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
→‎SPI Case: new section
Line 113: Line 113:
== SPI Case ==
== SPI Case ==


Can you please have a look[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Aman.kumar.goel&diff=prev&oldid=1194165984] and do you think is it enough to reconsider the closing? [[User:Bringtar|Bringtar]] ([[User talk:Bringtar|talk]]) 15:33, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
Can you please have a look[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Aman.kumar.goel&diff=prev&oldid=1194165984] and do you think it enough to reconsider the closing? [[User:Bringtar|Bringtar]] ([[User talk:Bringtar|talk]]) 15:33, 7 January 2024 (UTC)

Revision as of 15:33, 7 January 2024


Question regarding reverted edits on Kanaphan Puitrakul and Discussion

Hi there. I saw you had reverted edits on Kanaphan Puitrakul's page that I had question in the discussion, and had also removed that user's answers to my discussion post. I see that user is now blocked. Can you please provide a bit more context about the decision? I'd like to understand better. I do think some of the edits to the page had merit, but others not. Thanks. SlipknotRlZZ (talk) 00:40, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The user was blocked as a sock, and their edits were therefore reverted.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:41, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

FYI, the accused sockmaster (BrightsForever) is denying this on their talk page. Since you tagged them as suspected and not CU-confirmed, I told them to make an unblock request. --Paul_012 (talk) 13:11, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – January 2024

News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2024).

Administrator changes

added
removed

Technical news

Miscellaneous


Sent by ~~~~

Your last edits seem to have left this in a muddle? Didn't revert to intended version? I'll try and tidy it. PamD 21:18, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, I think they are longstanding typos, which have been fixed previously in complex edits by socks etc so reverted. Have just fixed the two typos, and left a note. PamD 21:22, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

They have indicated a willingness to accept the standard offer and use only one account ... actually, they did that before Christmas. Since no one's responded to it they pinged me again, so I have put the request hold for input from you, as the blocking admin. Daniel Case (talk) 19:13, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Daniel Case: Sorry for the delay in responding. Do you know when the last time a CU ran a check on Sadbunny3 to make sure they have not obviously socked in the last 90 days?--Bbb23 (talk) 14:40, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No, I don't. Could you, if it's not too much to ask? Daniel Case (talk) 18:56, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'll request it: {{checkuser needed}}.--Bbb23 (talk) 19:07, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
(talk page watcher) I saw the request earlier and was already checking. They are using one connection on which they have a not-very-common (but not rare or particularly unique) device in common with a few other accounts and IP edits, but other non-technical factors lead me to believe this is above board. The other accounts lack data to say conclusively that they're unrelated, and checkuser cannot prove a negative anyway, but in the context of the unblock request my opinion is that this is a green light. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 19:26, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks much, Ivanvector. Daniel, if you think we should unblock the user, then please go ahead.--Bbb23 (talk) 19:41, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You're welcome! Daniel Case (talk) 21:29, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Request for batch revert

Hi-

I'd like to request that all edits done by permanently blocked editor Daxtonlab with "created references section" in the summary (1639 edits) be reverted or, since I'm not sure this is possible, all their edits (4107 edits) be reverted.

The first bunch creates empty References sections in all those files. His other (all well intentioned) changes aren't as bad, but none of them are improvements. They mostly introduce WP:OL in text, or make meaningless changes to "website=" parameters or add incorrect "journal=" parameters to citations.

Let me know if there's any more information I can give you, or if I should ask someone else.

Thanks, Dan Bloch (talk) 19:44, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think you should take this to WP:AN.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:44, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Will do. Thanks. Dan Bloch (talk) 19:18, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Query

Why did you remove the speedy tag [redact]? This page is not only the user talk of a sock of an LTA troll who engages in targeted harassment of me personally, the sock is using my real name. The existence of the page is an attempt at WP:OUTING and it needs to be removed entirely. And it's not even a real user talk page anymore. There is no such user name registered, (the account was deleted apparently) and the page was edited by another sock of the harasser. In other words, I'd much appreciate it if you'd just delete the page entirely. There's no reason to maintain it. oknazevad (talk) 01:20, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Oknazevad Striking my prior, digging deeper as I missed the fact it's not an account's actual talk page. -- ferret (talk) 03:02, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Oknazevad OS is aware and looking. -- ferret (talk) 03:08, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Question

So, User:Mahadeb73, thanked me for a (sequential) bunch of old edits to wp:admin.

I checked their contribs, and only see 2 edits, and on their userpage I see Government of India. So, among other things, they seem to know wiki-syntax.

I'm not sure what (if anything) there is to address, but it all combined struck me as odd, and so I thought I'd ask your thoughts on this. - jc37 17:53, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No clue what's going on, but I blocked them as WP:NOTHERE based on their extensive Thanks log.--Bbb23 (talk) 19:06, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for looking into this. - jc37 19:10, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Insert eye roll here

Well that's wholly unsurprising.-- Ponyobons mots 20:19, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Plus ca change plus c'est la meme chose.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:31, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Question

I haven't done an SPI in ages. I suspect (I'm pretty sure) that someone I've been interacting with is a banned user (master account initials FS), but based upon the past, my guess is that checkuser is unlikely to find anything. So an SPI may be a waste of time. But I don't know. Any idea what my next steps should be, if anything? - jc37 16:05, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Too abstract for me, maybe some details?--Bbb23 (talk) 16:08, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry about being vague. Just feeling unsure of my footing here. - jc37 16:13, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Not much I can say except that SPIs are often decided based on behavior, not CU, so the fact that someone is stale should not be a barrier to filing an SPI.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:15, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ok thank you. I really haven't done a deep dive into their contribs to build a case. I guess for now that waits for another day when I have more time. Hopefully they won't be too much more disruptive in the meantime. Thanks again, I appreciate your advice. - jc37 16:26, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A kitten for you!

Happy New Year Bbb23! May this new year bring happiness and prosperity into your life. With the lights of the true path, Amen.

Once again, thanks for your kind interventions on my talk page.

Maliner (talk) 08:46, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Block

@Bbb23 I understand what you mean. What can I do? Where can I report this? Thank you. Kind regards, 14 novembre (talk) 16:09, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There's nothing you can do except appeal at it.wiki. If you've already tried that and if they have some sort of arbitration committee (as we do), you can appeal to them.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:14, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Bbb23 Thank you, what do you mean for "appeal" how can I know if they have one 14 novembre (talk) 16:24, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I've asked Elwood, the administrator who blocked you, whether they have a committee.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:41, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Bbb23, The User is a well-known LTA, "Calicanto2023", blocked until October and with very good reasons. The user "November 14" is the tenth he has created and to date we count more than 20 SP (the last one two hours ago) almost all of them just to create annoyance or nonsense. He obsessively repeats his unjustifiable request and has already been answered. There is nothing to do but ignore it. --Elwood (talk) 17:29, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Elwood: I was right. Your English is WAY better than my Italian, which consists mainly of operatic phrases and my knowledge of other romance languages. Thanks for the elaboration on the user's conduct at it.wiki, but having gone this far, I'm still curious. Does it.wiki have an arbitration committee, and, if so, does it function the way ours does?--Bbb23 (talk) 17:33, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No, we don't have it (at least for now), but requests for unblocking or clarification normally come through the usual various channels, talk, email etc. and to the attention of all sysops in RAA and are always considered by multiple parties. --Elwood (talk) 18:12, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Many thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:16, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

SPI Case

Can you please have a look[1] and do you think it enough to reconsider the closing? Bringtar (talk) 15:33, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]