Jump to content

User talk:NinjaRobotPirate

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 98.113.133.16 (talk) at 00:15, 24 August 2020 (You see? Even guys like you are "blocked" . Mark my words. You excessive blocking behaviour is causing collateral damage and WP:BITE to shared Verizon networks. It also does little to keep us from coming back a few minutes later. So watch out! You keep block, we’ll keep edit whether you like it or not, mate.). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Did you know that F5 is the "generate drama" key? Try it! Every time you press it, more drama is auto-generated on Wikipedia.
I hope you find my addition to your talk page aggravating and stressful, just the way you like it! :) Natureium (talk) 20:14, 1 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Attempted block evasion/sockpuppetry?

Not sure if I'm using this feature correctly, but it looks like this person may also be ylevental. The editing history looks like they're making edits on the same articles, and recently something very weird happened with a page ylevental had nominated twice for deletion. I think ylevental also tried to send me a message but I'm not sure how to access it, and then I got notification of edits made to my talk page from the anonymous account that I can't find either. I looked into past history and it seems like ylevental has been trying to specifically add anti-neurodiversity related articles while also nominating pro-neurodiversity articles for deletion at the same time. I'm not sure if that's allowed or not but it seems like evidence of bias in some way. (I've edited mostly pro-neurodiversity articles and have created or proposed several in the past too, but I haven't tried to delete anti-neurodiversity related articles. I don't think that's against any rules as far as I'm able to guess.) Maybe you could check on this? Ysannelo (talk) 22:12, 28 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, but I can't comment on any of this. Because of the issues involved (CheckUser blocks and oversighted content), you would probably have to privately contact the Arbitration Committee if you felt more needed to be done than has already been done. I realize that this is a non-answer, but that's the best I can give you. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 00:03, 29 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

YAQC

Yet Another Quick Check. Would you please check the almost certain duck JackiePie against UltraUsurper and AstraUsurper? I've already blocked Ultra for 2 weeks due to just CIR/disruption issues, as well as his IPv6, and indef'd Astra due to improper use in discussions (While userpage disclosed it as an alt, signature does not make this clear and he's using them all (master+alt+IP) in the same discussions). Duck evidence for JackiePie is that Ultra edits PewDiePie (Name connection), JackiePie has nominated an iOS related redirect for deletion (Ultra spends all day making a mess of iOS related redirects), and then having not signed his RfD, Ultra signed it as the master. -- ferret (talk) 12:14, 29 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

JackiePie is confirmed to the others. I was mostly curious to see if there'd be more than that, but that seems to be it. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 14:46, 29 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Appreciated as always. -- ferret (talk) 15:47, 29 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Check on Pleat2 please. Redirects user page, focused on iPhone and redirects and splits. Quack quack. -- ferret (talk) 17:49, 14 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 Confirmed, along with Zenoval. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 18:24, 14 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Conan the destroyer "top critics"

You said "we don't give special emphasis to the "top critics"". Yet Conan the Barbarian (1982 film)'s Wikipedia page gives special emphasis to the top critics. It seems to me Wikipedia is making double standards about The Destroyer and The Barbarian.— Preceding unsigned comment added by AlainDuponDetDupont (talk • contribs) 03:23, 30 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please see MOS:FILM#Rotten Tomatoes Top Critics. There is consensus against highlighting the opinions of a subset of critics from Rotten Tomatoes. I don't know what you're talking about when you say there's a double standard, though. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 03:27, 30 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Another Albe23413 sock

Good day @NinjaRobotPirate:!

We've got another one my friend Pamasawata0296, and he emerged less than two days after you blocked him. As of this writing, the user only has 7 edits under his belt but given that the pages he edits are related to Ang Probinsyano, I think we can make a strong case that he is a sockpuppet. There's also the diffs, even though there's just a handful of them as of this writing.

Here are the relevant diffs:

Pamasawata0296 - Special:Diff/965268942 Cocisj455 - Special:Diff/964765048 Albe23413 - Special:Diff/936184741

Since as of this writing, the user only has 7 edits, I had to compare the editing pattern with not only the sockpuppeteer but also with the most recent sockpuppet to illustrate how similar the pattern is. I know I can always count on you my friend. Warmest regards Gardo Versace (talk) 15:02, 30 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@NinjaRobotPirate: The user was blocked for disruptive editing by @PhilKnight:. However, before he was blocked he left a very angry message for me which all but confirms that he is a sockpuppet of Albe23413 as can be seen in these diffs:
Special:Diff/965317859, Special:Diff/965317859, Special:Diff/965318064, Special:Diff/965318251, Special:Diff/965318445, Special:Diff/965318676, Special:Diff/965318853, Special:Diff/965318912, Special:Diff/965319024, Special:Diff/965319280, Special:Diff/965319625, Special:Diff/965319737, Special:Diff/965319828, Special:Diff/965319921, Special:Diff/965319995, Special:Diff/965320091, Special:Diff/965320205 and Special:Diff/965320280
To understand how angry the message he left is, let me translate the Filipino text to English:
SON OF A BITCH!!! GARDO VERSACE!!! YOU ARE A DUMB EDITOR ON THE FACE OF THE EARTH AND YOU ARE ALSO A BLOCKER YOU ANIMAL!!!! I HOPE YOU DIE OF COVID YOU HAVE NO MERCY AND YOU ARE HEARTLESS YOU FOOL!!! YOU SHOULD BE WITH SATAN IN HELL!!!!
That is how angry he is at all the times I've reported him and he has been blocked. Given that he had just confirmed himself as an Albe23413 sock, can you still tag him for sockpuppetry even though he has just been blocked? Regards Gardo Versace (talk) 17:45, 30 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
It looks like Ponyo took care of everything. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 23:14, 30 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – July 2020

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

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Arbitration

  • Following the banning of an editor by the WMF last year, the Arbitration Committee resolved to hold an RfC regarding on-wiki harassment. The RfC has been posted at Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Anti-harassment RfC and is open to comments from the community.
  • The Medicine case was closed, with a remedy authorizing standard discretionary sanctions for all discussions about pharmaceutical drug prices and pricing and for edits adding, changing, or removing pharmaceutical drug prices or pricing from articles.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:25, 1 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

LTA

Hi--you responded to one of these fake unblock requests from this range; please check if my block modification, after the creation of a couple of sock accounts, is OK with you. Thanks! Drmies (talk) 13:39, 4 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • BTW, is there a way to run CU and see just the accounts, not the IPs, on a range? Thanks, Drmies (talk) 13:40, 4 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Nope. There might be a script that sorts the results, though. I generally try to leave talk page access enabled when I do long range blocks, but it's not always possible, of course. The problem is that some people can't even figure out how to make a proper unblock request when they've got talk page access enabled, so my thinking is that the number of people who figure out how to use UTRS must be even smaller. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 13:58, 4 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
      • How sad--I wish they'd show the accounts first, and then IPs up to 5000. I am sure there's a ton of abusive accounts [2607:FB90:0:0:0:0:0:0/32 here] (that little person had an old blocked account from which to threaten me) that still have email or talk page enable. Drmies (talk) 18:46, 4 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

QC

Sorry, I keep stumbling across some lately... :) Could you please check Crowkid555 (And already blocked Crowkid51) against ALEXP001? Duck evidence is somewhat strong, but I don't want to pull trigger on inexperienced editors needlessly. Both editors focus on adjusting the leads of video games and films for receptions, often with unsourced or original research. Both have gotten warnings, and I've blocked ALEXP001 once already. Note the similarity in their messages to my user talk in response to warnings: ALEXP and Crowkid. I feel the writing style is very similar as well as their use of edit summaries. Both use VE, but Crowkid appears to be exclusively mobile while ALEXP is not. -- ferret (talk) 11:46, 9 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Crowkid55, Crowkid555, Crowkid51, and ALEXP001 are all  Confirmed. However, they could potentially be editing from shared computers. Sometimes inexperienced, young editors create a bunch of themed accounts and don't seem to understand why everyone is so annoyed with them. It's difficult to say what to do in these cases. I usually try to give them a chance to comply with policy. I guess it depends on my mood and how disruptive they've been. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 12:23, 9 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I'll ponder a bit. I warned Crowkid555 about socking when I found Crowkid51. I'm not worried about the unused Crowkid55. ALEXP has already earned one block for unsourced/OR. Both accounts essentially continue those editing patterns. I'll give it some more thought and may ask them to fess up first. -- ferret (talk) 12:39, 9 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

In following of

In following of 1 and 2, please block this. Thanks for your attention. Benyamin (talk) 09:54, 10 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Done. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 09:55, 10 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Quick check request

Hi, I was just wondering if could do a quick check. A certain user was recently banned from editing a page, and soon afterwards a new user decided to join the Talk page, mirroring the same POV as the first user. What's interesting is that the first user once posted on the second user's Talk page, accusing them of sockpuppetry. A strange thing to do if they're the same person, but maybe that was the idea. So perhaps it is a pure coincidence and they are connected only by subject matter, but the timing strikes me as odd, and I was wondering if you could check. Thanks. WikiMane11 (talk) 17:51, 10 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Why is it that you appear to Wikipedia:Harassment anyone with a different opinion than your own. Looking at your edit history you have literally reported every single person that has an opposing opinion. I don’t take the false accusations of sockpuppetry lightly. Your false accusations won’t discourage me from editing as I see fit.Factlibrary1 (talk) 21:41, 10 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@ThunderPeel2001: you've got one diff there, but it's not enough to show evidence of sock puppetry. You'd have to show that one account mirrored the same POV using diffs. I don't really want to go looking for that myself. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 01:27, 11 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Factlibrary1: Well, that's a lie. I have not reported everyone. I reported two people, as per the WP guidelines for a topic under sanction. One of these people previously accused you of sockpuppetry, and both of which received temporary bans. Interesting, but I will drop things, because if is sockpuppetry, I believe you will cease now. I would note that your tone is potentially threatening. WikiMane11 (talk) 11:37, 11 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Anti-Racist Action: June 2020 rewrite

Hi - I posted on Talk for Anti-Racist Action about undoing the June 2020 rewrite, which is based on a report on a far-Right blog, includes many improperly cited claims, and names several individuals as being part of Torch Antifa chapters without evidence. Would be great to have your thoughts on this proposed change. Thanks. GNO23 (talk) 23:50, 10 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Emiliogogo or "jahiib punjit" striking again in a SPI investigation.

Muhammad jahiib punjit (talk · contribs) is striking again in a SPI Investigation I have just opened. With an almost identical name: Muhamaad jaiiiib poonjut (talk · contribs)

The last time this user was a sock of Emiliogogo (talk · contribs) but it's way too strange I open again a SPI investigation for the same user and this guy appears out of nowhere just some minutes after making it. He might be related to the main sock Weathertrustchannel (talk · contribs) or he's simply someone else? I don't know but it's way too strange happening twice in 2 different SPI cases for the same user. Nevertheless this guy is clearly the same "jahiib" as he was before. --TechnicianGB (talk) 16:52, 13 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

you are wrong. i is not suckpuppeting of Emiliogogo, Mr Indian Technician Muhamaad jaiiiib poonjut (talk) 16:54, 13 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oh so beautiful, this user just insulted me now in the SPI investigation I just made today. He might be a sock of the same SPI user using a VPN or something, how strange is that he did exactly the same back to June when I opened a SPI for Weathertrustchannel (talk · contribs) but now even faster than that time, also insulting me for an unknown reason. --TechnicianGB (talk) 17:22, 13 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I saw. I blocked the account for trolling. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 17:23, 13 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Kaypein

Alarjar again? Also see this IP. Flyer22 Frozen (talk) 05:18, 14 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No need to ping me if you reply. Flyer22 Frozen (talk) 05:21, 14 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keypein is probably the same person as Inkonvin. They could both be Bowei Huang 2, but that case is stale. Hard to say for sure. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 13:13, 14 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Second wave of socks

Hi, I've been a bit lax on the contact tracing and lockdown of the Queensland socks in the last month or two, and predictably, there's been a big rise in the number of cases... BWilliams89 has just popped up, and suprisingly used an edit summary once - never seen that before. But otherwise it's the usual, adding extra "History" heading levels, categories to children's TV shows, and reinstating edits of previous socks and obvious Brisbane IPs, for example, compare: [1] with this by JamesGentilenna232: [2], and IPs: [3], [4]. I guess that's all you need, but some more diffs: [5] with [6], [7], and [8]; and [9] with [10], [11], [12], [13], and [14].

I also found a couple of dozen or so IPs, so there's a bunch of cleanup to do, but most were short-term. These ones were active in the last day or two:

These haven't edited for a few days at least, but look long term:

PS, thanks for the tip about the mass-rollback script, it's come in handy a few times, including for some of these... --IamNotU (talk) 23:49, 16 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It's difficult to judge the collateral damage on those wide IP ranges that you highlighted above. If they remain an issue, I guess raise it again. Maybe I'll figure something out later. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 02:31, 17 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. Fyi, BWilliams89 (talk · contribs) seems to have made a sort-of attempt at an unblock request, without using the template. They did do this at least once before. I left them a note, among other things imploring them to stop editing... if you look at it, feel free to remove my comment if you think it's not appropriate in some way, and/or should be handled by an admin instead.
About the /48 ranges, yes there would be a lot of collateral damage, not really practical I guess, unless there's some trick I don't know about. --IamNotU (talk) 23:12, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, could you renew these blocks: [15] and [16]? Thanks. I managed to get in touch with this user's support worker, and sent him an e-mail. Waiting to hear back, and in the meantime they're still editing, but there could be some hope of an end in sight soon. I guess we'll have to wait and see how effective the measures are, might not be 100%... --IamNotU (talk) 18:28, 13 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again... so the user continues with the usual socking, and I've tried to explain in e-mail to their support worker (who signed up as Ptupps77 (talk · contribs)) that there's little chance of them getting unblocked. Actually I guess it would be an unban, due to WP:THREESTRIKES, right? I won't go into details of the e-mails, but the support worker isn't willing to encourage them to stop editing, and is requesting that we find a way to accommodate their different abilities. The user, as we've seen, is quite adamant about editing and really does not appreciate being blocked... Do you know if there's any precedent for someone who, as we've also seen, isn't able to explain that they understand the reasons for their block, to get unblocked? Maybe with some kind of supervision? I had the idea to post to WP:AN, but then I though, yeah no, that's not the best idea I've had lately... Do you know a good person to talk to about something like that? Thanks... --IamNotU (talk) 01:07, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I think that, in practice at least, site bans for sock puppetry don't usually apply to an editor until someone actively completes the process by tagging the user page as banned. I don't think an unblock like what you proposed could ever work. Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not therapy would be cited by anyone who you contacted. But if you wanted to try, Arbcom is pretty much the only community-oriented body that you could consult. I don't think the Wikimedia Foundation has anything in place for this sort of thing. The WMF people that I've spoken to have all been friendly, though, so you could try them anyway and see what they say. Most of the time when I email the WMF, though, I get a friendly and polite message that says they're not going to do anything about the problem. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 05:50, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Good to know about the 3X ban thing, thanks. In the first e-mail to the support worker, I explained about WP:CIR, and how extensive the disruption has been. I hoped they'd answer "ok, will make sure that doesn't happen anymore", but no. They're very pleasant and positive though. I already started to write another reply, and mentioned "Wikipedia is not therapy" etc. but I feel like I'm just repeating myself. I'm familiar with all the guidelines and can explain that there's really no chance of just being unblocked and allowed to edit freely if they can't make an unblock request and take the standard offer. But I don't have any authority, and I don't hang around AN/ANI enough to know what kind of rare exceptions might have been made in the past. Probably best for an admin to talk to the support worker, it doesn't seem like Arbcom is the right fit at this point. I thought you might know an admin who would be a good person to have a dialogue with them. I do my best to be diplomatic but this issue isn't really my field. I wanted to be a little more low-key than asking for someone at AN, but I could still do that if you think it's a good idea. --IamNotU (talk) 21:10, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately, there isn't really anything in place for this, and I doubt any of us have training. I'm just an IT guy. But, like I said, nobody ever gets unblocked like that. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 22:13, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, that's somewhere like where I'm at...
Ok, thanks, I'll look around some more for an admin who's a good communicator/negotiator and would be willing to help convince the support worker to get the user to stop socking, or something else I haven't thought of. Anything would be better than the way it is now. I'll try e-mailing the support worker again, but I just have the feeling they're not going to take it from me, and will want to talk to my manager... --IamNotU (talk) 23:38, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Walterblue222

Hi, hope you're doing well these days. I saw an IP editor comment on Talk:Blackwashing in film and reverted it. Reviewing their contributions, it turns out they are the IP address for Walterblue222, as they state here. Would you be able to block this IP? Also, should the talk page be protected or not? Erik (talk | contrib) (ping me) 11:03, 17 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not really sure if policy allows me to protect that talk page. On the positive side, that talk page is probably good bait for racist trolls. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 15:24, 17 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Edit filter

This isn't my area of expertise, but is it possible to add an edit filter to block a persistent edit to a single article? Various IP addresses keep adding "also known as Hellraiser X: Judgment" to the article Hellraiser: Judgment without a citation, even though the film has never been called that in any country. It's not happening frequently enough to justify semi-protection, but whoever is adding it is being persistent lately. The most recent attempt went undetected for a full seventeen days in what is a Featured Article. There is no practical purpose for this edit.

[17], [18], [19]

This appears to be the same IP hopper who kept adding non-existent alternative titles to Friday the 13th articles back in 2018. If memory serves, Bignole had a few run-ins with them as well. Darkknight2149 20:22, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It's possible to limit an edit filter to affect only a single article, but every edit to every article would be checked against that filter. That would make it rather expensive for limited benefit. When there's trivial, recurring disruption to a single article, a hidden note via an HTML comment is usually the most practical solution. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 21:17, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
 Done I doubt this will be effective against this particular user, but I went ahead and added it. Hopefully it at least slows it down. Darkknight2149 21:25, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

RealMODOT

Can user:RealMODOT please be blocked ASAP. She clearly will not stop until blocked. CLCStudent (talk) 02:54, 21 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Done. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 02:57, 21 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Now is abuing her talkpage. CLCStudent (talk) 03:04, 21 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
That's not really abuse. People are allowed to post inane things to their own talk page. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 03:08, 21 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
She is constantly spamming the talkpage. That is what I am getting at. I am not talking about the "I hate you". CLCStudent (talk) 03:10, 21 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
That's not abusive. All you have to do is not look at the talk page. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 03:15, 21 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Everything is American. Everything.

0Detail-Attention215's edits are devoted to making everything American, e.g. here, here, and here, or any of their 9-10 character contributions I checked. This seems very familiar, but after some searching I haven't been able to connect the habit with a name. Does it ring a bell with you? BlackcurrantTea (talk) 12:12, 22 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There are a couple socks who are disruptive around media nationalities, but I don't recognize someone who's an SPA toward identifying everything as American. For whatever reason, it's usually the opposite in my experience (edit warring to remove any mention of the United States). It's usually pretty easy to identify these editors because they become obsessed with fixing certain articles. If they weren't obsessive, they probably wouldn't have gotten blocked in the first place. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 16:28, 22 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, thanks. I've seen the show obsessives, too. This may be an instance of the way everything can start to look familiar after a certain amount of time: Déjà Wikipedia. BlackcurrantTea (talk) 19:55, 22 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Possible IP sock

Hate to pester you, but could you take a quick look at this ANI report? Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Disruptive IP edits I think it's a sock you've dealt with before, but another editor doesn't agree it's them. Anyway, the IP is engaging in edit warring as I speak and being disruptive, so it seems a block is warranted in any case. Crossroads -talk- 23:48, 22 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I blocked for edit warring. If you think it's an IP sock, you can file a report at WP:SPI with evidence in the form of diffs. I don't really want to conduct my own investigation from scratch. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 00:57, 23 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. Well, I had thought that the evidence at ANI might be enough to run CU. But since it's an IP, I know that it may not be allowed to tie an IP to an account. Crossroads -talk- 03:10, 23 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, CheckUsers are generally prohibited from publicly linking accounts to IP addresses. There's some speculation posted at the ANI discussion, but it's not convincing enough for me to block as a sock puppet. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 04:30, 23 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wristmeetrazor

I am unsure if I am using this feature correctly. But, I made an account to plead my case. I was false banned from editing for 20 days for editing the genre of a band which is always falsely labelled. Very unfair to assume that I am the troll and incorrect one in this matter. The band wristmeetrazor is labelled incorrectly as a screamo band when they are not. Stylistically, and sonically, they are a metalcore band. I am unsure how to resolve this matter. Thank you in advance — Preceding unsigned comment added by Klefmop (talk • contribs) 22:33, 27 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is a little confusing to figure out at first, but it looks like you're getting the hang of it. I added a header to your post. Looking at Wristmeetrazor, it doesn't seem like anyone has been blocked from editing recently. Was this a while ago? The issue is that Wikipedia is written from what reliable sources say. There will always be someone who strongly disagrees with a genre classification. You can challenge a genre classification on the article's talk page, perhaps via WP:ONUS, which says that "all verifiable information need not be included in an article". Once you convince the other editors that this information should not be included, you'll have consensus to remove it. Then, the people who add it will be blocked for disruptive editing. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 00:03, 28 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ufufcguc still plugging away

Hi, seems 2A01:111F:100F:5800::/64 is the same as 2A01:111F:B48:D000::/64, same as 2A01:111F:E1A:A400::/64, same as... well you know. --IamNotU (talk) 17:15, 28 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Same /32, but very different /64s. Oh well. At least the /64s stay allocated for a while. That's more than you can say for some ISPs. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 20:30, 28 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked user continuing to edit own talk

Should 58.179.223.210 (talk · contribs) be blocked from editing their talk page? It seems to be repeated unsourced BLP. POLITANVM talk 04:21, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, doesn't seem interested in making unblock appeals. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 04:36, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – August 2020

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

Administrator changes

added Red Phoenix
readded Euryalus • SQL
removed Jujutacular • Monty845 • Rettetast • Madchester

Oversight changes

readded GB fan
removed Keegan • Opabinia regalis • Premeditated Chaos

Guideline and policy news

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:21, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

62.226.64.0/18 rangeblock

You blocked Special:Contributions/62.226.64.0/18 for WP:NOTFORUM violations. Based on the similar comments at Talk:Sinn Féin#Centre-left and Talk:Sinn_Féin#far-left extreme would sound more appropriate (which I'll be removing following any action deemed necessary) it would appear Special:Contributions/80.131.50.81 is the same editor, especially as their ISP is also Deutsche Telekom AG like 62.226.70.20's is. Thank you. FDW777 (talk) 21:45, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, seems to be the same ranter. I range blocked Special:Contributions/80.131.32.0/19, which should quiet things down a bit. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 21:57, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. FDW777 (talk) 21:58, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Listen Here

Heard administrator sir, if you don't know how to work on Wikipedia, then quit working on Wikipedia, you should check IP addresses before blocking someone and what they were saying was probably Mayank123456 Srivastava is related Listen, you are not a Brahma , now in Your horoscope Saturn 's Sade Sati Will walk . 27.60.82.49 (talk) 07:09, 2 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Evading your block is an excellent way to prove that you're not a sock puppet. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 09:41, 2 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I don't believe in astrology; I'm a Sagittarius and we're skeptical. GMGtalk 11:40, 2 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

August 2020

Hello, NinjaRobotPirate. Thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia since 2007; however, I have found a particular edit to List of awards and nominations received by Joaquin Phoenix on 27 July 2020 by you that had an edit summary as follows: "block evasion". Well, I guess that IP user was evading a block, but I fail to see the inaccuracy of the information added by that user. If the claims by the user were unsourced, I will accept your revert of the edit. Thank you. Friend505 (talk) 13:49, 3 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Must be a full moon this week. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 20:30, 3 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
There is going to be a full moon this week. How did you know? And also, you did not answer my question. NinjaRobotPirate, if you could answer my question, I would appreciate it. Thank you. Friend505 (talk) 22:06, 3 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
You seem pretty bossy for a new user. Please see WP:BANREVERT. If you have legitimate questions that need the help of a CheckUser, I am available to help. Otherwise, please find some other administrator to pester. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 22:41, 3 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I apologize for annoying you, NinjaRobotPirate. You're humorous, actually. I am just a relatively new patroller. I am still not very experienced to knowing which edits are good and which edits may need to be reverted. I am still in my "getting experience" period of being a Wikipedian. Sorry, and thank you. Friend505 (talk) 23:47, 3 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Well, it's not a big deal. But maybe it'd be better to focus on the more obvious stuff until you get more experience? Confronting random editors might not go too well. I'm admittedly a bit too irritable sometimes, but some editors will bite your head off. That's technically blockable behavior, but it's not a good idea to engage in behavior that might be construed as provoking them.

Also, thank you for saying that I'm humorous, but I'm afraid that my sense of humor doesn't usually work too well on Wikipedia. I tend to be rather dryly sarcastic, and it's not always easy to tell when I'm serious. I once lived in the bad part of town but enjoyed taking nighttime walks. A friend asked me, "Aren't you scared of the weirdos who come out after midnight?" I replied, "No. I am one of the weirdos who come out after midnight." A true enough statement, I suppose. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 02:43, 4 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Well, thanks for your advice, NinjaRobotPirate. Friend505 (talk) 11:43, 4 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

That road vandal...

...that Yamla just reverted here, please see my log for a couple of CU blocks. Maybe you know who this is and care to tag them--I'm not sure if their angry edits are worth the trouble. Thanks! Drmies (talk) 20:51, 4 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's probably just a bored kid with a few socks. I think I saw one of the accounts at AIV and blocked it. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 21:43, 4 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I've seen them before, I know it, a few months ago. They are not a new user, that's a fact. Two of the ranges have seen previous sock activity, but I wasn't familiar with them. Drmies (talk) 23:47, 4 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sxologist

Is that a CheckUser match? I would be very surprised if he is Skoojal/Freeknowledgecreator. See my comments at ANI here. The POV of the two editors are complete opposites. I'm sure stranger things have happened, but it seems unlikely from where I stand and I just want to make sure. Sxologist has been very helpful at sexual orientation articles. Crossroads -talk- 21:44, 4 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Same ISP, different computer. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 21:47, 4 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Don't millions of people share an ISP? Or do you mean IP? Between that and the misaligned timing I mentioned at ANI, I'm not convinced. Is there any further evidence? If FKC is Sxologist, he spent hours and hours fighting against his previous POV. Crossroads -talk- 21:51, 4 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia does not have millions of active editors, and not every ISP is a multinational conglomerate. That's like saying, "Doesn't every Wikipedia page get millions of page views every day?" Pages related to COVID19 do, Rabid Grannies does not. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 22:08, 4 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not seeing how that follows. The behavioral evidence is extremely dissimilar, and the probability that two separate editors will have the same ISP is quite high. More in-depth explanation here. Crossroads -talk- 22:27, 4 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sweep

Would you be able to sweep on Eltomas2003? The user has been active lately and required more banning from offwiki channels like IRC/Discord. Last SPI sweep was May I think. I've actually submitted a lock request to the stewards as well, because they use Meta to pester admins around their block/TPA revoke. I don't have a specific sock identified, so if that prevents a sweep, I understand. -- ferret (talk) 22:00, 4 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but Arbcom has made it very clear that they're cracking down on anything that they consider to be fishing. If there are cross-wiki issues that need to be resolved, stewards can post evidence on the CU mailing list, though. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 22:34, 4 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Got it. Didn't occur to me that that was essentially what this would be. I'll let the stewards handle from here as they see fit. -- ferret (talk) 22:43, 4 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppet investigation (SPI) of 俏綾 and Xayahrainie43

Hi, NinjaRobotPirate,
There was a sockpuppet investigation (SPI) of Xayahrainie43 relating to me and 俏綾. A checkuser, Ivanvector, deemed me to be unrelated as stated on the sockpuppet investigation page. However, he stated that it was possible that 俏綾 could be a sockpuppet of Xayahrainie43. Cabayi came and gave some information about 俏綾. However, after Cabayi did so, no one else attended to the investigation. However, 俏綾 continued to edit. 俏綾 even edited one of my subpages. I came to you since you are a friend of mine and also a checkuser. For more information, please visit this page. Since you are a checkuser, you are able to see 俏綾's IP address. If it geo-locates to Taiwan, then you may be able to provide a next step to the sockpuppet investigation, since 俏綾's behavior seems close to Xayahrainie43's behavior. Also, please notice Cabayi's note. Thank you. Friend505 11:38, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked based on behavioral evidence presented in the SPI case. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 04:29, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@NinjaRobotPirate: Thanks for blocking the guy, NinjaRobotPirate. This way, Wikipedia will be a bit more free from sockpuppetry. By the way, NinjaRobotPirate, do you think I have a bit of credit in the process since I kind of triggered your block of the user? I think if I had not reported the sockpuppet investigation (SPI) to you and wrote that extra information, this sockpuppet may not have been blocked, since it seemed like everyone else previously involved in the SPI just stopped caring about it. Anyways, even if I'm not one of the people who get credit, I am also still happy to help in the process. Thank you. Friend505 10:29, 8 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
SPI cases do tend to languish. However, I personally try not to look for credit on Wikipedia. If you do, you'll likely end up disappointed. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 10:45, 8 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@NinjaRobotPirate: Yeah, good idea, NinjaRobotPirate. Anyways, I did not report that again just to get credit; I wanted to help Wikipedia become a cleaner place. I also want to report to you a possible case of IP sockpuppetry of Xayahrainie43. Please take a look at this page. I know my link address is the same as the old link that I posted to you about the case involving 俏綾, but that case was moved into the archive. I found this new potential Xayahrainie43 IP sockpuppet and opened a new, fresh sockpuppet investigation (SPI). Please take a look at this new potential sockpuppet case, since you are a checkuser. Thank you. Friend505 13:25, 8 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Block evasion?

Hi there! 95.145.218.119 restored an edit on Dolly-Rose Campbell that you deleted hours before. Your edit summary was "block evasion", so I assumed this was another IP also evading the same block.

Just wanted to let you know, in case you wanted to check it out! Here's the diff: [20] - Whisperjanes (talk) 00:51, 9 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, probably the same person. Probably going to keep popping up on more IP addresses, unfortunately. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 01:20, 9 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please help me

Hello Sir My name is MK0122, I am the Manager, Administrator and Founder of Flipkart wiKi Fandom, on this wiki my name is User: Flipkartsysop, my Bot Account caught a member moving the page without meaning, I blocked it for 1 month. When my Bot Account tried to rollback its edit, but it was telling that the failback was failed, please help me now. I blocked this user- [21] My user Page - [22]

Bot User page -[23] IP Block List -[24] MK0122 (talk) 02:34, 9 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, but I don't really understand what you're asking. I also don't really know anything about running a wiki on Fandom or Wikia or whatever. I assume it uses the same general interface as the MediaWiki installation here. If so, you should be able to use the documentation at mediawiki.org. Maybe try fixing the vandalism from your admin account instead of a bot account? Sorry, but I have no idea. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 03:40, 9 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for this information Sir.MK0122 (talk) 04:36, 9 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Information About Shiv Ram Singh Inter College 's Image

Hello, sir Shiv Ram Singh Inter College Image have Update in six Months ago ,sir please give me permission to Change the Image of Shiv Ram Singh Inter college ,but Image is come on google Seach Result ,Can I download the image of Shivram Singh Inter College from Google, on the page of Shivram Singh Inter College.(thanks) MK0122 (talk) 05:05, 10 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

RE:August 2020

Look, believe it or not that source you so highly regard was not helpful in the least. It didn't say how Hanna-Barbera were involved or anything actually informative. Hanna-Barbera and Turner Animation are not the same. If you consider Turner and Hanna-Barbera the same, then maybe we should list Tom and Jerry: The Movie as a Hanna-Barbera movie? And clearly not everyone views The Pagemaster as a Hanna-Barbera movie, because it's not even on List of works produced by Hanna-Barbera. -- 92.237.150.49 (talk) 09:56, 10 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Doesn't matter. As an encyclopedia, Wikipedia is written according to what reliable sources say, not according to what individual editors believe to be true. If some random person comes to that article and says, "I believe in my heart that Disney made this", what would you say? How can you possibly argue against that change if you're saying that editors should be free to change any content and remove sources as long as they think the source is wrong? Your way leads to madness. This is why we have policies against it and why we block people who do this. Also, citing Wikipedia itself is kind of pointless; as you just recently proved, anyone can change our articles to report whatever they want, regardless of what the sources say. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 12:13, 10 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Bill & Ted's Excellent Adventures (1990 TV series) says Gordon Kent developed it without a source. It's just random policing, it's always been that way on Wikipedia and that will never change.The Pagemaster was a Turner movie. You don't see Hanna-Barbera's name anywhere on the poster. And that's not because Turner and Hanna-Barbera are the same, they're not. This isn't a Disney and Pixar scenario. -- 92.237.150.49 (talk) 00:26, 11 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I only go by what the studios make. Disney made The Lion King. I know this for a fact, the world knows this for a fact. There's no actual real proof that Hanna-Barbera was involved in this movie. No artists refer to this, no news articles refer to this, there's no actual evidence other than putting Hanna-Barbera's name beside The Pagemaster. -- 92.237.150.49 (talk) 00:28, 11 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Right, there's no proof, except for the proof that you disruptively removed. Congratulations on attaining omniscience, but you're not a reliable source, so we can't use your divine knowledge to write encyclopedia articles. You can enlighten the world via a blog, though. And, yes, it is random policing. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 01:11, 11 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked for making edits I didn’t make?

Hello. I hadn’t edited on Wikipedia in a long time, so long that I don’t remember my old username nor do I have the old email I used to log in with it. A couple weeks ago, I made a quick edit on a page because it had been vandalized, and I thought I’d fix it quickly, so I did. I decided tonight I wanted to make an actual username again, and I go to do so, and it says you had banned me for sock puppetry. I then clicked the username / IP address associated with my phone to look at what lead to this. I then see a long list of “user contributions“ that I never did. Walking Dead, basketball players, a measles outbreak, all pages I’d never even looked at let alone edited. I’m not sure how something like that happens, but I made this username on another device to reach out and make it clear that I have no desire to make sock puppet accounts or be misleading. I just wanted to get back to contributing. Mostly what I’d like to do is just revert little vandalizations or fix typos. But I didn’t make the edits on my phone that it says I was banned for. Thank you. Rorys1989 (talk) 06:59, 11 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, that sounds like one of my blocks. To stop disruption, we sometimes block a collection of IP addresses used by a disruptive editor. Anyone using that internet service provider could potentially get the same message and be unable to edit while logged out. That's one of the benefits of being logged into an account – you don't get random messages or suffer from blocks designed to stop someone else. You should be able to edit just fine as long as you stay logged into your account. Let me know if you have problems editing while logged into your account, and I'll fix it. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 07:04, 11 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Housekeeping

I ran across some edits by BlueshockerSZN, who appears to be an unblocked Fieryflames sock. No edits since April, but it's the usual musician photo edits (and arguing about them in article talk), hockey player edits, user name elements consistent with previous socks, etc. Indignant Flamingo (talk) 01:27, 12 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, he was active on Commons in July. I can't check for other accounts on English Wikipedia, but you might consider asking a CheckUser to look into it over there. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 01:45, 12 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Why Can't I create a wiki for Nima Owji

Hello, How are you today? I wanna create a wiki for Nima Owji. He is one of the youngest programmers and directors. Why his name is protected?Mohammadrezaliaghat (talk) 07:54, 12 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Because sock puppets were spamming our website. Try creating a profile on a social networking website instead. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 08:06, 12 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know who spammed but Nima Owji is a famous person. I can give you many refrencesMohammadrezaliaghat (talk) 08:11, 12 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No, you're not a famous person, and stop creating sock puppets. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 08:42, 12 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Amtria62

Thank you for checking Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/FreeatlastChitchat. Would you mind if you can check Amrita52 against Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Kkm010? 

There are indeed a number of sockmasters engaged in changing nationalities, but Amrita62 gets close to Kkm010 big time. Compare: [25][26] or removal of "school names" on infobox on same article,[27][28] or that they "restored earlier" version on this same article:[29][30] Aman Kumar Goel (Talk) 08:25, 13 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Everything in the Kkm case is stale, and, honestly, I don't really remember how to identify Kkm behaviorally. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 08:40, 13 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
After making the above message, I had been thinking about that too. The reason why Amrit62 didn't come out as a sock ultimately is because Kkm010 is stale. I have filed a separate report here: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Kkm010. Aman Kumar Goel (Talk) 08:52, 13 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

User using IMDb to create many articles

Hi! You pointed out to me a few months ago that I was using IMDb for premiere dates, and I have been really making an effort not to use IMDb as a citation at all. In the meantime, I've come across editor Hitcher vs. Candyman who has been creating many film articles and clearly using IMDb to generate things like release dates and other credits. I've addressed it with them back in late July, and it does not appear that they are taking it into serious consideration (see Radium Girls (film) and Elsewhere (2019 film), for example). Would you mind reaching out to them? Perhaps hearing it from an administrator would guide them into better editing habits like it did me. BOVINEBOY2008 16:48, 16 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Bovineboy2008: Are you reporting me? Hitcher vs. Candyman (talk) 17:01, 16 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Hitcher vs. Candyman: Are you still adding poorly sourced information to articles? I'm happy to take it to ANI if you would like me to. BOVINEBOY2008 17:04, 16 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Bovineboy2008: Perhaps if you could please address your concerns at my talk page before we get into ANI. It appears that you want me to get blocked or something. Hitcher vs. Candyman (talk) 17:08, 16 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Hitcher vs. Candyman: I would prefer you just edit to the same standards set out for all editors. And I have addressed this with you back in July. BOVINEBOY2008 17:10, 16 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Part of the problem is that half of the content in film articles used to be unsourced, but few people made a big deal of it. When I started making a big deal of it, it was not really a welcome change. But I think things are really getting better. For one thing, we have more people reverting vandalism in film articles now that they can tell what the correct date is for a premiere, what the verified production companies are, etc. Before, it was all basically guesswork. Is this date right? Maybe! Who knows. Hitcher vs. Candyman, you seem to do good work, but, really, don't copy from the IMDb. Most of the time, it's correct, but it's also subject to a lot of incorrect guesswork. Or sometimes it's just plain wrong. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 18:09, 16 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You've got mail!

Hello, NinjaRobotPirate. Please check your email; you've got mail! The subject is Wikipedia email from user "Mdaniels5757".
Message added 14:12, 17 August 2020 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

—‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 14:12, 17 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If you check the block log, I didn't make the range block in question. I only tweaked the block to avoid collateral damage. If you're affected by an anon-only range block, stay logged into your account and you'll be able to edit just fine. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 15:29, 17 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

IP not heeding warnings

Hey there NinjaRobotPirate! This IP 177.72.48.196 has been changing images for no reason and making overall disruptive edits to multiple hurricane related articles. Many users (including myself) have posted multiple warnings on this IP’s talk page but they simply seem to be WP:NOTHERE since they fail to answer or apparently heed any warnings. Do you think a temporary block may be needed in this situation? We’ve asked this IP to explain the reasoning behind their edits but they always fail to respond so I honestly have no idea what to do. I’d very much appreciate your help with this. Thank you! CycloneYoris talk! 18:46, 17 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I did a short block for disruptive editing and left a note about communicating. The IP address is registered to a Brazilian internet service provider, so there may be language issues. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 05:19, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you so much! Let's hope they return to edit constructively once the block expires. CycloneYoris talk! 06:01, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello there, NinjaRobotPirate! I saw that you are a checkuser. Can you do a small check for me on this user - User:Miguel 04012010 ? I have a small feeling that the aforementioned user might be 177.72.48.196 (talk · contribs). However, most of the edits Miguel has been doing have been constructive and of good-faith, until this edit. It is very certain that this user is unrelated to the IP, and certainly didn't know not to put non real-color images to storm infoboxes (the account in pretty new), but from the edit summary, I feel that the user knows what he is talking about. Also, 177.72.48.196 (talk · contribs) has stopped editing completely, even after the block ended. I may be all wrong, and I apologize if it is all for nothing. Thank you very much! ~ Destroyeraa🌀 14:52, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Destroyeraa: policy generally forbids me from revealing someone's IP address. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 15:11, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
But can you just tell me if the they are the same user. Please. Thank you. ~ Destroyeraa🌀 15:14, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I just told you that this is against policy to connect an IP address to an account. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 15:16, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
OK. Got it. I'm not a checkuser. But how did you find out that 177.72.48.196 (talk · contribs) is Brazilian? ~ Destroyeraa🌀 15:22, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Click the button that says "geolocate" at the bottom of Special:Contributions/177.72.48.196. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 15:26, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Shaun of the Dead

Hello. I apologise to bother you, but recently, I read the article, and although it belongs to the category "Parodies of horror", there is no information/source/citation that would support that claim. I checked, and it seems that the edit was made by an IP user who had some issues with adding unsourced content and categories to various articles. Could you take a look at it, please? Thank you. --89.66.254.10 (talk) 01:30, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like we discussed this a bit in Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Film/Archive 70#Shaun of the Dead. If you think that the article shouldn't be in that category, you could always remove it. If nobody disagrees with you, the issue is resolved. That's a popular film, though, so someone might disagree. If they do, you could discuss it on the article talk page. In that old discussion, it looks like I suggested that we include prose commentary about this rather than categories, which still strikes me as a good idea. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 09:43, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
We could always poll the denizens of the Winchester to see if there's consensus for the category.-- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 17:31, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Dean Winchester edits Wikipedia? NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 19:49, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Rd64e socks

Hi NRP! Thanks for handling SPIs once again. You note that the account I reported is unrelated to Rd64e but is related to other socks of even more socks that you blocked for being socks of Rd64e. I explained this previously but unfortunately received no reply. Obviously, this makes reporting new cases of the "TX Interactive LTAs" unnecesserily difficult. The vandalism starting from ElizabethNicoleTl is probably a new string of LTAs, but I have no way to check this. Could you help me split the SPI cases into two trees, so that I can report future cases properly? Regards, IceWelder [✉] 18:13, 21 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I could ask a clerk to split the cases. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 18:17, 21 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you kindly. IceWelder [✉] 18:59, 22 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Pocoyohasan8

Got a quacker here: ReaderWrecker10. Since you took out ReaderWrecker01–09 I thought maybe you'd like to complete the set. Betty Logan (talk) 18:04, 22 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ugh, what a pain. I guess kids don't have anything better to do right now. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 18:42, 22 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:NinjaRobotPirate&oldid=974613844"