Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors/Backlog elimination drives/March 2022
Appearance
Sock account
[edit]Emir Shane, who participated in this drive, has been blocked as a sockpuppet account; see the account's talk page. Cheers, Baffle☿gab 18:35, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
- Trulio Drulio is also a blocked sock account of the same person. Baffle☿gab 18:48, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
- They are one and the same person, according to their own admission (see User_talk:Emir_Shane#Speedy_deletion, at the end). They seem to think that they can edit constructively from certain accounts. Were their copy edits, if any, constructive. If they were, it would okay for a non-blocked editor to add them, if they've been reverted only for being a sockpuppet. Dhtwiki (talk) 21:11, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
- @Dhtwiki:, I had reviewed two of the person's copy-edits and flagged them as good but I haven't checked whether the edits have been reverted. The person's first and second accounts were blocked for repeatedly recreating a promotional article, so the person my be trying to establish some legitimacy in the community. I don't think these accounts should be awarded any barnstars, and we should probably blank their sections here too. Cheers, Baffle☿gab 21:58, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
- Did a quick scan of the articles that were edited.
- Gender roles in Islam (collective diffs): Some extra content was added. A grammatically-correct sentence was rewritten to be incorrect (
Several passages of the Quran deal
→Several passages of the Quran deals
; emphasis mine). Extra content was added in a quote without using editorial brackets. Overall, not a net improvement. - Shadow Warrior 2 (collective diffs): Introduced a mispelling.
- Human rights abuses in Manipur (collective diffs): Changed issue to insurgency, which doesn't make sense. Introduced single quotes for a piece of legislation that doesn't require it. Rewrote Anti-terrorism laws in the state have shielded security forces from prosecution to Anti-terrorism laws in the state have shielded security forces from prosecuting local residents (emphasis added), changing the meaning.
- Vikas Dubey (collective diffs): Changed force to muscle power, which sounds awkward. Some changes, like
booked
→charged
andsimilarly to
→Example text
used less colloquial language or reduced the verbiage. Introduced a teaser sentence (The real cause of the accident remains a mystery to this day
). Removed a YouTube trailer reference.
- Gender roles in Islam (collective diffs): Some extra content was added. A grammatically-correct sentence was rewritten to be incorrect (
- @Baffle gab1978: I don't think they should be awarded any barnstars (participation barnstar is up in the air), but their edits, no matter their overall value, should be noted, albeit struck out with an explanation. Thoughts on reinstating {{copy edit}} tags after examining them a little more? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 23:40, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks @Tenryuu:; I agree and my review of Gender roles in Islam (their c/e here was poor. There were a few positive changes but overall I don't think there was any improvement. Sorry, I should review more carefully in future. I don't think even a participation barnstar is warranted because the person was (and may still be) evading a block. This has happened before but I can't remember where or when. Cheers, Baffle☿gab 01:42, 1 April 2022 (UTC)
- Agree that barnstars shouldn't be awarded, especially if the edits were substandard, and even if they weren't. Dhtwiki (talk) 21:44, 1 April 2022 (UTC)
- withhold and revert Reidgreg (talk) 11:19, 2 April 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks, @Reidgreg:; I've struck out the sock accounts' entries; I won't complain if you or any other coordinator wishes to completely remove them. Cheers, Baffle☿gab 13:16, 2 April 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks @Tenryuu:; I agree and my review of Gender roles in Islam (their c/e here was poor. There were a few positive changes but overall I don't think there was any improvement. Sorry, I should review more carefully in future. I don't think even a participation barnstar is warranted because the person was (and may still be) evading a block. This has happened before but I can't remember where or when. Cheers, Baffle☿gab 01:42, 1 April 2022 (UTC)
- Did a quick scan of the articles that were edited.
- @Dhtwiki:, I had reviewed two of the person's copy-edits and flagged them as good but I haven't checked whether the edits have been reverted. The person's first and second accounts were blocked for repeatedly recreating a promotional article, so the person my be trying to establish some legitimacy in the community. I don't think these accounts should be awarded any barnstars, and we should probably blank their sections here too. Cheers, Baffle☿gab 21:58, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
- They are one and the same person, according to their own admission (see User_talk:Emir_Shane#Speedy_deletion, at the end). They seem to think that they can edit constructively from certain accounts. Were their copy edits, if any, constructive. If they were, it would okay for a non-blocked editor to add them, if they've been reverted only for being a sockpuppet. Dhtwiki (talk) 21:11, 31 March 2022 (UTC)