Jump to content

User talk:NinjaRobotPirate/Archive2020-2

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Attempted block evasion/sockpuppetry?

Not sure if I'm using this feature correctly, but it looks like this person may also be ylevental. The editing history looks like they're making edits on the same articles, and recently something very weird happened with a page ylevental had nominated twice for deletion. I think ylevental also tried to send me a message but I'm not sure how to access it, and then I got notification of edits made to my talk page from the anonymous account that I can't find either. I looked into past history and it seems like ylevental has been trying to specifically add anti-neurodiversity related articles while also nominating pro-neurodiversity articles for deletion at the same time. I'm not sure if that's allowed or not but it seems like evidence of bias in some way. (I've edited mostly pro-neurodiversity articles and have created or proposed several in the past too, but I haven't tried to delete anti-neurodiversity related articles. I don't think that's against any rules as far as I'm able to guess.) Maybe you could check on this? Ysannelo (talk) 22:12, 28 June 2020 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but I can't comment on any of this. Because of the issues involved (CheckUser blocks and oversighted content), you would probably have to privately contact the Arbitration Committee if you felt more needed to be done than has already been done. I realize that this is a non-answer, but that's the best I can give you. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 00:03, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

YAQC

Yet Another Quick Check. Would you please check the almost certain duck JackiePie against UltraUsurper and AstraUsurper? I've already blocked Ultra for 2 weeks due to just CIR/disruption issues, as well as his IPv6, and indef'd Astra due to improper use in discussions (While userpage disclosed it as an alt, signature does not make this clear and he's using them all (master+alt+IP) in the same discussions). Duck evidence for JackiePie is that Ultra edits PewDiePie (Name connection), JackiePie has nominated an iOS related redirect for deletion (Ultra spends all day making a mess of iOS related redirects), and then having not signed his RfD, Ultra signed it as the master. -- ferret (talk) 12:14, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

JackiePie is confirmed to the others. I was mostly curious to see if there'd be more than that, but that seems to be it. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 14:46, 29 June 2020 (UTC)
Appreciated as always. -- ferret (talk) 15:47, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

Check on Pleat2 please. Redirects user page, focused on iPhone and redirects and splits. Quack quack. -- ferret (talk) 17:49, 14 July 2020 (UTC)

 Confirmed, along with Zenoval. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 18:24, 14 July 2020 (UTC)

Conan the destroyer "top critics"

You said "we don't give special emphasis to the "top critics"". Yet Conan the Barbarian (1982 film)'s Wikipedia page gives special emphasis to the top critics. It seems to me Wikipedia is making double standards about The Destroyer and The Barbarian.— Preceding unsigned comment added by AlainDuponDetDupont (talk • contribs) 03:23, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

Please see MOS:FILM#Rotten Tomatoes Top Critics. There is consensus against highlighting the opinions of a subset of critics from Rotten Tomatoes. I don't know what you're talking about when you say there's a double standard, though. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 03:27, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

Another Albe23413 sock

Good day @NinjaRobotPirate:!

We've got another one my friend Pamasawata0296, and he emerged less than two days after you blocked him. As of this writing, the user only has 7 edits under his belt but given that the pages he edits are related to Ang Probinsyano, I think we can make a strong case that he is a sockpuppet. There's also the diffs, even though there's just a handful of them as of this writing.

Here are the relevant diffs:

Pamasawata0296 - Special:Diff/965268942 Cocisj455 - Special:Diff/964765048 Albe23413 - Special:Diff/936184741

Since as of this writing, the user only has 7 edits, I had to compare the editing pattern with not only the sockpuppeteer but also with the most recent sockpuppet to illustrate how similar the pattern is. I know I can always count on you my friend. Warmest regards Gardo Versace (talk) 15:02, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

@NinjaRobotPirate: The user was blocked for disruptive editing by @PhilKnight:. However, before he was blocked he left a very angry message for me which all but confirms that he is a sockpuppet of Albe23413 as can be seen in these diffs:
Special:Diff/965317859, Special:Diff/965317859, Special:Diff/965318064, Special:Diff/965318251, Special:Diff/965318445, Special:Diff/965318676, Special:Diff/965318853, Special:Diff/965318912, Special:Diff/965319024, Special:Diff/965319280, Special:Diff/965319625, Special:Diff/965319737, Special:Diff/965319828, Special:Diff/965319921, Special:Diff/965319995, Special:Diff/965320091, Special:Diff/965320205 and Special:Diff/965320280
To understand how angry the message he left is, let me translate the Filipino text to English:
SON OF A BITCH!!! GARDO VERSACE!!! YOU ARE A DUMB EDITOR ON THE FACE OF THE EARTH AND YOU ARE ALSO A BLOCKER YOU ANIMAL!!!! I HOPE YOU DIE OF COVID YOU HAVE NO MERCY AND YOU ARE HEARTLESS YOU FOOL!!! YOU SHOULD BE WITH SATAN IN HELL!!!!
That is how angry he is at all the times I've reported him and he has been blocked. Given that he had just confirmed himself as an Albe23413 sock, can you still tag him for sockpuppetry even though he has just been blocked? Regards Gardo Versace (talk) 17:45, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
It looks like Ponyo took care of everything. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 23:14, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – July 2020

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

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Arbitration

  • Following the banning of an editor by the WMF last year, the Arbitration Committee resolved to hold an RfC regarding on-wiki harassment. The RfC has been posted at Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Anti-harassment RfC and is open to comments from the community.
  • The Medicine case was closed, with a remedy authorizing standard discretionary sanctions for all discussions about pharmaceutical drug prices and pricing and for edits adding, changing, or removing pharmaceutical drug prices or pricing from articles.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:25, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

LTA

Hi--you responded to one of these fake unblock requests from this range; please check if my block modification, after the creation of a couple of sock accounts, is OK with you. Thanks! Drmies (talk) 13:39, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

  • BTW, is there a way to run CU and see just the accounts, not the IPs, on a range? Thanks, Drmies (talk) 13:40, 4 July 2020 (UTC)
    • Nope. There might be a script that sorts the results, though. I generally try to leave talk page access enabled when I do long range blocks, but it's not always possible, of course. The problem is that some people can't even figure out how to make a proper unblock request when they've got talk page access enabled, so my thinking is that the number of people who figure out how to use UTRS must be even smaller. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 13:58, 4 July 2020 (UTC)
      • How sad--I wish they'd show the accounts first, and then IPs up to 5000. I am sure there's a ton of abusive accounts [2607:FB90:0:0:0:0:0:0/32 here] (that little person had an old blocked account from which to threaten me) that still have email or talk page enable. Drmies (talk) 18:46, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

QC

Sorry, I keep stumbling across some lately... :) Could you please check Crowkid555 (And already blocked Crowkid51) against ALEXP001? Duck evidence is somewhat strong, but I don't want to pull trigger on inexperienced editors needlessly. Both editors focus on adjusting the leads of video games and films for receptions, often with unsourced or original research. Both have gotten warnings, and I've blocked ALEXP001 once already. Note the similarity in their messages to my user talk in response to warnings: ALEXP and Crowkid. I feel the writing style is very similar as well as their use of edit summaries. Both use VE, but Crowkid appears to be exclusively mobile while ALEXP is not. -- ferret (talk) 11:46, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

Crowkid55, Crowkid555, Crowkid51, and ALEXP001 are all  Confirmed. However, they could potentially be editing from shared computers. Sometimes inexperienced, young editors create a bunch of themed accounts and don't seem to understand why everyone is so annoyed with them. It's difficult to say what to do in these cases. I usually try to give them a chance to comply with policy. I guess it depends on my mood and how disruptive they've been. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 12:23, 9 July 2020 (UTC)
I'll ponder a bit. I warned Crowkid555 about socking when I found Crowkid51. I'm not worried about the unused Crowkid55. ALEXP has already earned one block for unsourced/OR. Both accounts essentially continue those editing patterns. I'll give it some more thought and may ask them to fess up first. -- ferret (talk) 12:39, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

In following of

In following of 1 and 2, please block this. Thanks for your attention. Benyamin (talk) 09:54, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

Done. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 09:55, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

Quick check request

Hi, I was just wondering if could do a quick check. A certain user was recently banned from editing a page, and soon afterwards a new user decided to join the Talk page, mirroring the same POV as the first user. What's interesting is that the first user once posted on the second user's Talk page, accusing them of sockpuppetry. A strange thing to do if they're the same person, but maybe that was the idea. So perhaps it is a pure coincidence and they are connected only by subject matter, but the timing strikes me as odd, and I was wondering if you could check. Thanks. WikiMane11 (talk) 17:51, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

Why is it that you appear to Wikipedia:Harassment anyone with a different opinion than your own. Looking at your edit history you have literally reported every single person that has an opposing opinion. I don’t take the false accusations of sockpuppetry lightly. Your false accusations won’t discourage me from editing as I see fit.Factlibrary1 (talk) 21:41, 10 July 2020 (UTC)
@ThunderPeel2001: you've got one diff there, but it's not enough to show evidence of sock puppetry. You'd have to show that one account mirrored the same POV using diffs. I don't really want to go looking for that myself. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 01:27, 11 July 2020 (UTC)
@Factlibrary1: Well, that's a lie. I have not reported everyone. I reported two people, as per the WP guidelines for a topic under sanction. One of these people previously accused you of sockpuppetry, and both of which received temporary bans. Interesting, but I will drop things, because if is sockpuppetry, I believe you will cease now. I would note that your tone is potentially threatening. WikiMane11 (talk) 11:37, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

Anti-Racist Action: June 2020 rewrite

Hi - I posted on Talk for Anti-Racist Action about undoing the June 2020 rewrite, which is based on a report on a far-Right blog, includes many improperly cited claims, and names several individuals as being part of Torch Antifa chapters without evidence. Would be great to have your thoughts on this proposed change. Thanks. GNO23 (talk) 23:50, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

Emiliogogo or "jahiib punjit" striking again in a SPI investigation.

Muhammad jahiib punjit (talk · contribs) is striking again in a SPI Investigation I have just opened. With an almost identical name: Muhamaad jaiiiib poonjut (talk · contribs)

The last time this user was a sock of Emiliogogo (talk · contribs) but it's way too strange I open again a SPI investigation for the same user and this guy appears out of nowhere just some minutes after making it. He might be related to the main sock Weathertrustchannel (talk · contribs) or he's simply someone else? I don't know but it's way too strange happening twice in 2 different SPI cases for the same user. Nevertheless this guy is clearly the same "jahiib" as he was before. --TechnicianGB (talk) 16:52, 13 July 2020 (UTC)

you are wrong. i is not suckpuppeting of Emiliogogo, Mr Indian Technician Muhamaad jaiiiib poonjut (talk) 16:54, 13 July 2020 (UTC)

Oh so beautiful, this user just insulted me now in the SPI investigation I just made today. He might be a sock of the same SPI user using a VPN or something, how strange is that he did exactly the same back to June when I opened a SPI for Weathertrustchannel (talk · contribs) but now even faster than that time, also insulting me for an unknown reason. --TechnicianGB (talk) 17:22, 13 July 2020 (UTC)

Yeah, I saw. I blocked the account for trolling. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 17:23, 13 July 2020 (UTC)

Kaypein

Alarjar again? Also see this IP. Flyer22 Frozen (talk) 05:18, 14 July 2020 (UTC)

No need to ping me if you reply. Flyer22 Frozen (talk) 05:21, 14 July 2020 (UTC)

Keypein is probably the same person as Inkonvin. They could both be Bowei Huang 2, but that case is stale. Hard to say for sure. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 13:13, 14 July 2020 (UTC)

Second wave of socks

Hi, I've been a bit lax on the contact tracing and lockdown of the Queensland socks in the last month or two, and predictably, there's been a big rise in the number of cases... BWilliams89 has just popped up, and suprisingly used an edit summary once - never seen that before. But otherwise it's the usual, adding extra "History" heading levels, categories to children's TV shows, and reinstating edits of previous socks and obvious Brisbane IPs, for example, compare: [1] with this by JamesGentilenna232: [2], and IPs: [3], [4]. I guess that's all you need, but some more diffs: [5] with [6], [7], and [8]; and [9] with [10], [11], [12], [13], and [14].

I also found a couple of dozen or so IPs, so there's a bunch of cleanup to do, but most were short-term. These ones were active in the last day or two:

These haven't edited for a few days at least, but look long term:

PS, thanks for the tip about the mass-rollback script, it's come in handy a few times, including for some of these... --IamNotU (talk) 23:49, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

It's difficult to judge the collateral damage on those wide IP ranges that you highlighted above. If they remain an issue, I guess raise it again. Maybe I'll figure something out later. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 02:31, 17 July 2020 (UTC)
Thanks. Fyi, BWilliams89 (talk · contribs) seems to have made a sort-of attempt at an unblock request, without using the template. They did do this at least once before. I left them a note, among other things imploring them to stop editing... if you look at it, feel free to remove my comment if you think it's not appropriate in some way, and/or should be handled by an admin instead.
About the /48 ranges, yes there would be a lot of collateral damage, not really practical I guess, unless there's some trick I don't know about. --IamNotU (talk) 23:12, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

Hi, could you renew these blocks: [15] and [16]? Thanks. I managed to get in touch with this user's support worker, and sent him an e-mail. Waiting to hear back, and in the meantime they're still editing, but there could be some hope of an end in sight soon. I guess we'll have to wait and see how effective the measures are, might not be 100%... --IamNotU (talk) 18:28, 13 August 2020 (UTC)

Hi again... so the user continues with the usual socking, and I've tried to explain in e-mail to their support worker (who signed up as Ptupps77 (talk · contribs)) that there's little chance of them getting unblocked. Actually I guess it would be an unban, due to WP:THREESTRIKES, right? I won't go into details of the e-mails, but the support worker isn't willing to encourage them to stop editing, and is requesting that we find a way to accommodate their different abilities. The user, as we've seen, is quite adamant about editing and really does not appreciate being blocked... Do you know if there's any precedent for someone who, as we've also seen, isn't able to explain that they understand the reasons for their block, to get unblocked? Maybe with some kind of supervision? I had the idea to post to WP:AN, but then I though, yeah no, that's not the best idea I've had lately... Do you know a good person to talk to about something like that? Thanks... --IamNotU (talk) 01:07, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

I think that, in practice at least, site bans for sock puppetry don't usually apply to an editor until someone actively completes the process by tagging the user page as banned. I don't think an unblock like what you proposed could ever work. Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not therapy would be cited by anyone who you contacted. But if you wanted to try, Arbcom is pretty much the only community-oriented body that you could consult. I don't think the Wikimedia Foundation has anything in place for this sort of thing. The WMF people that I've spoken to have all been friendly, though, so you could try them anyway and see what they say. Most of the time when I email the WMF, though, I get a friendly and polite message that says they're not going to do anything about the problem. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 05:50, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
Good to know about the 3X ban thing, thanks. In the first e-mail to the support worker, I explained about WP:CIR, and how extensive the disruption has been. I hoped they'd answer "ok, will make sure that doesn't happen anymore", but no. They're very pleasant and positive though. I already started to write another reply, and mentioned "Wikipedia is not therapy" etc. but I feel like I'm just repeating myself. I'm familiar with all the guidelines and can explain that there's really no chance of just being unblocked and allowed to edit freely if they can't make an unblock request and take the standard offer. But I don't have any authority, and I don't hang around AN/ANI enough to know what kind of rare exceptions might have been made in the past. Probably best for an admin to talk to the support worker, it doesn't seem like Arbcom is the right fit at this point. I thought you might know an admin who would be a good person to have a dialogue with them. I do my best to be diplomatic but this issue isn't really my field. I wanted to be a little more low-key than asking for someone at AN, but I could still do that if you think it's a good idea. --IamNotU (talk) 21:10, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
Unfortunately, there isn't really anything in place for this, and I doubt any of us have training. I'm just an IT guy. But, like I said, nobody ever gets unblocked like that. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 22:13, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
Yeah, that's somewhere like where I'm at...
Ok, thanks, I'll look around some more for an admin who's a good communicator/negotiator and would be willing to help convince the support worker to get the user to stop socking, or something else I haven't thought of. Anything would be better than the way it is now. I'll try e-mailing the support worker again, but I just have the feeling they're not going to take it from me, and will want to talk to my manager... --IamNotU (talk) 23:38, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

Hi, I still haven't gotten anywhere with the above, but in the meantime the same old edits continue. Could you re-block these long-term IPs that have become active again: Special:Contributions/110.143.41.148, Special:Contributions/124.19.16.206, Special:Contributions/203.217.13.205? There are also these, I may not have caught them in time: Special:Contributions/203.45.154.240 and Special:Contributions/113.11.187.71. Thanks. --IamNotU (talk) 14:58, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

Re-blocked all but the last two, which haven't been active recently. It's kind of frustrating sometimes, but policy discourages blocking inactive IP addresses. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 15:29, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

A couple more recent ones, long-term, rarely but exclusively used: Special:Contributions/119.18.38.51, Special:Contributions/101.187.225.240. --IamNotU (talk) 16:54, 23 December 2020 (UTC)

Wow, is that something like two years of activity on that one IP? Well, I blocked them both for three months, which should at least help in the short-term. I might have to start defaulting to even longer blocks, though. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 22:15, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
As far as I can tell, he travels a lot, and some of the places he visits regularly have static IPs for their WiFi. Could be hotels, doctor's offices, etc., I don't know. So you'll see him returning to an IP every once in a while, over a period of years. Others are dynamic. The majority are from Telstra 2001:8004:* these days, probably his home, like this week's: Special:Contributions/2001:8004:2772:7203::/64. Those don't last very long. Don't know why I'm doing this on Christmas, hope you've got something better to do! Cheers... --IamNotU (talk) 17:46, 25 December 2020 (UTC)
Seems like as likely of an explanation as anything else. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 23:07, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

Walterblue222

Hi, hope you're doing well these days. I saw an IP editor comment on Talk:Blackwashing in film and reverted it. Reviewing their contributions, it turns out they are the IP address for Walterblue222, as they state here. Would you be able to block this IP? Also, should the talk page be protected or not? Erik (talk | contrib) (ping me) 11:03, 17 July 2020 (UTC)

I'm not really sure if policy allows me to protect that talk page. On the positive side, that talk page is probably good bait for racist trolls. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 15:24, 17 July 2020 (UTC)

Edit filter

This isn't my area of expertise, but is it possible to add an edit filter to block a persistent edit to a single article? Various IP addresses keep adding "also known as Hellraiser X: Judgment" to the article Hellraiser: Judgment without a citation, even though the film has never been called that in any country. It's not happening frequently enough to justify semi-protection, but whoever is adding it is being persistent lately. The most recent attempt went undetected for a full seventeen days in what is a Featured Article. There is no practical purpose for this edit.

[17], [18], [19]

This appears to be the same IP hopper who kept adding non-existent alternative titles to Friday the 13th articles back in 2018. If memory serves, Bignole had a few run-ins with them as well. Darkknight2149 20:22, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

It's possible to limit an edit filter to affect only a single article, but every edit to every article would be checked against that filter. That would make it rather expensive for limited benefit. When there's trivial, recurring disruption to a single article, a hidden note via an HTML comment is usually the most practical solution. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 21:17, 18 July 2020 (UTC)
 Done I doubt this will be effective against this particular user, but I went ahead and added it. Hopefully it at least slows it down. Darkknight2149 21:25, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

RealMODOT

Can user:RealMODOT please be blocked ASAP. She clearly will not stop until blocked. CLCStudent (talk) 02:54, 21 July 2020 (UTC)

Done. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 02:57, 21 July 2020 (UTC)
Now is abuing her talkpage. CLCStudent (talk) 03:04, 21 July 2020 (UTC)
That's not really abuse. People are allowed to post inane things to their own talk page. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 03:08, 21 July 2020 (UTC)
She is constantly spamming the talkpage. That is what I am getting at. I am not talking about the "I hate you". CLCStudent (talk) 03:10, 21 July 2020 (UTC)
That's not abusive. All you have to do is not look at the talk page. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 03:15, 21 July 2020 (UTC)

Everything is American. Everything.

0Detail-Attention215's edits are devoted to making everything American, e.g. here, here, and here, or any of their 9-10 character contributions I checked. This seems very familiar, but after some searching I haven't been able to connect the habit with a name. Does it ring a bell with you? BlackcurrantTea (talk) 12:12, 22 July 2020 (UTC)

There are a couple socks who are disruptive around media nationalities, but I don't recognize someone who's an SPA toward identifying everything as American. For whatever reason, it's usually the opposite in my experience (edit warring to remove any mention of the United States). It's usually pretty easy to identify these editors because they become obsessed with fixing certain articles. If they weren't obsessive, they probably wouldn't have gotten blocked in the first place. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 16:28, 22 July 2020 (UTC)
Ok, thanks. I've seen the show obsessives, too. This may be an instance of the way everything can start to look familiar after a certain amount of time: Déjà Wikipedia. BlackcurrantTea (talk) 19:55, 22 July 2020 (UTC)

Possible IP sock

Hate to pester you, but could you take a quick look at this ANI report? Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Disruptive IP edits I think it's a sock you've dealt with before, but another editor doesn't agree it's them. Anyway, the IP is engaging in edit warring as I speak and being disruptive, so it seems a block is warranted in any case. Crossroads -talk- 23:48, 22 July 2020 (UTC)

I blocked for edit warring. If you think it's an IP sock, you can file a report at WP:SPI with evidence in the form of diffs. I don't really want to conduct my own investigation from scratch. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 00:57, 23 July 2020 (UTC)
Thank you. Well, I had thought that the evidence at ANI might be enough to run CU. But since it's an IP, I know that it may not be allowed to tie an IP to an account. Crossroads -talk- 03:10, 23 July 2020 (UTC)
Yes, CheckUsers are generally prohibited from publicly linking accounts to IP addresses. There's some speculation posted at the ANI discussion, but it's not convincing enough for me to block as a sock puppet. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 04:30, 23 July 2020 (UTC)

Wristmeetrazor

I am unsure if I am using this feature correctly. But, I made an account to plead my case. I was false banned from editing for 20 days for editing the genre of a band which is always falsely labelled. Very unfair to assume that I am the troll and incorrect one in this matter. The band wristmeetrazor is labelled incorrectly as a screamo band when they are not. Stylistically, and sonically, they are a metalcore band. I am unsure how to resolve this matter. Thank you in advance — Preceding unsigned comment added by Klefmop (talk • contribs) 22:33, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia is a little confusing to figure out at first, but it looks like you're getting the hang of it. I added a header to your post. Looking at Wristmeetrazor, it doesn't seem like anyone has been blocked from editing recently. Was this a while ago? The issue is that Wikipedia is written from what reliable sources say. There will always be someone who strongly disagrees with a genre classification. You can challenge a genre classification on the article's talk page, perhaps via WP:ONUS, which says that "all verifiable information need not be included in an article". Once you convince the other editors that this information should not be included, you'll have consensus to remove it. Then, the people who add it will be blocked for disruptive editing. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 00:03, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

Ufufcguc still plugging away

Hi, seems 2A01:111F:100F:5800::/64 is the same as 2A01:111F:B48:D000::/64, same as 2A01:111F:E1A:A400::/64, same as... well you know. --IamNotU (talk) 17:15, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

Same /32, but very different /64s. Oh well. At least the /64s stay allocated for a while. That's more than you can say for some ISPs. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 20:30, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

Blocked user continuing to edit own talk

Should 58.179.223.210 (talk · contribs) be blocked from editing their talk page? It seems to be repeated unsourced BLP. POLITANVM talk 04:21, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

Yeah, doesn't seem interested in making unblock appeals. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 04:36, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – August 2020

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

Administrator changes

added Red Phoenix
readded Euryalus • SQL
removed Jujutacular • Monty845 • Rettetast • Madchester

Oversight changes

readded GB fan
removed Keegan • Opabinia regalis • Premeditated Chaos

Guideline and policy news

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:21, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

62.226.64.0/18 rangeblock

You blocked Special:Contributions/62.226.64.0/18 for WP:NOTFORUM violations. Based on the similar comments at Talk:Sinn Féin#Centre-left and Talk:Sinn_Féin#far-left extreme would sound more appropriate (which I'll be removing following any action deemed necessary) it would appear Special:Contributions/80.131.50.81 is the same editor, especially as their ISP is also Deutsche Telekom AG like 62.226.70.20's is. Thank you. FDW777 (talk) 21:45, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

Yeah, seems to be the same ranter. I range blocked Special:Contributions/80.131.32.0/19, which should quiet things down a bit. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 21:57, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
Thank you. FDW777 (talk) 21:58, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

Listen Here

Heard administrator sir, if you don't know how to work on Wikipedia, then quit working on Wikipedia, you should check IP addresses before blocking someone and what they were saying was probably Mayank123456 Srivastava is related Listen, you are not a Brahma , now in Your horoscope Saturn 's Sade Sati Will walk . 27.60.82.49 (talk) 07:09, 2 August 2020 (UTC)

Evading your block is an excellent way to prove that you're not a sock puppet. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 09:41, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
I don't believe in astrology; I'm a Sagittarius and we're skeptical. GMGtalk 11:40, 2 August 2020 (UTC)

August 2020

Hello, NinjaRobotPirate. Thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia since 2007; however, I have found a particular edit to List of awards and nominations received by Joaquin Phoenix on 27 July 2020 by you that had an edit summary as follows: "block evasion". Well, I guess that IP user was evading a block, but I fail to see the inaccuracy of the information added by that user. If the claims by the user were unsourced, I will accept your revert of the edit. Thank you. Friend505 (talk) 13:49, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

Must be a full moon this week. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 20:30, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
There is going to be a full moon this week. How did you know? And also, you did not answer my question. NinjaRobotPirate, if you could answer my question, I would appreciate it. Thank you. Friend505 (talk) 22:06, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
You seem pretty bossy for a new user. Please see WP:BANREVERT. If you have legitimate questions that need the help of a CheckUser, I am available to help. Otherwise, please find some other administrator to pester. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 22:41, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
I apologize for annoying you, NinjaRobotPirate. You're humorous, actually. I am just a relatively new patroller. I am still not very experienced to knowing which edits are good and which edits may need to be reverted. I am still in my "getting experience" period of being a Wikipedian. Sorry, and thank you. Friend505 (talk) 23:47, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
Well, it's not a big deal. But maybe it'd be better to focus on the more obvious stuff until you get more experience? Confronting random editors might not go too well. I'm admittedly a bit too irritable sometimes, but some editors will bite your head off. That's technically blockable behavior, but it's not a good idea to engage in behavior that might be construed as provoking them.

Also, thank you for saying that I'm humorous, but I'm afraid that my sense of humor doesn't usually work too well on Wikipedia. I tend to be rather dryly sarcastic, and it's not always easy to tell when I'm serious. I once lived in the bad part of town but enjoyed taking nighttime walks. A friend asked me, "Aren't you scared of the weirdos who come out after midnight?" I replied, "No. I am one of the weirdos who come out after midnight." A true enough statement, I suppose. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 02:43, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

Well, thanks for your advice, NinjaRobotPirate. Friend505 (talk) 11:43, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

That road vandal...

...that Yamla just reverted here, please see my log for a couple of CU blocks. Maybe you know who this is and care to tag them--I'm not sure if their angry edits are worth the trouble. Thanks! Drmies (talk) 20:51, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

I think it's probably just a bored kid with a few socks. I think I saw one of the accounts at AIV and blocked it. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 21:43, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
I've seen them before, I know it, a few months ago. They are not a new user, that's a fact. Two of the ranges have seen previous sock activity, but I wasn't familiar with them. Drmies (talk) 23:47, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

Sxologist

Is that a CheckUser match? I would be very surprised if he is Skoojal/Freeknowledgecreator. See my comments at ANI here. The POV of the two editors are complete opposites. I'm sure stranger things have happened, but it seems unlikely from where I stand and I just want to make sure. Sxologist has been very helpful at sexual orientation articles. Crossroads -talk- 21:44, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

Same ISP, different computer. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 21:47, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
Don't millions of people share an ISP? Or do you mean IP? Between that and the misaligned timing I mentioned at ANI, I'm not convinced. Is there any further evidence? If FKC is Sxologist, he spent hours and hours fighting against his previous POV. Crossroads -talk- 21:51, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
Wikipedia does not have millions of active editors, and not every ISP is a multinational conglomerate. That's like saying, "Doesn't every Wikipedia page get millions of page views every day?" Pages related to COVID19 do, Rabid Grannies does not. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 22:08, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
I'm not seeing how that follows. The behavioral evidence is extremely dissimilar, and the probability that two separate editors will have the same ISP is quite high. More in-depth explanation here. Crossroads -talk- 22:27, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

Sweep

Would you be able to sweep on Eltomas2003? The user has been active lately and required more banning from offwiki channels like IRC/Discord. Last SPI sweep was May I think. I've actually submitted a lock request to the stewards as well, because they use Meta to pester admins around their block/TPA revoke. I don't have a specific sock identified, so if that prevents a sweep, I understand. -- ferret (talk) 22:00, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

Sorry, but Arbcom has made it very clear that they're cracking down on anything that they consider to be fishing. If there are cross-wiki issues that need to be resolved, stewards can post evidence on the CU mailing list, though. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 22:34, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
Got it. Didn't occur to me that that was essentially what this would be. I'll let the stewards handle from here as they see fit. -- ferret (talk) 22:43, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

Sockpuppet investigation (SPI) of 俏綾 and Xayahrainie43

Hi, NinjaRobotPirate,
There was a sockpuppet investigation (SPI) of Xayahrainie43 relating to me and 俏綾. A checkuser, Ivanvector, deemed me to be unrelated as stated on the sockpuppet investigation page. However, he stated that it was possible that 俏綾 could be a sockpuppet of Xayahrainie43. Cabayi came and gave some information about 俏綾. However, after Cabayi did so, no one else attended to the investigation. However, 俏綾 continued to edit. 俏綾 even edited one of my subpages. I came to you since you are a friend of mine and also a checkuser. For more information, please visit this page. Since you are a checkuser, you are able to see 俏綾's IP address. If it geo-locates to Taiwan, then you may be able to provide a next step to the sockpuppet investigation, since 俏綾's behavior seems close to Xayahrainie43's behavior. Also, please notice Cabayi's note. Thank you. Friend505 11:38, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

Blocked based on behavioral evidence presented in the SPI case. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 04:29, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
@NinjaRobotPirate: Thanks for blocking the guy, NinjaRobotPirate. This way, Wikipedia will be a bit more free from sockpuppetry. By the way, NinjaRobotPirate, do you think I have a bit of credit in the process since I kind of triggered your block of the user? I think if I had not reported the sockpuppet investigation (SPI) to you and wrote that extra information, this sockpuppet may not have been blocked, since it seemed like everyone else previously involved in the SPI just stopped caring about it. Anyways, even if I'm not one of the people who get credit, I am also still happy to help in the process. Thank you. Friend505 10:29, 8 August 2020 (UTC)
SPI cases do tend to languish. However, I personally try not to look for credit on Wikipedia. If you do, you'll likely end up disappointed. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 10:45, 8 August 2020 (UTC)
@NinjaRobotPirate: Yeah, good idea, NinjaRobotPirate. Anyways, I did not report that again just to get credit; I wanted to help Wikipedia become a cleaner place. I also want to report to you a possible case of IP sockpuppetry of Xayahrainie43. Please take a look at this page. I know my link address is the same as the old link that I posted to you about the case involving 俏綾, but that case was moved into the archive. I found this new potential Xayahrainie43 IP sockpuppet and opened a new, fresh sockpuppet investigation (SPI). Please take a look at this new potential sockpuppet case, since you are a checkuser. Thank you. Friend505 13:25, 8 August 2020 (UTC)

Block evasion?

Hi there! 95.145.218.119 restored an edit on Dolly-Rose Campbell that you deleted hours before. Your edit summary was "block evasion", so I assumed this was another IP also evading the same block.

Just wanted to let you know, in case you wanted to check it out! Here's the diff: [20] - Whisperjanes (talk) 00:51, 9 August 2020 (UTC)

Yes, probably the same person. Probably going to keep popping up on more IP addresses, unfortunately. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 01:20, 9 August 2020 (UTC)

Please help me

Hello Sir My name is MK0122, I am the Manager, Administrator and Founder of Flipkart wiKi Fandom, on this wiki my name is User: Flipkartsysop, my Bot Account caught a member moving the page without meaning, I blocked it for 1 month. When my Bot Account tried to rollback its edit, but it was telling that the failback was failed, please help me now. I blocked this user- [21] My user Page - [22]

Bot User page -[23] IP Block List -[24] MK0122 (talk) 02:34, 9 August 2020 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but I don't really understand what you're asking. I also don't really know anything about running a wiki on Fandom or Wikia or whatever. I assume it uses the same general interface as the MediaWiki installation here. If so, you should be able to use the documentation at mediawiki.org. Maybe try fixing the vandalism from your admin account instead of a bot account? Sorry, but I have no idea. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 03:40, 9 August 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for this information Sir.MK0122 (talk) 04:36, 9 August 2020 (UTC)

Information About Shiv Ram Singh Inter College 's Image

Hello, sir Shiv Ram Singh Inter College Image have Update in six Months ago ,sir please give me permission to Change the Image of Shiv Ram Singh Inter college ,but Image is come on google Seach Result ,Can I download the image of Shivram Singh Inter College from Google, on the page of Shivram Singh Inter College.(thanks) MK0122 (talk) 05:05, 10 August 2020 (UTC)

RE:August 2020

Look, believe it or not that source you so highly regard was not helpful in the least. It didn't say how Hanna-Barbera were involved or anything actually informative. Hanna-Barbera and Turner Animation are not the same. If you consider Turner and Hanna-Barbera the same, then maybe we should list Tom and Jerry: The Movie as a Hanna-Barbera movie? And clearly not everyone views The Pagemaster as a Hanna-Barbera movie, because it's not even on List of works produced by Hanna-Barbera. -- 92.237.150.49 (talk) 09:56, 10 August 2020 (UTC)

Doesn't matter. As an encyclopedia, Wikipedia is written according to what reliable sources say, not according to what individual editors believe to be true. If some random person comes to that article and says, "I believe in my heart that Disney made this", what would you say? How can you possibly argue against that change if you're saying that editors should be free to change any content and remove sources as long as they think the source is wrong? Your way leads to madness. This is why we have policies against it and why we block people who do this. Also, citing Wikipedia itself is kind of pointless; as you just recently proved, anyone can change our articles to report whatever they want, regardless of what the sources say. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 12:13, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
Bill & Ted's Excellent Adventures (1990 TV series) says Gordon Kent developed it without a source. It's just random policing, it's always been that way on Wikipedia and that will never change.The Pagemaster was a Turner movie. You don't see Hanna-Barbera's name anywhere on the poster. And that's not because Turner and Hanna-Barbera are the same, they're not. This isn't a Disney and Pixar scenario. -- 92.237.150.49 (talk) 00:26, 11 August 2020 (UTC)

I only go by what the studios make. Disney made The Lion King. I know this for a fact, the world knows this for a fact. There's no actual real proof that Hanna-Barbera was involved in this movie. No artists refer to this, no news articles refer to this, there's no actual evidence other than putting Hanna-Barbera's name beside The Pagemaster. -- 92.237.150.49 (talk) 00:28, 11 August 2020 (UTC)

Right, there's no proof, except for the proof that you disruptively removed. Congratulations on attaining omniscience, but you're not a reliable source, so we can't use your divine knowledge to write encyclopedia articles. You can enlighten the world via a blog, though. And, yes, it is random policing. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 01:11, 11 August 2020 (UTC)

Blocked for making edits I didn’t make?

Hello. I hadn’t edited on Wikipedia in a long time, so long that I don’t remember my old username nor do I have the old email I used to log in with it. A couple weeks ago, I made a quick edit on a page because it had been vandalized, and I thought I’d fix it quickly, so I did. I decided tonight I wanted to make an actual username again, and I go to do so, and it says you had banned me for sock puppetry. I then clicked the username / IP address associated with my phone to look at what lead to this. I then see a long list of “user contributions“ that I never did. Walking Dead, basketball players, a measles outbreak, all pages I’d never even looked at let alone edited. I’m not sure how something like that happens, but I made this username on another device to reach out and make it clear that I have no desire to make sock puppet accounts or be misleading. I just wanted to get back to contributing. Mostly what I’d like to do is just revert little vandalizations or fix typos. But I didn’t make the edits on my phone that it says I was banned for. Thank you. Rorys1989 (talk) 06:59, 11 August 2020 (UTC)

Yeah, that sounds like one of my blocks. To stop disruption, we sometimes block a collection of IP addresses used by a disruptive editor. Anyone using that internet service provider could potentially get the same message and be unable to edit while logged out. That's one of the benefits of being logged into an account – you don't get random messages or suffer from blocks designed to stop someone else. You should be able to edit just fine as long as you stay logged into your account. Let me know if you have problems editing while logged into your account, and I'll fix it. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 07:04, 11 August 2020 (UTC)

Housekeeping

I ran across some edits by BlueshockerSZN, who appears to be an unblocked Fieryflames sock. No edits since April, but it's the usual musician photo edits (and arguing about them in article talk), hockey player edits, user name elements consistent with previous socks, etc. Indignant Flamingo (talk) 01:27, 12 August 2020 (UTC)

Hmm, he was active on Commons in July. I can't check for other accounts on English Wikipedia, but you might consider asking a CheckUser to look into it over there. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 01:45, 12 August 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Why Can't I create a wiki for Nima Owji

Hello, How are you today? I wanna create a wiki for Nima Owji. He is one of the youngest programmers and directors. Why his name is protected?Mohammadrezaliaghat (talk) 07:54, 12 August 2020 (UTC)

Because sock puppets were spamming our website. Try creating a profile on a social networking website instead. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 08:06, 12 August 2020 (UTC)

I don't know who spammed but Nima Owji is a famous person. I can give you many refrencesMohammadrezaliaghat (talk) 08:11, 12 August 2020 (UTC)

No, you're not a famous person, and stop creating sock puppets. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 08:42, 12 August 2020 (UTC)

Amtria62

Thank you for checking Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/FreeatlastChitchat. Would you mind if you can check Amrita52 against Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Kkm010? 

There are indeed a number of sockmasters engaged in changing nationalities, but Amrita62 gets close to Kkm010 big time. Compare: [25][26] or removal of "school names" on infobox on same article,[27][28] or that they "restored earlier" version on this same article:[29][30] Aman Kumar Goel (Talk) 08:25, 13 August 2020 (UTC)

Everything in the Kkm case is stale, and, honestly, I don't really remember how to identify Kkm behaviorally. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 08:40, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
After making the above message, I had been thinking about that too. The reason why Amrit62 didn't come out as a sock ultimately is because Kkm010 is stale. I have filed a separate report here: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Kkm010. Aman Kumar Goel (Talk) 08:52, 13 August 2020 (UTC)

User using IMDb to create many articles

Hi! You pointed out to me a few months ago that I was using IMDb for premiere dates, and I have been really making an effort not to use IMDb as a citation at all. In the meantime, I've come across editor Hitcher vs. Candyman who has been creating many film articles and clearly using IMDb to generate things like release dates and other credits. I've addressed it with them back in late July, and it does not appear that they are taking it into serious consideration (see Radium Girls (film) and Elsewhere (2019 film), for example). Would you mind reaching out to them? Perhaps hearing it from an administrator would guide them into better editing habits like it did me. BOVINEBOY2008 16:48, 16 August 2020 (UTC)

@Bovineboy2008: Are you reporting me? Hitcher vs. Candyman (talk) 17:01, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
@Hitcher vs. Candyman: Are you still adding poorly sourced information to articles? I'm happy to take it to ANI if you would like me to. BOVINEBOY2008 17:04, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
@Bovineboy2008: Perhaps if you could please address your concerns at my talk page before we get into ANI. It appears that you want me to get blocked or something. Hitcher vs. Candyman (talk) 17:08, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
@Hitcher vs. Candyman: I would prefer you just edit to the same standards set out for all editors. And I have addressed this with you back in July. BOVINEBOY2008 17:10, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
Part of the problem is that half of the content in film articles used to be unsourced, but few people made a big deal of it. When I started making a big deal of it, it was not really a welcome change. But I think things are really getting better. For one thing, we have more people reverting vandalism in film articles now that they can tell what the correct date is for a premiere, what the verified production companies are, etc. Before, it was all basically guesswork. Is this date right? Maybe! Who knows. Hitcher vs. Candyman, you seem to do good work, but, really, don't copy from the IMDb. Most of the time, it's correct, but it's also subject to a lot of incorrect guesswork. Or sometimes it's just plain wrong. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 18:09, 16 August 2020 (UTC)

You've got mail!

Hello, NinjaRobotPirate. Please check your email; you've got mail! The subject is Wikipedia email from user "Mdaniels5757".
Message added 14:12, 17 August 2020 (UTC). 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.

—‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 14:12, 17 August 2020 (UTC)

If you check the block log, I didn't make the range block in question. I only tweaked the block to avoid collateral damage. If you're affected by an anon-only range block, stay logged into your account and you'll be able to edit just fine. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 15:29, 17 August 2020 (UTC)

IP not heeding warnings

Hey there NinjaRobotPirate! This IP 177.72.48.196 has been changing images for no reason and making overall disruptive edits to multiple hurricane related articles. Many users (including myself) have posted multiple warnings on this IP’s talk page but they simply seem to be WP:NOTHERE since they fail to answer or apparently heed any warnings. Do you think a temporary block may be needed in this situation? We’ve asked this IP to explain the reasoning behind their edits but they always fail to respond so I honestly have no idea what to do. I’d very much appreciate your help with this. Thank you! CycloneYoris talk! 18:46, 17 August 2020 (UTC)

I did a short block for disruptive editing and left a note about communicating. The IP address is registered to a Brazilian internet service provider, so there may be language issues. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 05:19, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
Thank you so much! Let's hope they return to edit constructively once the block expires. CycloneYoris talk! 06:01, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

Hello there, NinjaRobotPirate! I saw that you are a checkuser. Can you do a small check for me on this user - User:Miguel 04012010 ? I have a small feeling that the aforementioned user might be 177.72.48.196 (talk · contribs). However, most of the edits Miguel has been doing have been constructive and of good-faith, until this edit. It is very certain that this user is unrelated to the IP, and certainly didn't know not to put non real-color images to storm infoboxes (the account in pretty new), but from the edit summary, I feel that the user knows what he is talking about. Also, 177.72.48.196 (talk · contribs) has stopped editing completely, even after the block ended. I may be all wrong, and I apologize if it is all for nothing. Thank you very much! ~ Destroyeraa🌀 14:52, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

@Destroyeraa: policy generally forbids me from revealing someone's IP address. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 15:11, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
But can you just tell me if the they are the same user. Please. Thank you. ~ Destroyeraa🌀 15:14, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
I just told you that this is against policy to connect an IP address to an account. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 15:16, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
OK. Got it. I'm not a checkuser. But how did you find out that 177.72.48.196 (talk · contribs) is Brazilian? ~ Destroyeraa🌀 15:22, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
Click the button that says "geolocate" at the bottom of Special:Contributions/177.72.48.196. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 15:26, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

Shaun of the Dead

Hello. I apologise to bother you, but recently, I read the article, and although it belongs to the category "Parodies of horror", there is no information/source/citation that would support that claim. I checked, and it seems that the edit was made by an IP user who had some issues with adding unsourced content and categories to various articles. Could you take a look at it, please? Thank you. --89.66.254.10 (talk) 01:30, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

It looks like we discussed this a bit in Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Film/Archive 70#Shaun of the Dead. If you think that the article shouldn't be in that category, you could always remove it. If nobody disagrees with you, the issue is resolved. That's a popular film, though, so someone might disagree. If they do, you could discuss it on the article talk page. In that old discussion, it looks like I suggested that we include prose commentary about this rather than categories, which still strikes me as a good idea. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 09:43, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
We could always poll the denizens of the Winchester to see if there's consensus for the category.-- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 17:31, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
Dean Winchester edits Wikipedia? NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 19:49, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

Rd64e socks

Hi NRP! Thanks for handling SPIs once again. You note that the account I reported is unrelated to Rd64e but is related to other socks of even more socks that you blocked for being socks of Rd64e. I explained this previously but unfortunately received no reply. Obviously, this makes reporting new cases of the "TX Interactive LTAs" unnecesserily difficult. The vandalism starting from ElizabethNicoleTl is probably a new string of LTAs, but I have no way to check this. Could you help me split the SPI cases into two trees, so that I can report future cases properly? Regards, IceWelder [✉] 18:13, 21 August 2020 (UTC)

Yeah, I could ask a clerk to split the cases. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 18:17, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
Thank you kindly. IceWelder [✉] 18:59, 22 August 2020 (UTC)

Pocoyohasan8

Got a quacker here: ReaderWrecker10. Since you took out ReaderWrecker01–09 I thought maybe you'd like to complete the set. Betty Logan (talk) 18:04, 22 August 2020 (UTC)

Ugh, what a pain. I guess kids don't have anything better to do right now. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 18:42, 22 August 2020 (UTC)

HarveyCarter

These three IPs:

  • 37.152.231.26
  • 213.83.71.233
  • 51.7.17.153

Show all the signs of being the banned editor HarveyCarter. They're working together on Kessler syndrome, Heinrich Müller (Gestapo), Oradour-sur-Glane massacre, and Dracunculiasis, and the geolocation of all three corresponds to that of HarveyCarter.

Beyond My Ken (talk) 23:12, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

I'm not really familiar with HarveyCarter. But it looks like Berean Hunter already blocked one of those IPs, so I blocked the others. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 00:03, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
Thanks. Beyond My Ken (talk) 02:13, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

SPA

Hey NRP, could I trouble you to take a look at this editor's changes? They seem to all revolve around spreading Keshav Tyohar into the project and it really feels like this is a promotional SPA, possibly even the subject themself, but wouldn't mind a second opinion. This is an edit they've made several times, and it's just really bizarre to include an assistant's credit in a soundtrack. I also moved the subject's article back to draft because it feels underestablished, and they moved it back. In case I'm being hypersensitive, your thoughts are appreciated, thanks. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 21:01, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

Ah, the plot thickens. I just found this account as well. So now I know they're using multiple accounts to do this. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 21:20, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
Interestingly, those two accounts are not quite confirmed – same narrow IP range but different computer. Uhgty4598, an account with no edits, is confirmed to Ekucha belrima, though. I'd guess that Label4me is also related, but that account is stale. I'd consider indeffing them all for promotion and socking. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 21:40, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
Thanks for the help. Created an SPI just to log the details (in case you didn't get the ping). Thanks! Cyphoidbomb (talk) 22:47, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

Soooo, a day after I block these socks and move Keshav Tyohar back to draft (this kid was a runner-up on a televised Indian singing competition, and has sung a few songs since then), this guy comes out of a ten day slumber to add more references and move the draft back to live. And this edit suggests very heavily that this is an as-yet-to-be-disclosed paid editing situation. I tend to be reserved about page deletions, but at what point would it be suitable to consider that article pure advertising? So far I've seen two groups with silent agendas to keep it live. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:31, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

I blocked new account as a paid sock. The thought had crossed my mind earlier that this was a paid sock farm – a spammer or two popped up on the same IP range as the others. As far as the article is concerned, I'd go with WP:AFD. Then recreations can be deleted under WP:G4 or WP:G5. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 18:46, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

Bedriczwaleta socks and a meat?

Hi. In a SPI i filed i *personally* believe that 186.111.139.203 and 186.111.135.18 is likely to be ducks (i don't like to say the obvious as i don't want to bite) and i have suspected 185.66.252.219 as meatpuppet (since they edited the same template with the 186.111 IPs and done similar things to that template - but i'm not confirming it as i don't believe that they live near each other (different countries, in fact) and likely a coincidence as i don't believe 186.111 IPs are canvassing). Could you consider helping a hand (handling) on this case? I'm unsure on how to handle meatpuppet cases. Thank you, SMB99thx my edits 09:44, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

I just recently noticed that 185.66.252.219 edited first by looking at the edit history of the template, and 186.111 did undo the revert Nicholas made against 185.66.252.219. However, it is important to note that 185.66 did not geolocate into the same country as the 186.111 IPs. I'm not sure. Thanks, SMB99thx my edits 11:08, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
I don't know anything about this case. However, 185.66 geolocates to Kyrgyzstan and is editing topics related to Kyrgyzstan. That's usually a sign that it's not a proxy. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 19:09, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
NinjaRobotPirate, thanks for the analysis. I just checked 185.66.252.0/24 IP range just recently and found out that this is someone who has been editing Wikipedia for 6 months if not longer, and definitely older than the Bedriczwaleta socks - which is why i know 185.66 is unrelated to Bedriczwaleta despite their similar interests (editing coronavirus medical cases charts and programming). I'm not sure how 186.111.139.203 got wind of the 185.66.252.0/24 edits and undid the Nicholas Velasquez's revert on a 185.66.252.0/24 edit which led me into some suspicion of meatpuppetry - despite no canvassing from 185.66.252.0/24. If i recall correctly, if a sock reverts someone's undo of an user who's not even related but edited in the same topic, then that user will be treated as a sock or a meatpuppet. If i'm wrong, then we can definitely cross out 185.66 IP as a meatpuppet in this case (leave them alone) and just block 186.111 IPs with diffs provided in the SPI. Thanks, SMB99thx my edits 23:14, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
When it comes to something major like COVID19, there's going to be lots of crossover between unrelated people. The more popular the topic, the more false positives there will be. Anyone can revert a block-evading sock puppet per WP:BANREVERT. If an editor in good standing restores an edit made by a sock puppet, that's also allowed per WP:PROXYING (subject to the restrictions of that policy). However, they take ownership of the content by doing so, and they can be blocked for disruption if they restore a disruptive edit. By the way, pinging someone on their own talk page doesn't work. Of course, it doesn't hurt anything, either, but it's a waste of keystrokes. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 00:19, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

User:TheTVGuy66

Hi NinjaRobotPirate & Vanjagenije,
This editor is a possible sockpuppet of User:Yay Dad. The disruptive editing behaviors are pretty much that same as User:Yay Dad and User:Orange Mo. — YoungForever(talk) 21:46, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

You need to provide evidence. I don't remember what kinds of edits Yay Dad makes. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 22:07, 27 August 2020 (UTC)
Yay Dad: Added this [31] months earlier, ignoring MOS:TVUPCOMING. Today TheTVGuy66, ignored MOS:TVUPCOMING and added similar to what Yay Dad added months ago [32].
I do not know who Yay Dad or Orange Mo is, but I am not them. Our coincidental edits do not make me the same person, I made a couple edits recently and it sounds like that other user has made frequent edits in the past. My added information included sources. Before making more accusations, please make sure you're correct, let's not split hairs over a small misunderstanding on a TV show article. I've been editing on Wikipedia for years, which is possibly longer than that spam user, which as I stated earlier, is not me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TheTVGuy66 (talk • contribs) 23:50, 27 August 2020 (UTC)
It does seem like it could be coincidental. YoungForever, I suggest filing a case at WP:SPI if you think there's enough evidence. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 00:00, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

Katherine Barrell

Hello, NRP. The BLP is the target of vandalism again: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11. It needs to be protected again. Thanks! Pyxis Solitary (yak). L not Q. 07:02, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) It looks like most of it is coming from the same ipv6/64 address [33]. Ravensfire (talk) 14:06, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
Yeah, I blocked the IP that was doing most of the vandalism and semi-protected the article. If it starts up again, I can do some more blocks and a longer protection. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 14:47, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
Thank you! Pyxis Solitary (yak). L not Q. 23:48, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

2020 United States Senate election in Kentucky

On 29th August, you reverted a change that was later reinstated. I reverted the reinstatement but it has been reinstated again. I'd be grateful for some clarity on this. Thanks, Etsnev (talk) 18:11, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

Yeah, it's a sock puppet. I'll semi-protect the articles. I'll need a few minutes, though. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 18:13, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
NinjaRobotPirate, thanks. There's been another edit that I don't think is justified. I'd be grateful again for some clarity. Thanks, Etsnev (talk) 18:59, 1 October 2020 (UTC)
I don't think that's a sock puppet, if that's what you mean. That edit is very similar to the edits that the other sock puppets were making, but this editor seems to have an existing interest in the Libertarian Party. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 20:28, 1 October 2020 (UTC)
No that's not what I mean. The user is citing a condition ``There aren't third party candidates in other [similar] election infoboxes" that isn't relevant. The relevant condition is 5% polling. The user has made several similar edits without regard to the polling condition: one has been instantly reverted, another was also reverted several times, while the Kentucky one hasn't been yet, though the Libertarian candidate's polling average is 5%. Etsnev (talk) 20:40, 2 October 2020 (UTC)
Sorry, I don't really know anything about that. Is that 5% polling condition a guideline or policy? NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 20:55, 2 October 2020 (UTC)
It's certainly the case for the 2020 Presidential Election and I think de facto, if not de jure, it is the case elsewhere. Etsnev (talk) 19:26, 7 October 2020 (UTC)

Protection

Hello, will you move protect and edit protect my userpage and User:Synoman Barris/CVUA/my course , they are high risk pages that I may not want to be vandalised. Thanks for understanding. Megan Barris (Lets talk📧) 06:51, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

@Synoman Barris: sure. Is semi-protection enough? If I do full protection, you won't be able to edit them any more. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 07:01, 31 August 2020 (UTC)
Well, I assumed semi is good enough for the edit protection, and made the move protection admin-only. If that's not what you wanted, I can change it. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 07:29, 31 August 2020 (UTC)
NinjaRobotPirate, Extended confirmed confirmed is better, since I intend only me to be editing those pages, the move protection is good enough. Thanks for understanding! Megan Barris (Lets talk📧) 07:44, 31 August 2020 (UTC)
Well, there are bureaucratic rules about when extended confirmed protection can be used, and Wikipedia:Protection policy#User pages has its own bureaucracy on top of that. If vandalism becomes a problem, I can upgrade it to ECP. Just let me know. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 16:14, 31 August 2020 (UTC)
NinjaRobotPirate, Sure, thank you so much. Cheers Megan Barris (Lets talk📧) 19:55, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

Hijiri88 unblock request on UTRS

https://utrs-beta.wmflabs.org/appeal/33345 This has languished for a couple of weeks. No longer familiar with the many issues. Restore TPA? Carry to WP:AN? Cheers, --Deepfriedokra (talk) 11:41, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

@Deepfriedokra: the last time I tried to use UTRS, it refused to let me log in, and I gave up on it. Without having seen any appeals on UTRS, I'd say that it's probably fine to restore Hijiri88's talk page access. I'm sure he got the point about interaction bans. His block is a complicated, weird mix of being self-requested and "for cause". The drama involved might make it difficult to find an admin willing to look into it. If he agrees to it, maybe an appeal posted to WP:AN would be a good idea. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 18:29, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

WhenDatHotlineBling again

ClarenceOfTheCreek (talk · contribs) is another one or a copycat. Of course, Berean Hunter will be around to block him when you don't. Same goes for Drmies.

I've been reverting him, but he's reverting me back. Flyer22 Frozen (talk) 08:10, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – September 2020

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

Administrator changes

added Eddie891
removed Angela • Jcw69 • Just Chilling • Philg88 • Viajero

CheckUser changes

readded SQL

Guideline and policy news

Arbitration

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:56, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

(S)he's back - Serial sock puppeter Zjec aka "Clash of Clans" troll-impostor

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Tenet2149

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Log?type=thanks&user=Tenet2149&page=&wpdate=&tagfilter=&wpfilters%5B%5D=newusers

Darkknight2149 03:34, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Blocked. Let me know if more show up. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 03:43, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Absolute hummer AfD nomination

An editor who doesn't even have a posting on his talk page has made a very poor AfD nomination. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ajman University. I tried to close it; nominator reverted it and his arguments are not in any way policy based. It's also clear no BEFORE was done. All of his edits have been on the topic of that U or related topics. In short, it stinks. John from Idegon (talk) 03:59, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Yeah, probably Galendalia.  Confirmed to Oportunityketchuplog. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 04:08, 6 September 2020 (UTC)
Figured it was something like that, but I didn't realize you were a CU. Out of curiosity, if it hadn't been a sock, would you still have closed it? John from Idegon (talk) 05:27, 6 September 2020 (UTC)
Since 2017, actually. I don't make a big deal of being a CU, so it sometimes doesn't stick in peoples' minds. It looks like the nominator was in the process of withdrawing the nomination, so I might have made it "official". Sometimes that helps to defuse stuff. I don't know why he reopened it just to bicker, but the sock master was blocked for incompetence. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 06:27, 6 September 2020 (UTC)
Thanks. Appreciate the help and the education. John from Idegon (talk) 06:48, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Late apologies!

Hello NinjaRobotPirate, I just wanted to issue an apology for previous edits I made that were unsourced many months back relating to the pandemic. While the issue is over, I still wanted to issue a formal apology as I continue my quest to productive edits. Happy editing!Lima Bean Farmer Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 05:54, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

I don't think you need to apologize for that. Wikipedia can be confusing at first, and improving as an editor is a never-ending quest. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 06:42, 6 September 2020 (UTC)
Hello, NinjaRobotPirate. 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.

FunySmike (talk) 12:32, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

Sweep check

This one may be a miss, but Blipts and MemeCityMayor bear resemblances to AdamUsername. Tweaking of release dates and "critical reception" in leads along with manual reverts and repeating it over and over. I'm fairly certain about Blipts, MemeCityMayor may be different based on edit summary use. -- ferret (talk) 16:36, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

Blipts is very  Likely (basically confirmed, except that I'm not really very familiar with the ISP), but MemeCityMayor is on a different continent. I wouldn't be surprised if there were accounts before AdamUsername; there are logged-out edits stretching as far back as the CU tool can see, and they've continued past the block. He's obviously been at this for a while. I'll block the likely guy. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 18:02, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
Thanks. While I'm here, unrelated but the user talk left at Herzlmodal suggests some block evasion going on. -- ferret (talk) 19:28, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
Ha. Probably part of a WP:NOTHERE sock farm around Michael Johnson123111. The socks seem to surface occasionally to remove commas or berate editors they dislike. I don't think any of them have ever become extended confirmed yet, so I don't know what the end plan is. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 20:20, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
I've blocked 41.141.0.0/17 in relation to the AdamUsername farm. -- ferret (talk) 15:06, 12 September 2020 (UTC)
Also operating under 105.154.0.0/16, 105.155.0.0/16, 105.157.0.0/16 in August/September, but it's less frequent and the collateral is higher. He pops up in 160.176.0.0/15 and 105.158.0.0/16 back in July. Hopefully the /17 above will get most of it. -- ferret (talk) 15:33, 12 September 2020 (UTC)

Question

Regarding the election articles that were locked, I realize we have a sock puppet problem, but does the lock really need to go till October 29? That seems kind of long and inconvenient for other users who want to be productive. Is there really that much of a risk that the sock puppeteers would keep it up for two months? 73.222.81.136 (talk) 05:33, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) Some folks are pretty Wiki-obsessed, and keep trying for years. Others want to use Wikipedia to share their version of The Truth. Pains in the neck for constructive editors. --Deepfriedokra (talk) 06:03, 9 September 2020 (UTC)
Unfortunately, this sock puppeteer has explicitly stated that he intends to continue disrupting these articles indefinitely because he's bored. These issues are part of why he was blocked in the first place. You should consider creating an account. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 19:54, 9 September 2020 (UTC)
Oh wow.73.222.81.136 (talk) 23:24, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

CableSolvesStringTheory

CableSolvesStringTheory (talk · contribs) So should he be reverted at all those articles? Flyer22 Frozen (talk) 19:43, 11 September 2020 (UTC)

There's at least one technically adept sockmaster who knows how to write vandal bots. This bot only made minor fixes, though, right? I didn't notice anything but {{csv}} being put into infoboxes. I'd just let it go. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 19:51, 11 September 2020 (UTC)

Paugussett

I have unblocked them based on the CU. But I don't think I can recall any recent case where the behavioral evidence of socking was so high. The level of coincidence is off the hook. -Ad Orientem (talk) 21:57, 12 September 2020 (UTC)

Meat puppetry or some other form of off-site canvassing is always a possibility, but sometimes people just appear randomly. I've seen some accounts where three or four CheckUsers in a row run a check with a rationale consisting of some variation of "this must be sock puppet", "how can this not be a sock puppet", etc. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 23:23, 12 September 2020 (UTC)
Meat puppetry crossed my mind. But that is very hard to prove. -Ad Orientem (talk) 04:23, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

About the category editing.

Are you willing to set up a time for me to make my edits, or should I just use the bot like you requested? I really liked Lugnuts' suggestion. However, if my category "contributions" are too much of a burden to you, I won't do it. I'd rather leave a trivial task unfinished than inconvenience an experienced editor. Scorpions13256 (talk) 11:54, 13 September 2020 (UTC)

I'm already hiding many edits – including categorization. I still see mountains of busy work, like AWB and HotCat ("removed Category:1980s action thriller films; added Category:1987 action thriller films using HotCat"). The point is that using a bot a) uses a standardized process for making widespread, automated edits; b) has a process for making requests; and c) has options in special:preferences to minimize disruption to people's watchlists. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 22:43, 13 September 2020 (UTC)
Alright. I guess I'll make the request sometime this week. Scorpions13256 (talk) 01:48, 14 September 2020 (UTC)
Done. Scorpions13256 (talk) 20:33, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

I noticed you have protected "Nima Owji" draft page. Why?

Hello, Today I saw you have moved "Nima Owji" page to blacklist and no one can create a page for Nima Owji, Why? He is one of the youngest programmers and Directors. I will show you some pages to see he is notable.

As you can see here, He has designed for the most famous journal in Transplant https://journals.lww.com/transplantjournal/Fulltext/2019/08000/Shiraz_Organ_Transplant_Center__The_Largest_Liver.1.aspx?Ppt=Article%7Ctransplantjournal:2019:08000:00001%7C%7C

This is his page on Google Scholar, He is only 14 but he has a publication about SQL Injection in Computer Science http://scholar.google.com/citations?user=Wyoj3qEAAAAJ&hl=en

This is his Biography https://nioapp.ir/nima-owji-biography/

Is it enough? You can simply search him on Google. Please remove his name from blacklist, Thanks. Have a nice timeJahedpourkian (talk) 05:48, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

Because you keep spamming it using sock puppets. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 06:07, 14 September 2020 (UTC)
SOme people ask, "why?" I prefer to ask, "why not?" --Deepfriedokra (talk) 10:06, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

Anti-Biden vandal

Please block Dworbird (talk · contribs), user is persistently spreading obvious Anti-Biden sentiments across several pages. ɴᴋᴏɴ21 ❯❯❯ talk 20:25, 05:41, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

Looks like I was a little too slow. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 05:50, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

Hey....:

uh, where and why did you suggest a block on my IP? Cyberquell (talk) 12:57, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

@Cyberquell: I have no idea what you're talking about. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 13:01, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

Ok, I tried to edit a page where it had an out of date article and it said you blocked me. Was it a mistake? Cyberquell (talk) 13:10, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

Hey no harm no foul, I went on a rant on my page earlier about this so if you see it ignore it unless you are bored :) but seriously there was an article I wanted to edit and it didn’t let me cause it said you placed a block on my ip? Was it an accidental automated response? Cyberquell (talk) 13:12, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

You're probably trying to edit while logged out. Sometimes when there's excessive vandalism, a large number of IP addresses get blocked in what's called a "range block". Because of the potential for collateral damage, these blocks usually don't affect registered users. If you stay logged in to your account, you shouldn't have any trouble editing. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 13:19, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

Ok, thanks much. My bad, I’ll admit I was little peeved earlier, I got it now though, thanks for the tip. 👍🤡 Cyberquell (talk) 13:24, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

You've got mail

Hello, NinjaRobotPirate. 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.

Edmond Dantès d'un message? 00:15, 19 September 2020 (UTC)

Erewhon Robinson

Hi. Could you please revoke Erewhon Robinson's talk page access, too? See their talk page history to see why (they're abusing it for spamming with their fake article, promoting their own YouTube channel).—J. M. (talk) 06:50, 19 September 2020 (UTC)

Done. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 06:55, 19 September 2020 (UTC)

Are?

Are this user is a bot?? yaour name is Robot!— Preceding unsigned comment added by Tokyo Metro 6000 series (talk • contribs) 02:52, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

I was human the last time I checked. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 06:52, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
Arrrr! --Deepfriedokra (talk) 14:16, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
it took me a second to get that, but then I realized that it's a better response than mine. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 14:27, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

Closing of merge proposal

Hello, do you think this 'Merge proposal' closed properly?. I think this was affected by the votes of multiple new editors and IPs. While checking these accounts (M Kariyappa, Rajarshi Mondal, Aarul Chandekar, SoumyaEAST, Figoitjodfj), I found the account creation time and edit history of most of the editors who supported the merger are similar in nature; thus, my suppositions that these accounts are SPAs working as meatpuppets/sockpuppets of an experienced editor. There are lots of tweets and FB posts that can be seen as canvassing attempts 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 . What can be done to restore this merger?.- Akhiljaxxn (talk) 18:36, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

You could file a case at WP:SPI if you think there was sock or meat puppetry. I don't think there's a bureaucratic process for challenging merges. In that case, WP:AN would probably be the best place to get it overturned. I don't really know anything about association football, so it's difficult for me to even understand what people are talking about or recognize what POV they might be pushing. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 00:34, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

User:Q8x

Is this Alarjar yet again? Flyer22 Frozen (talk) 19:24, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

Whoever it is, they were working to WP:Autoconfirmed. Flyer22 Frozen (talk) 19:25, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

Q8X is confirmed to some globally locked accounts that stewards labeled as socks of Gvozdet, who seems to be known as Dolyn on this wiki. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 19:56, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
Thanks for looking into and handling this. Flyer22 Frozen (talk) 20:16, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

A user you have blocked is requesting unblock.

Just an alert to let you know! Please see User talk:WorldwideBallcaps! Thanks! Heart (talk) 20:04, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

Request for unblock alert!

This is me letting you know that a user you have declined a block for has requested to be unblocked again after six months. See User talk:Pv.abhinav. Thanks! Heart (talk) 01:41, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

@HeartGlow30797: you don't have to send alerts. I suggest that you work on expanding articles instead of clerking admin areas. That's how you build a reputation on Wikipedia and become an administrator. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 03:26, 30 September 2020 (UTC)
NinjaRobotPirate, thanks for the advice! I mostly do miscellaneous things, however, I do some work on Wikipedia though! Will take this under advice! Thanks and happy editing! Heart (talk) 03:34, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

LTA

You ran into this one before. I don't know who it might be. Drmies (talk) 22:47, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

It looks like some cross-wiki troll. At least one of the accounts was globally locked. I don't remember associating this troll with a particular account. I've always found it interesting that there are so many right-wing trolls but comparatively few left-wing ones. Maybe the stewards could suggest something, but it doesn't look like range blocks would do much good unless we blocked a lot of IP ranges. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 23:46, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – September 2020

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

Administrator changes

added Ajpolino • LuK3
readded Jackmcbarn
removed Ad Orientem • Harej • Lid • Lomn • Mentoz86 • Oliver Pereira • XJaM
renamed There'sNoTime → TheresNoTime

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:43, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Move request set up by blocked IP

I see you blocked User:101.98.135.42 for block evasion. Should we therefore continue with a move request initiated by this IP or would it be within policy to close this on grounds of block evasion? Schwede66 21:14, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

When block-evading socks make proposals, I usually close them if nobody has responded. If someone who's not a sock puppet has supported the proposal, I usually let it go. That's from Wikipedia:Speedy keep, which is only supposed to apply to deletion proposals, but it seems like a good rule of thumb. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 21:29, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Possible block evasion

I have noticed a user (Special:Contributions/191.156.67.210) making some strange and disruptive edits.[34] (Recent edit, October 4, 2020.) Then I checked out the subrange of IP addresses and attempted to fix some more of that editors other strange messing and found worse.(Special:Contributions/191.156.67.210/16). (This user likes to rewrite the introduction to the Critical response section, which strange and mildly annoying, but deleting access dates from references is disruptive, and doing things like deleting references to Deadline.com and PostTrak scores without any explanation is so misguided it no different from vandalism.)

I figured I should do a google search and I found more examples of the weird pattern of editing,[35] and noticed that this user seems to be the same user as had been previously blocked by you. Maybe this editor has stopped doing the specific thing that got him blocked or maybe not, but maybe you might take a look at Special:Contributions/191.156.67.210/16 and see if it is the same user doing the same things he was already banned for. -- 109.79.166.89 (talk) 23:02, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

Yeah, that's a blocked editor. I've been blocking her for several years now. Any Colombian IP editor who rewrites the opening sentence to film reception sections is probably her. It's kind of a niche obsession for someone in South America. She used to use registered accounts but gave up after I blocked them all. As far as I can tell, it's been all IP editors since 2017. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 00:01, 6 October 2020 (UTC)
Blocked already that was fast. Do you recall what the specific reason for the block was or was it a mix of things? I might have shrugged it off except for the deleting Deadline references.
It's a shame that energy can't be redirected. There are plenty of terrible films articles that could do with improvement. -- 109.79.166.89 (talk) 00:21, 6 October 2020 (UTC)
She was blocked for refusing to communicate when other editors objected to her edits. It's a fairly common problem, unfortunately. I call it the "ghost theory of sock puppetry": sock puppeteers are often like characters in ghost stories – restless spirits who repeat the same behavior forever. If they could change their behavior, they probably wouldn't have been indefinitely blocked. Like ghosts, many sock puppeteers have unfinished business and go right back to haunting the articles they were editing before their block. So, they keep making the same ritualistic edits in the same articles for years and years, while ignoring every attempt to communicate with them. They could probably be unblocked if they just make an unblock request, but they have no interest in communicating or collaborating. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 01:00, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

Seems to be at it again Special:Contributions/186.31.169.108 "had a percentage".

Apologies in advance, wasn't sure if it was better to start another section or add a comment here. I suppose I should probably learn to report these on some official noticeboard somewhere? -- 109.79.176.62 (talk) 17:34, 11 November 2020 (UTC)

Yeah, that's her. It's fine to post here. If you post to a noticeboard, it'll probably just sit there until I see it, anyway. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 18:26, 11 November 2020 (UTC)

Just an observation

Hi,

also ::@Salvio giuliano:, @Ymblanter:, regarding this matter ([36]), I recently noticed this ([37]), along with a fellow editor ([38]).

The "Chicken Kiev" phrase/joke is to apparent, and some argumentations are very similar, which the user bludgeoned on my talk page earlier (likewise Canadian interest/affiliation). I don't wish to overreact it or no to assume good faith, but recently some "newbie" (?) editors are very inventive. If I would be wrong, sorry from everyone, but...(KIENGIR (talk) 23:29, 5 October 2020 (UTC))

If you have evidence, you should post it to a case at WP:SPI. I don't really know anything about the Kyiv/Kiev discussions. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 00:16, 6 October 2020 (UTC)
RogueRickC137 is most likely the blocked user Piznajko, who was previously socking using IPs, but I do not have enough convincing evidence (and time to be honest) to file an SPI at the moment. In addition, I promised to step out of the Kiev/Kyiv issue, and I am keeping my word.--Ymblanter (talk) 05:32, 6 October 2020 (UTC)
@Ymblanter:,
thank you for the info, sure, I just and only pinged you because you three admins were involved in this issue's outcome, not intended to draw you into anything new regarding this topic (but tbh, the user in question really played our nerves to hell). Cheers.(KIENGIR (talk) 12:19, 6 October 2020 (UTC))

Possible duck.

I've debated asking on this one, as I'm really unsure but there's some overlap. Squid45 became active a day after UltraUsurper was reblocked. While the new account has avoided redirect and cellphone work, they've focused heavily on Minecraft, including two articles/drafts that UltraUsurper had made. Because he's still occasionally editing his user talk page, I know that UltraUsurper is recently active. I'm on the fence here, the duck isn't quite quacking, but if you're willing to look. Likely unrelated, but AlphaMaltar2005 also popped up in the last 3-4 days editing articles Squid45 has been working on. -- ferret (talk) 14:13, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

Squid45 and UltraUsurper are on different continents. Also, UltraUsurper is currently under a hard block, which the pandemic makes a bit more difficult to evade. It looks like some of the other CUs have noticed UltraUsurper and started doing range blocks. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 17:12, 6 October 2020 (UTC)
Thanks. I felt this one might be a miss, the coincidences seemed worth looking into. -- ferret (talk) 17:16, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

Mention at ANI

Just to let you know, I mentioned you here Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Race and intelligence block and ban issue in a fairly incidental way. Nil Einne (talk) 21:58, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

You've blocked 71.222.23.2 several times as a block evader who edits animation articles. It will come as no surprise that they've returned as 71.222.79.226. Thanks, BlackcurrantTea (talk) 17:22, 8 October 2020 (UTC)

That's someone who engages in copyright violation. If you happen to notice copy-pasted text, let me know, and I'll revdel it. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 19:44, 8 October 2020 (UTC)
I'll keep that in mind. The few I looked at added names, titles, and categories, nothing obviously wrong. I'll take a look tomorrow if they've not been rolled back en masse first. Zzzzz, BlackcurrantTea (talk) 21:17, 8 October 2020 (UTC)
I reverted a few for various reasons, but didn't see any copyvio. The majority were additions of categories or credits. BlackcurrantTea (talk) 11:26, 10 October 2020 (UTC)
At least one of his registered accounts used to edit war to restore copyright violations and unsourced trivia to BLPs. I guess there's hope that sometimes people become a little less disruptive as they get older. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 13:18, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

User:Vertical Venom

Appreciate your prior help with a recent thread at ANI, but another report I submitted has gone a while now without a response: WP:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Persistent disruption by Vertical Venom.

In addition to what's listed there, I came across another revelation. Vertical Venom appears to be a sock of User:Bradley026258 making a lot of similar edits as User:Hypersonic Shooter and User:Linear Impulse (both confirmed socks) at many of the same articles. Would you mind checking that, or would you prefer I start a formal SPI? Thanks in advance for any assistance you're able to provide. --GoneIn60 (talk) 02:39, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

Yeah, that's him.  Confirmed and blocked. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 05:37, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

Update

While some of their edits have been constructive, I have no doubt recently-created account User:Skyscreamer500 is the same editor reincarnated. Hitting many of the same articles and making similar edits. --GoneIn60 (talk) 21:17, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

Gerixau, again

Hi NRP,

Apologies for bringing this up again, but following the last discussion four weeks ago, here are all of their mainspace edits over the last five days: unsourced addition; repeating the same unsourced addition after it was reverted as unsourced; copyediting the previous edit, which was an unsourced addition by an IP that is almost certainly Gerixau editing logged out; unsourced addition; and unsourced addition.

Thanks for your attention, JBL (talk) 21:44, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

Blocked indefinitely again. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 22:09, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

Redirect sock

This the usual one again? Or is there more than one usual one? Flyer22 Frozen (talk) 07:07, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

I'm not sure who you mean. Who do you think this is a sock puppet of? Brandon5015 creates disruptive redirects, but he's mostly limited to profanity. I think there a few others, too, but it's difficult for me to remember details if I haven't blocked someone recently. I keep a list of sock puppets in an offline text file to help me remember this stuff, but my notes don't really mention redirects except for him. In fact, I could probably remove a few of them that I added five years ago. I wonder if Borcker is still around? NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 07:18, 12 October 2020 (UTC)
See #User:Q8x. I'm asking about Alarjar. But in the User:Q8x discussion, you confirmed a different sock. Flyer22 Frozen (talk) 07:38, 12 October 2020 (UTC)
Probably Bowei Huang 2. I guess I should add that one to my list. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 07:50, 12 October 2020 (UTC)
I remember that sock master. Flyer22 Frozen (talk) 07:55, 12 October 2020 (UTC)
He pops up intermittently, but not so often that I remember him. Alarjar, Dinkton, and some others are all probably him. Those, and Aimingon, are almost certainly the same person, though, even if they're not Bowei Huang 2. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 08:06, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Hey.

Remember me? It’s been a while. I’ve done a lot of vandalism reversion since you unblocked me, and i must say, Twinkle’s helped a lot. Thank you for giving me another chance. And again, if you see vandalism from this IP again, it’s not me. Peace out. Littlecat456(OwOchat Ver 1.1)(.log) 09:10, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

You've got mail!

Hello, NinjaRobotPirate. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 18:11, 12 October 2020 (UTC). 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.

-- ferret (talk) 18:11, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Unsourced Content

Once again, sorry for what I have been doing. I'll remember next time not to change anything you add because you did say this is my final chance before you block me for removing reliable sources... Luigitehplumber (talk) 17:35, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

Well, the problem is that Wikipedia is written according to what reliable sources say, not what we believe to be true. Wikipedia:Verifiability, not truth is an essay that talks about this a bit. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 23:13, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

Block

Hi NinjaRobotPirate, urgent block needed for 2600:1015:B052:E7EE:4DA8:D29E:110:4823 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • blacklist hits • AbuseLog • what links to user page • COIBot • Spamcheck • count • block log • x-wiki • Edit filter search • WHOIS • robtex.com • Google) - vandalism on Kate Hudson.-KH-1 (talk)

Thank you NRP! Much appreciated. Might try and get some sleep now 😅 Patient Zerotalk 04:32, 15 October 2020 (UTC)
I'll try to keep an eye on the IP range. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 04:36, 15 October 2020 (UTC)
NinjaRobotPirate, IPv6 blocks are completely ineffective until you rangeblock the /64. Elizium23 (talk) 04:37, 15 October 2020 (UTC)
Might need semi-protection.-KH-1 (talk) 04:38, 15 October 2020 (UTC)
Came here to suggest the same thing. Patient Zerotalk 04:41, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

Request

I confirm this is a static IP. I am too addicted to Wikipedia. I am requesting a block of 2 weeks to get less addicted. I want it to be anon only, account creation blocked, cannot edit own talk page. I have no interest of logged in editing but this will reduce collateral(if any). Thanks. 67.85.37.186 (talk) 21:41, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

Well, I'm not really sure I like the idea of self-requested blocks on IP addresses. However, there isn't any obvious collateral damage, and I'd rather that you didn't go on a vandalism spree to force the issue. So, I guess the request is granted. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 23:58, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

Quick check for film copyvio sock

Could I get a quick check on the awfully ducky SpecialAgent047 and WikiAgent013? WikiAgent013 began just after SpecialAgent047 blanked their talk pages of prior warnings. Both are engaged in copyvio/close summary of film/video game content. I've blocked WikiAgent013 for their second time on COPYVIO grounds regardless. -- ferret (talk) 23:16, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

Just realized the duckiness goes even deeper than I thought so I'm going to go ahead and indef both, but curious if there are more. -- ferret (talk) 23:18, 16 October 2020 (UTC)
 Confirmed, no sleepers that I can see. The edits seem somewhat familiar, though. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 23:40, 16 October 2020 (UTC)
Tagged up for now, thanks. I suspect I'll find another tomorrow. -- ferret (talk) 23:45, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Admin's Barnstar
You're a good admin. Thank you for the work you do. ~ Destroyeraa🌀 01:13, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
It's always nice to have your work noticed. Thanks for saying so. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 02:48, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

block of WellThisIsTheReaper

I feel like the behaviors of user WellThisIsTheReaper(told everyone he had a duplicate account on the first edit), and user TechnoBladeSPX (only admitted the connection between his fake accounts after being blocked by the administrator), are very different. These diffrent behavours seem to indicate to me that there seems to have been a unnecessary block of WellThisIsTheReaper. I want to ask, how strong is the Check user evidence to block WellThisIsTheReaper?  Techie3 (talk) 09:33, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

He can make another unblock request. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 10:29, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Saving Prívate Perez

Hi,

I noticed that you created wiki pages for several co actors on saving private Perez and I’d like your help to create one for me Marius Biegai . Hope you can help me. Thanks Marius Biegai mbiegai@yahoo.con CharlieChilango (talk) 11:00, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

I don't think I created any articles about the actors in that film, though I did create a few articles about Mexican science fiction and horror films a while ago. It's not very easy for me because the sources are usually not in English, though I can sometimes puzzle out some words in Germanic or Romance languages. My ability understand German is mostly limited to heavy metal lyrics, though (Du... du hast... du hast mich!) I can look into it and see if I can find some sources, but you might consider trying to create a draft via articles for creation. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 12:26, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

Cedar Point

Hello NRP. Regarding Special:Contributions/2600:1009:B14A:EF3:84B7:C9E4:65B:951D. You already issued a /40 rangeblock on 1 October keeping this anonymous user from posting at User talk:GoneIn60. Just now I got a new complaint on my talk page about personal attacks at Talk:Cedar Point. (I had removed a clear personal attack back on 16 August "that makes you a fool, and a liar", but haven't followed up closely since then). One option is to add more partial blocks to this IP range for Cedar Point and its talk page, but it might be more straightforward to make this a sitewide block, for the same duration as the existing partial block. The problem has been going on for quite some time, so the editor who is using the fluctuating IP shouldn't be taken by surprise. Would you be OK with this modification of your rangeblock to make it a sitewide block? If I did this I woud also extend it to one month from today. A review of the /40 also indicates some plain vandalism comes from that range. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 01:57, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

I personally have found partial blocks to be a real help when it comes to range blocks. I don't have to worry so much about collateral damage any more. But if you've already looked at the range and ascertained the collateral damage, it seems fine to me to turn it site-wide. This IP editor is pretty annoying, and I got a nice little message, too. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 08:46, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
NPR: zero, repeat zero, "vandalism" has been done through any of my fluctuating i.p.s. I came to this site to post verifiable truth. But obviously i came to the wrong website to do it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1009:B14A:EF3:84B7:C9E4:65B:951D (talk) 10:56, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
p.s. ...any edits that were done via my same i.p. prior to this year, were not my edits. i did not even live within the Dayton Ohio area, at that time. thank you.

(b.t.w., the "investigation" that i previously had mentioned to you, was EXTERNAL, re. a potential "disinformationist-for-hire"). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1009:B14A:EF3:84B7:C9E4:65B:951D (talk) 11:14, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

You've got mail!

Hello, NinjaRobotPirate. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 20:36, 26 October 2020 (UTC). 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.

Dreamy Jazz talk to me | my contributions 20:36, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Thank you and already potential sock-puppet account

My name is Quartzgoldbling and I want to first genuinely thank you for stepping into the edit-war on Canada Christian College's page and blocking 76.10.169.60. However, within minutes on the admin page, another user, 199.7.156.249 jumped in to question my credibility. Now this user is already entering into an edit-war with me and has flagged the article as having a contributor who has a "close connection" to the subject. I'm literally dying over here and need some help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Quartzgoldbling (talk • contribs) 05:02, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

Yes, that's the same person on a different IP. I'll clean up what I can. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 11:02, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

Please block

Hi. Will you please block 114.4.0.0/16 (talk · contribs) since IPs on this range have been persistently harassing and vandalizing pages I edited and my talk pages for months. Not only in enwiki but also across several wikis like idwiki and commonswiki. Its sisters, 120.188.0.0/17 (talk · contribs) and 114.5.0.0/17 (talk · contribs) (also 114.5.0.0/16 (talk · contribs) on ENWIKI) are now globally blocked for this exact reason. Thanks. Flix11 (talk) 04:57, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

Mz7 already blocked 114.4.220.0/22, so you might contact Mz7 if there's more disruption. I can try to keep an eye on that range, but I'm already keeping an eye on so many IP ranges that it's kind of hard for me to notice anything unless it's really overt. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 12:36, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – November 2020

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

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:52, 1 November 2020 (UTC)

Possible sock puppetry by FortniteRishabS0122

Do you mind to comment at Sockpuppet investigations/FortniteRishabS0122, I think an blocked editor is using multiple accounts. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 20:51, 3 November 2020 (UTC)

Aptesttt (talk · contribs), the editor is evasion their block again. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 02:52, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
 Confirmed and blocked. There were a couple others where that came from, too. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 03:21, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
152.32.107.77 (talk · contribs), I think the editor is using another account again. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 14:40, 9 November 2020 (UTC)
That IP geolocates to the Philippines. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 17:41, 9 November 2020 (UTC)
Okay. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 19:04, 9 November 2020 (UTC)
172.58.107.189 (talk · contribs) 172.58.110.205 (talk · contribs) I'm pretty sure that these accounts are from the same editor. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 02:49, 12 November 2020 (UTC)
Looks like these IP editors are related to some other blocked ones. For example, this edit seem to reference this one. Technically, you're supposed to be the one doing this kind of hunting for diffs... I must be bored. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 03:27, 12 November 2020 (UTC)
Sorry, I use diffs next time. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 04:20, 12 November 2020 (UTC)
QUARANTINEPACK (talk · contribs), this account was created today and I think the editor is evasion their block yet again. Considering the editor has been editing hip hop-related articles in the past, such as Nav [39], Emergency Tsunami [40], and Gunna discography [41]. The editor also created articles with bad sources, just like before [42] [43]. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 23:03, 28 November 2020 (UTC)

I am not the same editor as anybody else. QUARANTINEPACK (talk) 23:11, 28 November 2020 (UTC)

Well, the evidence presented is a bit light, but you're in the same geographical area and editing the same articles.  Blocked and tagged. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 04:34, 29 November 2020 (UTC)
Another possible block evasion Newcheck (talk · contribs) and just like before, have a bad habit of coming back to the same articles as before [44] [45] [46] [47] [48] [49]. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 06:29, 4 December 2020 (UTC)
Yeah, probably him.  Blocked and tagged. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 06:55, 4 December 2020 (UTC)
23.115.8.101 (talk · contribs) I think the editor is block evasion yet again [50] [51] [52] [53]. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 05:52, 20 December 2020 (UTC)
Blocked for a week. But, ideally, your diffs should show an edit that the newest sock puppet did and an edit that an older sock puppet did. The reason why I blocked this IP is because of Special:Diff/992227375 and Special:Diff/995278759. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 06:04, 20 December 2020 (UTC)
I will do that next time, thank you for explaining that to me. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 06:13, 20 December 2020 (UTC)
24.28.40.70 (talk · contribs) Another block evasion by this editor and once again going back to the same articles [54] [55] [56] [57] [58] [59] [60] [61]. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 19:50, 23 December 2020 (UTC)

Looks like him to me... blocked for a week. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 22:21, 23 December 2020 (UTC)

65.36.59.228 (talk · contribs) Another block evasion by Rishabisajakepauler [62] [63] [64] [65] [66] [67]. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 21:26, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
2600:1700:1111:58F0:6999:1F67:F97A:75D9 (talk · contribs) Yet another block evasion by Rishabisajakepauler and just like before, going back to the same articles [68] [69] [70] [71] [72] [73] [74] [75]. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 05:51, 1 January 2021 (UTC)
Yeah, that looks pretty obvious from the diffs. Blocked. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 09:04, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

Dcasey98

Not sure what happened here. Must have accidentally clicked the wrong box when closing the case. -- RoySmith (talk) 14:23, 10 November 2020 (UTC)

Reporting Alishahmoradi2

Alishahmoradi2 (talk · contribs)

This editor keep adding unsourced content and also edit warring in the article I Am > I Was [76] [77] [78]. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 15:48, 13 November 2020 (UTC)

I left a message on the editor's talk page. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 20:07, 13 November 2020 (UTC)
Thank you, also the reason why the edits are unsourced at I Am > I Was because if you look at the credits of the album, the guest appearances are only credited as vocals not feature artists. Hope you have a better understanding of the issue. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 21:12, 13 November 2020 (UTC)

Patiparmeshwar rangeblock

Hey NRP, I was contemplating blocking this range, because of prolific Patiparmeshwar socking. The bulk of the edits in that range back to September or so seems to come from him, but if I block this range, with 16,000 addresses, there might be too much collateral damage. Rangeblocks aren't exactly my specialty. Got any tips? Should I narrow it to something else? The addresses I was looking to shush were:

  • 39.42.134.181
  • 39.42.140.53
  • 39.42.161.249
  • 39.42.162.210
  • 39.42.176.241

Thanks, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 19:38, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

Well, the collateral damage isn't quite as bad as one might expect because there are many spammers active on that IP range. "Read my blog to find out these ten quick and easy steps to lose weight" – that sort of thing. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 21:20, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

Edit warring by Pablo youngs

Pablo youngs (talk · contribs)

This editor is edit warring at To Pimp a Butterfly [79] [80] [81] [82], I try not to get in a edit war with this editor but the edits look unconstructive to me. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 03:18, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

Well, those edits aren't really vandalism, which would require that the editor be intentionally trying to make the article worse. But I'm not sure why Pablo youngs is removing two paragraphs. Maybe it's an accidental edit or a visual editor error? Who knows. I restored them, and maybe the editor will explain himself on the talk page. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 04:05, 16 November 2020 (UTC)
Those edits are not accidental, this editor had edit warring before in the article back in October 2018 over the same topic [83] [84] [85], and never have discuss this at the article's talk page. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 05:06, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

Whovian99

Hi there, I just noticed that this user has been blocked for being a sock puppet. This user has recently been editing List of Twin Peaks episodes (on my watchlist) by expanding episode summaries. Since you're one of the blocking admins I thought I should let you know that they possibly have other accounts. Once the main account was blocked, a new account and an IP began editing in the exact same fashion on that same article. The users being: SixSevenHeaven (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) and 50.216.78.198 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log). Drovethrughosts (talk) 13:49, 17 November 2020 (UTC)

Yeah, probably block evasion. Blocked. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 21:44, 17 November 2020 (UTC)
Hi again, it seems this user is IP hopping as another two different IPs have popped on that same article making the same type of edits. Should the article be protected to prevent this user from circumventing their block? Drovethrughosts (talk) 15:30, 20 November 2020 (UTC)
Done. It's just a week, but we can extend it easily enough. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 17:37, 20 November 2020 (UTC)

Vandal report

Ibaman (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) This editor is trolling on Wikipedia articles, using offensive language and might be a sockpuppet of an unknown blocked user. MarkTheGoodWikipedian (talk) 16:12, 17 November 2020 (UTC)

Screaming Mad George

I do not understand how what I did is any different to various other articles on makeup and special effects people. I stuck to the style used by various Academy Award winning such as Greg Cannom and Kazu Hiro, some of the credits gathered have almost certainly come from IMDB as they're almost all unreferenced. I also do not understand how I could possibly write the information any different to what I had done, for example, IMDB lists "An American Werewolf in Paris (special makeup effects artist)" so I added "An American Werewolf in Paris (1997) - special makeup effects artist". You say "Although facts can't be copyrighted, their presentation can be" but how could I possibly change the formatting to not be similar to IMDB whilst sticking to general guidelines of formatting credits? 03Heat (talk) 12:12, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

There is no general guideline to formatting credits. There's an information page at WP:FILMOGRAPHY, but that's not a guideline. For some reason, you stripped out the italics from the film titles, which actually is part of a guideline. The IMDb is user-generated, just like Wikipedia, so you shouldn't be copying from it, anyway. I sourced every statement and credit that I added when writing this article. Those citations at the bottom of the page are not decorative items – it took me a lot of time to find them, read through them, and condense them into an encyclopedia article in my own words. If I can write an entire article without copy-pasting anything from the IMDb, I'm sure you can, too. For example, I credited him with the cockroach scene in Nightmare on Elm Street 4 because that's what I found in a reliable source. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 12:50, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

Block IP

87.19.172.51 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) has made a disruptive edit past his last warning given by you: [86]. I think a longer block is due, after the 24-hour block on November 15. El Millo (talk) 19:19, 19 November 2020 (UTC)

Blocked for a week. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 19:33, 19 November 2020 (UTC)

random note of misleading capricious deletionism

== Reliable sources == Please don't cite random [[WP:SPS|self-published blogs]]. See our [[WP:RS|guideline on reliable sources]] for how to identify sources that are acceptable on Wikipedia. [[WP:RSP]] has links to various discussions on many sources. If you stick to the sources considered reliable, such as ''[[The New York Times]]'' and the [[BBC]], you'll have less trouble. [[User:NinjaRobotPirate|NinjaRobotPirate]] ([[User talk:NinjaRobotPirate|talk]]) 05:24, 21 November 2020 (UTC)

'Hello! I am NinjaRobotPirate, and I'm here to loot, pillage, kill, and edit Wikipedia articles. Thank you.'

No citations to self-published blogs, all were reliable sources:
  • Tiano, Jack (1981). American Bartender's School Guide to Drinks. New York, N.Y.: Rutledge Press. ISBN 0-8317-4116-3. OCLC 7461414. Distributed by W.H. Smith
  • Christoph (6 July 2012). "Sex on the Beach Cocktail". James & Everett. Retrieved 20 November 2020.
  • "Bartending/Bartender". California LaborMarketInfo, The Economy. Employment Development Department, State of California. Retrieved 20 November 2020.
  • Goldfarb, Aaron (11 May 2018). "Inside the worst cocktail trend in history, from Fuzzy Navels to Sex on the Beach". NY Post. Archived from the original on 2018-05-11. Retrieved 21 November 2020.
  • Colmenares, Alfonso. Bars Stories. Babelcube Inc. ISBN 978-1-5071-6852-3. Retrieved 21 November 2020.
  • Bruno, Joe (21 August 2009). "Sex on the Beach". American Bartenders School of NY. Retrieved 20 November 2020.

You are on notice to stop this behavior and undo this damage.

24.7.104.84 (talk) 18:36, 21 November 2020 (UTC)
Stuff like "mixthatdrink.com" are not useable as sources on Wikipedia. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 09:33, 22 November 2020 (UTC)
As well as the James & Everett and Colmenares sources. Both are self-published with no editing oversight. --GoneIn60 (talk) 20:32, 22 November 2020 (UTC)

Blocked user returns

Not sure if you saw the update above, but this user is now hitting the gas and increasing the disruption after I'm sure they saw me post here. If you could take a look, it would be greatly appreciated. --GoneIn60 (talk) 17:36, 22 November 2020 (UTC)

No, sorry, I didn't see that.  Confirmed to Vertical Venom. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 18:11, 22 November 2020 (UTC)

Another occurrence

It didn't take long, but here we go again. This edit is nearly identical to the edits made by Vertical Venom here and here, and originally by an IP here. The only problem of course is that 206.173.105.94 doesn't geolocate to the same area as 207.229.102.17, the range that the previous activity came from, but I'm confident this is the same editor. I suppose I could pursue page protection, but it will likely spill over to other articles. Thoughts? --GoneIn60 (talk) 02:54, 25 November 2020 (UTC)

Yeah, seems to be going on about the same stuff. Blocked for a week. I also semi-protected the page for a week. Maybe it'll help. I guess we'll see. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 03:28, 25 November 2020 (UTC)
Thank you, much appreciated! --GoneIn60 (talk) 03:31, 25 November 2020 (UTC)

Mail

Well, now there is an SPI opened, so the question in my mail to you may not be so important. But I'd still like to know the appropriate threshold when there's no SPI! Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 02:57, 23 November 2020 (UTC)

Likely sock of IP you blocked

Hi NinjaRobotPirate. I came across an IP that is making comments [87], [88] similar to those by an IP you blocked for long-term WP:NOTFORUM violations, on the same talk page, Talk:2020 United States Senate election in Arkansas. It seems very likely that this IP is a sock of the blocked IP. Please block the new IP if you agree with my assessment. Thanks.

Previously blocked IP: 62.226.81.185 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
New IP: 80.131.50.43 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)

― Tartan357 Talk 17:23, 23 November 2020 (UTC)

Yeah, that's got to be the same person. Note to self: that's Special:Contributions/62.226.64.0/18 and Special:Contributions/80.131.48.0/20. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 22:42, 23 November 2020 (UTC)

Likely New Account of Azerati83 and Php2000

Hi NinjaRobotPirate, I'm Hobomok, and I've recently dealt with a sock you just blocked, Php2000, over at Spanish colonization of the Americas and Genocide of indigenous peoples along with an anonymous ip Php2000 seemed to be working alongside. There have been some recent edits there by a couple of recently created accounts (mainly User:Frijolesconqueso), which began editing over at the Genocide of Indigenous Peoples' page shortly after Php2000 and the anonymous ip were banned (in fact, the account was created the day the anonymous ip was banned).

For example, the new user came back three days after creation to add a questionable source that multiple editors had removed previously when anonymous ip insisted on adding it earlier this month. You'll also note that the anonymous ip deleted the link to Clifford Trafzer's book in that edit, which the new user also tried to remove. The edits in question there were related to similar edits at Spanish Colonization of the Americas and sources called into question by those two previously banned users. For example, the ip user's removal of material here, Php2000 arguing that genocide should be removed from the lead shortly after on the talk page, and the new user's removal of similar, if not in some cases the same, material here. In short, I believe those previously banned accounts have reappeared and are working to undermine those pages again, which seems to be a persistent issue by one editor (Azerati83 and their growing list of socks) who has been banned multiple times and continues to make and remake sock puppet accounts after being banned. Would you mind stopping over there, or at this sockpuppet investigation I opened into the matter and taking a look at this issue so that both pages can return to normal and be edited normally? Thank you. --Hobomok (talk) 18:51, 23 November 2020 (UTC)

Hobomok I am disengaging with your frantic attempts to have me banned from Wikipedia, since they are a waste of our time and futile in the long-run. False or unverified information based on misconstrued sources will eventually disappear or be corrected, whether I'm here or not and no matter how ardently any specific editor aims to push a point of view. Wikipedia is, after all, a collective effort. I suggest you do not dedicate so much of your time to replacing a statement which is so indisputable it has remained stable for three years for one which is simply false yet closer to your personal world view. It is a humble request. Research, read up on the topic, challenge your own views and accept that there are certain periods of history which have more nuance than a 45 minute documentary on the History Channel. Think that Wikipedia is an educational resource for hundreds of millions of users who expect it to accurately reflect all of the most authoritative sources on specific topics. Don't look for obscure sources to support your own views as you have been doing but rather find the best sources to see how they can be best be reflected on Wikipedia. This way we will have a great free online encyclopedia we all can trust. For you it will also be a fulfilling experience where you learn new things.Frijolesconqueso (talk) 18:53, 23 November 2020 (UTC)
It looks like the SPI case is already being attended. It's probably best to keep the evidence over there instead of splintering the discussion. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 23:38, 23 November 2020 (UTC)

Removed addition for no reason

I made an addition to the article Shark Tale. It was removed because this user believed the addition was biased, which is not true. I simply said the movie received bad reviews from critics, which is true. I never entered my own opinion, I simply said that critics panned the movie. Most articles on a movie usually state how the movie was received by critics in the opening paragraphs. I was just repeating that aspect in this article, and it was for some reason removed. 107.5.19.153 (talk) 20:02, 23 November 2020 (UTC)

You're saying that the film was hated by every critic, but Metacritic says it received "mixed or average reviews". So, obviously your unsourced statement isn't going work in the lead. However, Rotten Tomatoes has it listed as "rotten". Maybe there's no consensus as such that belongs in the lead. One could, however, neutrally report what the two aggregators say without putting your own analysis on top of them. In this case, what I usually suggest is something like "The film received mixed reviews on Metacritic, and Rotten Tomatoes called it derivative." Rotten Tomatoes only recognizes the existence of "positive reviews" and "negative reviews" – there's no such thing as "mixed" on Rotten Tomatoes. Thus, the two aggregators often disagree with each other, which makes sweeping generalizations about the reception difficult to support. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 23:48, 23 November 2020 (UTC)

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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

If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:40, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

I like the old anarchist adage "don't vote; it only encourages them". NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 06:10, 26 November 2020 (UTC)

Block evasion

FYI Think about WP before you revert is an obvious sock of Think before you revert. Dylsss(talk contribs) 23:44, 25 November 2020 (UTC)

Yeah, seems a bit obvious. He'll probably be around a few more times. He's an edit warrior. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 02:31, 26 November 2020 (UTC)

73.38.205.168

user:73.38.205.168 is attemtping to make threats of violence according to the filter. CLCStudent (talk) 13:19, 27 November 2020 (UTC)

Blocked 3 days. I could probably go longer with a Comcast IP, but that'll hopefully get the point across at least. Can do a longer one if he comes back with more of the same. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 13:27, 27 November 2020 (UTC)

Beyoncé Talk

Is it okay for an editor to alter my own edit this way? [89] There is currently a dispute involving one editor, isento. That editor, according to me and Bgkc4444, is being belligerent in their tone, and they've now opened an RfC when one was opened just three months ago in regards to the lead of the article. If there were one more RfC, it should for now only pertain to the infobox. Some editors may oppose to "songwriter" being in the lead but not the infobox. The way the question is formulated, it could lead editors to vote "No" for the infobox just because they'd vote "No" for the lead. Israell (talk) 20:45, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

Striking someone's comment is a violation a WP:TPO, but it looks like Isento was already warned about that. RFCs are supposed to be "neutral and brief". Three months seems like a legitimate amount of time to wait before opening a new RFC, as long as it's not happening every few months. That would get kind of disruptive, I think. Consensus can change, but nobody wants to get stuck arguing the same point indefinitely. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 06:11, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

isento has now been blocked for 72 hours due to further conflicts. [90] [91] Israell (talk) 21:32, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – December 2020

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

Administrator changes

removed Andrwsc • Anetode • GoldenRing • JzG • LinguistAtLarge • Nehrams2020

Interface administrator changes

added Izno

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Arbitration

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:37, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

Blaine quickcheck

In response to Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard#User: Ferret, could you please check Blaine2020, Blaine2025 and BlaineStu2025? Very ducky. BlaineStu2025 referenced Blaine2020 on their user talk page. Blaine2025 is globally locked, a week before BlaineStu2025 was started. -- ferret (talk) 04:12, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

Yeah, they're part of a Blaine sockfarm:
Also some logged-out vandalism. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 06:48, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

Stinky sock

User:Dangerous_User smells a lot like User:HowToGetAwayWithAnnoyingEditors and User:Superstar999.

New user, with several edits so far adding reviews from Common Sense Media, and adding Accolades tables. Similar pattern of edits but a little bit more restrained so possibly a different editor, I expect with admin tools it will be much more obvious to you if this is a sock or not. -- 109.76.211.124 (talk) 14:49, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

Yeah, plus Special:Contributions/Santa Better Put Me On The Good List. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 17:31, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

Sock of Tbone49

Hey! I don't think we've spoken much before, or that I've asked you to investigate any users I suspect of being sock accounts—I used to report all socks I suspected to Ad Orientem before he retired. However, I've kept an eye on the account Tefjohn Don for the past few weeks for being a sock account of Tbone49, whose accounts were previously blocked by Bbb23, and I discussed with another user earlier today that I think there may be sleeper accounts I'm not aware of and so forth. Knowing this user, they may have already moved on. This user is very prolific, editing articles for contemporary pop music every day, mostly from their mobile device (which is a characteristic to easily identify them on the articles they frequent), and they have also edited from IP addresses located in Canada (199.7.159.25 is still blocked). Would you be able to look into it? I reported it to Ad Orientem via email, who passed it on to Drmies, but I'm not sure anything has/will come of that. Thanks. Ss112 14:46, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

Can you post some diffs that demonstrate the accounts are related? toollabs:sigma/editorinteract.py might be useful for that. Some stuff is just so obvious that it doesn't need evidence, like the screamy edit summaries by Nate Speed. But I don't really know this case, so I need some help to see the connection. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 08:50, 5 December 2020 (UTC)
The best kind of smoking gun is edits like this to Ava Max discography from the IP address 199.7.159.25 that they've used that you blocked in a wide CU block in October, and the same summary and behaviour from Tefjohn Don here, removing another source with the same summary. Their main edits are to discographies (they like Ava Max discography), and to add new releases by pop music artists where they will use Apple Music as a citation, like this by Tbone49 and this by Tefjohn Don. Using Toolforge, their major interests crop up around the amount of times both users have edited Major Lazer discography and Music Is the Weapon, an album by Major Lazer. As I pointed out, you'll find most of Tefjohn Don's edits are tagged with "Mobile edit, Mobile app edit, Android app edit", which is a substantial portion of Tbone49, Thatboi99, and the edits of the IP editor you blocked also. I'm sure a CU would reveal they all geolocate to the same area of Canada. The problem with these pop music editors is that they are not outright vandals or the sorts of editors who try to make the same changes to articles using different accounts. They will go to whichever pop artist has a new release and update those articles, which is the main way to identify them. Ss112 10:25, 5 December 2020 (UTC)
Policy makes it difficult to comment on CU blocks, but I can say that the CU block on 199.7.156.0/22 was because of a different sock puppetry case. I think there's enough behavioral evidence to block Tefjohn Don, though. If there's a history of using multiple accounts at the same time, I could check for sleepers. But, unfortunately, the other Tbone49 accounts are all stale. When that happens, some of the information is lost forever, but some data can be occasionally found buried in old log files. So it's not always a waste of time to run a check on a stale case, but it often is. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 11:05, 5 December 2020 (UTC)

Mad Max

Hi,

I don't know how else to get your attention so I'll put this here and you can make a new thread regarding it.

So here goes, I am from Victoria, Australia and am the biggest Mad Max fan you'll find. Anyway, I'm letting you know that no part of the 1st movie was shot anywhere outside of Victoria. No scene was shot at Stockton Beach in NSW. A previous film staring Mel Gibson and Steve Bisley called Summer City was, but rest assured no part of Mad Max was.

Also, I drive past several of the shooting locations on a regular basis as well as living that close to one of them I can see it and can tell you they were done at the following rural localities/ towns.

Exford, Balliang East, Quandong and Maddingley. I have no idea why you keep removing that and why you keep putting up Stockton when the last slide of the final credits says filmed on location in Victoria, Australia.

I can only assume you don't live in Victoria or even Australia because those who live close to the filming locations know where they are. A google street view search will show you Exford Rd, Exford is where the tanker is highjacked, that McCormicks Rd and Balliang- Bacchus Marsh rd in Maddingley are where 2 scenes involving the black interceptor were filmed and that Ballan Rd in Quandong heading east was were Max's family were killed.

Regards,

In the know — Preceding unsigned comment added by 1.136.109.243 (talk) 10:33, 5 December 2020 (UTC)

Well, the problem is that Wikipedia is written according to what reliable sources say. I can look into the article and the sourcing later (it certainly happens that sometimes someone adds wrong information), but the problem is that you're removing sources and replacing them with unsourced content. I understand that Wikipedia can be frustrating when you're sure that you're right about something. However, we have no way of knowing whether you are right or not. So, that's why we insist on adding citations. See Referencing for beginners for some help on that. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 10:42, 5 December 2020 (UTC)

"Has a percentage"

She's back again: Special:Contributions/186.30.183.45 -- 109.78.196.134 (talk) 02:33, 6 December 2020 (UTC)

James Veitch

I'm quite naive when it comes to these things but this is the biggest duck I've ever seen: Bromberg721. Thought you might be able to help given your past action at this page. — Bilorv (talk) 21:10, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

Looks like Ross kramerov to me. He's suspected of being a paid editor, so it's likely more people will randomly pop up to say, "Hello, I'm totally not a sock puppet or paid editor, but shouldn't we rewrite this article to be a glowing endorsement?" NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 21:55, 7 December 2020 (UTC)
Cheers, good to know. — Bilorv (talk) 00:09, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

UTRS

Hello,

Please could you look at this appeal on UTRS? You're the blocking admin and your input would be appreciated. I don't know whether or not to unblock the user or whether or not to restore TPA to allow an appeal there.-- 5 albert square (talk) 22:10, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

Sorry, I don't use UTRS. Is that Special:Contributions/2600:8804:1000::/48? That's actually Mz7's block, but I did the previous block (and revoked talk page access this time). If the IP editor is saying "it wasn't me", then enabling talk page access would be a waste of time. There aren't two different people edit warring in cartoons on that IP range. Otherwise, it'd probably be OK to enable talk page access. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 22:34, 7 December 2020 (UTC)
Ah sorry I thought you used UTRS for some reason. Yes it is-- 5 albert square (talk) 00:40, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

Username with a curious resemblance to yours

Just thought you may want to keep an eye on User:TechnoRobotPirate - they've done nothing wrong so far and I'm going to assume good faith, but the resemblance of their username to yours and perfect first edit to their userpage has made me suspicious. Other than that, sorry to bother you. Thanks :-) Pahunkat (talk) 17:22, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

Huh. Well, could be coincidence, I guess. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 17:32, 8 December 2020 (UTC)
Or not. Suffusion of Yellow (talk) 22:03, 8 December 2020 (UTC)
Yeah, it's PoliceOfficer124. Maybe I've blocked more of his socks than the other CUs? NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 23:37, 8 December 2020 (UTC)
Can't see the filter logs but it was a sock in the end. Glad they didn't cause much damage and we caught them before they could do more. Pahunkat (talk) 08:38, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

Another sockpuppet of Lemaroto?

Hey, there. Thelameavenger (talk · contribs) is continuing the same edits as Talkingaboutvinny (talk · contribs) ([92], [93], [94], [95]). I suspect that Thelameavenger might be yet another sockpuppet of Lemaroto (talk · contribs), based on their history. Can you please look into this? Thanks. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 20:34, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

Yeah,  Confirmed to Lemaroto. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 20:54, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

scribtor

I'm dying from laughter after combing through the sources, you're definitely right about the lack of technical relation but look at this url that they just added as a source, ctrl+f wiki. I'm cracking up. Praxidicae (talk) 16:20, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

Also @MER-C:. Dying over here. You'll get a kick out of this. Praxidicae (talk) 16:21, 11 December 2020 (UTC)
Yeah, these guys seem kind of incompetent. I remember seeing that sort of thing before, where they post something that's totally legit but includes links to UPE services. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 16:55, 11 December 2020 (UTC)
Yes, very much so. I think you'll find quite a few UPE articles from looking at what else cites the "sources" used in that article. MER-C 19:23, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

Sockpuppetry

Hardcore Legend Mic Foley a new account disrupting same article that was disrupted earlier by sockpuppet of an editor Rajanrao Shankar..is there a connection btwn two? Plz also check Aristocratic 536 Heba Aisha (talk) 03:25, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

You would need to show evidence in the form of diffs that makes it really obvious. It looks like I was at least tangentially involved in blocking one of those editors, and I apparently knew what I was talking about a few weeks ago. However, I don't remember anything about that any more. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 03:54, 12 December 2020 (UTC)
Thanks but he is blocked..I was correct, he was a sockpuppet but of a different person. SpacemanSpiff blocked him.Heba Aisha (talk) 05:23, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

Persistent editor returns

Looks like our favorite Whac-A-Mole editor is back! Recently-created User:Medusa1999 has already hit a few of the same articles. They post refs to newspaper.com that were clipped by "masonkim" and use images posted by Wacky Windjammer like the other socks. --GoneIn60 (talk) 08:14, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

 Confirmed. Good detective work. I'll see if I can do a range block or something. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 16:24, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

Reporting Pmcgvn

Pmcgvn (talk · contribs)

This editor keep adding unsourced content and also edit warring in Man on the Moon III: The Chosen [96] [97] [98] [99] [100] [101]. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 20:02, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

I would have probably shuffled this report over to some noticeboard except that this edit pretty clearly says the editor intends to continue doing this indefinitely. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 20:18, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
I wouldn't be surprised if this editor try to evade their block over this. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 20:33, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
The editor made this comment at their talk page, should this considered civil? TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 19:29, 15 December 2020 (UTC)
I'd suggest just letting stuff like that go. We can consider that, along with all the other petty stuff, when Pmcgvn starts editing again. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 19:58, 15 December 2020 (UTC)
Okay. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 20:01, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

Possible block evasion by 121.164.96.12

I believe that the IP, 121.164.96.12 is a sockpuppet of 182.228.204.130 who you've previously blocked for block evasion since this IP frequently uses Morocco World News as a source like the latter and even having the same excessive usage of exclamation marks at the end of their edit summaries.The Peoples Front of Judea (talk) 19:51, 16 December 2020 (UTC)

Yeah, it's someone who uses a VPN to evade blocks. He's easy to identify but very persistent. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 23:20, 16 December 2020 (UTC)

Sent a message!

Hello, NinjaRobotPirate. 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.

Persistent editor: Round 10

Finding it harder to get creative with section titles! User:Bradley026258 (the masonkim newspaper bandit) has returned and went straight for the Volcano coaster article in this edit. Aside from the usual block, would appreciate if you could protect that page again, perhaps for a month this time. Thanks! --GoneIn60 (talk) 05:13, 19 December 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected them all for a month. Maybe that'll help. The persistent ones are annoying, but people don't get indeffed for playing nicely. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 05:29, 19 December 2020 (UTC)
Understood. On occasion, they do make helpful edits that push articles in the right direction. It's just frustrating when they ignore discussion and repeat the unhelpful edits over and over. Appreciate your time...yet again! --GoneIn60 (talk) 05:54, 19 December 2020 (UTC)

Update 12/21/20

More of the same:

Out of the ones the editor hit this time, it might only be worth protecting Flight of Fear and Batman & Robin: The Chiller. They frequent those often. I'll do my best to sift out the junk and retain what's useful. --GoneIn60 (talk) 06:32, 21 December 2020 (UTC)

Both semi-protected for a month. I think I can get some range blocks in, too. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 08:19, 21 December 2020 (UTC)

Obvious sock

Nandanavijayan is a sock of Adhithya Kiran Chekavar who has been banned from editing anything related to social or ethnic groups of India including castes as well as history of Kerala. Othayoth shankaran too, but not tagged.

Chekavar: [102][103][104][105]

Kottakkal Kanaran Gurukkal: [106][107][108][109]

Advocacy and creation of Thiyyar article: [110][111][112][113][114](1st)[115] (2nd)

User:Unniyarcha and [116]

Ezhava: [117][118]

Creation of Thiyyar Regiment: [119][120][121]

Please consider this report. Additionally, Kalari Poothara (not blocked) is also a sock: [122][123]. Kalari Poothara vs Othayoth shankaran: [124][125], [126][127]. After Nandanavijayan's edit got reverted, they switched account and came back as Kalari Poothara [128] (both were online around the same time, see contribution history), that image was originally uploaded by Othayoth shankaran.--157.44.183.111 (talk) 14:45, 19 December 2020 (UTC)

I suggest you file a case at WP:SPI. I don't know anything about this. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 19:49, 19 December 2020 (UTC)

My Quick Check for December

Hey NRP! So Discret User caught my eye in the last week or two. It felt very familiar but I couldn't place a name. After a little more digging, I've come to suspect this is one of PlayerSacha's (and/or their suspected sock Superstar999). The edit note style, as well as the rough size of edits and experience with our templates, seems to fit, as does the topic areas. -- ferret (talk) 02:00, 23 December 2020 (UTC)

Yes, almost certainly the same as PlayerSacha. It looks like I was right about PrincessPeachWriter, too. PPW just showed up on the same IP range. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 02:21, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
You'll notice an unblock request. I won't detail here, but the request itself contains another behavior clue that convinces me 100% that the sockmaster is correctly tagged. -- ferret (talk) 03:42, 23 December 2020 (UTC)

Yo Ho Ho

Donner60 (talk) is wishing a foaming mug of Seasons Greetings! Whether you celebrate your hemisphere's Solstice or Christmas, Diwali, Hogmanay, Hanukkah, Lenaia, Festivus or even the Saturnalia, this is a special time of year for almost everyone!

Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{subst:User:WereSpielChequers/Dec20}} to your friends' talk pages.

Block duration for 124.169.242.95

Hi NinjaRobotPirate, thanks for your help with blocking 124.169.242.95 for disruptive editing. I don't know if this is the right place to bring this up or if ANI is more appropriate, but I wonder, though, if a week-long block is sufficient. The editor you blocked is one who has been making disruptive edits and hopping between IPs since at least October (see ANI discussion). The editor has ignored all warnings and attempts to discuss and provides no explanation with their edits. The IP-hopping makes it complicated to track all of the edits and the article and user talk page attempts to discuss. In response, a range of IPs, 124.169.224.0/19 (which includes 124.169.242.95), was blocked for one week and when they resumed the same disruptive editing behavior after that block expired, the range was blocked again for two weeks (see block log). Now that they have resumed the same disruptive editing behavior as soon as the two-week block expired and have been blocked again by you, I wonder if a substantially longer block is warranted (if not on the same range, then at least for this specific IP). Another individual IP within that range has also had separate blocks previously assigned (124.169.237.27 for 31 hours and again for 60 hours), although they have long since expired and the editor has not tried to edit again from that or other previous IPs. Pinging 5 albert square, Ivanvector, and Materialscientist as the admins who imposed the previous blocks in case they might have any other information to offer. Again, if this is more appropriately brought up at ANI or another forum, let me know. Thank you. – 108.56.139.120 (talk) 05:07, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

Well, I can try a month-long range block on 124.169.224.0/19. I don't think I saw the previous range blocks. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 05:21, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

Request to undo reverts on the Zahran tribe page

All the information that has been reverted by you was correct, and it bugs me to think that just because a user who evaded a block provided this correct information means that no one can also provide it even if it’s correct since someone who evaded a block added it first... How should this community add the correct information if it’s always locked up by you and is reverted whenever real information is added. Post Chlorophyll (talk) 13:34, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

Jude Law

Jude Law

Semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism. FloorMadeOuttaFloor (talk) 14:18, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

I did a range block. Should stop the vandalism. Depending on the time of day, you might get faster service from WP:RFPP. I guess I've been pretty active on Wikipedia around 04:00 UTC lately. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 05:27, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

Back at it

Hello NRP. After previous blocks 73.246.55.108 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) has gone right back to altering run times etc without providing an explanation or source for the changes. Best wishes to you and yours for 2021! MarnetteD|Talk 18:43, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) @MarnetteD: Blocked. -- ferret (talk) 18:52, 28 December 2020 (UTC)
Thnk you ferret. Best wishes to you as well. MarnetteD|Talk 18:55, 28 December 2020 (UTC)
There seems to be an increasing number of vandals who target infoboxes now. It makes me wish we could semi-protect infoboxes. Thanks for noticing that and taking care of it. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 23:39, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

reported proxy

I've found an IP belonging to an open proxy, 41.223.141.82, and I'd like to report it to a sysop who often blocks proxies and web hosts, like you. It's a proxy from Botswana and its subnet is 41.223.141.0/24, but there might be other subnets inside the net 41.223.0.0/16. You're also a checkuser, when you block it I suggest you to search for possible sockpuppets too, proxies are often used also for that and a check should be a standard procedure when dealing with proxies. Naragni (talk) 18:49, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

Try Wikipedia:WikiProject on open proxies. Usually, when people are on proxies, there's some racist (or, at the very least, nationalist) disruption related to petty politics on some other continent. This looks like people from Botswana editing topics about Botswana. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 00:14, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

Reporting Sweetdeeppurple

Sweetdeeppurple (talk · contribs)

This editor is genre warring in the articles The College Dropout and Late Registration, and also edit warring as well [129] [130] [131] [132] [133] [134]. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 07:03, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

Why are your edits dated to 30 January 2020? That was almost a year ago. Anyway, I blocked the editor as sock of MariaJaydHicky. There's some pretty suspicious crossover with Rashawnna. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 10:21, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
Sorry about that, I copy and paste my signature and didn't pay attention to that. Thanks for pointed that out. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 10:36, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

Sleepless box office performance

Would this consider the film as a bomb? I know some people will say the film made money, but they definitely spent money on ad costs, so it has to be a loss.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 2019AlwaysLit (talk • contribs) 07:09, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

In this discussion, consensus seems to be that bombreport.com is not a reliable source. If it's really a box office bomb, it will be all over Variety, The Hollywood Reporter, the Los Angeles Times, etc. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 09:46, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

https://variety.com/2017/film/reviews/sleepless-review-jamie-foxx-1201959388/ 2019AlwaysLit (talk) 19:11, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

That's a film review. What about it? Seriously, you need to stop adding your own opinions to Wikipedia articles. If you can't find a reliable source to summarize, just leave it out of the article. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 00:16, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

Block evasion

Hi NRP. I see you blocked Sweetdeeppurple here for being a sock of User:MariaJaydHicky. This "new" user is now making identical edits to the same articles as can be seen here, here and here for example. A possible sock? Robvanvee 19:37, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

Curious George 2

Wouldn't box office gross go under reception, and DVD sales go under release?

Happy New Year

Pratyush.shrivastava (talk) — is wishing you a Happy New Year! It's the last day of 2020 and tomorrow will be 2025. Hope the coming year brings pleasures for you. Have a prosperous, enjoyable and a productive 2025. This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year! -- Pratyush.shrivastava (talk) 18:20, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

Spread the New Year cheer by adding {{subst:New Year 2}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:NinjaRobotPirate/Archive2020-2&oldid=998002217"