User talk:Drmies

Archives

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10
11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20
21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30
31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40
41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50
51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60
61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70
71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80
81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90
91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100
101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110
111, 112, 113, 114, 115, 116, 117, 118, 119, 120
121, 122, 123, 124, 125, 126, 127, 128, 129, 130
131, 132, 133, 134, 135, 136, 137, 138, 139, 140
141, 142, 143, 144, 145, 146, 147, 148, 149, 150

This page has archives. Sections older than 15 days may be automatically archived by when more than 10 sections are present.

Zen-like is what you’ve been like.

You're right of course

I simply sometimes 'have a day'. Apologies for getting my knickers in a twist over that stuff. cheers. anastrophe, an editor he is. 23:24, 9 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No worries: thanks for the note. I'm sipping on a mint julep myself: it's all good. Drmies (talk) 23:54, 9 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for noticing. - I loved to see Marian Anderson and her story of protest against discrimination by singing on Easter Sunday 9 April 1939 on the Main page yesterday. Impressions of Easter here and music here. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:52, 10 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

My story today, Messiah (Handel), was my first dip into the FA ocean, thanks to great colleagues. - a few pics added, one day missing --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:58, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I added that day, and actually all up to yesterday. Huub Oosterhuis died, may refs are in Dutch, some facts need a ref. I'll go out now, and dream of someone having filled the blanks when I return ;) - I'll nominate now, or it may be too late. "with empty hands" --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:14, 14 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

He's on the Main page, with many red links. - Today's stories are about Johanna Geisler and Huub Oosterhuis, a singer and a songwriter. More here if you have time. - Instead of filling red links, I went for a concert. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:35, 16 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I filled one of the red links, but now Irma Blank died, and had no article. - Brighter: today is the 80th birthday of John Eliot Gardiner. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:57, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You may not be interested

But you ran across one of the editors here last year. [1]. They’re right about the conspiracy theorist though, don’t know about the rest, just the way they are going about it. Doug Weller talk 10:30, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Well, there's talk page conversation, thanks in part, I think, to User:Wee Curry Monster. Drmies (talk) 14:57, 14 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, that's good. Don't know if it will help. Not sure how much I care now that I think about it. Doug Weller talk 16:04, 14 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hump Back (Japanese band)

I was going to put the name origin story back into Hump Back (Japanese band) somewhere below the lead, but first I checked the reference. (1) I can't read Japanese; (2) even if I could use Google Translate to identify the text supporting the story, it's just a bunch of social media. So, even though it was a cute story, I can't properly reference it, so I'll let it go. Cheers! —Anomalocaris (talk) 01:31, 14 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

OK, sounds good. And if it were properly sourced I wouldn't have minded--but it's just not the kind of thing that should be in the lead. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 14:55, 14 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Moro Rebellion

Can you take a look at the editing by NmWTfs85lXusaybq on this article. There is discussion on the talk page, but no consensus (1-1), and the editor keeps reverting to their preferred version. Beyond My Ken (talk) 03:21, 18 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have protected the article and will monitor. Johnuniq (talk) 03:29, 18 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I was just coming here to let Drmies know not to bother checking it out. 3O has been requested. Beyond My Ken (talk) 03:41, 18 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Beyond My Ken's statement is inaccurate. I'm making a constructive rewrite of his material which has not been done before. That's not edit warring. NmWTfs85lXusaybq (talk) 03:51, 18 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm I just see you removing content. Drmies (talk) 14:29, 18 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The first sentence of his material has been summarized by original material and the third sentence provides no further information. So, I had to remove both of them. The second sentence can be rewritten and summarized by the material I provided, which has not been done in any of substantive contributions on Moro Rebellion made by Beyond My Ken and I. I think this kind of edit is constructive.

For more information, please read my suggestion for modification with the highlight difference on Talk:Moro_Rebellion#Merge_of_section_"Tactics"_and_section_"Controversy". Beyond My Ken simply ignores all my suggestions by a POV charge against me without assuming good faith. NmWTfs85lXusaybq (talk) 16:18, 18 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I am not against trimming that section in the way you suggested; I am opposed to erasing Trump from the article altogether. Putting that under "popular culture" is not the most elegant way of handling it; I'm sure a better solution can be found. Thank you, Drmies (talk) 18:47, 18 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your feedback. From my understanding, you're fine with the way of trimming the first sentence of his material and replace the second sentence to the summarized material rewritten by me. Your only concern is the removal of the third sentence. Putting that into a quote could be a good option. If you're still not fine with this, I will try to come up with another option later.

The conspiracy theory mentioned by Donald Trump has been included in references of Moro Rebellion and John J. Pershing. But both of them didn't included that in their materials. I think conspiracy theorists always provide different kinds of conspiracy theories which are not worth mentioning. Denying a conspiracy theory can't provide any further information. It's not necessary for an article about history to include the denial of a conspiracy theory as material. NmWTfs85lXusaybq (talk) 19:53, 18 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm putting the last sentence mentioning Trump into a quote for your concern. Talk:Moro_Rebellion#Merge_of_section_"Tactics"_and_section_"Controversy" is asking for third opinions. Could you provide a third opinion on that talk page? NmWTfs85lXusaybq (talk) 20:09, 18 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree. A conspiracy theory is worth mentioning if secondary sources make it so, and that's what happened here. Military Times ran it (from the wire, I guess), Foreign Affairs devoted a lengthy article to it, and here is a monograph--published by Springer, so YMMV, but still. I find references in JSTOR too; see this report. So, if the burden, via FRINGE, is that reliable sources discuss the ridiculous ideas of someone, then that burden is met here. Drmies (talk) 20:11, 18 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

OK, let's keep that sentence in material. NmWTfs85lXusaybq (talk) 20:49, 18 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have updated my suggestion on Talk:Moro_Rebellion#Suggested_Trimming. Are you fine with that now? Please check it again and leave your opinion there. NmWTfs85lXusaybq (talk) 21:02, 18 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Just to note, since this discussion is in regard to the content of the article Moro Rebellion, it should be taking place on Talk:Moro Rebellion, not here. Consensus discussions should take place on the article's talk page, not semi-privately elsewhere. I am therefor copying the discussion there.
My purpose in posting here was to ask an administrator to look at NmWTfs85lXusaybq's editing behavior on that article, not to start a discussion here which should be taking place there. Beyond My Ken (talk) 03:09, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- BMK, I'm feeling you, and I left my comments there. I did not see any reason to censure the editor (for edit warring, for instance) though I told them to stop making personal attacks. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 03:11, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  - No problem, I'm following what's going on. However, I just had to warn NmWTfs85lXusaybq on their talk page because they drastically altered the stuff I posted there that I copied from here. They have a tendency to play pretty fast and loose with their comments, changing them after they've been responded to, but this is the first time (to my knowledge) that they've changed material that I added there. Beyond My Ken (talk) 05:18, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I format subsections to help other editors follow it. You shouldn't have misplaced our discussion into the end of that talk page. I'm organizing these discussions chronologically. NmWTfs85lXusaybq (talk) 05:29, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    
    And when you reverted my edits, you just removed all my new comments there. Don't do that again. NmWTfs85lXusaybq (talk) 05:33, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  - BTW, did you look at my rewrite at Talk:Moro Rebellion#Chronological arrangement? Beyond My Ken (talk) 05:21, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Too much bludgeoning, too much ajida. Beyond My Ken (talk) 12:52, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

NmWTfs85lXusaybq has been warned by an admin. No need to keep this open. Beyond My Ken (talk) 06:38, 22 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Additionally, in the words of a wise admin, "This is not a debating club". Drmies (talk) 20:53, 22 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Wikihounding

Please note that the editor has started to follow me to articles that I've edited recently (and frequently), and which they've never edited before: Flatiron Building, Enemy of the people, The Palisades (Hudson River), Nazi Party. Martin Bormann. I warned them on their talk page [2], which they deleted, as is their right. Please consider warning them about their behavior. Beyond My Ken (talk) 03:11, 22 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have the right to edit these articles, because I have a good reason. Don't make such a POV charge against me. NmWTfs85lXusaybq (talk) 03:14, 22 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I am not charging you with making POV edits, I am charging you with following me to articles that I frequently edit and which you have never edited before, for the purpose of Wikihounding, something that you do not have the right to do. Beyond My Ken (talk) 03:17, 22 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

All my edits on these articles have a good reason. You are making a POV charge against me, just like you did on Talk:Moro Rebellion. NmWTfs85lXusaybq (talk) 03:18, 22 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It is not the quality of your edits which is in question -- although several went against talk page consensus -- it is the act of following an editor to articles they have recently edited which you have never edited before which constitutes Wikihounding. Beyond My Ken (talk) 03:23, 22 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

WP:WIKIHOUNDING: The important component of hounding is disruption to another user's own enjoyment of editing, or disruption to the project generally, for no overridingly constructive reason. NmWTfs85lXusaybq (talk) 03:26, 22 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

As I said, all my edits on these articles have a good reason. NmWTfs85lXusaybq (talk) 03:27, 22 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

My edits have no business with BMK. I have a good reason to support the restoration of the original image in The Palisades (Hudson River), which means I'm on BMK's side in their dispute. That's definitely not a harassment. NmWTfs85lXusaybq (talk) 03:35, 22 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Which is irrelevant, since you went to those articles in a campaign to harass me. Don't worry, admins understand what is and isn't harassment, and don;t need you to quote from the policy page that you just read for the first time. I trust their judgment in this. Beyond My Ken (talk) 03:40, 22 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It seems that you are wikilawyering. NmWTfs85lXusaybq (talk) 03:42, 22 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It may seem that way to you, but presenting evidence of a violation of behavioral policy is not Wikilawyering -- again, something that admins understand. Beyond My Ken (talk) 03:45, 22 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Then you don't need to repeat this again and again. Don't put your off-topic comments everywhere. NmWTfs85lXusaybq (talk) 03:47, 22 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I will put comments on the talk pages of whatever articles you follow me to, in order to allow editors to evaluate your edits with the knowledge of your ulterior motive in coming to that article to edit. If you want me to stop, the solution is quite easy: stop following me. Beyond My Ken (talk) 04:02, 22 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It's your right to make your comments. I just point that your comments are off-topic. Besides, I will defend my edits there. NmWTfs85lXusaybq (talk) 05:13, 22 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It's Beyond My Ken who made a POV charge against me on Talk:Moro Rebellion. I'm not just opposing him on any other article. In fact, I help him format his references in Flatiron Building and Enemy of the people. I pointed out the lack of reference in his material on Enemy of the people and he did add a reference later. The edits on Nazi Party and Martin Bormann are irrelevant to him. I'm on his side to oppose the replacement of the original image on The Palisades (Hudson River). Anyway, it's definitely not a form of WP:HOUND. NmWTfs85lXusaybq (talk) 05:35, 22 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'll try once more to explain, and then I'll just leave it alone. It's not about your having a POV, it's not about the quality of the edits, it's not about whether you agree or disagree with me, it's all about your following me to articles you never had any interest in until we had a content dispute. I should not have to look over my shoulder on articles I'm heavily invested in and see you behind me. There are currently 6,646,717 articles on English Wikipedia. That you should chose a half-dozen to edit which I have just edited recently, and which I've edited heavily before, is no coincidence. It means that you deliberately chose to go to those articles. It's also no coincidence, I think, that most of these edits happened after I stopped engaging with you on Talk:Moro Rebellion because of your WP:BLUDGEONing of that discussion. Perhaps you were motivated to follow me as a way to get me to engage again, I don't know, but I want it stopped. Beyond My Ken (talk) 06:31, 22 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I've just noticed that admin Johnuniq has warned you against continuing, so I'm going to collapse this section. Drmies can re-open it if they like. Beyond My Ken (talk) 06:38, 22 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Bulgar Khanate

Hello, you're helping Bulgarian far-right nationalists to manipulate and vandalize the initially Bulgar, later Bulgarian state Bulgar Khanate. I'm not sure you do it on purpose, intentionally or not but you firstly need to make a research on Bulgars (not to be confused with Bulgarians) and Volga Bulgaria and other Oguric peoples such as Onogurs, Utigurs, Kutrigurs. I assume you did not do that on purpose. Have a good day. 𐰴𐰺𐰀:𐰆𐰍𐰺 · Karakylchyg 19:08, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

User:Karak1lc1k, after almost ten years on Wikipedia you should know better than to commit such gross violations of WP:AGF. That passive-aggressive stuff, it's despicable. I'm going to leave you a warning on your own talk page, and if you continue edit warring you are likely to get blocked for that. Then there's the possible POV pushing, of course, and I am going to leave a "Contentious topics" warning as well. Drmies (talk) 21:25, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Questionable content added by IP range you blocked for long-term abuse

Hey Drmies, I noticed you partially blocked the IP range 2600:1700:C000:0:0:0:0:0/36 from several pages a few months ago, citing long-term abuse. I thought you may want to know that I came across this IP range continuously adding unsourced lists of character appearances to the Universal Studios Japan article without providing a single source. The user has been adding this particular section on and off for the past several months, and several users have reverted the addition of this section each time. Although someone started a talk page thread about these lists six months ago, the IP range in question has never touched the talk page.

Since you were the admin who p-blocked this IP range, I wanted to bring this to your attention. I was wondering if you were willing to either protect the Universal Studios Japan page or extend the page block. Thanks. – Epicgenius (talk) 19:23, 22 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Protection page request

Drmies, Hello, I'm here to request for indefinite semi protection need to my usertalkpage from personal attack by ip editors when we revert their edits on pages, i hope you understand my probelm and help to resolve my problems at this time. in past my usertalk page also was vandalized by many ip editors. Kind regards 🥇ÀvîRâm7^(talk)🩺 15:14, 23 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, I'm sorry--I'm not opposed in principle, but I don't see enough to warrant that somewhat extraordinary step. If it increases we can reconsider. Drmies (talk) 01:34, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm very upset for about that but we are fine to your reply, thanks for reply.Kind regards.🥇

ÀvîRâm7^(talk)🩺 04:01, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thank you for your helpful contributions, especially reverting that troll on my talk page! User3749 (talk) 16:24, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

My pleasure! Drmies (talk) 16:25, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Problematic user

Hi Drmies. I stumbled across what appears to me to be a problematic user, and I was wondering if you and/or your stalkers could have a look. On the surface, they appear to be a constructive user, but looking at their mainspace edits, I see that none of the online references they add exist (or if a "source" exists, it's completely irrelevant). They enclose all of the URLs in <nowiki>s, which appears to be an attempt to obscure the fact that they're not valid sources. (Here are just a few examples. In Maria de Knuijt: [3] [4], in Constance Mayer: [5] redirects to irrelevant page [6], in Florian Süssmayr: [7] [8] exists, but is irrelevant) And it's not just the "online" refs. They also supply offline refs, such as for an obviously false statement, which an actually constructive user deletes in this edit. (The year of death in that paragraph is also incorrect.) I am inclined to distrust everything they've done, and it may be a case where all of their edits should be reverted. MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 20:22, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Shoot Mandarax, I wish you'd pitch me something easy--no wonder you hadn't been by here in such a long time. Drmies (talk) 00:30, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
OK. I got more digging to do, but see this. It looks like the Ben Broos reference in the Knuijt article was made up. Do me a favor? Ben Broos seems to have died recently--he has no article in the Dutch wiki, only in the German and French ones (oddly enough). I couldn't find a resume/bibliography. Can you? Drmies (talk) 00:38, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Sorry, I didn't intend for this to be burdensome. I just wasn't sure what to do, and I know that you usually do know what to do. Perhaps this should be on some noticeboard or other. For a Broos bibliography, will WorldCat do?
  Selecting another "fact" to investigate... Constance Mayer's supposed relationship with and marriage to Joseph Ducreux, added here. All of the refs about their relationship are either nonexistent or about entirely unrelated subjects. I tried to independently find anything about it, but I was, unsurprisingly, unsuccessful. Honestly, I think we've both put in much more effort to AGF than they deserve; they just seem to be making things up and adding fake refs. An IP reverted the part about Ducreux; thanks to CaroleHenson for doing what I thought should be done but wasn't bold enough: completely reverting the user's edits on that page. MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 06:24, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  - It's like handling fake news: it takes a while to prove that something isn't there, like that Ben Broos article. Drmies (talk) 14:19, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    - I reverted the edits on the Constance Mayer article because I saw the same issues - invalid urls, use of nowiki for bare url citations, the information didn't seem to be correct. I should have posted something on the user's page. Very strange edits.–CaroleHenson (talk) 16:09, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      - Thanks CaroleHenson--feel free to add a note to the user's talk page. It's a strange case indeed, and I don't drop such blocks lightly, so your support helps. Thank you, Drmies (talk) 16:54, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
        Okay, Drmies, I added a note on the user's page here.–CaroleHenson (talk) 17:30, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
        Thanks, CaroleHenson. Mandarax, there really is no doubt, right, that this was fake. The Ben Broos thing sort of clinched it though it took me a while. He's dead and I can't find a website/resume, and he did published a chapter in that Yale UP book on Vermeer, but not with that title or on that topic. I loathe that kind of behavior and it reminds me of a long-blocked sock/LTA/harasser who had a similar interest.
        I moved the last article from mainspace; it's at Draft:Maria de Knuijt and I could use your help! Drmies (talk) 14:28, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
        Hello, It looks like an article about Maria de Knuijt would be very interesting! I would be really happy to work on Draft:Maria de Knuijt. Would you mind if I added some content to the draft?–CaroleHenson (talk) 16:06, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
        CaroleHenson, please go for it--I tried to ping you from the draft but misspelled your name--sorry. Thanks! Drmies (talk) 14:04, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
        Okay, cool. I am just finishing up on an article now and then will work on it.–CaroleHenson (talk) 16:56, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
        
        Sorry, I haven't been around for a few days. Wow, thanks CaroleHenson for the great work on Maria de Knuijt!
        Y'know, even though I said "I think we've both put in much more effort to AGF than they deserve", I still find myself wanting to AGF. Although I've only marginally checked, their latest draft appears to use refs that are properly formatted, exist, and are actually what they claim to be. Their earlier edits remain completely baffling to me. Maybe they've learned their lesson, but those earlier fake facts backed up by fake refs do not signal a promising start for a constructive contributor. MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 20:14, 29 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
        Mandarax, I missed you at the metal show in the Sanctuary last night. Everything OK? Well, listen, if you checked over that draft, and it seems proper to you, by all means, submit it and maybe accept it. It's mostly a resume, of course, but I do not want to stand in the way of a notable artist being represented. Thanks! Drmies (talk) 15:42, 30 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
        The Sanctuary looks like a fun venue, but somehow it seems to not have an article here. From the ad, it looks like last night's show would've been more psychedelic than metal. Are you going to Puke Turns 17 tonight?
        As I said, I "only marginally checked" the refs, and by that I mean I saw that the links were actually clickable, and I clicked on a few just to see if they went where they claimed to go. So, no, I haven't done anything close to checking over the article, and I don't intend to – about all I have the energy to do around here lately is mindless stuff like typo fixing. MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 22:33, 30 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
        
        CaroleHenson, holy moly. That was an amazing job you did. Thank you so much! Let's get it on the front page! Update: nominated. I was going to nominate Maria Thins too but I didn't realize there was an article already, and though the article is a thousand times improved, it's not five times expanded. Drmies (talk) 15:43, 30 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
        Thanks so much Drmies and Mandarax! I have really enjoyed working on the two Maria articles!–CaroleHenson (talk) 17:15, 30 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Milesgillham

Why do they discover only after being blocked that using one's real name is a poor choice? -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 17:13, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You mean Deepfriedokra isn't your real name?--Bbb23 (talk) 14:46, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Did they? They've been here long enough--which, incidentally, is why I made the block a short one, hoping they'd make better choices. Drmies (talk) 14:43, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
in my Harry Mudd voice-- W-w-walsh is the name. Leo Walsh. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 16:32, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Editor spamming Wikipedia with his own spammy fake articles as references

RahulRajputWiki (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

I just discovered this guy and left him a usertalk warning. Could people keep an eye on him and block if necessary? He is clearly WP:NOTHERE. Thanks. Softlavender (talk) 08:04, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) Looks like the same person as BalaArvinda and ArvindaRana. I'm investigating. --Kinu ^t/_c 08:13, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yep. They are all spamming Wikipedia with articles from junk aggregator sources -- websites called things like TheShahab, TheToughTackle, MichiganSportsZone. Softlavender (talk) 08:20, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

See also Himanshugulati123 and Sandhu navneet. I think a SPI might be in order here, as there are likely more. I'll do my best to revert some of the refspam and add those sites to the blacklist. --Kinu ^t/_c 08:27, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I don't personally have time to file an SPI, but if someone else wants to do so, then great. Otherwise, I think it's fine to continue to whackamole to get rid of them, or use CU as well if someone wants to. Softlavender (talk) 08:52, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm looking into it. It's always disheartening when you see usernames like that and check, and find that they're operating from already-blocked /32 ranges. Kinu, thank you for doing that: I'm glad you have those skills. Drmies (talk) 14:45, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Kinu, were you not a CU at one time? I'm looking at this range, and it's huge--but there's also an immense amount of shit coming from it, from the IPs and from the accounts, and there's a ton of accounts that are fishy (logged in often, never edited, usernames), and no fewer than 555 blocked accounts. So that skews the "collateral damage" balance a bit, but I don't know if it shifts it enough for a hard block. Ponyo, would you mind having a look? It's the IPv6 range, blocked by at least six admins including for LTA behavior--including CU blocks by NinjaRobotPirate and Materialscientist. At some point a hard block is warranted, IMO. Oh, the other range, the IPv4 range, is huge too, with tons of blocked users and I'm going through the list for the obvious and easily confirmed spammers. This one too, though, I think a hard block is warranted... Drmies (talk) 15:02, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm pretty sure I know which /32 you're talking about without even taking a peek under the covers. I'll poke around when my meeting is wrapped up.-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 15:38, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Ponyo--and as it happens I looked at that range a few days ago as well. It's really something. Hope you are having a lovely meeting! I'm leaving to avoid one! Drmies (talk) 15:40, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Avoidance is usually my first instinct, but I'm opening the meeting so...-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 15:43, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think we can hardblock it; the entire first page of results takes us back to just two days ago. There is sooooo much UPE/spam there. You could pretty much run a check every two days and just block a handful of spammers.-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 17:15, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

CU-confirmed with the above, blocked for a combination of CU, behavioral and username hints, and material deleted: User:Himanshu132001, Draft:10News.Live; User:LyricsLatest23; User:Mountainpackers (already blocked by Materialscientist, user page deleted); User:Fitness Flake; User:Rahul Choudhary 27; User:Infocontribution; User:Digirushsolutions (already blocked by 331dot); User:Dontgivedamn; User:UTKARSH THAKUR3090, Draft:NorthYatra; User:All Arabic Perfumes; User:Helenachris, Draft:Dushyant Savadia and User:Helenachris/sandbox; User:Graficoodesign (blocked in 2021!). Drmies (talk) 15:35, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, what a mess. Thanks to you and Ponyo for looking into this further. (For what it's worth, I've never been a CU, but I have considered throwing my name in the hat during the next cycle...) --Kinu ^t/_c 15:58, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That IP range is the gift that keeps on giving. I blocked a few more spammers. It's kind of crazy how many spammers are on there, but it must cover some kind of cyberpunk-style megacity. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 17:07, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks all, I appreciate the time and effort. What a freaking nightmare. Softlavender (talk) 18:59, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Softlavender, I'm sure you noticed that I pinged the BEST of the BEST! Yes, a nightmare, indeed. The only thing one can hope for, besides a rangeblock, is that all those customers who see their drafts and articles deleted ask for their money back. Drmies (talk) 14:06, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Not a vandal but a seriously clueless IP who is editwarring over the mess they made even after three or four warnings

122.106.1.123 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)

They are disrupting Barry Humphries, who just died. We need to keep the article clean (I think it's even going to ITN), but technically this incompetent IP (copyvio + broken links + broken English + random unnecessary trivia, even after several TP warnings) isn't vandalizing so I'm not going to AIV. Any help appreciated. Softlavender (talk) 08:50, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I left a note, with yours. Let's see if it helps. Drmies (talk) 15:04, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- I do confess that this is a good-faith IP and I may have over reacted. Their incompetence is probably not really their fault, and I was agitated because of the pending ITN and because every time I refresh my watchlist lately my screen freezes and my computer hangs for 40 seconds or so. Softlavender (talk) 19:02, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  - View your watchlist as normal the first time each day. After that, set "Period of time to display" to 6 hours or maybe even less. Then click Show. Now refreshing your watchlist should be much faster. Johnuniq (talk) 00:41, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    - Thanks Johnuniq, I'll try that. Softlavender (talk) 00:45, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Disruption on talk page by blocked editor

User:Missy elliott2, who you previously blocked, has created a large number of frivolous unblock requests. TPA revocation may be appropriate. Partofthemachine (talk) 04:48, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You got it. Thanks. Drmies (talk) 14:08, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Melibio

User:ABHammad has brought to my attention that COI edits from an IP and a new user are back at MeliBio. It brings to mind the problem written about in a recent Signpost article, if I remember it correctly. (See brief new user page User:Foodieee.) I forwarded this problem from the User talk:MB page and you looked at this two months ago. It seems it needs another look by an administrator. Thanks. Donner60 (talk) 09:14, 30 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Done--thanks. Drmies (talk) 16:00, 30 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Re. your ping on the unblock request

I suspect they're using ChatGPT to generate references and article content. The seemingly plausible but made-up references, and the rapid pace of editing, would fit with that explanation. The only reason why I thought that it might not be intentionally malicious is that some people seem to believe that these AIs are magic oracles that speak the truth instead of basically a fancy version of a Markov chain. There was someone else at ANI a few weeks ago who seemed genuinely confused to learn that if you ask ChatGPT to write you a Wikipedia article, it won't analyze the sources and understand them, it'll just make up some random shit that sounds vaguely related to the title. This perception is probably not helped by the fact that these things are now being grafted onto search engines, making them even more useless than they already were. Anyway, the user's responses aren't encouraging and I don't think they should be unblocked. Spicy (talk) 22:03, 30 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Possible sock-puppet

Hi Drmies!

Although User:Kaldari has retired from Wikipedia is User:Omphalographer here on Wikipedia a likely sock puppet for Kaldari or are Kaldari's edits here too old? The IP's may not match perfectly as Omphalographer is using a single purpose account. --Marshallsumter (talk) 23:02, 30 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]