Jump to content

User talk:Bbb23: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
m Reverted edits by Bobherry (talk) to last version by Iggy the Swan
Line 208: Line 208:
::::::{{reply|Iggy the Swan}} I was just told not to use the template... and I am not sure how My Royal Young page relates here. [[User:Govvy|Govvy]] ([[User talk:Govvy|talk]]) 15:58, 5 March 2020 (UTC)
::::::{{reply|Iggy the Swan}} I was just told not to use the template... and I am not sure how My Royal Young page relates here. [[User:Govvy|Govvy]] ([[User talk:Govvy|talk]]) 15:58, 5 March 2020 (UTC)
::::::I was talking about the notice on the top of the page about not adding the tags in any sockpuppet case. Perhaps I should have mentioned it in the first edit. [[User:Iggy the Swan|Iggy]] ([[User talk:Iggy the Swan#top|Swan]]) ([[Special:Contribs/Iggy the Swan|Contribs]]) 16:02, 5 March 2020 (UTC)
::::::I was talking about the notice on the top of the page about not adding the tags in any sockpuppet case. Perhaps I should have mentioned it in the first edit. [[User:Iggy the Swan|Iggy]] ([[User talk:Iggy the Swan#top|Swan]]) ([[Special:Contribs/Iggy the Swan|Contribs]]) 16:02, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

==New messages==
{{talkback|Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Guy Macon|Oppose|ts=17:57, 5 March 2020 (UTC)}}
<mark style="background:Silver">[[User:Bobherry|<span style="color:Red">Bobherry</span>]] [[User talk:Bobherry|<span style="color:White">Talk</span>]] [[Special:Contributions/Bobherry|<span style="color:Blue">Edits</span>]] </mark> 17:57, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

Revision as of 18:01, 5 March 2020


Caution
  • Unless otherwise requested, I will respond on this page.
  • Please include links to pertinent page(s).
  • Click New section on the top right to start a new topic.

New socks of Starbucks6789

Hi, I found three Starbucks6789's sock.

They both foucus on reality show's pages and make same edits especially edit tables. I started a investigations Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/24.183.100.236 and request for CheckUser, but it was declined. ——A675974811 (talk) 12:03, 13 February 2020 (UTC+8)

Northwestern Syria offensive (December 2019–present)

Hey Bbb23, seems the article Northwestern Syria offensive (December 2019–present) has been targeted by a block-evading IP editor. Today, you blocked for 72 hours editor 176.88.142.169 for disruptive editing and personal attacks. Just three hours later, 176.88.136.20 (similar IP) started editing in a similar POV pattern. At one point, an edit was also made by 176.54.10.88 (again a similar IP). His edit was virtually the same as one of those made by 176.88.136.20. Just wanted to let you know. Cheers! EkoGraf (talk) 21:26, 21 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I also asked El_C to check the article and determine if it needs protection in case its the same IP editor and he has just protected the article. EkoGraf (talk) 21:36, 21 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds like the best solution. Thanks for taking care of it.--Bbb23 (talk) 21:41, 21 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
No problem. :) EkoGraf (talk) 22:14, 21 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Its seems he/she have returned. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Nabu-Kudurri-Usur_Yaniv

He is using the same edit summary, and the same articles, same behaviour..Mr.User200 (talk) 14:04, 27 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

He/She is changing the outcome of most articles of the Syrian Civil War.Mr.User200 (talk) 14:08, 27 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you ...

February flowers
Alte Liebe

... for listening to my "uproar", on Handel's birthday, enjoy! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:14, 23 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

... today's Alte Liebe became especially meaningful after yesterday's funeral. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:10, 28 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

One of your sockpuppet investigations is the same as a much bigger investigation

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Thiyojs/Archive is the same person as Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/MusicLover650 (check all the "music programmer" edits). · • SUM1 • · (talk) 04:58, 27 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

For Your Attention

Hi Bbb23, I have created an article Named Aswathy Jwala that you previously deleted under WP:A7. she is a famous social worker from Kerala and Her original name is Aswathy Nair.but she is known as Aswathy Jwala.This is her Malayalam Wikipedia article. I call your attention to this article Aswathy Jwala Thanks-- Padavalam Kuttan Pilla  Talk  11:22, 27 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Landmark sub-headings

I would appreciate your response to my comments on the talk:Landmark Worldwide page, regarding your reversion of my edit. DaveApter (talk) 17:46, 27 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

You probably don't get thanked often enough for what you do, so thank you! With 14-year-old FA Tourette syndrome coming up on the mainpage next week, I've had enough work to do just to get it back up to snuff, without dealing with a sock, so The Thing You Do to help content is much appreciated. Best regards, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 03:20, 28 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Personalized thanks are much appreciated. BTW, what does "Typically, Derekx socks follow my edits" mean?--Bbb23 (talk) 16:51, 28 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
There's no short answer for that :) All related in that I was absent from Wikipedia for several years, and forgot who's who in the long-term sock world, and don't know the MO on most of the new sockmasters. First, I knew it wasn't Mattisse, who was known to plague me years ago. Next, I believe that Archtransit was established as a Dereks1x sock, and Archtransit was known to poke me, so that was a possibility. Third, I couldn't even remember the name of the literature sockmaster who plagued me, so couldn't check that out (still can't remember the name, Victoriaearle could remind me). And then, on the current arbcase, there was some indication that Architect was active. Long story short, I knew this was likely to be a well-known sockmaster, but didn't know which one, and I could only remember that Archtransit used to poke me, and he is suspected to be a sock of Dereks1x. I am way out of touch in the long-term abuse sockmaster department, which I see has grown alarmingly. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:26, 28 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Sockpuppetry

Good day Bbb23 (talk · contribs)!

Would like to ask for your help in looking into the activities of anonynous user 112.203.248.140 and Venny oops (talk · contribs). I have reason to believe that they might be another sockpuppets of already banned sockpuppeteer Albe23413 (talk · contribs).

In the case of anonymous user 112.203.248.140, the former and Albe23413 can be observed to add national TV ratings of shows brodcast by ABS-CBN. Eerily too, is the fact that the last activity log in Albe23413's account is dated February 10, 2020. The same date is when the anonymous user 112.203.248.140 started editing accounts. The first such edit: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:MobileDiff/940051089 is remiscent of these edits from Albe23413: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:MobileDiff/939257917 ; https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:MobileDiff/939261212 .

As for Venny Oops, similar to Albe23413, the focus of the user is to add episode titles to shows brodcast by ABS-CBN. I would like to ask for a checkuser be ran to determine whether said accounts, Venny Oopa and Albe23413 are sockpuppets of one another. It appears that the said user is trying to evade block again by employing anonymous editing for TV ratings and a user account for episode titles in order to fool our administrators that they are not in fact one and the same users. Said blocked user Albe23143 has in fact been found to have used four other sockpuppets in the past foe which he was meted out the penalty of an indefinite block, namely: AbstractAudition (talk · contribs), Kamel Camellia (talk · contribs) and Platypus156 (talk · contribs). Hoping for an immediate action on this matter. Thank you.

Warmest regards.

Gardo Versace (talk) 16:31, 28 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Venny oops is  Confirmed, blocked and tagged. no No comment with respect to IP address(es). Gardo Versace, in the future please don't use mobile diffs but ordinary ones. They're easier for me to parse. Thanks very much.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:49, 28 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Bbb23: thank you! I'm sorry about using mobile diffs, I haven't studied using ordinary diffs yet. Would like to learn more about it. Warmest regards Gardo Versace (talk) 04:18, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hey you beat me to the G11, but FWIW I was gonna deleted it. Check the history at Special:Undelete/Draft:Kung_Fu_Tea, pretty sure this is paid/COI editing; the content is basically identical. Plus it was an old redirect that got hijacked. Mind if I delete it and restore the old redirect? ~ Amory (utc) 19:14, 28 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If you like, but it was not a g11.--Bbb23 (talk) 19:17, 28 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppet: ARA SANTA FE

Hey Bbb23 can you re-open this SPI I want to add or have Allegheny1453 investigated, user is quacking kinda loud. -ie [1] [2] [3] - cheers FOX 52 (talk) 00:25, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Um, you can reopen the SPI if you wish.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:29, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Congratulations on your promotion (re: your edit summary). TonyBallioni (talk) 00:31, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, thank you, long overdue. I used the old Ponyo trick: be nice but make your edit summary clarify what you really mean.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:37, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Ponyo has skated along with these insidious edit summaries long enough. It's time she was held accountable. Softlavender (talk) 00:53, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
She's probably left for the weekend. If you wish, you can speak to her agent who never gets any leisure time: that's me! --Bbb23 (talk) 00:55, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I did leave for the weekend...and I stayed away an extra day! -- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 19:06, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The usual at Emily Bausback

Which is to say, possible block evasion. Might be time for page protection. Thanks and cheers, 2601:188:180:B8E0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 02:51, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe later but not enough for now. I blocked the IP.--Bbb23 (talk) 03:17, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

KillerGho$t

Hey Bbb23. I did ping you, but just in case...they have finally surfaced again. SPI logged as you requested. Hope it all looks ok? Robvanvee 07:45, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

When you file a report at SPI, the system signs for you, which means that pings don't work. If you want to ping someone, you have to add a comment to the report separately and sign it. I would have noticed it anyway, though, because I review what reports are outstanding every day.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:04, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Bbb23. Does that mean I should report them here from now on? Robvanvee 16:34, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
No, it means that you can file at SPI or report them here, depending on how you feel. Also, your presentation of evidence at SPI was overkill (I don't often say that). The more obvious the behavioral relationship the less evidence you need. You always have to present a certain minimum of evidence, i.e., one diff of the latest sock and one diff of a previous sock or the master, but you don't have to present the entire history of the case. --Bbb23 (talk) 14:49, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Ok thanks, I'll keep that in mind. Robvanvee 15:34, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hey Bbb23. Just for the record I have filed another SPI for this asshole. Only mentioning it here as I wanted to know if my toning down the evidence was sufficient or is it still overkill? Robvanvee 06:37, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
It's not overkill but it's missing comparison diffs, so you have quite a few diffs of the new sock but none of previous socks except a link to the archive, which is not ideal. So, what you can do in the future is side-by-side diffs, one for the new and one for previous, identify them clearly in the prose so the reviewer knows before they click on each and, as you've already done, identify the "category" of behavior. Don't worry. I have confidence in you. Eventually, you'll be the perfect filer, at least by my own standards. --Bbb23 (talk) 13:58, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Ha ha! Thank you Sensei. Robvanvee 14:48, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Very unusual number of single edit accounts, at least one blocked, and generally suspicious looking behavior for "new users". I believe it is worth a glance. Dennis Brown - 14:21, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The blocked user was a sock, but I looked at several others and there was no evidence of socking. Generally, these kinds of events stir up a lot of people, and I find that new users are far more likely to be separate people than socks.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:51, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
(talk page watcher) There is also some discussion on User_talk:El_C#Attacks_on_editors on El_C's talk.
Dennis Brown to give you a quick summary, The Pro BJP government groups (Hindutva groups) have been highly vocal on social media about this wikipedia page, clamouring for doing something to shift the NPOV balance of this article towards Pro Hindu bias. The talk page threads are clear examples. Many of these appear to be recruited by Social media posts and facebook/whatsapp/twitter groups. I would not be surprised if you find similar users/IPs who were involved in India Against Corruption saga on Wikipedia.--⋙–DBigXray 16:31, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Contesting speedy deletion of LA Latino Writers Association page

Hello! I'm new to creating pages on Wikipedia, but I'm really not clear on why the LA Latino Writers Association page was flagged for deletion. You flagged A7, that the topic was not significant enough. There are a significant number of published authors who were members and the group also published a literary magazine. Can you give me a more detailed reason for deletion? Or some guidance on how to make the page better? Spandph (talk) 03:17, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The article had very little in it. Perhaps you could develop it into something more appropriate for an enycyclopedia article. If you wish, I can restore it to draft space so you can work on it and then, when you think it's more substantial, submit it through WP:AFC where more experienced editors can review it and give you feedback. Let me know if that's what you want.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:46, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Suspected Sockpuppet

Good day Bbb23 (talk · contribs)!

Can you check the user YokieTokie (talk · contribs)? He started editing the pages that Venny oops (talk · contribs) edited after said user was blocked for being confirmed as a sockpuppet of Albe23413 (talk · contribs). Other than the fact that the said users focus on adding episode titles or TV ratings, there seems to be a pattern with the usernames that Albe23413 uses. If the user is confirmed to be a sockpuppet, this would be the fifth such other account that the user has launched after being blocked. Is there a way for us to prevent the sockpuppeteer from creating accounts over and over again? Hoping for a positive response on this regard.

Warmest regards

Gardo Versace (talk) 14:51, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 Confirmed + Great Motherland (talk · contribs · count) and Chinnypanda (talk · contribs · count). Very hard to stop socks from being created. Sometimes they can be hampered a bit by IP blocks, and sometimes they can be caught by edit filters. You might want to consider filing a report at SPI next time so at least editors other than yourself can identify them.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:15, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Bbb23: Thank you! I have tried filing an SPI report about the same user around August last year, but I kind of got lost in the rules. I'll be giving the rules on SPI some time to review. Again, thank you Bbb23 for acting on the matter with haste. Warmest regards Gardo Versace (talk) 16:49, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Similar cases

Informing you about this case since there were similar cases in past that you had closed. ⋙–DBigXray 11:09, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – March 2020

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

Guideline and policy news

  • Following an RfC, the blocking policy was changed to state that sysops must not undo or alter CheckUser or Oversight blocks, rather than should not.
  • A request for comment confirmed that sandboxes of established but inactive editors may not be blanked due solely to inactivity.

Technical news

  • Following a discussion, Twinkle's default CSD behavior will soon change, most likely this week. After the change, Twinkle will default to "tagging mode" if there is no CSD tag present, and default to "deletion mode" if there is a CSD tag present. You will be able to always default to "deletion mode" (the current behavior) using your Twinkle preferences.

Miscellaneous



Josip Pečarić

The article on Josip Pečarić is a bit of a magnet for bad behavior. Recently, Mujo France has been unhelpful there: repeatedly making controversial edits with thin sourcing, showing an unwillingness to discuss such edits. One aspect of this is that he has been aggressively advancing a negative point of view about the quality of the work of Pečarić, in a manner very similar to Vujkovica Brdo. Most of this has been happening on a talk subpage that I made to allow workshopping edits before moving to mainspace, so harm is so far limited. I'm particularly concerned about the last several edits on the talk subpage; see also Talk:Josip Pečarić. I ran the situation by David Eppstein, and he suggested SPI. Since you were involved in closing the prior investigations into this sock cluster, I thought it might be expedient to run it by you. I'm not very familiar with SPI, and will listen carefully to whatever you tell me to do. Russ Woodroofe (talk) 12:27, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 Confirmed. You can now continue the somewhat contentious discussion at the Talk page without the sock. Good luck.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:21, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I think I've found another sock puppet of User:DJdjPollard15. Would you mind checking it out for me? – PeeJay 11:46, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 Confirmed along with a few others.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:59, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hiya Bbb23, I was using TW to add IPs to the investigation due to current disruption, I am 100% sure it's the same guy. However I not sure if TW is adding them right, or not, who ever the troll is, he is very annoying, maybe you can help lock him down. Cheers. Govvy (talk) 13:39, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I hate Twinkle.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:01, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
heh, I like Twinkle, I like the features to fight vandalism, although way too many notices to pick from to smack ppl with!! Anyway, I still think this Mike Matthews17 has more accounts hidden away that haven't been picked up, switching between IPs. He has certainly been up to really weird disruptive edits. If I slap {{socketpuppet}} on accounts I suspect, does that link up with SPI? Govvy (talk) 14:36, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Do not put sock templates on any user's page.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:41, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Govvy: - see WP:LTA/MRY for an example as to the tag placement. Iggy (Swan) (Contribs) 15:38, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
That's not very helpful. Even I don't understand what you're talking about.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:50, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Iggy the Swan: I was just told not to use the template... and I am not sure how My Royal Young page relates here. Govvy (talk) 15:58, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I was talking about the notice on the top of the page about not adding the tags in any sockpuppet case. Perhaps I should have mentioned it in the first edit. Iggy (Swan) (Contribs) 16:02, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]