mouth, the original 2013 Court of Appeal judgment, which is as primary as any source can be, and can be found here: [5]. It's interesting that Cadbury had already secured rights in 1998, before colour was seriously considered in local law, but they got greedy, wanting to expand their purpureal empire from solid bars to drinking chocolate etc., and in doing so ultimately overreached themselves. A similar backlash happened with the Americans' recent Roe v. Wade affair. Rather than accept a one-week reduction of term limit in Mississippi alone, from 16 to 15 weeks, Jackson Women's Health Organization sued, which escalated the matter to their Supreme Court, resulting in a nationwide revocation. As William DeVaughn pointed out, sometimes it's best to be thankful for what you got!
If you're still not convinced, you can view the original 1995 trademark at the IPO here: [6]. Incidentally, this filing was registered three years later in 1998, yet our article's offending sentence mentions 2007. I'm not sure where that came from. The user may be referring to the later augmentative trade mark attempt filed in 2004. The Telegraph article (reference number 10, which also uses 2865c!) mentions 2008, but 2008 only refers to when the application was accepted and published in the Trade Marks Journal (30th May 2008 [7]), at which point companies are invited to oppose, which Nestlé did. It took a further three years before Cadbury was granted additional usage rights, which Nestlé challenged and lost the following year (2012), after which followed a long process of appeals finally resulting in Cadbury surrendering its colour rights in 2019, but not before cheekily applying for three new trademarks in 2013, two of which appear to have recently met with success post-2021. Kept that quiet didn't they!
So, the article's phrase "overturning that court ruling" pertains to the 2012 case (not explicitly mentioned in the article), whose loss Nestlé appealed against and won in October 2013. Without additional context it's not clear what was overturned. Better to say: "In October 2013, however, an appeal by Nestlé successfully challenged Cadbury's claim to the colour." Then the "Since 2007" needs one of those "[citation needed]" tags though, apologies, I lack the technical wizardry to install one, and daren't risk the wrath of another Squid attack should I mess it up! For what it's worth, it looks like one of your minor vandals has been at it here. In [8] the little rascal has been changing dates by a year and effacing random words. "Since 2008" seems to have been one of his victims. I'd say the original author intended "2008", but that "1998" was when Cadbury was first granted the right, as shown on the IPO site.
J — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.126.221.243 (talk) 04:11, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
Hi J. I'm pretty attached to my username, despite the fact that at my RfA some people thought it might be some sort of sexual boast (it isn't). If I ever decide to change it though, I think I might go for User:Robot Squid, unless you decide to register an account and beat me to it, I rather like the sound of that.
Are you a fan of Yeats? I still have about a dozen of his works, including The Second Coming, lodged in my brain from my youth. Why Should Not Old Men Be Mad is starting to make a lot more sense to me now than it did when I committed it to memory...
Your link to the IPO filing settles it for me. If you want to put a 'citaiton needed tag' on the page, you can do it by using those squiggly bracket things - double them up, and write the word fact in the middle, like this: {{fact}}. Feel free to fix up the dates as well - you can mention this discussion in your edit summary (something like 'per discussion at Girth Summit's talk page'), which should at least make any robot squids stop to check before unleashing their laser beams on you. Girth Summit (blether) 16:06, 27 August 2023 (UTC)


Indeed, sir. I'm interested in all flavours of truth, we both share that belated epiphany. Poetry rather passes over us in youth, but that's fine. The young aren't meant to read poetry. They've better ways to spend their time, and miles to go before they sleep. Time is poetry's rocking cradle, its inexorable caress. Having reached forty, the era of deep age, now's the time for Yeats—and strangely, Miles Davis. I always felt him rather affected; not real music, but that's changed. Sketches of Spain, for example, starting off with the adagio from Concierto de Aranjuez, followed by an inventive interpretation of Will O' The Wisp. These things have a sort of quiet power about them. Yes, it's right to foist poetry upon the young, even though they may hear, and not understand. You're not teaching the child: you're teaching the man. These are lessons for the future, and I've found value in them all—except Seamus Heaney, whose scraggy wee poems I'll never countenance!
Perhaps you're wrong. Yeats was himself rather "observant" at the time of writing; almost terminally so. We may still have a few more years of worthy denial at our disposal.
I did sort of actually sign up for an account the other day, as it was necessary for resolving this issue in Vector 2022. Speaking as someone who just the month before was wondering why one couldn't put a TOC on the side, I remain troubled at the result. There was no warning for us IPs and the volume of last-minute fixes strongly suggests the lengthy testing process was inadequate. I don't see why we couldn't just have a subdomain à la mobile, such as en.v.wikipedia.org. There was an argument about cache burden, but I'm not sure that holds up unless the number of V2010 users is small, or their browsing habits are strongly correlated. Anyway, it landed me a wikimedia username, but I haven't used it since. Were I designing the future afresh, I would have plumped for a cryptographic signature approach, rather than logons, where identity is composed at will then sent from client⇔server as required. It would have meant greater user control, finer permissions granularity and better data portability, and also satisfy the "something you have, something you know" paradigm, but it seems the Internet had other plans. GigaPod was a clumsy cryptic corruption of my name, but sounds remarkably Squid-like, doesn't it? I should try to use it more, but rather like the idea of scattering non-distinct breadcrumbs across the Internet. It's more Ozymandian. I once tried an experiment, reviewing a collection of hyperlinks saved ten years prior. 80% failed to resolve. It's like our electromagnetic footprint in space: a brief window between the invention of radio, with high-powered broadcasts, ionosphere permitting, and the moment we specialise to local, directed, highly multiplexed transmission, like phased array 5G, and thence go quiet forever, for the sun is no sooner risen with a burning heat, but it withereth the grass. I wonder where my breadcrumbs will end up.
If you'd like to claim Robot Squid, be my guest. Assuming I understand the terminology, it could prove another handy SquidPuppet.
Yes, I wondered about that username! And still wonder about "(blether)". Is that meant to be a talk link? In any case, I see your list of articles—that's one hell of a contribution. Thanks. And erstwhile geophysicist too. Tell me, do you know anything about lattices? I understand the basic crystal systems, Bravais, minimisation of bond energies etc., and still have the chemically redolent pages of my trusted Nuffield Book of Data, but don't understand how to predict structure outcome for different phases of a material during crystallisation. I don't understand phonon interactions, and this is clearly becoming important, in type-2 superconductors and the perovskite solar cells for example. I didn't even know silicon could be coaxed to yield an effective direct band gap when in amorphous form. Is there a proper list somewhere of mineral/compound states and their structures?
I'm also interested in the large-scale distribution of surface minerals across the western Sahara (region). I know for more than half a century they've been able to infer underlying structure/composition via remote sensing from surface gamma ray emissions etc., but these data tend to be collected by petroleum industry boffins who are obviously quite cagey about releasing it to the public. Do you know of anywhere stuff like this is published? For example, anywhere you can check the sand bed depths over time; anywhere that catalogues their mineral composition. Does the sand's composition vary, or is it all normalised by Chad's Bodélé depression?
OK, I've updated the article, correctly, I hope! Now, I shouldn't admit this, but I've the strangest urge to muddle the Pantone numbers up again. It's like the power of arcane knowledge at a dinner party. How gratifying it would be to correct the smug pedant whose Wikipedian crib sheet proved incorrect. Perhaps THIS is the vandals' true motive! Having seen the number of barnstars on your page (and the 200-fold ratio of blocked to unblocked users!) I'll try to resist the temptation.
J — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.126.221.243 (talk) 19:07, 29 August 2023 (UTC)
Wow - I'm feeling outgunned on the poetry front. I recognise miles to go before they sleep, and 'rocking cradle' sounds like another nod to the Second Coming (although it's a common enough phrase), but I suspect I'm missing a lot of references to other works in your last post. I'm an amateur poetry enthusiast with a few works by Yeats stuck in his head, not any kind of expert - but I will say that I rather like Heaney's translation of Beowulf, and that poem of his about digging with his pen. Perhaps that makes you suspect I listen to Classic FM, and CDs of Joanna Lumley reading Owen Wilfred over sweeping strings?
Phabricator is a world that I am happy to say that I do not understand. I am not a techy admin - I've got the CU bit, and I've got better at sniffing out proxies and VPNs and the like, but I don't claim to have any specialist knowledge about how websites actually work. I think it's probably magic. I hope you got the outcome you were looking for.
'Blether' is a talk page link. It doesn't work here, because you're already on the page it links to - wikilinks are like that. If you look at one of my comments elsewhere, you'll see that it takes you here.
I vaguely remember some chat about crystal lattices from my undergraduate days, but that was never my bag - sounds more like mineralogy or petrology than geophysics, but maybe I'm out of touch. No, I was a marine geophysicist - if you want someone to interpret some sidescan sonar data, some shallow seismic data, or even to do a multibeam survey of an area, I'd be your man. Or I was - it's been a while, I'm probably woefully behind the times on the latest techniques and kit.
The urge to vandalise: I never really quite get it. I could probably write some fairly substantial hoaxes, if I wanted to. I use a lot of offline sources in my articles - books, written on actual paper. I have the autopatrolled permission. Does anyone ever actually check what I write? Probably not, unless I take an article to WP:AFC. But what I never really understand is where the fun is in that. Ahah, I've got one over on them - I've written a lot of bollocks and nobody noticed! Yay me. Nobody knows that I've done it; as soon as anyone finds out it will be removed; but still, yay me. I can't get my head around it... Girth Summit (blether) 19:41, 29 August 2023 (UTC)


Ah, but didn't the last viscount Barrington remark: "Poetry is essentially an amateur activity." I used to listen to Joanna Lumley too. She read Rupert Bear, on audio cassette. Put me to sleep many a night. Wonderful. Did you catch Irons reading Eliot? [9] That was good. Yes, the squat pen digging reminds me of Newton; you know he grew up on a farm, but despised the toil, and so. Speaking of which, I came across Arthur O'Shaughnessy the other day, whose "Ode" features that famous line from Charlie & The Chocolate Factory. Rumour has it he was sired by Edward Bulwer-Lytton, the man who attempted in vain to gift us the adage: the pen is mightier than the spade.
Sometimes a man creates one good work. There's a painting I love, called Moonlight Marine by Franklin Stanwood. The haunting shadows on the face of the deep just touch a nerve. There are several other attempts at this seascape, but none captures the light correctly, only he got it right. And yet, nothing else of his does anything for me. Perhaps we may allow Heaney just one accolade! (Apologies, I'm not sure I can put images here inline directly, and this probably isn't the forum for image gossip anyway. I wanted to sign off with this amusing picure I crafted, but after reading the policy, don't think Wikimedia Commons would stand for such non-educational nonsense! Probably for the best.)
Oh, it's definitely magic :) Trouble is, the magic is piled high upon more magic, ad nauseam. And got you on the wikilinks. That's quite good the way that's built. A friend (who for some reason chose to be born in Glasgow) bought me "The Complete Patter" by Michael Munro. It's a comical dictionary to help "translate" Glaswegian to English—most of the words equate with 'alcohol' or some variant thereof! It's my primary dialect reference, but I couldn't find blether in it, so will let him know.
Thanks for humouring me on the science. It definitely sounds interesting stuff. I bet you've some stories to tell. I was reading about the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea the other day, the attempts to define the extent of the continental shelf, and how France claims twelve million km^2 by reason of its island territories. It seems there's been a rare bout of civility recently, with agreement on e.g. genetic code sharing and so on. An impending Clarion-Clipperton nodule harvesting collision probably awaits.
I'm glad you still use hard copy. Realise though there's a very real possibility that soon, some most terrible intelligence will hoover up the internet and all therein. It's disconcerting to consider how much of our knowledge stems directly from Wikipedia, and how vulnerable we are to manipulation and prediction. Do spare a few precious pages from its clutches. That sepia hoard may become our sole defence, one day. Yeah, I think vandalism may result from the disconnect between thinking something is difficult to do, and the doing of it. Many moons ago my friend came into school with a briefcase. It filled this ten-year old with awe. What wonders lay behind those combination locks? What caverns measureless to man? It was my introduction to lock picking, but imagine the disappointment to find nothing but pens, notebooks, erasers... Exactly what you'd find in any other satchel. The vandal is the same. He must consider the act a triumph. If you offer him a satchel, if there are no locks, surely that should be the end of it? Maybe the answer is to empower the vandal with more responsibility, hand him the keys to the kingdom? Or maybe, he'll always be a vandal! The only vandalism I commit is the deliberate misclassification of Captcha challenges. I claim the moral high ground and will happily go the extra mile to poison the training sets. My friend gave me a right telling off for it, but I told her: "One day, when that robot squid mistakes the laser designator of your WWIII-era flux compression pulse weapon for a harmless traffic light, you'll understand!"
J — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.126.221.243 (talk) 19:17, 30 August 2023 (UTC)

Congratulations

You needlessly piled on and helped bully a good and longstanding editor into leaving. I hope you're happy with your abusive behavior. 73.115.151.17 (talk) 16:26, 30 August 2023 (UTC)

Well, IP editor, I'm open to reasonable criticism of my actions, but I'll ask you this: did I needlessly pile on, or did I implement an obvious consensus amongst a range of editors (admins and non-admins, people who had been involved in earlier discussions and people who had not). Did I do it cruelly or rudely, or did I go to lengths to tell the person in question how much I valued their contributions, and how I would be happy to reverse my action if they undertook to do the one thing that everyone was asking them to do, and that they are more than capable of doing?
And no - that editor leaving was not my doing. I assume they are a rational adult, and they made a conscious decision to walk away because a few editors criticised the way they sometimes cite sources and asked them to stop doing it. If they don't want to contribute here, that's their decision to make. You surely don't want to operate in an environment where the way to evade any kind of sanction or scrutiny of ones work is to write this and demand that somebody else be sanctioned? They're welcome back at any time, there are no restrictions on their account, all that has happened is that their article creations will now go into a queue for reviewing (as with what happens for articles created by the vast majority of editors) so we can make sure that the sourcing is accessible.
Happy isn't the word I'd choose to describe how I feel about it, but I don't think I was wrong to take the steps I took. If you can suggest a better way I might have done it, I'm all ears, but if I hadn't done it somebody else would have - the room was very readable. Girth Summit (blether) 16:52, 30 August 2023 (UTC)
By the way, and just out of interest - you wouldn't have edited under an account in the past, would you? Perhaps one that is blocked? That's not an accusation, I haven't run a check on your IP, I just wondered. Girth Summit (blether) 16:58, 30 August 2023 (UTC)
Not that it needs to be said but I'm going to say it anyway. Nothing that Girth did was "abusive behavior" and I think he showed great compassion and empathy for MJ.--ARoseWolf 18:22, 30 August 2023 (UTC)
I assume this is trolling, but that's hardly fair to Girth Summit. I'm still not really convinced sending Ɱ's articles through NPP would have solved the underlying problem (Ɱ's work has clearly been getting scrutiny, which is what brought us here), but given both the local consensus at AN/I and (fide Novem Linguae) current standards for granting autopatrolled, that action wasn't out of line.
I'm broadly sympathetic to Ɱ's feelings about the general atmosphere on present-day Wikipedia and demands for arbitrary levels of polish before entering mainspace, but he chose to play the man, rather than the ball; that is, focus on the question of whether scope_creep bullied him, whether he was asked nicely, etc., rather than submit to the community the question of whether his opaque Columbus Library references fell below our standard for "bare URLs". Having looked at his shifting explanations at AN/I and AfD for using these links (would have changed them if a neutral party had asked, thought he could ignore said neutral party because it was one criticism and he gets a lot of general praise, should have been asked nicely, these are OK because it's mostly people from Columbus who are reading the article), I'm inclined to think that Ɱ was ultimately going to quit unless the community endorsed the use of those links, and pulling autopatrolled at worst sped that up. Choess (talk) 03:23, 31 August 2023 (UTC)
Considering the IP's contribs since leaving the message above, I'm not going to lose any sleep over what they consider to be abuse.
On the question of whether the NPP queue would have helped the situation, I actually think that it would. I'm not very active on NPP now, but there was a time when it was my main activity here. I know that NPP is distinct from general gnoming, but a lot of people do a bit of both at the same time - if you've read an article closely enough to mark it as patrolled, it's not much additional effort to fix some typos, fire refill at a few URLs, fix any links to disambiguation pages, that sort of thing. If I see more than one article by the same editor that has the same issues, I usually go and have a quick chat with them, suggesting how to avoid the issue in future. If I'd seen an editor putting refs like that into mainspace, I'd definitely have approached them; perhaps if that had happened at an earlier stage, when it was just a one or two instances rather than a big pile of them, Ɱ might have realised that they weren't in-line with the community's expectations and been able to stop doing it without feeling like they were losing face.
I know what you mean about feeling ganged up on - it can't have been nice to discover that a whole bunch of people think that what you have been doing for some time is, all of a sudden, a massive problem. I tried to get across to them that, while it was a problem, there's an easy solution and that they aren't being 'punished' in any way, but maybe it was too late for that. I hope not - maybe a bit of time away will heal the hurt feelings. Girth Summit (blether) 08:06, 31 August 2023 (UTC)

Twin-turbo

Andrewhlava2 (talk · contribs) block evading sock puppet has respawned Graywalls (talk) 23:20, 30 August 2023 (UTC)

Looks like someone beat me to it. Girth Summit (blether) 08:08, 31 August 2023 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – September 2023

News and updates for administrators from the past month (August 2023).

Guideline and policy news

  • Following an RfC, TFAs will be automatically semi-protected the day before it is on the main page and through the day after.
  • A discussion at WP:VPP about revision deletion and oversight for dead names found that [s]ysops can choose to use revdel if, in their view, it's the right tool for this situation, and they need not default to oversight. But oversight could well be right where there's a particularly high risk to the person. Use your judgment.

Technical news

Arbitration

  • The SmallCat dispute case has closed. As part of the final decision, editors participating in XfD have been reminded to be careful about forming local consensus which may or may not reflect the broader community consensus. Regular closers of XfD forums were also encouraged to note when broader community discussion, or changes to policies and guidelines, would be helpful.

Miscellaneous

  • Tech tip: The "Browse history interactively" banner shown at the top of Special:Diff can be used to easily look through a history, assemble composite diffs, or find out what archive something wound up in.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:21, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

Who's the "correct" master?

I've blocked MathewSymonds24 as a sock of Vanueditor (globally locked) based on behavior and the fact that Mathew used a logo in Makoons Play School that was subsequently deleted as part of a mass delete on Commons of all images uploaded by Vanueditor. Then I tried to figure out, based on the global locks, whether Vanueditor was a sock or a master. The related global locks didn't say, but the Vanueditor global lock referred to Abdullah Ayub Wiki, which is stale, not blocked for socking at the time on en.wiki, and really doesn't look the same to me. Any helpful information you can get out of all this, or is it just a waste of time by an obsessive admin (me)? Mathew and Vanueditor are not stale, but that wouldn't get me any nearer to AAW. Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:14, 31 August 2023 (UTC)

Urgh, this is one of those cases. Give me a minute... Girth Summit (blether) 16:45, 31 August 2023 (UTC)
OK, I'm going to record this SPI style. MathewSymonds24 is  Confirmed to Amansharma111, and also to the following accounts (mostly blocked or locked already, tags can be switched to  Confirmed):
So, yeah - this is Amansharma111 for sure. If there's an older connection to Abdullah Ayub Wiki, I'm not seeing it. This would probably do with further poking around with CU - I'm just listing the accounts I came across from going through MathewSymonds24's and Vanueditor's contribs, I haven't run cross-checks against the listed accounts and I don't have time now. I'll try to revisit it later on. Girth Summit (blether) 17:07, 31 August 2023 (UTC)
Oops, I didn't know I was opening up Pandora's box. It looks like all the accounts you've listed are blocked and/or locked. I'll tag them later. That will give you a chance to revisit, and I am very tired. Thanks, sorry for the "urgh".--Bbb23 (talk) 17:37, 31 August 2023 (UTC)
Ha - not your fault. I just hate it went the cases cross-fertilise each other and you start chasing your tail. This ended up simpler than I thought it would at first, just needa another sweep as they seem to be very active. Girth Summit (blether) 17:40, 31 August 2023 (UTC)
All the accounts you listed above are now tagged as confirmed (including one that you tagged on August 20 as confirmed to a different master - just thought I'd mention it).--Bbb23 (talk) 11:26, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
That was 13amitsingh, I think? I tagged it as a sock of Hajpyoip, and if you look at the relevant SPI case you'll see I noted there that it needs to be merged into the Amansharma case. It's on hold for training porpoises at the moment. Girth Summit (blether) 08:21, 2 September 2023 (UTC)
I've had a bit of a sweep out. The following are also  Confirmed to the socks above:
There were a few more, but they're already globally locked; I think these should probably all be locked too, I'll raise a proforma SPI report later today and request it from there. Girth Summit (blether) 08:51, 2 September 2023 (UTC)
Thanks, I noticed your comments at SPI as well for future filings.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:06, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

CU Request

Can you have a look at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Amansharma111. The sock just came back within hours after the latest block. 111.92.118.50 (talk) 03:15, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

WikiProject Yorkshire Newsletter - September 2023

Delivered September 2023 by MediaWiki message delivery.
If you do not wish to receive the newsletter, please add an N to the column against your username on the Project Mainpage.

12:13, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Amansharma111

It must be delightful to find a new job to fill your life. Too bad you have to stop teaching; I'm sure your students will miss you.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:33, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

Indeed - this one just won't quit! Girth Summit (blether) 15:37, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

Precious anniversary

Precious
Four years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:56, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

Thanks Gerda. Little acts like this bring a smile to people's faces - mine included. :) Girth Summit (blether) 16:32, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

Regarding FYE31

Hey, I'm the user who put FYE31 on the SPI page, and I saw your question to JBW and am willing to give some context for why SPI is mentioned. I put it there on the advice of a user from the Wikipedia Discord server since I saw that the behavior was basically the same between a couple of blocked IP ranges and FYE31. I did not accuse them of sockpuppeting, but only block evasion from a blocked IP address and continuing the editing that got them blocked on the IP which I put on the SPI page. reppoptalk 05:56, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

Thanks - I've declined their unblock request having looked at the IP range's behaviour before it was blocked. Girth Summit (blether) 16:33, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

Please consider the claims made at User:Collins Isabelia#Accounts

I believe we have a naive user in need of education and guidance, but we might equally have a proliferation of socks. I'd appreciate your guidance to me on how I might best handle this, please. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 21:36, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

I see that Primefac already blocked the other accounts, but left that one unblocked. I acted too hastily however, and blocked the Collins Isabelia one as well - I've unblocked it now, and hopefully they will stick to one account. Let me know if you see them messing about with extra accounts disruptively in future. Girth Summit (blether) 16:42, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

Ban Revert

Hi, should we banrevert these and other changes in this article by the [sock? Thanks. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 12:48, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

Yes, probably - I sometimes do things like that myself when I block an account, but sometimes don't have time. If you think these are in any way questionable, ditch them - they shouldn't have been made. Girth Summit (blether) 17:36, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

Stray thought, re AN/I

Having made my share of blocks for disruptive anti-LGBTQ speech, I've thought on and off about whether the statements "trans women are men" and "trans men are women" are per se problematic. There doesn't seem, to me, anything inherently wrong with constructing "man" and "woman" as immutable concepts.[a] I mean, I disagree with it, but they're fairly arbitrary terms and if someone wants to define them that way, it strikes me as no more or less objectively correct than rival, more trans-inclusive definitions. We aren't even consistent about it as an encyclopedia: For individual people we follow a self-identification model of gender, but for medical articles we use "man" and "woman" to refer to sex.[b]

Where I've come down, though, is something similar to what you've said at AN/I: It's about presentation, not ideology. Just like many Christians believe that all non-Christians go to Hell, and we do not block people who believe that this is true and a good thing—but we do block people who make a point of going around and saying "You're going to Hell" to non-Christians (or, to anyone, really). Civilly arguing for the inclusion of RS sources that see gender as nonexistent, synonymous with sex, or otherwise immutable is not inherently disruptive (although in practice it will usually turn into a WP:CPOV situation). Pushing that on one's userpage, in edit summaries, in unrelated talkpage discussions, etc.—that's different. Even if they're right! From time to time someone comes to my usertalk and lets me know that I'll never be a woman. Now, I entirely agree with them, but clearly they're saying this thinking it will upset me, so they get blocked, and that makes sense, even though they were technically right.

Anyways, all a bit of a ramble, but this all popped into my head and seemed too far afield to drop in the middle of a TBAN thread.

Notes

  1. ^ This is going to get quoted out of context someday, so I'll just go on the record with what I personally believe: I don't think gender is a meaningful concept. I'd call myself somewhere under the postgenderist umbrella. To the extent it makes sense to use terms like "man" and "woman" at all, I think it's either in the context of broad aesthetic conventions, or as generalized terms in a biological context (although "male" and "female" are better there).
  2. ^ This is not to say that, in all medical contexts, it is appropriate to say a trans woman has a male sex, or a trans man a female sex. Hormones and surgery change sex characteristics in clinically significant ways—a doctor is not considering me male for the purposes of a breast exam. But that usually doesn't matter for high-level encyclopedia articles that are summarizing secondary sources that are summarizing primary sources that probably didn't have a large enough trans subpopulation to note it in the results, if they tracked that variable at all, which they probably didn't.

-- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she|they|xe) 00:41, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

Thanks Tamzin. My own views on the subject are probably considerably less well thought-through, less well-informed and more internally contradictory than your own. I agree with you (I think?) that in order for any two people to have a meaningful conversation about gender, they both have to agree on what they mean by the terms involved, otherwise they will get nowhere and probably frustrate or even offend each other. I'm not sure I'd quite put myself entirely in the postgenderist camp, but certainly men and women (however you define those terms) have an awful lot more in common than they have that distinguishes them, and I think society would be better off if we were trying to minimise differences in how we think about, and what we expect of, the different genders. Live and let live though - I'm not here to police what other people think, it's how they act that matters. Yes, trolls who say things with the intention of offending or upsetting someone need to be blocked without any fuss. Editors who wish to contribute to this subject area need to do so in a manner that demonstrates respect towards others, including those who disagree with them. Girth Summit (blether) 12:14, 6 September 2023 (UTC)
I apologize if I am out of line for commenting on this discussion on your talk page, Girth, but I read what Tamzin said and I felt a real need to respond. Tamzin, you don't need me to legitimize your position, I believe it is legitimate because it is yours. However, I want to say that I admire you and you are inspirational to a lot of people. The fact that anyone would take the time to come to your talk page and leave disparaging comments about your life choices that affect only your life is mind boggling. Where as I hold the belief that all people should be allowed to express themselves and their beliefs, I also hold to the idea that Wikipedia, while a public encyclopedia in which anyone can edit, is a private entity that can make rules which govern its platforms. I more than likely keep a few traditions, have a few belief's and hold to a few practices and principles in my own life that many would find bizarre, if not a bit intriguing, none of which affect how I edit or conduct myself beyond the boundaries of acceptable editing policy. I guess the point I am getting at is a person's gender or sex does not in anyway hinder or enhance my ability to work with them to improve the encyclopedia. Nevertheless, haters gonna hate and they will get blocked too. You are special, amazing, beautiful, and an integral part of our community, my community, here. Again, sorry Girth. --ARoseWolf 14:00, 6 September 2023 (UTC)
You're always welcome to chime in on this talk page ARoseWolf. Girth Summit (blether) 17:42, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

Email

Hello, Girth Summit. 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.

Ingratis (talk) 01:21, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

Email

Hi Girth: I sent you an email about a week and a half ago relating to an ArbCom matter – nothing bad about you. I just wanted to let you know that if you have no objection to the action proposed in the email, ArbCom intends to move forward with the action in 48 hours. Best, KevinL (aka L235 · t · c) 22:41, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

Hi Kevin - I've just checked through my inbox and found it. Apologies - it came in right at the start of term here and got buried. I'll look back at the details and get back to you ASAP. I've replied now. Girth Summit (blether) 09:43, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

New page patrol October 2023 Backlog drive

New Page Patrol | October 2023 Backlog Drive
  • On 1 October, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin.
  • Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles and redirects patrolled.
  • Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive.
  • Articles will earn 3x as many points compared to redirects.
  • Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:13, 9 September 2023 (UTC)

Hi Girth, can you tell me what's wrong with my filing?

Sequence of events leading to the filing of this sockpuppet investigation can be found here - Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Pirate of the High Seas

The clerk has literally called this a non-SPI issue. Did I do something wrong? The diff. links clearly link the case to the suspect using the IP address.


I literally did what I am directed to do, the user used an IP to make a retaliatory attack. Where is the appropirate place to raise the issue then? Or are IP's let simply free from violations? Thewikizoomer (talk) 18:23, 10 September 2023 (UTC)

From a quick look, I'd observe that checkuser should not be requested when it's an IP you're reporting - the CU policy doesn't allow us to connect IPs to accounts. As for the other stuff, I'd advise you to reach out to Firefly directly for clarification - there seems to be some history there that I'm not aware of. Best Girth Summit (blether) 19:42, 10 September 2023 (UTC)
Thanks for responding Girth. Firefly has taken action on this. The users involved got a temporary block. Thewikizoomer (talk) 19:56, 10 September 2023 (UTC)

Deleted article question

After you dealt with sockpuppetry related to to Peter39c (the relevant archive), you G5'd 2023 Italian wildfires. The only issue is that I'm fairly sure it was created before the user was subject to any blocks or bans. Since I don't have access to the now-suppressed revisions, I don't know if it would be acceptable to request undeletion. If you don't mind checking, please let me know. The article might be still a worthy CSD due to copyright issues as this user had related issues; if that's the case, let me know and I won't request undeletion. ~ Pbritti (talk) 13:27, 13 September 2023 (UTC)

I'm unlikely to get chance to look at this before Friday, but leave it with me and I'll get back to you. Best Girth Summit (blether) 21:26, 13 September 2023 (UTC)
Hi again Pbritti - I've taken a look, and you're right, it was originally created prior to Peter39c's block. I don't know why I didn't look back further - their sock, Doriath77, had made enough edits to it to fill the first page of the history, but I would normally check back further to find the original creation date; must have been having an off day. With that being said, I am nervous about reinstating it myself. The blocked user is a prolific ignorer of the copyright policy, and is apparently in the habit of simply translating Italian-language sources and adding the text to our articles; that would be beyond my ability to detect with any degree of reliability. I'd be more comfortable with the article simply being recreated from scratch (since I imagine it is a notable subject). If you want to pursue the undeletion rout, would you be willing to take it to WP:DRV for review? If the consensus of the community is that it should be reinstated, sobeit. Best Girth Summit (blether) 18:49, 15 September 2023 (UTC)
Thanks for checking—obviously not a big deal and really a stereotypical case of WP:SNOW piercing the bureaucratic red-tape as I don't see a reason I should seek it being undeleted only to be completely scrapped at revdel. I think recreation from scratch is preferable given your insight. Thank you again for checking and confirming my concerns regarding possible copyvios! I have a bit on my plate, but if you see activity on that page from someone before me, it might be a good sign of another sock; I'll keep it watched. ~ Pbritti (talk) 02:42, 16 September 2023 (UTC)

CU request

Hello @Girth Summit, Hope you doing well. Sorry to bother you. I have noticed you interacting with many other users I interact here. Therefore I am here to request you to kindly investigate a sockpuppet investigation going on against me at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Souniel Yadav. Its been 12-13 days since it was filed and is awaiting Checkuser. I come to check updates daily but go back disappointed seeing no progress. I even tagged you and two other checkusers but you people might have been busy. I might sound desperate or you may think I am in a hurry. But I can't help myself. I am not able to concentrate with my edits because of it. I would request you to kindly investigate it as soon as possible. I have never abused the privileges given to my account and have always tried to give my best. I have made mistakes as everyother newbie does. I have also improved me with suggestions from seniors. I would request you to please do this as soon as possible. Shaan SenguptaTalk 13:06, 13 September 2023 (UTC)

I am pretty busy tomorrow, and unlikely to be able to look at this until Friday. I make no promises, but if I get a chance to look at it before anyone else does I will. Girth Summit (blether) 21:28, 13 September 2023 (UTC)
Ok @Girth Summit. I just brought it to your attention. I would request you to do this the earliest possible. Take your time. I shall wait for a couple of more days. Shaan SenguptaTalk 02:08, 14 September 2023 (UTC)
OK, so having looked briefly at the SPI case, I'm not going to jump onto it. I don't investigate cases on request; I'm a volunteer, and if it had been a cut-and-dried bad faith filing I would have been happy to close it, but that appears not to be the case so at least some cursory investigation will be necessary. Since I am not particularly familiar with the proposed sock puppeteer, I'm not sure what I would bring to the case. I will therefore treat it as I would any other: as and when I have time to work on the (lengthy) queue, I may or may not get to this one. Sorry I can't offer you any more than that. Best Girth Summit (blether) 21:30, 15 September 2023 (UTC)
@Girth Summit I am accused of being a sockpuppet of Souniel Yadav so I just wanted to get that thing solved ASAP. I even pinned you and two other checkusers in that discussion. But since you guys didn't reply so I thought of coming to your talk page one at a time. Anyways, is there a way I can formally request to get it solved? Shaan SenguptaTalk 01:47, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
The case is in the queue at WP:SPI. As you can see, there are lots of cases open - someone will get around to it in due course. There isn't really a mechanism by which you can request that your case be expedited ahead of others. Girth Summit (blether) 08:48, 16 September 2023 (UTC)

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Reuss-Lobenstein on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 09:31, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

New pages patrol newsletter

Hello Girth Summit,

New Page Review article queue, March to September 2023

Backlog update: At the time of this message, there are 11,300 articles and 15,600 redirects awaiting review. This is the highest backlog in a long time. Please help out by doing additional reviews!

October backlog elimination drive: A one-month backlog drive for October will start in one week! Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles and redirects patrolled. Articles will earn 4x as many points compared to redirects. You can sign up here.

PageTriage code upgrades: Upgrades to the PageTriage code, initiated by the NPP open letter in 2022 and actioned by the WMF Moderator Tools Team in 2023, are ongoing. More information can be found here. As part of this work, the Special:NewPagesFeed now has a new version in beta! The update leaves the NewPagesFeed appearance and function mostly identical to the old one, but updates the underlying code, making it easier to maintain and helping make sure the extension is not decommissioned due to maintenance issues in the future. You can try out the new Special:NewPagesFeed here - it will replace the current version soon.

Notability tip: Professors can meet WP:PROF #1 by having their academic papers be widely cited by their peers. When reviewing professor articles, it is a good idea to find their Google Scholar or Scopus profile and take a look at their h-index and number of citations. As a very rough rule of thumb, for most fields, articles on people with a h-index of twenty or more, a first-authored paper with more than a thousand citations, or multiple papers each with more than a hundred citations are likely to be kept at AfD.

Reviewing tip: If you would like like a second opinion on your reviews or simply want another new page reviewer by your side when patrolling, we recommend pair reviewing! This is where two reviewers use Discord voice chat and screen sharing to communicate with each other while reviewing the same article simultaneously. This is a great way to learn and transfer knowledge.

Reminders:

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:45, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

New possible sock

Please take a look at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Mark Jhonny. The previous socks were blocked by you. The new account has already recreated new spam articlea including multiple times deleted articles Abhilash Pillai (writer) (Abhilash Pillai (screenwriter) and Abhilash Pillai (film writer)). 202.164.137.22 (talk) 09:33, 23 September 2023 (UTC)

Looks like Firefly got to this one already. Girth Summit (blether) 07:15, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

LTA

Take a look at Talk:Culture of Switzerland, looks like the sock involved in this situation is back with a new account. DuncanHill (talk) 19:20, 24 September 2023 (UTC)

I took the liberty. -- zzuuzz (talk) 20:09, 24 September 2023 (UTC)
Thanks Zzuuzz. Girth Summit (blether) 07:15, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

Recent SPI block امپراتوری های ایران

Hey Girth Summit, I see you recently SPI blocked User:امپراتوری های ایران [10]. Said editor added Islam to Ya'qub ibn al-Layth al-Saffar article, which has been mirrored by user:Inlistdetilas.[11][12]

Could this be a sock? --Kansas Bear (talk) 01:39, 26 September 2023 (UTC)

Yep - blocked. Girth Summit (blether) 07:15, 26 September 2023 (UTC)

User:Altay74 posting about block on reddit

I just wanted to let you know that Altay74 has taken to complaining on Reddit, in case you weren't already aware. See here! -- RockstoneSend me a message! 23:46, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

Meh. I'm not a sock, it's all a coincidence - another day, another sock arguing that they're not a sock and it's all just a coincidence. Girth Summit (blether) 07:20, 26 September 2023 (UTC)

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Purdue University Global on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 21:30, 26 September 2023 (UTC)

Pavle Gazi

reestablish the Pavle Gazi page. I don't care if he was blocked.... TheUzbek (talk) 14:01, 27 September 2023 (UTC)

I don't appreciate your tone - I'm not going to respond to a request phrased like this. You are at liberty to persuade me as to why I should undelete the article, with reference to the relevant policies, or you can simply recreate the article yourself if you believe the subject to be notable. It shouldn't be difficult, the article contained only three sentences. Girth Summit (blether) 16:25, 27 September 2023 (UTC)
My tone is angry because you deleted a perfectly warranted and needed article on a leading politician of the League of Communists of Yugoslavia who played a very important role in the 1970s- He held both state and party offices, was a member of the LCY Presidency, LCY Central Committee and leading activist in his republican branch.
I've created a ton of articles, and I'm working on creating more. Most of the links in the Template:League of Communists of Yugoslavia were red, and I'm working on making them all blue. To succeed in that user's like you should not delete articles needed by the encyclopaedia.
Why is there a rule to delete articles by guys who breach WP policy? Ludicrous. TheUzbek (talk) 13:05, 28 September 2023 (UTC)
The policy is detailed at WP:G5. The author of that article was the sockpuppet of a globally locked long-term abuser of this project, who is not only blocked on enwiki, but is forbidden from contributing to any Wikimedia project. They should not have written that article. Nobody else had contributed to it substantively, there was just a spot of gnoming (addition of categories, typo fixing and the like). We don't tend to spend our time evaluating the work of banned users, we usually just delete it on sight. The encyclopedia was getting along fine for the twenty years or so before a sock wrote a three-sentence stub about that subject; I expect we will continue to get along fine without one, but if you think we need it then, as I said, you are welcome to create it yourself (and I expect you would do a much better job of it than the sock did).
Now, next time you don't understand why an experienced editor has done something, I suggest you ask politely - if anything is ludicrous about this situation, it is your unwarranted anger directed towards someone who spends a great deal of time voluntarily to protect the project and its contributors from the harm done by people who come here to abuse our platform. Girth Summit (blether) 14:40, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/BaltimoreCraft

Seems like that I've investigated that under some sort of wrong name, since I've never heard of LWCU/Lenis Felipe before, until you've made the first edit on this page. Not to worry, some users are first aware of long term editing violations later than others. Additionally, I wasn't aware of "StormAgnesSkinner" until I browsed the meta:SRG page and noticed that has been reported and obviously AgnesBaltimoreSwan contains Agnes as well. @Fehufanga:, it looks like you know the culprit in the brief report on meta. Iggy (Swan) (Contribs) 18:59, 27 September 2023 (UTC)

I have a script installed that marks globally locked accounts, and gives a link to their central authority page. When I see a locked account in an SPI report I follow the breadcrumbs. I can dig out the name of the script if you're interested? Girth Summit (blether) 19:59, 27 September 2023 (UTC)
@Iggy the Swan "LWCU" refers to the loginwiki, which stewards use to do xwiki checkuser. The LWCU indication on the lock notice means that it was found from loginwiki. —*Fehufangą (✉ Talk · ✎ Contribs) 22:01, 27 September 2023 (UTC)
I don't know much about stewards' shorthand style - I just follow the breadcrumbs they leave behind. All I know for sure is set out at the SPI case. G'night all. Girth Summit (blether) 22:16, 27 September 2023 (UTC)
If it is the script which makes the linked usernames have the red dashes underneath, I am already using it. Also I didn't realise LWCU refers to something but it appears someone created that account with the username without editing once. Iggy (Swan) (Contribs) 08:13, 28 September 2023 (UTC)
Yeah, sounds like the same one. It greys them out too (unless that's a different script, I lose track of the ones I run). Girth Summit (blether) 14:44, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/B9 hummingbird hovering

Not sure why the puppetmaster's user page has never been tagged, since it's apparently (according to the logs), not the first time this user has been caught socking. Skyerise (talk) 13:30, 30 September 2023 (UTC)

WikiProject Yorkshire Newsletter - October 2023

Delivered October 2023 by MediaWiki message delivery.
If you do not wish to receive the newsletter, please add an N to the column against your username on the Project Mainpage.

13:10, 1 October 2023 (UTC)

You've got mail

Hello, Girth Summit. 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. Rejoy2003(talk) 20:10, 2 October 2023 (UTC)
Hi. I received your email. Unless I'm looking at the wrong account, one of the accounts you mentioned has not edited in several years, so I'm not sure that there is any ongoing disruption that needs attention. I'll add that it's not enough just to point to a few articles that two accounts have both edited - you would need to present specific evidence outlining what it is about the editing that makes you suspect they are the same person. Girth Summit (blether) 07:12, 3 October 2023 (UTC)
Do you need a specific evidence on wiki or off-wiki? I can provide a strong evidence on the latter, but I'm not sure if that'll be sufficient. Rejoy2003(talk) 07:40, 3 October 2023 (UTC)
I don't quite understand the question - do you mean the evidence is off-wiki (e.g. someone boasting about running socks on Facebook) or are you talking about how you will provide the evidence (e-mailing it rather than raising an SPI case)? Girth Summit (blether) 09:57, 3 October 2023 (UTC)
To be specific, I'm a part of a WhatsApp group of Wikipedians in accordance with WP:GOA. I wanted this thing to be done more discreetly as a reason to not jeopardize my relation with this editor. Their real name matches with their username or phone number associated with the group. Hence I'm confident that it is a sockpuppet account. Rejoy2003(talk) 10:06, 3 October 2023 (UTC)
You can send evidence of that nature through on an email. Girth Summit (blether) 10:07, 3 October 2023 (UTC)
Done Rejoy2003(talk) 13:13, 3 October 2023 (UTC)
Thanks. I've taken a look, and it does look likely that they're the same person. However, I'm not seeing any evidence of on-going disruption - as I said, one of the accounts hasn't edited for years, and only ever made a handful of edits. They probably ought to have declared it as an alt account, but since it seems to have been abandoned I'd consider that water under the bridge. If I've missed something, and you believe there is an on-going reason for me to intervene, let me know. Girth Summit (blether) 13:37, 3 October 2023 (UTC)
I see, so if an editor has an alt account and not in use, it isn't a Wikipedia policy violation untill and unless they start editing back through the sockpuppet? Rejoy2003(talk) 14:28, 3 October 2023 (UTC)
It's more of a 'meh' than a statement about policy. Administrators are here to stop ongoing disruption, not to rake over editing from years ago to see whether there was any past disruption. Remember also that we don't automatically block people for using an undeclared alt account - if it looks like an honest mistake, we tend to just ask them to declare the connection on their userpage. I don't see the benefit of going through their historic editing to see whether there were any WP:BADSOCK violations (like block evasion, or vote-stacking or whatever), if there is no suspicion that such behaviour is still going on today; I'm also not going to go to their talk page and ask them to declare a connection to an alt account that hasn't edited in three years, and has only a handful of edits in total. Does that make sense? Girth Summit (blether) 14:35, 3 October 2023 (UTC)
As an aside, take a look at my recent contributions; set it to show the last 500, if you like. It should hopefully become clear that I have plenty of work to keep me busy clearing up ongoing disruption from socks, I think my time is better-spent doing that than worrying about old cases. Girth Summit (blether) 14:38, 3 October 2023 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – September 2023

News and updates for administrators from the past month (September 2023).

Guideline and policy news

  • An RfC is open regarding amending the paid-contribution disclosure policy to add the following text: Any administrator soliciting clients for paid Wikipedia-related consulting or advising services not covered by other paid-contribution rules must disclose all clients on their userpage.

Technical news

  • Administrators can now choose to add the user's user page to their watchlist when changing the usergroups for a user. This works both via Special:UserRights and via the API. (T272294)

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:41, 4 October 2023 (UTC)

Sarah Keyworth

I was wondering if you had any advice about the linked article above. Keyworth uses pronouns, but I haven’t been able to find a Wikipedia policy about what the approach is for our articles. I can’t imagine just because they choose to use they etc., Wikipedia has to follow suit. I have been reverting editors, maybe incorrectly. Seasider53 (talk) 15:11, 4 October 2023 (UTC)

I think normal practice is to follow the example of recent reliable sources - if they are using singular they when referring to someone, so do we; if they don't, we don't. Girth Summit (blether) 15:22, 4 October 2023 (UTC)

Please visit/revisit Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Princek2019

The alleged Fela Akinse has returned to create yet another draft about Fela Akinse. I think you were last to look at them and thought you might like another crack at it.

Either we believe this editor that they are Akinse, or they are sock/meat. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 12:09, 8 October 2023 (UTC)

I think that last time I ran a check, I determined that they were likely to be a different person from the other socks. I don't know whether running another check would be helpful. If we accept their assertion that they are the subject of the article they're writing, WP:COIN seems like it might be more appropriate than SPI? Girth Summit (blether) 16:03, 8 October 2023 (UTC)

LTA

Hello Girth, User:20983476r and User:963257q were involved in multiple instances of image vandalism on the 2023 Herat earthquakes page yesterday. They added uncensored images, which resulted in both accounts being locally blocked and globally locked due to a history of abuse. I kindly request that if there is an existing SPI case page for this LTA, please add their usernames to it. If not, please create a new SPI case page and include their details to maintain a record of this LTA's actions for the future reference. Thank you. 𝙳𝚛𝚎𝚊𝚖𝚁𝚒𝚖𝚖𝚎𝚛 𝚍𝚒𝚜𝚌𝚞𝚜𝚜 01:30, 9 October 2023 (UTC)

I'm not sure who that is, other than it being a cross-wiki vandal. I expect that some of the Stewards might have a better idea than me about who they are, but I'm not going to take any action myself. Girth Summit (blether) 07:19, 9 October 2023 (UTC)
GS, you may (or may not) find the CU log for the first one of interest. I doubt a meticulous record will be useful though. -- zzuuzz (talk) 08:32, 9 October 2023 (UTC)
Hmm - thought I'd looked at the log - must have looked at the second one twice! Thanks Girth Summit (blether) 08:40, 9 October 2023 (UTC)

Thank you

Hey @Girth Summit. Thank you again for giving me a second chance to be a valuable contributor to Wikipedia. Mr vili (talk) 09:30, 9 October 2023 (UTC)

You're welcome, good luck to you. Girth Summit (blether) 21:49, 9 October 2023 (UTC)

Possible socks

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

The account has been recently created on the Spanish Wikipedia and has made some hasty edit across various Wikipedias in different languages, including massive reversions to an article I have been improving recently. It seems to be familiar with Wikipedia mechanics, and therefore I suspect it might be a sockpuppet of some well-known sockmaster (Rajputbhatti?) or someone who targeted me in the past (Foorgood?).

Derek-airtken: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Derek-airtken

This account is likely Jobas'; currently it seems to be dormant, but I already noticed it in the past and its edits are in the same style as those of Jobas and his other sockpuppets (also notice the WP:CWW warnings on their talk pages). Æo (talk) 12:22, 10 October 2023 (UTC)

Also ping @RoySmith. Æo (talk) 12:26, 10 October 2023 (UTC)
I did a quick comparison to data we have on file for both Jobas and Rajputbhatti. There's no obvious connection to either based on CU. RoySmith (talk) 13:39, 10 October 2023 (UTC)

I just noticed the above section. I'll add what I wrote in a new section anyway in case it helps.

Started with WP:ANI#Disruptive reversions by new user. I then reviewed the edits of the new user, Renatones (created September 25), and believe they are a sock of Trenaliv (CU-blocked without tags by zzuuzz). First, the page intersection, second the topics that go well beyond the individual pages, and third the often long detailed edit summaries. I'm almost willing to block based on behavior alone, but thought it might be a good idea to confirm and to find out if there is an earlier master. Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:47, 10 October 2023 (UTC)

Trenaliv is most like Evlekis - I'll leave this to zzuuzz, who is more familiar with that LTA than I am. Girth Summit (blether) 14:05, 10 October 2023 (UTC)
Well yes, Trenaliv is the LTA known as Evlekis, and goes with all the socks blocked at the same time here. (The LTA known as) Evlekis is sometimes inconclusive, and (looking briefly) that's what I'm currently seeing. There's a fair bit of data to investigate, and it's not pretty. But what I do see fairly clearly is that Renatones is almost certainly Atilla the Great. -- zzuuzz (talk) 14:07, 10 October 2023 (UTC)
I've seen enough, and stolen Bbb23's thunder. -- zzuuzz (talk) 14:20, 10 October 2023 (UTC)
I was just coming to the same conclusion, about both accounts. Girth Summit (blether) 14:21, 10 October 2023 (UTC)
And for clarity, they're confirmed to the previous batch (I linked above). There's some debate about how many Evlekis sockmasters there actually are, but this is certainly at least one of them. -- zzuuzz (talk) 14:25, 10 October 2023 (UTC)
If it helps, the following IPs are likely from the same person behind Renatones. They already edited the "religion in Hungary" article in the past with arguments similar to those of Renatones and trying to pass off 2011 data as 2021 data (and I reverted them, this is why the second IP mentioned me in an edit summary): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/2A00:23EE:2620:9026:B0A0:25F9:F628:FA9A ; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/2A00:23EE:1468:5AE1:A532:CC93:1477:4392 Æo (talk) 14:30, 10 October 2023 (UTC)
Boy, all I did was step away and go eat some breakfast. It's good to know that Evlekis is still around.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:41, 10 October 2023 (UTC)
Oddly enough, a new Rajputbhatti report just popped up on my watchlist. Might be related? RoySmith (talk) 14:46, 10 October 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for the revert on Italy

I can't anymore, this guy has already been blocked many times and has persecuting me with sooo many socks and IPs. User:JamesOredan, User:Venezia Friulano and dozens more (and also many IPs). Look at my talk page while he wages edith war on me with one account (User:Viristo), he goes there with one his IPs and mocks me saying I won't be able to stop him. Makes me angry, I am reporting all the time but it never ends. He is so obvious too and does it in my face to make me angry.Barjimoa (talk) 15:50, 11 October 2023 (UTC)

I'd recommend reading WP:DENY and WP:RBI. Often, what trolls are really doing is trying to get an emotional response. Your best bet is to report them and move on with your day without giving them any further thought. I know it's frustrating, but try not to give them the satisfaction they are looking for. Girth Summit (blether) 15:56, 11 October 2023 (UTC)

ANI case against Jargo Nautilus

Sorry to bother you, but I believe that there must be consequences for Grandmaster's recent actions. My mental health has been severely affected today. I'm extremely angry and upset. I quit editing Wikipedia for the most part because of the horrible effect that it was having on my mental health. Now, I have been forced to return to this hellhole of a website in order to deal with the problems that were created by Grandmaster. I've still been reading Wikipedia occasionally, which is how I discovered the attack (it was sent as a message to my user page by the other victim, JM2023), and I've still occasionally edited my own user page. The source formatting of this website is good, but the culture is horrendous. But Wikia basically has the same source formatting as this website, so I prefer to hang out over there instead. I don't like this place. Jargo Nautilus (talk) 09:56, 16 October 2023 (UTC)

Please, there must be consequences for a person's actions. I ask you to do the right thing. I am innocent in all of this, and there needs to be justice. Jargo Nautilus (talk) 10:13, 16 October 2023 (UTC)

I did not think I would be crying today, but now I am. I have had a terrible day, all because of Grandmaster. He needs to face some kind of consequences for what he has done. This website has been terrible for my mental health. It's a terrible website. Jargo Nautilus (talk) 10:18, 16 October 2023 (UTC)

I'm sure you're sincere in what you are saying, but you are not helping yourself here. Someone thought you might have been socking. I investigated the allegation, and found that you weren't. You are entirely free of suspicion, and can simply go back over to Wikia (or do anything else you want to do). If you want to pursue this, you will need to present evidence not that you are upset, but that the SPI case was raised against you maliciously, but even if you were to do that successfully, the consequences for the filing party would likely be along the lines of a warning not to do it again. I would advise you just to put this behind you and move on with your day. Girth Summit (blether) 10:23, 16 October 2023 (UTC)
Well look mate... How am I even supposed to know any background information about the SPI case given that I was absolutely not involved in the previous discussions at all? If anything, the only person who will have even the slightest clue of what was actually going on, aside from Grandmaster himself, is JM2023. Essentially, this entire kerfuffle was caused by those two editors getting into a fight, and then I was randomly roped into the conflict for no reason. I want out! Jargo Nautilus (talk) 10:29, 16 October 2023 (UTC)
The other detail that is important is that I actually know Grandmaster... from a long time ago. I encountered him way back in February 2023 and in the months leading up to it. This is why I suspect that he was specifically vindictive against me. I think Grandmaster has basically been holding a grudge against me for months, stalking my account and apparently trying to find any way to attack me. I was able to let go of my conflicts of the past. I walked away. Grandmaster didn't. He kept trying to find ways to attack me even though I was already (as he pointed out) topic-banned from editing a long time ago. The most recent attack against me is so surprising, because I had basically already forgotten about Grandmaster by this point. He really needs to let go. I'm not the one you should be telling this to. Jargo Nautilus (talk) 10:34, 16 October 2023 (UTC)
If I can request one specific thing, I ask that Grandmaster be forbidden from interacting with me in any way, shape, or form. I don't want to ever hear about that person ever again. I will be willing to drop all charges against him if this condition can be enforced. He needs to stop harassing me and stop dragging on a conflict that I already walked away from eight months ago. Jargo Nautilus (talk) 10:40, 16 October 2023 (UTC)
You are making a lot of assertions here, but you are not providing any evidence. How has Grandmaster been stalking your account and trying to find ways to attack you - aside from filing this SPI case, what actions has he taken since February that involve you?
In asking that GM be forbidden from interacting with you, what you are proposing is known as an Iban. I can't help you there, I'm afraid - administrators do not have the authority to issue them unilaterally, they are a community sanction that need to be imposed by consensus at a venue like WP:ANI. There is no chance of your being able to get such a sanction imposed without any evidence, which leads me back to my earlier question - aside from filing an SPI case, what has GM done to you?
Let me put it to you form my perspective, as someone who handles SPI cases pretty much on a daily basis (usually more than one per day). An editor sees someone behaving in a manner that they believe they recognise. They have a think about it, look at the editing pattern, and think to themselves 'that looks like that editor I encountered a while back, who got blocked/Tbanned from this area'. They report their concerns, and we investigate. Very often, the allegations are true - sockpuppetry is very common here, unfortunately - but we're always careful to investigate accusations thoroughly so that innocent parties aren't unjustly blocked. As far as I can tell (absent any evidence to the contrary), that's what happened here. Someone saw behaviour they thought they recognised, reported it, but when I investigated I found that the reported accounts weren't connected. Case closed, as far as I'm concerned - someone had suspicions, they were wrong, let's all move on. Girth Summit (blether) 10:45, 16 October 2023 (UTC)
Firstly, ask yourself, why did it even come into Grandmaster's mind to accuse me of sockpuppeting, when he literally hasn't even interacted with me ever since February 2023? Grandmaster must have a crush on me if he was thinking about me all this time. I've literally forgotten about that guy, but he is still coming up with creative new ways to be a pain in my backside. What sort of "suspicious activity" did I do in order to justify the SPI accusation? Absolutely nothing, which is why the SPI case was shot down in about five seconds. This Grandmaster guy has literally been using Wikipedia since 2005, he's an extremely experienced editor, and yet he is still doing amateurish behaviour like starting a sockpuppet case with basically zero evidence to prove his baseless accusations. Jargo Nautilus (talk) 10:52, 16 October 2023 (UTC)
I think in saying that he hasn't interacted with you since February, you are kind of telling me that he hasn't been hounding you. He saw another account, thought that they were doing similar stuff to whatever it was that led to your topic ban (I don't know what that was, and have no interest in relitigating it here), so he reported his concerns. Nobody is saying that you've done anything suspicious - someone else did something that reminded someone of you, that's all. It wasn't you, the case is closed, no further action needed. If it happens again you might have a valid complaint, but a single SPI isn't a pattern of behaviour that should raise concerns. Now, I think I've given you enough of my volunteer time today - please go and do whatever it is you feel like doing, and enjoy the rest of your day. Girth Summit (blether) 10:59, 16 October 2023 (UTC)
Thank you for your time today. Grandmaster can waste his life, but I will not be wasting mine or yours any longer. Thank you again. Jargo Nautilus (talk) 11:00, 16 October 2023 (UTC)

Unsourced changes

You may care to have a look at 174.48.231.224, who already seems to be attracting some attention. Gog the Mild (talk) 13:35, 16 October 2023 (UTC)

Those messages on their talk page are pretty old, it could easily be a different user (although the contributions from this IP over the last year or so do suggest that it's stable, and occasionally used by someone with an interest in ancient history). Girth Summit (blether) 13:50, 16 October 2023 (UTC)
They made a couple of tweaks last December to the article Battle of Leptis Parva which I created. This was the last battle of the Mercenary War, which they made extensive changes to today. This is such an esoterically specialist area that it has to be the same editor. It was mostly for info, I always find it difficult to judge how seriously to take IPs making unsourced edits to the leads of near randomly selected articles. Gog the Mild (talk) 14:59, 16 October 2023 (UTC)

Reg Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/AarushSinha10

Hey Girth Summit, If you have the time, can you please take a look at this? Looks like a obv case of socking to me. Thanks <3 Jeraxmoira (talk) 17:44, 16 October 2023 (UTC)

Hi - thanks for reaching out. I appreciate that you're trying to do the right thing and get someone to look at this particular case, hopefully you can appreciate that there are a lot of open SPIs at the moment (it's backlogged), and a limited number of us volunteering our time to process them. As a general rule, I don't jump on particular ones upon request, unless you can show me that it's particularly urgent (for example if multiple socks are harassing someone or performing lots of high-speed vandalism). Someone will get around to looking at it in due course, I promise. Best wishes Girth Summit (blether) 17:53, 16 October 2023 (UTC)
No problem. There is no rush because the disruptive editing was prevented by protecting the page initially when I filed this SPI. I only reached out as it looked like blatant socking and thought it wouldn't require a lot of investigation. Thanks for the reply and no worries, I'll wait for a CU to look at it <3 Jeraxmoira (talk) 18:15, 16 October 2023 (UTC)

Flex Liberia LTA

Is Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Flex Liberia approaching LTA status, if so, I could start making a report on it. Thanks, Seawolf35 (talk) 19:48, 16 October 2023 (UTC)

To be honest (and I recognise that I'm saying this as a checkuser, so my perspective is somewhat one-sided), I'm not sure how useful LTA pages are. Even before I got the CU bit I rarely looked at them; nowadays it's an 'almost never' rather than a 'very rarely'. Publicly available and detailed behavioural descriptions of an LTA's habits are a bit like a 'what not to do' guide to help them avoid detection in future; long lists of IP addresses they may have used in the past (but which aren't confirmed) are quickly outdated. We have cuwiki, where we share and record information that can't be posted here. I can't tell you how to spend your time, but if I were you, I wouldn't spend it writing an LTA page on this person. Best wishes Girth Summit (blether) 19:59, 16 October 2023 (UTC)

Feedback request: History and geography request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:List of military occupations on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 03:30, 17 October 2023 (UTC)

Addis Aemero

Dear Girth Smith,

I am writing to notify you that I am sad about the deletion of the page Addis Aemero. Addis Aemero is notable enough to be mentioned on Wikipedia B/c the profile is even mentioned on BBC with its own Article . I believe it needs a page on Wikipedia. I want to ask you respectfully if you allow me to have the page back or If i am allowed to recreate the page. Thanks. Hermelaa Tesfaye (talk) 11:15, 17 October 2023 (UTC)

I take it that you are the person who previously edited as User:Eyoab? Girth Summit (blether) 11:45, 17 October 2023 (UTC)

Please accept this token

The Special Barnstar
I choose to title this "The Barnstar of Infinite Patience" since you display it. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 20:50, 17 October 2023 (UTC)

Technical Finding SPI question

Hi. I was pointed here by Yamla. I see that Bbb23 moved my comment on my SPI (apparently I put it in the wrong place, oh well). They've expressed that they want it archived, implying they don't want anyone to comment any further there, so I will ask my question to you here directly instead:

What is a technical check? Does this mean that a check was done on my IP? Does this mean enough behavioural evidence was present to conclude a technical check was necessary? If so, what about the behavioural evidence was convicing? I am not experienced with SPI and this is the first I've seen of it, so the information would be helpful for me to understand the process that led to this taking place regarding me.

In particular I don't want to be behaviourally associated with Jargo Nautilus in other users' minds since he and I seem to be mostly of opposite opinions and conduct; I don't want to be dragging his baggage around.

Yamla's response included:

The process that lead to that was the filing of a sockpuppet investigation at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Jargo Nautilus. You'd have to ask Girth Summit what they found concerning, but note that checkuser data isn't generally used when the report is convincing. In such cases, there's no need for an investigation, the report itself is already convincing. It's when there's some amount of doubt, such as was the case here.

Just wondering if there was any behavioural evidence you found credible or that was not refuted by my comment? Horse Eye's Back seemed to express that they believe I am a sockpuppet based on behavioural evidence. JM2023 (talk) 20:20, 16 October 2023 (UTC)

@JM2023 (talk page watcher) I have been drawn to this and examined Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Jargo Nautilus. The conclusion, by two editors highly experienced in these investigations is that you and Jargo Nautilus are unrelated.
The investigation is ended, which is why it is being archived.
Any Wikipedia editor may face an investigation into anything that may or may not have done at any time. It happens. This one has concluded that there was no substance in the report. You are unrelated. You will not achieve anything by pursuing this, because there is nothing to achieve. It has been closed.
Put simply, an editor suspected something. They asked for others to test that suspicion. The suspicion was proven unfounded. Isn't it time move forward with no stain on your characters from this investigation? 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 20:47, 16 October 2023 (UTC)
I'm just asking if there were any behavioural suspicions on the part of the reviewers, since one user (Grandmaster) said there were behavioural similarities, and another user (Horse Eye's Back) concluded that the behaviour was the same... and I'm concerned I'm coming off as being like Jargo Nautilus (who is going to multiple pages and talking about how all of this is "traumatizing" and lambasting Grandmaster and various other users). Can't say I'd enjoy being seen that way. And of course Horse Eye's Back's remark came after the first review, implying he doesn't accept it? I'm not here trying to cause trouble, I'm curious to see if there are indeed behavioural similarities which I can't see myself, particularly regarding whether that triggered a checkuser action. I'm not trying to come off as pedantic or incessant or something. JM2023 (talk) 20:56, 16 October 2023 (UTC)
To be frank, you're coming off as someone who wants tips on how to do sockpuppetry and escape attention. I was also considering performing a check. Let's say the circumstances that aroused suspicion won't arise again and let it go at that. OK? Cabayi (talk) 21:11, 16 October 2023 (UTC)
uhh... does this look like a violation of WP:AGF to anyone else? Like I'm not trying to start anything. But to summarize: I was accused of being a sockpuppet; that's fine, I write a defense; it's not something I'm torn up about. Two userchecks are performed and I'm cleared, the investigation is over. I'm not contesting the investigation; officially I'm not a sockpuppet. But apparently my behaviour is seen to be similar (and the count of users who view the behaviour as similar is now apparently up to 3 i.e., you say "the circumstances aroused suspicion") and at least one user still views me as being a sockpuppet. Since I'm concerned my behaviour is too similar to Jargo Nautilus who is not being civil and I don't want to be seen as being him or to behave similarly to him, I ask if any behaviours were found to be similar and which behaviours they were... and now I'm told an admin thinks I'm asking for instructions on successful sockpuppetry (after I was just cleared for that very thing).
Like I'm not trying to press the issue, but actually maybe I am, because I'm failing to see why my behaviour is similar or suspicious, and when asking for specifics I'm now perceived to be doing something bad by an admin and I don't understand why. It makes me a little concerned for the future of my account. JM2023 (talk) 21:32, 16 October 2023 (UTC)
@JM2023 This is very simple:
  • No-one is going to tell you what if anything aroused their suspicions because no-one is going to give an editor a clue about how sockpuppetry is detected. Heck, I have no idea.
  • You have been cleared
  • It is time to stop this rather strange quest.
You and the other editor affected by this should both understand that now is the time to move on. Indeed, the more each of you keeps banging on about it the more people less charitable than I are going to scratch their heads and wonder about it, good faith assumptions notwithstanding. See Streisand effect for reference to unintended consequences. You are straying into the arena of being about to cause those in my view. Indeed, until today I was totally uninterested in your behaviour, had never heard of your account. Now loads of people have heard of you and of the other editor. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 22:06, 16 October 2023 (UTC)
All I am asking for is for someone to point out what the similarity is that I fail to see because I don't want to behave like Jargo and I do want to see what it is that I'm doing that makes it look like that. Multiple people have apparently seen similarities, even in my and Jargo's comment, but somehow I haven't. Those people know what those similarities are but cannot tell me, despite the similarities being apparently public knowledge anyone can find. And the more I ask what they are the more suspicion I raise. Somehow even random non-admins can see behavioural similarities in my comments and his yet I cannot even be told what they are.
At this point even if this entire website suspects me of being a sockpuppet due to the Streisand effect (which I would say this is not -- I'm not trying to hide anything, I'm trying to find something), the only reason it would bother me is because I am not even told how my behaviour (i.e. comments, formatting, expression, interests) is similar. Like that's all I want to know. I don't understand why it seems to be such a huge deal that "loads of people have heard of" me. All I want is to be told what specifically I am doing that makes me look like a sock. I want to know what was so suspicious about the comments and edits.
And yes I know this is long-winded and maybe it's time to drop the stick like you said, but I just want to be told what it is that I've been doing that makes editors notice similarities my behaviour with Jargo's (BEFORE this disscussion and Jargo's various discussions which I had no part of). It feels like every time I ask for that behavioural similarity, I am just told that me asking is itself is suspicious. Like I can't find a guideline telling me I'm doing something wrong by asking what the similar behaviour was, or by asking for ways to distance my behaviour from a now-associated user. Yamla seemed to be perfectly fine and helpful with my question and pointed me here. I'm not trying to relitigate, I'm asking what public behaviours I haven't seen that others have seen. If I'm doing something wrong by writing yet another comment, I'm fine with dispute resolution or ANI or whatever. JM2023 (talk) 22:42, 16 October 2023 (UTC)
There's no similarity. It's a moot point. There's no evidence of any sockpuppetry. Let's move on. Jargo Nautilus (talk) 22:47, 16 October 2023 (UTC)
I may add that various comments here can be construed as personal attacks against myself, Jargo Nautilus. Furthermore, you have to remember that the person who is responsible for causing this crisis is JM2023 himself, who was apparently engaging in contentious confrontation with Grandmaster immediately beforehand, which led to the creation of the SPI. Jargo was mostly (90%) inactive from February 2023 and onwards. Jargo Nautilus (talk) 22:24, 16 October 2023 (UTC)
I will add that it's clear to me that the SPI was a complete farce from the beginning. Grandmaster obviously knew that we were two separate people, and he simply created the SPI in order to be intentionally irritating. Anyone who briefly skimmed over the evidence would have immediately seen that we were not the same person, and there was absolutely zero credible evidence to suggest otherwise. The SPI was created very lazily by Grandmaster, who barely even made an attempt to find credible evidence of his claims. Jargo Nautilus (talk) 22:28, 16 October 2023 (UTC)
Please do not get involved. I've been avoiding discussions you and others have mentioned me in because they are all so contentious and controversial. Apparently enough people still suspect us of being the same person that your behaviour combined with my questioning casts suspicion on me as well. I do not want to carry your opinions and actions around with me, and the more we interact, and the more you involve yourself, the worse and more suspicious we appear to various editors. JM2023 (talk) 22:29, 16 October 2023 (UTC)
There is no evidence that we are the same person? If we are the same person, then how are we having this conversation? Let's not entertain the fantasies of Grandmaster; that argument has been completely nullified as of yesterday. There is not and has not ever been any evidence of us being the same person. It's a ridiculous notion. I would rather die than be mistaken for a Canadian. Jargo Nautilus (talk) 22:35, 16 October 2023 (UTC)
Please stop, other editors have told me this makes my situation worse because they still have suspicions. Think of the fact that your actions now make me look bad. JM2023 (talk) 22:37, 16 October 2023 (UTC)
I have opposition to your actions. Firstly, in the SPI, you made a massive list of "evidence" to support your claims against the SPI. This was simply playing into Grandmaster's hands and accepting his SPI as reality, when in fact it was a big lie. I made absolutely no attempt to dispel the SPI claims because I knew that they had no ground to stand on. There was no necessity to challenge the fabricated fantasies. Jargo Nautilus (talk) 22:39, 16 October 2023 (UTC)
Bear in mind that I basically don't care about the SPI itself because I knew from the beginning that it was fake. What I do care about is Grandmaster's attempts to drag me into his conflicts which I already walked away from eight months ago. He seems to be unable to let go of a long-held grudge. I have already stopped editing contentious areas of Wikipedia a long time ago. That's in the past now. Jargo Nautilus (talk) 22:44, 16 October 2023 (UTC)

Gosh. I logged in quickly before going to bed, hoping to check in on a thread I am involved in at another venue. I see more notifications than I think I have ever received in one go, and a wall of text on my talk page. To anyone watching this develop: do me a favour, and don't post unless you really feel you need to. If I have investigated your account on the grounds of a sockpuppetry allegation, be advised that I will not discuss the details of my observations with you (but will to the extend necessary with other administrators and checkusers if my actions are challenged). Rest assured that if you are not blocked, then you are not blocked. Good night. Girth Summit (blether) 23:25, 16 October 2023 (UTC)

And, as an afterthought, JM2023, I'll add that you have a right to query what I've done. Don't expect specifics, but I'll give you a broad-brush in the morning. Again, good night. Girth Summit (blether) 23:30, 16 October 2023 (UTC)
Well, a broad brush would be better than nothing. All these experienced editors answering me here had me feeling like I was doing something wrong. JM2023 (talk) 23:34, 16 October 2023 (UTC)
OK, I took another look at the case to remind myself of the specifics (it was one of seventeen SPI cases I handled yesterday, it's hard to keep all the details in your head). The evidence is all pretty much there in the filing - your account was created a short time after the other account's topic ban was imposed. You have considerable overlap in your editing interests. Yes, you refuted that in your statement at the SPI, but sockpuppeteers often deny sharing interests with their old accounts, and they often lay dormant for long periods before starting up again (or indeed, folk may run more than one account at a time). There are also certain similarities in the ways that you interact with other editors, which I'm not going to elaborate on. Taken altogether, I believed (and still believe) that a check was justified, and would be the quickest way to establish whether your accounts were connected. As it transpired, they weren't, so all is well. Best wishes Girth Summit (blether) 09:10, 17 October 2023 (UTC)
We definitely did not have very similar edit histories. For starters, 90% of my early edits were about Taiwan, which I believe is a topic that JM2023 has rarely commented on. Furthermore, JM2023 seems to be mostly interested in "In the News", which is a section that I have never (?) commented on, as far as I know. The only similarity was that we were both interested in Nagorno-Karabakh. Except, there are quite a lot of people who are interested in that topic, so it's not exactly damning evidence of us being the same person. As I said, the entire case was a farce from the very beginning. Both Grandmaster and Horse Eye's Back have interacted quite a lot with me in the distant past, so if they were able to scrape one single brain cell together, they would be able to immediately determine that JM2023 and I are not the same person. Clearly, they are either (1) lying / fooling around or (2) suffering from memory loss. Jargo Nautilus (talk) 20:30, 17 October 2023 (UTC)
As I said, this is a situation where two people who know me quite well have accused me of being the same as some other completely random person. And from a quick glance at their behaviour and profile history, there is basically no similarity between me and them. Overall, I find this situation to be both hilarious and offensive. See, I could even accuse Grandmaster and yourself, Girth Summit, of being the same person, and it would hold an equal weight of validity (i.e. no validity at all, case closed). Jargo Nautilus (talk) 20:33, 17 October 2023 (UTC)
Also, I think you mentioned somewhere that the majority (?) of cases in the sockpuppet board are successful / accurate. Which means that only a minority of the cases on SPI are farcical and/or unsuccessful. I believe that if Grandmaster attempts another stunt like this again, then there should be consequences. An SPI case should not be taken lightly; it's a highly serious accusation. An SPI case needs to be backed up with truckloads of evidence, not a random offhand statement. In Grandmaster's SPI case against me, he basically had no evidence, and the case was closed as quickly as it was opened. Jargo Nautilus (talk) 20:42, 17 October 2023 (UTC)
Thanks for your thoughts on this. I'm not saying that sarcastically, I mean it - I probably don't spend enough time thinking about what it feels like to be the subject of an SPI case when one is innocent. Having said that, I think I've said all I have to say about this particular case, given that I was the person who closed it without any funding or action against the accused parties. Best wishes Girth Summit (blether) 23:06, 17 October 2023 (UTC)
GS, just a heads up that I have indefinitely blocked Jargo Nautilus. You can look at the block log for details if you wish.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:35, 17 October 2023 (UTC)

The sock that always vandalizes religion / country pages.

Hello, I saw your message saying it's a sock account, I've expected this because it's not the first time I see a brand new account doing this. Sometimes such accounts get blocked and sometimes they just stop editing after few days. If I encounter another of such accounts, can I mention this here in your talk page for a fast check? Thank you! LucenseLugo (talk) 12:40, 19 October 2023 (UTC)

You're welcome to mention them here, but it's better to report them at SPI (in case I'm busy, someone else will pick it up). If you use Twinkle, it's pretty easy - just navigate to the account's user talk page or its contributions, pull down the Twinkle menu and choose ARV --> Sockpuppety. The master in those cases is Rajputbhatti. Then just make a quick note about your evidence - it's usually enough just to mention a few of the pages they're editing, they're pretty easy to spot. Girth Summit (blether) 13:02, 19 October 2023 (UTC)
I just saw you indicated Rose Mwandingi to be a sock/LTA. I also reported 2002sj at AIV along with the former account, as they appear to be the same person. TornadoLGS (talk) 16:25, 19 October 2023 (UTC)
Yep, that just led me to another three accounts. Might need to go back and do a wider sweep of that range, there were bloomin' loads of socks. Girth Summit (blether) 16:33, 19 October 2023 (UTC)
It's a never-ending and unpleasant game of whack-a-mole. TornadoLGS (talk) 17:36, 19 October 2023 (UTC)
How many years of SPI reporting and I never knew it was on twinkle... CMD (talk) 01:50, 20 October 2023 (UTC)
You've been doing them... by hand?!? You deserve a medal, they're horrible to file manually. Girth Summit (blether) 08:18, 20 October 2023 (UTC)

rajputbhattis edits are being reinstated by two IPs

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/182.177.30.178

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/223.123.84.134

Barbardo (talk) 17:40, 20 October 2023 (UTC)

I've blocked the 182... address for a bit. They seem to have moved on from the 223... address, so I'll leave that, but let me know if you see any more and I'll look at some range blocks. Cheers Girth Summit (blether) 21:06, 20 October 2023 (UTC)

I think Flex Liberia is back again.

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Flex Liberia, I think they are back again. Seawolf35 (talk) 02:07, 20 October 2023 (UTC)

Thanks; looks like someone else got to it before I logged in this morning. Girth Summit (blether) 09:17, 20 October 2023 (UTC)
And again I think, with the similar usernames. Seawolf35 (talk) 00:07, 21 October 2023 (UTC)

I think you missed this...

On the sock investigation of Hilspress, you didn't delete the articles as per G5. Best, Reading Beans (talk) 15:37, 21 October 2023 (UTC)

Yeah, sometimes I do that, sometimes it's a bit ambiguous because I can see that others have made edits, which some may consider 'substantive' - I didn't spend time to make the determination in this case, by all means go ahead and tag them if you think they'd qualify. Girth Summit (blether) 15:48, 21 October 2023 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Girth_Summit/Archive_20&oldid=1186146766"