User talk:Berean Hunter

This user believes in equal pay for women and doesn't understand why it should be any other way.

⋙–Berean–Hunter—► ((⊕))

@This user can be reached by email.

Indian popular science writers

Please include name of Brijmohan Gupta from India — Preceding unsigned comment added by 106.223.26.79 (talk) 22:37, 30 November 2019 (UTC)

What?
 — Berean Hunter (talk) 17:06, 1 December 2019 (UTC)

U got mail

Hey Please check email for discussion regarding recent 6 month block. Thankyou Froggydad — Preceding unsigned comment added by Froggydad (talk • contribs) 16:43, 1 December 2019 (UTC)

Froggydad, You didn't mention an IP address so I cannot comment specifically about that. However, I doubt the IP block has anything to do with you and was probably to deal with other problematic sockmasters.
 — Berean Hunter (talk) 17:06, 1 December 2019 (UTC)

Probably a sock

Hi, could you check if this IP(109.226.43.148 (talk · contribs · WHOIS)) is the same as (80.246.139.172 (talk · contribs · WHOIS)). They both making the same edits. See [1], [2], [3] etc. You have blocked 80.246.139.172 for being a sockpuppet. --SharabSalam (talk) 22:25, 1 December 2019 (UTC)

Thank you, SharabSalam. They are IP socks indeed and now blocked.
 — Berean Hunter (talk) 23:25, 1 December 2019 (UTC)

UTRS request

Could you pop over to UTRS appeal #27812 when you have a chance? It's with regard to possible IPBE for an account caught in one of your checkuser rangeblocks. Cheers, -- Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 21:17, 2 December 2019 (UTC)

•  Done Ponyo and IPBE granted.
   — Berean Hunter (talk) 21:27, 2 December 2019 (UTC)

Always efficient; thank you! -- Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 21:29, 2 December 2019 (UTC)

Conflict of Interest?

Not sure what the conflict of interest is. We generally have just added current statistics that are based on Census Bureau data or our own projections / estimates. We add GreatData.com because that's the source of the info. DataPro2013 (talk) 13:42, 5 December 2019 (UTC)

DataPro2013, who is "we"?
 — Berean Hunter (talk) 13:53, 5 December 2019 (UTC)

Angelique Rockas

I have no idea why you feel the need to undo my edits, those are various fixes, for example, tweaking of words, fixing references, nothing that I wouldn't do myself. Undoing it just leave the article a worse state than it needs to be, whether the person who asked me to do is a sock is of no relevance. Hzh (talk) 19:20, 5 December 2019 (UTC)

Yes it is because that would be you proxying edits for a confirmed and now-blocked sock, Hzh. That would make you a meatpuppet, so please do not do it again. I block editors that knowingly do that. Please see this case to see the details.
 — Berean Hunter (talk) 19:27, 5 December 2019 (UTC)

No, it does not make me a WP:MEATPUPPET. I have no idea who the editor is, he or she just asked me to look at the article, and I gave some advice, fixed a few minor issues (for example, the citation needed tag is there already requesting sources). What I did is no more than what I would do for any other article where similar issues exist (for example, where a citation needed tag exists). Why leave the references in a mess just because of that? Hzh (talk) 19:43, 5 December 2019 (UTC)

This is a banned editor and now you do have an idea of who this is because I have shown you. You would be a meatpuppet going forward. You need to stay clear of this from now on. Thank you.
 — Berean Hunter (talk) 19:49, 5 December 2019 (UTC)

So you would prefer an article to be in a worse state instead of good-faith edits that can improve the article? I wasn't doing in anything controversial (fixing a citation needed tag is not controversial), neither is tidying minor issues like references. I think you need to read carefully what WP:MEATPUPPET entails, which is someone who engages in the same behavior as another user in the same context, and who appears to be editing Wikipedia solely for that purpose, and that is not what I was doing. Hzh (talk) 20:07, 5 December 2019 (UTC)

I didn't sanction you and had not warned you of anything...well, until this thread anyway. Good edits or bad, you shouldn't do it anymore because it would be proxying and you don't "have independent reasons for making such edits". You've been getting used for a while as you helped one of their socks here. This person has manipulated others and that must end. I don't fault you for what you have done in the past.
 — Berean Hunter (talk) 20:25, 5 December 2019 (UTC)

You are making assumptions about why I do the edits I do. I participated in the deletion discussion of the article for Internationalist Theatre, and sometimes I do go back to the article that I had voted on to check if the issue has been fixed or they need improving, and try to fix them, and also fix related articles related to the topic. Therefore I do have independent reason to edit this article since it is closely related to Internationalist Theatre. I do think you should avoid accusing people of meatpuppetry when what they did is not that. Hzh (talk) 21:14, 5 December 2019 (UTC)

1. You had never edited that article until you were canvassed by an Amfithea sock right here on 17 October 2018. You didn't !vote until the next day at 11:39, 18 October 2018 and your first edit to that article followed a few minutes later at 11:58, October 18, 2018 and with this edit, it was the last day that you ever edited that article...so you never returned to it.
2. You had never edited the Rockas article until you were canvassed by another Amfithea sock beginning in this thread which started 29 November 2019 and your first edit was 15:03, December 5, 2019‎.
3. I never accused you of meatpuppetry but if you keep arguing with me, I'm willing to rethink the situation. I don't buy your claim that "I do have independent reason to edit this article" for reasons listed above and I'll have to begin wondering why you are trying so hard to push back for the sake of banned sockmasters/paid editors. I suggest that you drop the stick now and make very sure that you steer clear of anything to do with proxying edits for this sockmaster...or any other for that matter. Stay out of those articles.
    — Berean Hunter (talk) 22:07, 5 December 2019 (UTC)

Bias and Abuse of Moderator Status wrt to Alleged Douma Chemical Attack in Syria

I'm sorry, but how are you qualified as a moderator with the ability to lock down a page by disputing a source, when the source is the SOURCES OWN WEB PAGE which provides a list of their funding channels. Bellingcat is a self-admitted United States propaganda channel.

Are you on the payroll of the State Department or one of its numerous Think Tanks? I question your objectivity. 173.230.187.144 (talk) 06:51, 8 December 2019 (UTC)

• You are engaging in original research and a bit of synthesis there. The consensus on the talk page is to leave the Bellingcat sources alone and that doesn't include some conspiracy theorist IP coming along and trying to manhandle that page. You haven't really produced any sources to convince the other editors there of anything...and it will take consensus to effectuate any changes that you are trying to make. Produce proper sources and discuss with the other editors there.
   — Berean Hunter (talk) 06:57, 8 December 2019 (UTC)

You are engaging in pedantry and trying to obscure the fact that Bellingcat is funded by the National Endowment for Democracy, a US federally funded propaganda tool. Is Bellingcat's own "ABOUT" page not a direct and relevant source? Why are you happy to publish their articles and accept them at face value, but not willing to accept their own "ABOUT" page. Defend your bipolar actions. I'm not convinced your qualified to objectively manage this page. Who do I contact to review your moderating actions? 173.230.187.144 (talk) 07:06, 8 December 2019 (UTC)

There was an RFC that the source should stay and I'm an admin that is enforcing that consensus. You don't get to undermine that source without some form of consensus. There was also a RSN thread that formed a consensus that it is reliable. You are claiming something against that on the talk page and that is where you will need to discuss with your fellow editors and if you can convince them then you will have consensus. I moved your thread to the bottom where it belongs. Your sharp POV editing and edit warring (I now see that you are blocked for that) is unwelcome.
 — Berean Hunter (talk) 13:59, 8 December 2019 (UTC)

User:Kansascitt1225

Hello, a suspected sockpuppet of User:Kansascitt1225 has asked me to refer to you for his claim that he was unblocked previously and should not receive a block for this new sockpuppet. Can you weigh in? Eagles 24/7 (C) 16:19, 9 December 2019 (UTC)

I don't know what he is talking about, Eagles247.
 — Berean Hunter (talk) 17:02, 9 December 2019 (UTC)

User:Hosh Noka.exe 3

This new sockpuppet of the usual Mexican TV hoaxer has just mde an appearance on eswiki. He is yet to do something anywhere else but I'm sure he's more than ready.--MexTDT (talk) 04:56, 10 December 2019 (UTC)

86.24.216.121

Further to this ANI disucssion, 86.24.216.121 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) is still refusing to update dates when updating stats... GiantSnowman 10:46, 10 December 2019 (UTC)

GiantSnowman, I hardblocked for six months. If he starts to communicate and gives assurances that he won't repeat the behavior then we can consider unblocking him.
 — Berean Hunter (talk) 11:28, 10 December 2019 (UTC)

Lovely, many thanks. GiantSnowman 12:26, 10 December 2019 (UTC)

Unblock please.

Fried baloney

I just wanted to tell you that every time I go on Wikipedia with a thought to editing something, I get a sick feeling in my stomach. People do not ask to be born into certain groups, and I was raised in public schools to believe that everyone's story, everyone's history, is legitimate, it happened. It can be interpreted it different ways, as can anything; points of view change. You have basically told me that my history, my point of view of my history, is illegitimate, because I as a Jew met the wrong person on a train. I hope you have a happy life destroying other people's lives. I will not communicate with you again and will not have anything further to do with editing Wikipedia. MatildaQ22MatildaQ22 (talk) 14:33, 11 December 2019 (UTC)

Hmm, the unblock "condition that you will not edit Israeli/Palestine conflict or Zionist/Anti-Zionist material" has destroyed your life has it? Exaggerate much? Your persecution complex is a bunch of baloney as well. You sound like a sock and if you veer away from the conditions of the unblock, you will be blocked. Further, I can rescind my unblocking of you if you are dissatisfied with the terms that you agreed to.
 — Berean Hunter (talk) 15:23, 11 December 2019 (UTC)

Yuck. Can you rescind the image?--Bbb23 (talk) 16:02, 11 December 2019 (UTC)

Tirgil34's activity on Wiktionary and other projects

Hi. Would you please submit a global block for all Tirgil34's sockpuppets (both confirmed and suspected). Some of his socks are still active and he uses them; e.g. a case like Special:Contributions/Hirabutor (blocked on EN WP) but still active on Wiktionary and uses his sockpuppet for personal attacks like this. The odd thing is Wiktionary admins and some other users of that project are aware of his LTA case & non-stop sockpuppetry BUT they still allow him editing there. As you already know, Tirgil34's case is not limited to EN WP and it's global. That nationalist troll has infected other projects too; from others WPs like German and Russian to Wiktionary and Commons. Thanks. --Wario-Man (talk) 05:17, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

You may make the request yourself here, Wario-Man. I recommend that you only list the active accounts (within the last 90 days) and link back to the SPI case as was done in this request. By listing active accounts, the stewards may find other active, undiscovered accounts including those that haven't edited here. I would not list all of the old accounts. If older accounts go active at some point then make new requests at that time.

I'm a bit busy but it is better to teach you how to fish anyway.
 — Berean Hunter (talk) 13:21, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

It’s that time of year!

Christmas tree worm, (Spirobranchus gigantic) Atsme Talk 📧 16:58, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
	Time To Spread A Little Happy Holiday Cheer!!
	I decorated a special kind of Christmas tree in the spirit of the season. What's especially nice about this digitized version: *it doesn't need water *won't catch fire *and batteries aren't required.
	Have a very Merry Christmas – Happy Hanukkah‼️ and a prosperous New Year!! 🍸🎁 🎉

• Thank you, Atsme and Merry Christmas to you as well!
   — Berean Hunter (talk) 17:46, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

blocked as troll?

hi!

it looks like i was blocked as a troll on 8.dec.2019 -- can you tell me why? i'm not sure i've even logged in to edit anything in a million years.

thanks!

136.49.29.191 (talk) 23:20, 13 December 2019 (UTC)Rothko999