Jump to content

User talk:Sir Sputnik/Archive 9

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 5←Archive 7Archive 8Archive 9Archive 10Archive 11

New Amin mehraien sock

Located at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Amin mehraien. Screams of WP:DUCK. Best, GPL93 (talk) 14:20, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Hello

Hi there, though its not about the edits and issues, I just wanted to say to you Sir Sputnik to take care of yourself and stay safe! Please wash your hands before or after touch anything. Thanks! — 76.67.122.166 (talk) 15:38, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – April 2020

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

Guideline and policy news

  • There is an ongoing request for comment to streamline the source deprecation and blacklisting process.

Technical news

Arbitration

  • Following the banning of an editor by the WMF last year, the Arbitration Committee resolved to hold a Arbcom RfC regarding on-wiki harassment. A draft RfC has been posted at Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Anti-harassment RfC (Draft) and not open to comments from the community yet. Interested editors can comment on the RfC itself on its talk page.

Miscellaneous

  • The WMF has begun a pilot report of the pages most visited through various social media platforms to help with anti-vandalism and anti-disinformation efforts. The report is updated daily and will be available through the end of May.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:00, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

Draft:Atto Abbas

Draft:Atto Abbas

Hello Sir sputnik I have made couple of research and improved the article Atto Abbas on draft please check it and Check all the sources they are notable now and verified thank you .

SPI training

Hi greetings, I am editing Wikipedia since two years. Currently I'm working on anti-vandalism, NPP, article writing, etc. I'd like to work also on Sock puppet investigation. I reported some suspected users at SPI page. I placed a request in WT:SPI/C, but it got no responses. I'm writing this post as a request for accepting me as your trainee. It's entirely lies on your decision. As a SPI clerk your training will help me to improve my skills. I shall be highly honoured if you can consider my request. Thank you.--PATH SLOPU 10:12, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

@Path slopu: The lack of response at WT:SPI/C is due to a lack of need for new clerks at the moment. The SPI backlog is shorter than it's been in years. That being said, you're also not qualified. At a minimum, I would expect a new trainee to have been filing SPI cases on a regular basis for close to a year. Sir Sputnik (talk) 23:32, 22 April 2020 (UTC)
Hi greetings, I agree with you. I will try to increase my SPI works. Thank you. PATH SLOPU 15:27, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – May 2020

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

Administrator changes

removed Gnangarra • Kaisershatner • Malcolmxl5

CheckUser changes

readded Callanecc

Oversight changes

readded HJ Mitchell

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:19, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Slovenski Volk SPI

Hello, please see this [1]. The Slovenski Volk SPI just got a little more complicated. Khirurg (talk) 01:00, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

Deleting redirect 2019 Dhivehi Premier League

Hello sir. I believe the redirected 2019 Dhivehi Premier League is irrelevant to keep since the league format change for the 2019–20 Dhivehi Premier League season was announced as soon as 2018 Dhivehi Premier League finished. Here is the reference. Dhivehi Premier League Format Changes. League starts In June Thanks. ZZ47 (talk) 00:12, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

@ZZ47: Since this does not meet any of the criteria for speedy deletion of redirects, a deletion request has to go through WP:RFD. That being said, I also don't think deletion is appropriate. Since the 19-20 season is the first after the format change, the title for the old format seems like a plausible search term. Sir Sputnik (talk) 00:29, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

Great. Sounds reasonable. Thanks. ZZ47 (talk) 22:04, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

with reference to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/CanadaMaple123

Hi, thanks for the investigation and closing of the SPI. Noted that one of the puppets accidentally/intentionally wrote his email address in the talkpage. [2] Do you think a clean up and a revdel is needed? Thanks --Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 01:48, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

@Justanothersgwikieditor: I noticed that, and no action is needed. Disclosing personal information is only ever a problem, if it's not your own. I have no reason to think that the email doesn't belong to the editor who posted it. Sir Sputnik (talk) 02:15, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
Noted on that. Thanks for everything! --Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 02:52, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – June 2020

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

Administrator changes

added CaptainEek • Creffett • Cwmhiraeth
removed Anna Frodesiak • Buckshot06 • Ronhjones • SQL

CheckUser changes

removed SQL

Guideline and policy news

Arbitration

  • A motion was passed to enact a 500/30 restriction on articles related to the history of Jews and antisemitism in Poland during World War II (1933–45), including the Holocaust in Poland. Article talk pages where disruption occurs may also be managed with the stated restriction.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:28, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

Ovingham FC

Hi Sir, I am The Tuna Apple, and an enthusiast in Australian rules football. I was intending on creating a page for the Ovingham Football Club, and maybe a page for the Wingfield Royals Football Club, both former local football clubs in South Australia (if I get enough reliable sources and information). However, I saw that a previous page named Ovingham Football Club had been deleted on 14 November 2018 by you due to a sockpuppet, and the information that I have found to help create the page for the former Ovingham Football Club might be somewhat similar to that of the previous page, in which it said to please contact the user who deleted the page before proceeding. The warning said to contact you. Is there anything that I should do before proceeding to make the page? Cheers. — Preceding The Tuna Apple (talk) 08:56, 17 June 2020 (UTC) comment added by The Tuna Apple (talk • contribs) 09:01, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

@The Tuna Apple: Apologies for the delayed response. Just do whatever it was you were going to do. Whether or not you're the same person who was blocked two years ago will be readily apparent. If you're ever unsure about creating an article, whatever the reason, consider submitting it to Wikipedia:Articles for creation as draft. This way you can get feedback from more experienced editors. Sir Sputnik (talk) 00:14, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

Transfermarkt as a source

I have changed Transfermarkt to UEFA.com, but edit was again undone. — Preceding unsigned comment added by NJ18 (talk • contribs) 20:54, 7 June 2020 (UTC)

Carles Puyol

Hi. You deleted all my changes because I added Transfermarkt as one of the references. But I also had added other reference (Spanish LaLiga containing the same information). I did so, because the previous links were broken (and I just took the first two links I found - one of them being TM -, because previously there were two links). I have now just kept Spanish LiLiga's reference and deleted Transfermarkt. I also added one reference form Marca (a mainstream Spanish sports newspaper) for the height. To do so, I reverted your edition (reverting mine), because it was easier that way. SFBB (talk) 00:28, 8 June 2020 (UTC)

By the way (I deleted the link and it's no problem), but why is Transfermarkt not a reliable source (it'S accepted in the German Wikipedia)? Transfermarkt is a reputed online sports newspaper and the second most important in Germany after kicker.de. Furthermore, Transfermarkt is owned by the reputed Axel Springer Verlag, which is also behind die Welt and die Bild Zeitung among many other newspapers (which, I guess, are reliable sources). Has there been a discussion/decision on this subject that I'm missing?SFBB (talk) 01:28, 8 June 2020 (UTC)
@SFBB: Sorry about that, I guess I'm really not with it on Tansfermarkt issues today. The reason Transfermarkt's stats database is considered unreliable is that it can be edited by the site's userbase. From the site's login page: Whether player info, coach info, club info, or match report – as a Transfermarkt user, you can edit and add to almost all data by yourself. Dewiki likely still allows simply because they've not had the same problems with the site that we have had here. There was an incident several years ago where errors added to enwiki by one very prolific but misinformed editor started showing up on Transfermarkt as well, which raised serious circular reporting concerns. (Also since you mentioned BILD as a source, tabloid newspapers are generally not regarded as reliable). Sir Sputnik (talk) 01:48, 8 June 2020 (UTC)
Hi, thanks for the answer. I wasn't aware that the database could be edited by users (most likely the references to transfermark I've seen in the past are from non-editable articles). Regarding Bild Zeitung, I'm much aware that you have to careful with it, but I mainly used it as umbrella-term the entire output by Axel Springer Verlag using that name including Auto Bild, Computer Bild, Sport Bild (which I myself regarded as reliable at the press and magazine level).SFBB (talk) 12:43, 8 June 2020 (UTC)

Spam user

Hello. This new user User:Shiff7 is changing everything on Mohamed Sifan to invalid data. Can you please help me undo his all edits to the page and request him not to spam.ZZ47 (talk) 08:44, 8 June 2020 (UTC)

Ravil Tagir

Hi, could you kindly nominate article of Ravil Tagir as he fails WP:GNG, please? I request you as I don't know to apply related deletion procedures. Thanks. Isik (talk) 17:25, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

Transfermarkt

Hey. Just saw you mentioned that Transfermarkt is not a reliable source for an article. A genuine question is: why? It's got mods and content is reviewed before being posted - besides, I've seen it being used as a source for information by ESPN and Globo here in Brazil, so why isn't it reliable?

Thanks in advance. Horcoff (talk) 22:15, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

@Horcoff: Mod's or no, it's still user-edited, so counts as a self-published source, and there are circular reporting concerns. There was an incident several years ago where errors added to Wikipedia by one very prolific but misinformed editor started showing up on Transfermarkt as well. Sir Sputnik (talk) 14:28, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Suspected Wikipedia sockpuppets of Ednei Campos De Jesus De Brito

A tag has been placed on Category:Suspected Wikipedia sockpuppets of Ednei Campos De Jesus De Brito requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.

This message was automatically delivered by QEDKbot. 22:47, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

SPI request

Hello, I saw that you are an active SPI clerck. I have been included in a report at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Theedardanian. I would want the report to proceed as quickly as possible, so do you maybe have the time to assess it and approve checkuser request?--Maleschreiber (talk) 00:26, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

I am included in the same report, If approval is possible that would be great! Cheers Atlonche (talk) 00:41, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

Jürgen Damm

If Transfermarkt isn't reliable then on which site should simple stats like caps and goals be found?

@Parxpower: Soccerway is generally pretty good and already cited in the article. For his LigaMX stats, the Mexican Football Association maintains a decent stats database. But there are many others as well. Also, please sign your comments by appending four tildes (~~~~). Sir Sputnik (talk) 19:35, 1 July 2020 (UTC)


Administrators' newsletter – July 2020

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

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Arbitration

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:26, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

Deposit Guarantee Fund of Ukraine

Hi, saw you turned down a G5 but Speiko and Rommelnyk are confirmed sockpuppets with Rommelnyk the older editor from 2015 as per Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Speipk0 which is going to be renamed to Rommelnyk, regards Atlantic306 (talk) 02:58, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

@Atlantic306: I'm aware of that. However, none of their accounts were blocked when this page was created. Correct me on this if I'm missing something. G5 does not apply to all sockpuppetry. Only to block evasion. Sir Sputnik (talk) 03:03, 4 July 2020 (UTC)
ok thanks Atlantic306 (talk) 03:07, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

PineTime

Please see https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log/block&page=User%3AElfinshadow which is a sock of Dwaro which has been banned since Feb 2019; The article was created by Streepjescode, which is linked to Dwaro SPI. The article was created after February 2019, thus the creation occurred while their block is in effect. Graywalls (talk) 14:35, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

Add: The concerns raised in the section above happens to be similar. It's an evasion, because it was created by a sock that was later discovered to have been created by a sock of a user who had an existing block at the time the article was created (after February 2019). Graywalls (talk) 14:53, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

@Graywalls: The finding at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Dwaro/Archive was that Elfinshadow is not the same person as the other accounts. Sir Sputnik (talk) 17:03, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

Association Football Rivalry Draft

When you applied Delsort to put the MFD for the Iranian football rivalry into the football deletion sorting list, it somehow broke the HTML markup, which was supposed to make the list comment be small followed by /small. Well, if you look at the history, you will see that the angle bracket to delimit the /small was dropped. Since the non-ended small was transcluded, this had the effect of making the entire listing of MFD's small. It is fixed.

I didn't know that one could do deletion sorting on MFDs. I have only done deletion sorting on AFDs. But apparently the MFD deletion sorting thing has, at least once, burped. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:54, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

@Robert McClenon: Thanks for fixing that. By way of explanation, this isn't formal delsorting per se. WP:FOOTY maintains a seperate list of open discussions on the project page as WikiTable. I suspect this practice actually predates delsorting. So when I applied the "delsort" this wasn't me using the delsort template, but instead copying and pasting a stock comment, apparently without the closing angle bracket. Sir Sputnik (talk) 18:31, 12 July 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)

Cambodian New Year

May want to nip 124.248.166.69, which is pretty obviously Phnom Penh Skyline editing while logged out. This has been going on for...more than year? Longer? GMGtalk 13:56, 5 August 2020 (UTC)

Not block evasion?

Hi SS, could I please trouble you to edify me about this? I think I'm missing the nuances. Bbb23 indeffed the article creator Smjsmj89 under a CU-block, subsequent editor Ayshubiju was also determined to be related to the master, TintuArunav was (in my opinion) related to RoboShutter, who was also possible to the master, but all of these accounts were evading previous blocks, so I'm not entirely clear why the article can't be nuked. Thanks kindly, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 20:52, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

@Cyphoidbomb: This page was created on 17 May 2020, well before any of these accounts were blocked. Sir Sputnik (talk) 21:11, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
A-haaaa! Thanks. I knew I was missing some crucial detail. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 21:14, 14 August 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) 09:57, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Scam with subject person

Hi I'm Yash from India I'm a child actor some Wikipedia administrator ask me money from Publish my article sir I found you through talk page of Yash Gawli can you help me with this spam issues someone is also Miss using my information in Wikipedia as well claim my awards and fimlography what should I do and where should I contact

Thanks.... I hope you'll help me with this — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2409:4043:2D1E:37F1:0:0:B988:1600 (talk) 09:30, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

Speedy deletion on Draft:Cheang Peng Wah

Hello, I note you removed the speedy deletion tag placed by ​Robertsky. The user who created the page about the article has indeed been blocked for abusing multiple accounts. Please refer to the SPI report here. Seloloving (talk) 17:22, 21 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)

You've said that Transfermrkt isn't reliable, but it is better than not having any sources at all Brianludden05 (talk) 11:46, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

Confused

I've been lightly following this saga. Earlier today you blocked someone as a suspected sock, but on October 6 the SPI cleared him.

I'm all for blocking socks and I'm all for blocking non-socks who edit disruptively, but it gets confusing when a block log entry says one thing and the SPI contradicts in. Can you clarify and/or update the SPI and/or update the block log? davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 17:32, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

@Davidwr: Thank you for bringing this to my attention. I did not notice that this account had been previously reported to SPI. I would have, of coure, consulted Callanecc and TheSandDoctor before blocking if I had. You're both welcome to weigh in here (or by email if you want to discuss this privately). That being said, I find the behaviour sufficiently similar to warrant a block despite the technical evidence. Sir Sputnik (talk) 23:10, 15 October 2020 (UTC)
Thanks for the ping. I am indifferent here. I trust your judgement and am fine with it either way. --TheSandDoctor Talk 06:01, 16 October 2020 (UTC)
I've updated the SPI, based on some more evidence, I'd say Spotify1451 is  Confirmed. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 02:05, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

2a02:587:c455:9300:6c16:468e:54d4:695f

user:2a02:587:c455:9300:6c16:468e:54d4:695f is abusing her talkpage. CLCStudent (talk) 15:44, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

@CLCStudent: For one off incidents like this, just revert and ignore, which you seem to have already done. Sir Sputnik (talk) 21:04, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Happy Adminship Anniversary!

Happy Adminship Anniversary!

Have a very happy adminship anniversary on your special day!

Best wishes, CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 01:25, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Precious anniversary

Precious
Two years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:30, 24 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) 11:53, 1 November 2020 (UTC)

Transfermarkt

Wondering what makes you think transfermarkt is unreliable or anything less than definitive? 2A02:C7F:60A:A100:450D:F931:749F:D0B1 (talk) 02:31, 4 November 2020 (UTC)

Much of its content is user-edited meaning it is a self-published source. Sir Sputnik (talk) 02:48, 4 November 2020 (UTC)
Anything to back that up? It seems to be that the only part that outsiders can contribute to is "rumours" section. 2A02:C7F:60A:A100:450D:F931:749F:D0B1 (talk) 13:19, 4 November 2020 (UTC)
According to the site's login page: Whether player info, coach info, club info, or match report – as a Transfermarkt user, you can edit and add to almost all data by yourself. Sir Sputnik (talk) 13:22, 4 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)

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)

Speedy deletion on Big River Way

Hello, I note that you have speedy deleted Big River Way as it was created by a sockpuppet account (whom I shall not name). However, I am thinking of reinstating the article as it has potential and that the topic has significance to the Grafton area. I am wondering if it is possible to recreate or reinstate the last version of the article, so I can continue working or build upon it. I note that the articles made by the sockpuppet are not up to standard, however, I intend to/or have improved his articles, an example being Outer Sydney Orbital.

Building on a previous version will just make it easier for me. If this is not possible, that will be all good. Marcnut1996 (talk) 01:26, 3 December 2020 (UTC)

@Marcnut1996: Feel free to recreate the article, but restoring the previous content would not be appropriate. Sir Sputnik (talk) 21:33, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
@Sir Sputnik: Thanks for your response. Marcnut1996 (talk) 22:02, 3 December 2020 (UTC)


Edit violation

Sir, user 217.33.65.211 is making random edits on Ismail Easa with false information. Can you please revert the edits to the latest edited version by me? Thanks. ZZ47 (talk) 07:18, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

New sockpuppet

Hi. User Arthur Brum (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Arthur_Brum)/[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Arthur_Brum/Archive) created another sockpuppet: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/RealityIllusion. Please check. 177.142.41.77 (talk) 20:31, 22 December 2020 (UTC)

Jorge Presiga‎

Please, check the following links: [3], [4], [5], [6], [7], [8], [9], [10], [11]. This user is trying to use Wikipedia to promote himself. Since he failed on eswiki, he's now trying here and is succeding at it.--MexTDT (talk) 02:50, 23 December 2020 (UTC)

@MexTDT: WP:G5 applies to attempts to evade sanctions imposed on this project. A block elsewhere does not preclude an editor from editing here. If you have COI concerns, please report them to WP:COIN. Sir Sputnik (talk) 00:26, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

User:PPSOfficial

Hi Sir Sputnik. I saw you blocked this account per WP:SOCK. I'm not sure how you came to that conclusion, but I think Norasky53 might be a WP:DUCK as well. Both accounts were editing the same articles and uploading similar images to Wikipedia and Commons for those articles and PPSOfficial's posts at User talk:PPSOfficial#December 2020 are similar to some edit summaries left recently by Norasky53 (like the ones mentioned here and here) in the which they refer to other editors as "governors" and "communists". Norasky53 uploaded a bunch a files to Wikipedia that were deleted as copyvios; after Norasky53 got blocked for doing the same thing on Commons, PPSOfficial reuploaded many of the same files the next day to Commons. Let me know if you feel an SPI is warranted here; it seems to be more than a coincidence, but I guess that's all it could be. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:20, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

You might also want to look at User talk:163.53.197.173#Help I have blocked by admin user: Sir Sputnik since this IP appears to claiming they are Innora53, which is another one of the socks you've blocked. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:29, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
@Marchjuly: Thank you for bringing this to my attention. This all looks pretty cut and dry. Sir Sputnik (talk) 03:03, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
Thanks for taking a closer look at this. FWIW, the Norasky53 account created a few articles and drafts of questionable notability, but I’m not sure whether they should just be deleted per WP:EVADE (WP:G5) or whether they should be AFD instead. Some of the created pages have already been redirected, but the redirects would be orphans if the target articles are deleted. — Marchjuly (talk) 04:11, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
I think this person might be back again at Lourn Sochetra. New account created today that immediately starts to create Draft:Smallworld Smallband and edit other articles where the previous sock were active as well as also uploading the same copyrighted files to Commons that the others keep trying to upload. Let me know whether an WP:SPI is needed for this. -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:39, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
Update: Lourn Sochetra was blocked by another admin who also is an admin on Commons; so, I guess nothing more needs to be done here. -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:56, 21 January 2021 (UTC)

Create unprotection

Hey Sir S, hoping you can please unprotect Draft:Navneet Chauhan from creation; we currently have an AfC draft at User:Hello2ddn/sandbox/Navneet Chauhan which really should be in the draftspace for the AfC process, and thus which I intend to move there. FWIW, extended confirmed create protection, rather than full create protection, is usually more than sufficient to prevent spam in the draftspace, and makes life easier for AfC reviewers like myself. Thanks, UnitedStatesian (talk) 20:36, 4 January 2021 (UTC)

@UnitedStatesian: The author of the userspace draft is quite clearly the same blocked editor whose sockpuppetry made the protection necessary in the first place. As such, unprotecting the page would not be appropriate at this time. Sir Sputnik (talk) 23:27, 4 January 2021 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – January 2021

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

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Arbitration

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:08, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

Deletions

Please restore the page Guérin Lebrun that I removed the CSD tag from. I think you should also restore Guido II Embriaco, which I would have removed a CSD tag from had it been placed. Srnec (talk) 04:58, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

This was unambiguous block evasion, so restoring the article would not be appropriate. You're welcome to recreate the article in your own words if you think the subject is notable. Sir Sputnik (talk) 21:50, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
So are you. Srnec (talk) 01:04, 16 January 2021 (UTC)

Architect 134

Hi, Sir Sputnik. You closed Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Architect 134 because one of the accounts had already been blocked; but I had added a list of other ones to the report, all of which are still unblocked. Cheers, gnu57 18:43, 17 January 2021 (UTC)

@Genericusername57: Sorry about that. Given the lack of clearly presented evidence your report, I see no real benefit to reopening the case as it stood. I'm assuming you do have evidence. If this is the case, please refile the report with proper formatting and the evidence presented in a clear fashion. Sir Sputnik (talk) 19:25, 17 January 2021 (UTC)

Emblem of Cambodia

Hi Sir Sputnik, you protected Royal arms of Cambodia for persistent sock-puppetry recently, just to let you know Emblem of Cambodia is experiencing similar disruptive editing and protection there might also be useful. Cheers Polyamorph (talk) 13:40, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

@Polyamorph: Thank you for bringing this to my attention. Disruption on Emblem of Cambodia is not at the point were protection is warranted, but I'll keep in eye on the in case that changes. Sir Sputnik (talk) 21:51, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

User:Wikireahu

Hi Sir Sputnik. It seems as if Phnom Penh Skyline might be again as Wikireahu based their recent editing of Cambodian New Year. Looks to be trying the make similar changes that were made to the article that were made by other accounts confirmed to be SOCKs. -- Marchjuly (talk) 08:20, 28 January 2021 (UTC)


Administrators' newsletter – February 2021

News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2021).

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:10, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

Transfermarkt

Do you have a ping on refs from transfermarkt? ;) You seem to be mostly removing any ref to them. --SuperJew (talk) 19:48, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

Sort of. I wrote a simple web scraper that uses the External Link Search to find references to it in the article namespace. Sir Sputnik (talk) 20:25, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
Interesting :) Cool to know --SuperJew (talk) 06:09, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

Warum?

Wenn dies sicherlich wird gelöscht sein? WP:SNOW, nein? Do tell me if my German is as bad as that horrendous page Cheers, RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 02:10, 19 February 2021 (UTC)

@RandomCanadian: Because it's core evidence at SPI and removing it before I'm done seems counter-productive. I'll get to it. Sir Sputnik (talk)

Cypriot Special Forces

Hello, You recently deleted a "Rangers (Cyprus)", page, since its being recreated is it possible to get the old data back or does it begin from scratch? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.178.219.146 (talk) 10:34, 20 February 2021 (UTC)

Deleted recreated page

Hello! You recently deleted the page "Steve Rubanguka" because it is recreated. Last time it was deleted because he did not have records of playing in professional club against another professional club so i did understand the deletion that time. But this time i recreated it because he has now 6 games where he played as a professional football player. Can you help me recreate it? Do you have tips? Thank you very much! Jaman19 (talk) 12:38, 23 February 2021 (UTC)

@Jaman19: I've restored the page, as the subject now meets WP:NFOOTBALL. Sir Sputnik (talk) 22:13, 23 February 2021 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – March 2021

News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2021).

Administrator changes

added TJMSmith
removed Boing! said Zebedee • Hiberniantears • Lear's Fool • Only • WGFinley

Interface administrator changes

added AmandaNP

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • When blocking an IPv6 address with Twinkle, there is now a checkbox with the option to just block the /64 range. When doing so, you can still leave a block template on the initial, single IP address' talkpage.
  • When protecting a page with Twinkle, you can now add a note if doing so was in response to a request at WP:RfPP, and even link to the specific revision.
  • There have been a number of reported issues with Pending Changes. Most problems setting protection appear to have been resolved (phab:T273317) but other issues with autoaccepting edits persist (phab:T275322).

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:15, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

Transfermarkt (again)

Transfermarkt is WP:UGC and IMO obviously not WP:RS. However, it is not listed at WP:RSPS. Is there WP:CONSENSUS that it cannot be used as a WP:EL? If there is a CONSENSUS of any kind, it should be listed at RSPS. It seems to me that it is in exactly the same case as the notoriously unreliable IMDb (I've seen split filmographies, duplicated filmographies, you-name-it) - which is a permitted EL per WP:IMDB-EL. If there is no existing CONSENSUS, one is sorely needed. I find Transfermarkt invaluable in disambiguating footballers by birthdate, and in reverting vandalism (see e.g. 1, 2 and 3, from today). Narky Blert (talk) 00:02, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

Assuming we're talking about player profiles here, it runs afoul of points 1 and 2 of WP:ELNO. As a stats website, it is by no means unique. For sporting statistics there is almost always a more reliable alternative available that should generally be cited in-line rather than as an external link. Where Transfermarkt is unique is unsurprisingly its coverage of the transfer market. However, this falls squarely into unverifiable research territory with the site regularly publishing transfer fees that were not made public, and the players' market valuation being a subjective assessment without clear methodology behind it. Sir Sputnik (talk) 00:50, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

Inquiry

Hello, there is an inquiry about me in the suckpuppets section, as to whether i have 2 accounts. It's true, I have two accounts and I made a mistake. They accused me of putting other people's faces into some historical images, it was just a project with a friend of mine and I'm very sorry. I also added several high resolution content that was not present on wikipedia. I would also like to say that I only photosshopped 3 uploaded images, while the others were historical correct and high resolution images. I'm very sorry I got anxious for fear of causing trouble, I'm sorry. Thank you for your time All the bests --TommasoRmndn (talk) 11:02, 9 March 2021 (UTC)

Please would you explain your close rationale

At Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/TechSavy123 you closed it with a rationale that I do not quite understand. Yes, they are blocked for name policy violations. If we assume them to be the same person, I wonder if you would elaborate on why that is not sock puppetry. I am obviously missing something in the definition. I chose to ask here rather than clutter up a closed report with a discussion. Please ping me in any reply. Fiddle Faddle 08:30, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

@Timtrent: A block for username violations, is a soft block, that is to say a block against the account not the person operating it. The person behind the account is permitted to continue editing under a different username, and is usually told explicitly that they may register a new account. We should not then sanction the editor for doing exactly that. Sir Sputnik (talk) 13:29, 12 March 2021 (UTC)
Thank you. I understand more clearly now. Fiddle Faddle 16:49, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

spihelper

Hello Sir Sputnik, I'm informing all SPI clerks who use spihelper about the new spihelper userbox. Jerm (talk) 01:58, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

Wikitext userbox where used
{{User wikipedia/spihelper}}
This user manages sockpuppet investigations with spihelper.
 linked pages


Administrators' newsletter – April 2021

News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2021).

Administrator changes

removed Alexandria • Happyme22 • RexxS

Guideline and policy news

  • Following a request for comment, F7 (invalid fair-use claim) subcriterion a has been deprecated; it covered immediate deletion of non-free media with invalid fair-use tags.
  • Following a request for comment, page movers were granted the delete-redirect userright, which allows moving a page over a single-revision redirect, regardless of that redirect's target.

Technical news

  • When you move a page that many editors have on their watchlist the history can be split and it might also not be possible to move it again for a while. This is because of a job queue problem. (T278350)
  • Code to support some very old web browsers is being removed. This could cause issues in those browsers. (T277803)

Arbitration

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:20, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

LTA

Hello, sorry to bother you. Can you please block Klka7745556169 and Klka7745556168? Both are LTA Denizgezmis557761. --Ashleyyoursmile! 12:26, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

Same with S1O1-2O10719. Thank you! NonsensicalSystem(error?)(.log) 12:34, 23 April 2021 (UTC)
All three seem to be blocked, I've reported the socks at SRG for locking. JavaHurricane 12:39, 23 April 2021 (UTC)
Back at User:JavaHorricane. JavaHurricane 12:56, 23 April 2021 (UTC)
And User:JavaHarricane. JavaHurricane 12:58, 23 April 2021 (UTC)
And a few others, all now blocked. JavaHurricane 13:27, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – May 2021

News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2021).

Administrator changes

removed Enchanter • Carlossuarez46

Interface administrator changes

removed Ragesoss

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • The user group oversight will be renamed to suppress. This is for technical reasons. You can comment at T112147 if you have objections.

Arbitration

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:52, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

Louie Watson

You removed my transfermarkt source as it was "not reliable" why? The "reliable" soccerbase one literally says hes English StatsIreland (talk) 17:26, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

Transfermarkt

Hi, good work with removing references using Transfermarkt. However, when doing so could you also remove the content added with it, rather than leaving it in unsourced, like here? Thanks, Mattythewhite (talk) 01:31, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

No. Given that Transfermarkt is accurate more often than not, I usually don't have reason to challenge the verifiability the content in question. As such, I prefer to leave that evaluation to others who will know more about the subject of the article in question than I do. In most cases I know very little, if anything at all, about the subject. If we take the case of Shaun Wright-Phillips as an example, a quick check before removing the ref revealed that he was playing at Manchester City when they won the FA Cup in 2011, so listing that as an honour seems without further digging at least reasonable. On the other hand, the fact that it's only being added ten years after the fact suggests that there's some nuance to this that I'm missing. So I leave that to others who may know that nuance to sort out. Sir Sputnik (talk) 01:44, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Perhaps A Mission Impossible But I Have To Try.

I’m revisiting an old case of sockpuppetry, covert UPE and the worst possible sort of gaming perpetuated by Oluwa2Chainz see the archive to aid you in remembering. I am revisiting this in order to shed light on a new case I’ve been trying to put together for a while now. I would be sending you a mail shortly. Celestina007 (talk) 15:19, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

Mail Sent

Hello, Sir Sputnik. 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.

Celestina007 (talk) 15:26, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

Please explain

your edit here. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_members_of_the_United_Nations_Security_Council&diff=next&oldid=1026566028

Do you really think we live in the year 2011? --2603:7000:2143:8500:A556:F22F:837A:C755 (talk) 01:34, 3 June 2021 (UTC)

July 2011 was the last change in membership of UN with the admission of South Sudan. Hence, "As of July 2011, there are currently..." Sir Sputnik (talk) 01:37, 3 June 2021 (UTC)
It is in the past. We are to write for the reader, reading today. Not as though this is a newspaper article written a decade ago. And this is not a quote. Therefore, your revert was I would submit incorrect. If you disagree, can you think of somewhere to get a third party to chime in? Thanks. --2603:7000:2143:8500:A556:F22F:837A:C755 (talk) 01:43, 3 June 2021 (UTC)
The past tense in your formulation suggests the 193 number is no longer current. If the as of July 2011 bit bothers you, I'd have objection if you remove it, just don't write in the past tense when describing the current state of affairs. Sir Sputnik (talk) 01:48, 3 June 2021 (UTC)
No. The sentence as written, as you restored it - states only what the number was as of July 2011. So what you restored makes no sense - it is inconsistent with the year being 2021. If one were to provide a proper ref for what the number is as of June 2021, that would of course be a different story. Until next month. But frankly - looking at this again, the sentence however rewritten should be anchored with a ref .. reflecting the date. That way a reader knows that was the case now .. when they are reading it in the future, when it may not be the case.

In my formulation I did not suggest it was no longer current. Just that it was the case then. If you rewrite it with a ref as to what is the case now - you would do the reader a service by letting the reader know the date that statement was true. It does not mean it was not true the next day. But you of course are not today in a position to state what will be true the next day. It would be wrong I would suggest foryou to suggest otherwise, by not date-anchoring the statement.2603:7000:2143:8500:A556:F22F:837A:C755 (talk) 01:57, 3 June 2021 (UTC)

YGM

Hi, I got an email regarding a sensitive SPI matter that you were involved in – you were contacted directly as well but they followed up with me; would you mind having a look at the email? If it didn't arrive, I'm happy to pass on the relevant details as well. Thanks. --Blablubbs|talk 11:56, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

@Blablubbs: Please do pass the email on, because I don't know what email you're talking about. I'm assuming it's not the from Celistina, a few sections up. Sir Sputnik (talk) 23:10, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
Thanks, sent. --Blablubbs|talk 23:18, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
@Blablubbs: Could double check the username of the editor who sent you the email. When I look them up, it says they don't exist. Or just pass on their email address. Right now I don't actually have means of replying to them. Sir Sputnik (talk) 23:34, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
Emailed again, apologies. --Blablubbs|talk 23:37, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – June 2021

News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2021).

Administrator changes

added Ashleyyoursmile • Less Unless
removed Husond • MattWade • MJCdetroit • Carioca • Vague Rant • Kingboyk • Thunderboltz • Gwen Gale • AniMate • SlimVirgin (deceased)

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • Wikimedia previously used the IRC network Freenode. However, due to changes over who controlled the network with reports of a forceful takeover by several ex-staff members, the Wikimedia IRC Group Contacts decided to move to the new Libera Chat network. It has been reported that Wikimedia related channels on Freenode have been forcibly taken over if they pointed members to Libera. There is a migration guide and Wikimedia discussions about this.

Arbitration

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:46, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Reliability of Transfermarkt as a third-party source

Thanks for pointing out some of the issues with Transfermarkt -- I wasn't aware of the policy on SPSs. However. I still think disregarding it summarily is an ill-advised move. I believe SPS on living persons are only to be shunned when they make claims about LPs. However, seeing as Transfermarkt only provides a raw count of player statistics, it would seem inappropriate to apply that rule in this case. Particularly, I know TM have a body of moderators and administrators who review all edits around the clock, everything is fact-checked and checked again in very similar fashion to Wikipedia, which I would consider a reliable source. I've also noticed that Transfermarkt is supported by other non-SPSs in virtually all cases. I think Transfermarkt should be permitted as a source for player statistics exclusively when supported by at least one non-SPS, as it provides a level of detail (and quite frankly, consistency and accuracy) in that respect which is absent from all other sources. Fateful apparition (talk) 22:52, 20 June 2021 (UTC)

You're not listening to any of what I last said. Not sure what you mean by treating it "as unverified". I should point out that WP:SPS provides a rule of thumb (see: WP:COMMON) rather than a universal law. In the case of TM, much has changed over there in the 8 years since you outlawed it on Wikipedia, and on here as well. I think the current stance should reflect that, rather than ancient customs. Fateful apparition (talk) 00:32, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

I'm clearly not going to get anywhere reasoning or using common sense with you. I won't revert your edit, but just know that I will continue to use TM as a third-party source in the absence of other more preferable (non-SPS) sources. If you have an issue with this, you can ban me or whatever since you're an administrator. But you'd be contributing to the wider hegemony ingrained in the Wikipedia system, so you're advised to think carefully before doing so. --Fateful apparition (talk) 12:29, 21 June 2021 (UTC)


Administrators' newsletter – July 2021

News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2021).

Guideline and policy news

  • Consensus has been reached to delete all books in the book namespace. There was rough consensus that the deleted books should still be available on request at WP:REFUND even after the namespace is removed.
  • An RfC is open to discuss the next steps following a trial which automatically applied pending changes to TFAs.

Technical news

  • IP addresses of unregistered users are to be hidden from everyone. There is a rough draft of how IP addresses may be shown to users who need to see them. This currently details allowing administrators, checkusers, stewards and those with a new usergroup to view the full IP address of unregistered users. Editors with at least 500 edits and an account over a year old will be able to see all but the end of the IP address in the proposal. The ability to see the IP addresses hidden behind the mask would be dependent on agreeing to not share the parts of the IP address they can see with those who do not have access to the same information. Accessing part of or the full IP address of a masked editor would also be logged. Comments on the draft are being welcomed at the talk page.

Arbitration

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:27, 3 July 2021 (UTC)

Retirements and returns

The length of time something has been happening for is no indication of whether it's right to do it. A loan is, by definition, a temporary move, so the end of a loan does not need to be recorded. Meanwhile, retirements do not involve a player joining another club; for the same reason, we don't list all the players a club releases at the end of each season in those articles. If you could restore my edit, I'd appreciate it. – PeeJay 18:57, 5 July 2021 (UTC)

If it's been consistently for an extended period of time, you should not be overturning that convention without consulting others first, because there will likely be someone who disagrees, in this case me. There maybe an argument to be made about excluding retirements. A loan return on the other hand involves a player leaving one club and joining another. That's a transfer. If it falls within the club and temporal scope of list, it should be recorded. Sir Sputnik (talk) 19:03, 5 July 2021 (UTC)
The player doesn't join another club, though, they simply return to their parent club. The end of a loan is determined at its start and should be taken as a matter of course. There's no need to list them. – PeeJay 19:08, 5 July 2021 (UTC)
Just because a change in club was agreed upon ahead of time, doesn't mean it somehow magically different or didn't happen. Sir Sputnik (talk) 20:32, 5 July 2021 (UTC)
No one's saying it didn't happen, I'm saying you can take it as read that it happened. Not everything needs to be spelled out explicitly. Thanks. – PeeJay 22:17, 5 July 2021 (UTC)
You're suggesting excluding transfers that fall in the scope of the list on a technicality. Just no. Sir Sputnik (talk) 00:12, 6 July 2021 (UTC)
They’re not transfers, full stop. – PeeJay 02:30, 6 July 2021 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – July 2021

News and updates for administrators from the past month (July 2021).

Guideline and policy news

  • An RfC is open to add a delay of one week from nomination to deletion for G13 speedy deletions.

Technical news

  • Last week all wikis were very slow or not accessible for 30 minutes. This was due to server lag caused by regenerating dynamic lists on the Russian Wikinews after a large bulk import. (T287380)

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

and

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:19, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

Sock sprotect

Good morning. Could sprotects be applied to Germany national football team and Germany Olympic football team and American imperialism and Germany national football team records and statistics and Germany national football team honours, Western Bloc, Puppet state and Joseon please? It's the same guy. Thanks for your work Bumbubookworm (talk) 21:36, 8 August 2021 (UTC)

I've protected Puppet State. The others are either already under protection, or have not seen enough recent disruption to warrant protection, IMO. I am watching the pages in case that changes. Sir Sputnik (talk) 16:50, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
He's on List of socialist states continuously. Thanks Bumbubookworm (talk) 07:04, 16 August 2021 (UTC)
Vietnam was not a Marxist-Leninist country in 1945, you can check, thanks. 2001:EE0:41C1:6543:5403:64CD:AF9:155B (talk) 07:08, 16 August 2021 (UTC)
In 1945, the Democratic Republic of Vietnam was established as a primitive democratic state with pluralism, multi-partyism, a little freedom and human rights. 2001:EE0:41C1:6543:5403:64CD:AF9:155B (talk) 07:41, 16 August 2021 (UTC)

2021–22 1. FC Schweinfurt 05 season

Hello, you destoyed a number of revisions I did for this page! Please wait until I am ready.Sekundogenitur (talk) 21:17, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Kimsa_Sok

Hello. Is it possible to not tag any future socks considering that this is a chronic cross-wiki spammer and LTA? --Minorax«¦talk¦» 09:37, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – September 2021

News and updates for administrators from the past month (August 2021).

Administrator changes

readded Jake Wartenberg
removed Emperor • Viridian Bovary
renamed Ashleyyoursmile → Viridian Bovary

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • The Score extension has been re-enabled on public wikis. It has been updated, but has been placed in safe mode to address unresolved security issues. Further information on the security issues can be found on the mediawiki page.

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:46, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – October 2021

News and updates for administrators from the past month (September 2021).

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Arbitration

  • A motion has standardised the 500/30 (extended confirmed) restrictions placed by the Arbitration Committee. The standardised restriction is now listed in the Arbitration Committee's procedures.
  • Following the closure of the Iranian politics case, standard discretionary sanctions are authorized for all edits about, and all pages related to, post-1978 Iranian politics, broadly construed.
  • The Arbitration Committee encourages uninvolved administrators to use the discretionary sanctions procedure in topic areas where it is authorised to facilitate consensus in RfCs. This includes, but is not limited to, enforcing sectioned comments, word/diff limits and moratoriums on a particular topic from being brought in an RfC for up to a year.

Miscellaneous

  • Editors have approved expanding the trial of Growth Features from 2% of new accounts to 25%, and the share of newcomers getting mentorship from 2% to 5%. Experienced editors are invited to add themselves to the mentor list.
  • The community consultation phase of the 2021 CheckUser and Oversight appointments process is open for editors to provide comments and ask questions to candidates.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:05, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

Liberty Poole

Hello. I noticed that you declined the Speedy on this article as "author is not blocked, a single context free diff does not prove sockpuppetry" The tag from DarkGlow perhaps could have used more information so I would like to provide the requested context. The "author" is not actually Annamargarita0 but the banned/blocked/globally locked prolific sockpuppeteer ZestyLemonz. That user has requested AM0 to create articles multiple times, e.g., [12], [13], [14]. Those three requesters have all been blocked as ZestyLemonz socks ([15], [16], [17]). RoySmith earlier today warned AM0 against any further proxy-article creation for ZestyLemonz. The articles as they stand both for WP:DENY reasons and for the more salient fact that they represent copyright violations per WP:COPYWITHIN. I hope this information is helpful. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 18:36, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

@Eggishorn: Thank you for clarifying. It looks like someone else has already deleted the article. Sir Sputnik (talk) 20:52, 18 October 2021 (UTC)


Happy Adminship Anniversary!

Query

Hello, Sir Sputnik,

A new editor, ShahRangila, came to WP:REFUND, requesting a restoration of Draft:Qubilai Barlas, a page you deleted as the work of a sockpuppet. There is also Draft:Qubilai Barlus, which is the page creation of an editor blocked for personal attacks or harassment. I thought you might have some familiarity with this sockpuppet or at least more familiarity than I have. I'd appreciate if you could look it over and see if the sockpuppet had reappeared. Thanks! Liz Read! Talk! 22:53, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

@Liz: This is not the first time I've been mistaken for SpacemanSpiff, and I'm not really sure why, but I'm happy to have a look at the drafts. Sir Sputnik (talk) 22:58, 21 October 2021 (UTC)
This looks pretty cut dry. In the refund statement, they more or less admit to sockpuppetry. Paired some little things that I don't particularly want to get into publicly for WP:BEANS reasons, and I'm satisfied that all the accounts involved here are operated by the same person. I've gone ahead and blocked ShahRangila and retagged Imperialreal and their sockpuppet. Sir Sputnik (talk) 23:25, 21 October 2021 (UTC)
Oh, wow, how embarrassing. I don't know how I did that. Maybe I saw your name on the SPI case when I looked at it. Thanks for your graciousness. Liz Read! Talk! 04:51, 22 October 2021 (UTC)
I am happy to let you field questions posed to me :) On this, it's a rather huge sock farm, I've blocked many socks without documenting at SPI. —SpacemanSpiff 15:45, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

Precious anniversary

Precious
Three years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:26, 24 October 2021 (UTC)

Help needed

Excuse me and sorry if I am bothering you but I have reported a disruptive editor for sockpuppeting but there haven't been any progress which led me to believe that there is something wrong with the format of the compliant. I would appreciate if you could say if something is wrong with the complaint. Thank you and sorry if I am bothering you - UmdP 06:02, 29 October 2021 (UTC)

@UMDP: At glance, there doesn't seem to be anything wrong. At any given time there are usually between 50 and 150 open cases and only a small number of editors actually working on them. For a case to be pending for 6 days without anyone commenting on it is normal. These things take time sometimes. Sir Sputnik (talk) 12:26, 29 October 2021 (UTC)
Thank you. I thought I made a mistake with typing the complaint. Sorry for bothering you. - 13:04, 29 October 2021 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – November 2021

News and updates for administrators from the past month (October 2021).

Guideline and policy news

  • Phase 2 of the 2021 RfA review has commenced which will discuss potential solutions to address the 8 issues found in Phase 1. Proposed solutions that achieve consensus will be implemented and you may propose solutions till 07 November 2021.

Technical news

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:44, 1 November 2021 (UTC)

Jackpot: The IP is a sock puppet of Phnom Penh Skyline

Based on the edits he fixed, the IP claims to be Innora53 but he is actually Phnom Penh Skyline. Has anyone and you opened the sock puppet case yet? -184.146.39.97 (talk) 07:51, 8 November 2021 (UTC)

There are currently no open SPI cases for Phnom Penh Skyline. Sir Sputnik (talk) 16:33, 8 November 2021 (UTC)

Please check for significant contributions

I have made significant contributions to Gerben Wiersma, meaning that CSD G5 was not applicable. SilverserenC 22:27, 9 November 2021 (UTC)

Simply saying your changes are significant does not meant this is actually the case. If you think the subject is notable, feel free to recreate article in your own words. I would advise you against this sort of editing, systematically targeting G5 nominated pages. At best it looks it looks suspicious. At worst, it might be intentionally assisting in sockpuppetry. Sir Sputnik (talk) 22:35, 9 November 2021 (UTC)

Please check the participation of socks

This 3 IP (112.187.211.184)(106.168.123.161)(219.251.78.18) belongs to one person and constantly tags articles that are not needed with socks, and with the help of the administrator, has taken the article approved by you to the AFD.This person is constantly sabotaging and deleting articles with his game. I am sure his intention is personal. Please check.--5.124.224.172 (talk) 07:20, 15 November 2021 (UTC)

User:Mctochris

User:TheAjollaApp is CU-confirmed with that one. Drmies (talk) 02:54, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of ABU TV Song Festival 2021

Hi! I saw you declined my request for speedy deletion because no indication that this is block evasion. I guess I should have linked the SPI case, which I filed here: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Kidhackr. I think I would agree to wait with the speedy deletion until the CU request is done, but there are certainly many indications that this is block evasion (same username, same editing pattern). ―Jochem van Hees (talk) 23:33, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

@Jochem van Hees: Thank you for clarifying. If Jaiden4 is blocked as sockpuppet, feel free to renominate the page. In future please always include the name of the master account in your G5 nominations, and please wait until the creating account has been blocked. An editor under investigation should be given the benefit of the doubt until the investigation is complete. If there's pressing need to have a page deleted sooner, it will almost certainly meet one of the other criteria for speedy deletion. Sir Sputnik (talk) 02:42, 21 November 2021 (UTC)
Ah thanks, I'll keep that in mind next time. ―Jochem van Hees (talk) 10:34, 21 November 2021 (UTC)


ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

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

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

If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:25, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

Phone Bhoot film

Now, film's release date also announced please draft article move to article. Sush150 (talk) 16:08, 26 November 2021 (UTC)

I am doing the same to request unprotection. Kailash29792 (talk) 09:20, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
Per WP:NFF, unreleased films should generally not have their own articles unless the production itself is notable. This does not appear to be the case here. Sir Sputnik (talk) 03:54, 6 December 2021 (UTC)

A memo for User:Matt Smith and User:Kanguole

I am voicing some concerns that an unknown user (possibly User:Ineedtostopforgetting) operates a sock farm who edits Taiwan-related articles who claims Taiwan is a independent sovereign nation. So far, I have gathered the user socks:

Please note that these users have 1 or 2 edits with no talk page filled. Find a possible sock puppet who operates those farms (maybe a IP) and open a SPI case. -184.146.39.97 (talk) 08:27, 2 December 2021 (UTC)

Hi. Could you please explain the steps of "Find a possible sock puppet who operates those farms (maybe a IP) and open a SPI case"? I'm busier recently, but I'll see what I can do. --Matt Smith (talk) 09:30, 2 December 2021 (UTC)

History page

Administrators' newsletter – December 2021

News and updates for administrators from the past month (November 2021).

Administrator changes

removed A Train • Berean Hunter • Epbr123 • GermanJoe • Sanchom • Mysid

Technical news

  • Unregistered editors using the mobile website are now able to receive notices to indicate they have talk page messages. The notice looks similar to what is already present on desktop, and will be displayed on when viewing any page except mainspace and when editing any page. (T284642)
  • The limit on the number of emails a user can send per day has been made global instead of per-wiki to help prevent abuse. (T293866)

Arbitration


Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:25, 3 December 2021 (UTC)

Update

Sir Sputnik, did you check the section regarding the Taiwan related edits? One user popped up and reverts it then reverts back. Can you overlook it? -184.146.39.97 (talk) 18:57, 5 December 2021 (UTC)

If you want this looked into, please report it to SPI with evidence. Sir Sputnik (talk) 19:02, 5 December 2021 (UTC)

Edit war

Sir Sputnik, please keep an eye out on the Foreign relations of Taiwan article. One more move User:Shunwound makes, can you block that user if reverts again? -184.146.39.97 (talk) 15:06, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

You are also engaged in edit warring. I strongly suggest you back off and discuss the matter with other interested editors lest you be blocked yourself. Sir Sputnik (talk) 03:08, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

Administrators will no longer be autopatrolled

A recently closed Request for Comment (RFC) reached consensus to remove Autopatrolled from the administrator user group. You may, similarly as with Edit Filter Manager, choose to self-assign this permission to yourself. This will be implemented the week of December 13th, but if you wish to self-assign you may do so now. To find out when the change has gone live or if you have any questions please visit the Administrator's Noticeboard. 20:06, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

Merchandise giveaway nomination

A t-shirt!
A token of thanks
Hi Sir Sputnik! I've nominated you (along with all other active admins) to receive a solstice season gift from the WMF. Talk page stalkers are invited to comment at the nomination. Enjoy! Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}} talk ~~~~~
A snowflake!

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:50, 31 December 2021 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – January 2022

News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2021).

Guideline and policy news

  • Following consensus at the 2021 RfA review, the autopatrolled user right has been removed from the administrators user group; admins can grant themselves the autopatrolled permission if they wish to remain autopatrolled.

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

  • The functionaries email list (functionaries-en@lists.wikimedia.org) will no longer accept incoming emails apart from those sent by list members and WMF staff. Private concerns, apart from those requiring oversight, should be directly sent to the Arbitration Committee.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:25, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

How we will see unregistered users

Hi!

You get this message because you are an admin on a Wikimedia wiki.

When someone edits a Wikimedia wiki without being logged in today, we show their IP address. As you may already know, we will not be able to do this in the future. This is a decision by the Wikimedia Foundation Legal department, because norms and regulations for privacy online have changed.

Instead of the IP we will show a masked identity. You as an admin will still be able to access the IP. There will also be a new user right for those who need to see the full IPs of unregistered users to fight vandalism, harassment and spam without being admins. Patrollers will also see part of the IP even without this user right. We are also working on better tools to help.

If you have not seen it before, you can read more on Meta. If you want to make sure you don’t miss technical changes on the Wikimedia wikis, you can subscribe to the weekly technical newsletter.

We have two suggested ways this identity could work. We would appreciate your feedback on which way you think would work best for you and your wiki, now and in the future. You can let us know on the talk page. You can write in your language. The suggestions were posted in October and we will decide after 17 January.

Thank you. /Johan (WMF)

18:14, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Sir_Sputnik/Archive_9&oldid=1079578761"