User talk:Mvqr/2021/November

Archives

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:58, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Reverting edits by sock

I can see the logic of denying a sockpuppet the satisfaction of creating articles, but does the encyclopedia really benefit from the mass removal of a group of necessary non-diffusing categories such as this edit? It seems sad, and wasteful of effort. PamD 18:01, 24 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Pam! The sock was doing this at a very high pace, was using the Cat-a-lot to do mass changes (dozens of edits a minute), spending less than a minute between gadget invocations. In some cases, though apparently not this one, it appeared wrong. In some cases they also changed the category itself. This series of puppets made these sweeping changes, getting up to about 500 plus edits in each account, in like 15 minutes of Cat-a-lot use. I am concerned the only reason they did this was to become extended confirmed, and that they did not pay attention so much to the edits they did.--Mvqr (talk) 18:11, 24 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

But you have gotten me reading into category policy, there is much to learn here.--Mvqr (talk) 18:17, 24 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks: I can see you've already undeleted a lot of these. I suppose quite legitimately one could work pretty fast to add a missing non-diffusing parent category, which is the sort of edits I'd seen them doing. I tried to look at the SPI history but my head started to spin: as so often I couldn't get back to see what the original problem had been ( there was presumably a history of an account being blocked for a non-SPI reason, which inspired them to start creating the socks). Ah well. Thanks. PamD 18:44, 24 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Rollback

Hi Mvqr. After reviewing your request, I have enabled rollback on your account. Keep in mind these things when using rollback:

Getting rollback is no more momentous than installing Twinkle.
Rollback should be used to revert clear cases of vandalism only, and not good faith edits.
Rollback should never be used to edit war.
If abused, rollback rights can be revoked.
Use common sense.

If you no longer want rollback, contact me and I'll remove it. Also, for some more information on how to use rollback, see Wikipedia:Administrators' guide/Rollback (even though you're not an admin). I'm sure you'll do great with rollback, but feel free to leave me a message on my talk page if you run into trouble or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of rollback. Thank you for helping to reduce vandalism. Happy editing! FASTILY 11:46, 28 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]