User talk:Bbb23

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

86.8.201.* blocks

Should 86.8.201.137 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) get blocked along with the other address you just blocked in that range? See Spider-Man: Far From Home for edits in question. —C.Fred (talk) 01:41, 26 November 2019 (UTC)

Yes, thanks for bringing it to my attention. So many, and I felt I had to block them singly, which is so more work.--Bbb23 (talk) 01:45, 26 November 2019 (UTC)

Is this a situation of ban evasion? Simmerdon3448 is claiming that they were reverting edits by a banned user—as they are appealing the block I just gave them for 3RR violation. —C.Fred (talk) 01:51, 26 November 2019 (UTC)

You can see that my blocks were CU blocks. The question is did Simmerdon3448 know that at the time they reverted. I didn't look. Did they claim it in any of their edit summaries? Did they have a basis for such a claim if they indeed made one? Sorry I can't be of more help.--Bbb23 (talk) 01:55, 26 November 2019 (UTC)

Yeah, constructively, indef block == ban for purposes of revert-on-sight. I did ask where the diff of the report to ANI was for enforcement of ban evasion. I'll take a look at the edit summaries closer; all the ones I saw mentioned edit warring, not ban evasion. —C.Fred (talk) 01:57, 26 November 2019 (UTC)

And no mention of ban evasion until after the fact. They claimed reverting disruptive editing. The kicker for me was when they reverted one more time even after I told them they were involved in a content dispute and did not qualify for the 3RR exemption. —C.Fred (talk) 02:00, 26 November 2019 (UTC)

Although you're more on top of this than I am, I would leave them blocked unless they show some insight into their policy violations, which, thus far, doesn't seem the case.--Bbb23 (talk) 02:02, 26 November 2019 (UTC)

That's my inclination, and they don't seem to show any insight into the policy. I wanted to make sure I wasn't missing some situation that you knew more about. Thank you. —C.Fred (talk) 02:04, 26 November 2019 (UTC)

I sincerely apologise for my behavior regarding posting my website as i was unaware of Wikipedia's policy. Sorry if i offended you but can you please remove the block? Hams999 (talk) 16:53, 2 December 2019 (UTC)

Grammeteo818 Sockpuppet questions

Can you please start the Sockpuppet investigations page / SPI of Grammeteo818 since you were the one who blocked the user first? Snyn7 (talk)

Page wrongly deleted

The Hilary Rowland page was deleted by speedy deletion but did not fit the criteria for speedy deletion, and should be restored. Please restore and if you take issue with any of the content, post in Talk and revise rather than delete. Thank you! SarahWoodstock (talk) 08:35, 29 November 2019 (UTC)

@SarahWoodstock: I already told you what to do on your Talk page, but you apparently wish to ignore it as it doesn't suit your agenda. If you continue to create Talk pages of non-existent articles rather than follow Wikipedia procedures, you risk being blocked. Frankly, I don't believe you have any legitimate purpose in being here other than to promote Rowland.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:07, 29 November 2019 (UTC)

I don't understand why you are being so hostile. I don't see any instructions. You only said my editing was disruptive, but I was only improving the post. As I said, given that the page was live for over a decade, I don't believe this page for the criteria for speedy deletion. Please restore and tell me what to change. Thank you!  — Preceding unsigned comment added by SarahWoodstock (talk • contribs) 13:36, 30 November 2019 (UTC)

Regarding deleted article

Good evening, A page that I recently tried my hand at creating, Caresocius, was deleted for being an advertisement. I was not finished with creating the page and wanted to incorporate more or perhaps remove elements that may seem like an advertisement. This is a company that I discovered and was really passionate to write about in my homeland. Please let me know if you have any further suggestions for the article that can help me become a better contributor. Thank you for the help. Csdestiner09 (talk) 06:00, 1 December 2019 (UTC) talk

A significantly more likely reason why you wrote that article is that you were paid to do so. Blocked for UPE. MER-C 11:09, 1 December 2019 (UTC)

This user has admitted editing on certain topics, but the account itself has not edited those topics. Might be worth a check. MER-C 13:28, 1 December 2019 (UTC)

Mohanthal for you

	For nonstop work at SPI
	Traditional Gujarati sweet dish which will give you some energy and refreshments. Only consume if you don’t have diabetes. :p Harshil want to talk? 16:42, 1 December 2019 (UTC)

Closure re the chemical weapons dispute

Hi, did you mean to leave a closing message on this AN3 where you wrote 'No action' in the header? Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 00:16, 2 December 2019 (UTC)

No. Do you think I should have? SharabSalam self-reverted, which mooted the issue of whether they had violated 1RR. Honestly, I'm not sure they needed to do that for a revert of something that was added two years ago, but... I'll leave a comment, though, if you think that would be better.--Bbb23 (talk) 01:28, 2 December 2019 (UTC)

Now closed per my wording. I asked because sometimes random people come by and change the headers of these reports, so it is worth checking for an admin comment in the body. EdJohnston (talk) 04:59, 2 December 2019 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – December 2019

News and updates for administrators from the past month (November 2019).

Administrator changes

EvergreenFir • ToBeFree

Akhilleus • Athaenara • John Vandenberg • Melchoir • MichaelQSchmidt • NeilN • Youngamerican • 😂

CheckUser changes

Beeblebrox

Deskana

Interface administrator changes

Evad37

Guideline and policy news

• An RfC on the administrator resysop criteria was closed. 18 proposals have been summarised with a variety of supported and opposed statements. The inactivity grace period within which a new request for adminship is not required has been reduced from three years to two. Additionally, Bureaucrats are permitted to use their discretion when returning administrator rights.
• Following a proposal, the edit filter mailing list has been opened up to users with the Edit Filter Helper right.

Technical news

• Wikimedia projects can set a default block length for users via MediaWiki:ipb-default-expiry. A new page, MediaWiki:ipb-default-expiry-ip, allows the setting of a different default block length for IP editors. Neither is currently used. (T219126)

Arbitration

• Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee Elections is open to eligible editors until Monday 23:59, 2 December 2018 UTC. Please review the candidates and, if you wish to do so, submit your choices on the voting page.

Miscellaneous

• The global consultation on partial and temporary office actions that ended in October received a closing statement from staff concluding, among other things, that the WMF will no longer use partial or temporary Office Action bans... until and unless community consensus that they are of value or Board directive.

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:47, 2 December 2019 (UTC)

User: SeanMXD

Why do you keep removing the picture on Yenitza Muñoz? SeanMXD (talk) 02:50, 2 December 2019 (UTC)

Bothiman

Hey there, is there any chance you could check for Bothiman sleepers? Is that super-vague? I saw Lisvanna show up at an article on Vijay to emphatically demand the removal of a source that suggested the latest Vijay film might not have made as much as other sources were claiming. Since our chief Vijay fan is Bothiman, that's got me thinking. They also created a user page, as socks often do, but it's not exactly the same format as Bothiman, so I'm not 100% confident that there is a behavioural match. Any help would be appreciated, as usual. Thanks! Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:59, 2 December 2019 (UTC)

 Confirmed + Pgagrwl (talk · contribs · count).--Bbb23 (talk) 16:12, 2 December 2019 (UTC)

Gracias. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:55, 2 December 2019 (UTC)

Cyphoidbomb, Bbb23, since you're talking about them, 99.99% sure Petersunl this is the latest - usual Vijay hype-train (whoo! whoo! all aboard!) edits. Ravensfire (talk) 22:44, 4 December 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for the help

Hi, Bbb23. Just dropping by to say thanks for the assistance on deleting my erroneously created investigation request page on a suspected sockpuppeteer. It's obviously my first time requesting an investigation on sockpuppetry, so I wasn't quite certain how to go about it. So thanks for the assistance. I appreciate it.

Migsmigss (talk) 19:21, 2 December 2019 (UTC)

Why?

Why is it inappropriate, you mean by possible outing? Atlantic306 (talk) 20:54, 2 December 2019 (UTC)

Page deleted

So I created a page for the technical fest of my college but after being accepted it was deleted. Reason being it's an event but the problem is that there is a category page for these events, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Technical_festivals_in_India There are 30+ pages of the same kind as my page was and there are some pages with hardly any content. The page that I created has citation and was informational but it got deleted anyway. So, I wanted to ask what exactly is different in those pages and my page... I can't link to the page because it's deleted but it was "Titiksha (Fest)" Thank You Shoaib Ahmed 00 (talk) 12:27, 3 December 2019 (UTC)

User:Apples&Manzanas

Hi, suspect this account is a sockpuppet, they started an AFD in their first few edits. Just asking if it reminds you of anyone before I look closer, it reminds me of several blocked editors such as Sheldybett (talk · contribs), regards Atlantic306 (talk) 22:01, 4 December 2019 (UTC)

• Also similar to CosmicEmperor (talk · contribs) with the interest in food articles Atlantic306 (talk) 23:09, 4 December 2019 (UTC)

Abuse of my in AfD

Please point to any rules in Wikipedia that prevent my perfectly reasonable vote on AfD that you are harassing and abusing me over.MarcelB612 (talk) 05:09, 5 December 2019 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Do not disrupt Wikipedia to illustrate a point. BD2412 T 05:31, 5 December 2019 (UTC)

I did not disrupt anything. I engaged appropriately in the AfD voting process, I did not disrupt it. My participation was then disrupted, by Bbb23, to make a point by the way. Wikipedia:Do not disrupt Wikipedia to illustrate a point DOES NOT apply at all to this case. I was not protesting the AfD process. I was not using the AfD process "in a way I felt was consistent, with the aim of making it changed". I am not protesting for any sort of change to Wikipedia's AfD process. Indeed, as I've already stated: I was NOT making a "protest vote". MarcelB612 (talk) 05:40, 5 December 2019 (UTC)

You're more or less on your own there. Doug Weller talk 16:50, 5 December 2019 (UTC)

Page wrongly deleted - entekrishi.com

Hi. Why you deleted entekrishi.com page? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entekrishi.com that article was deleted in 2015 and restored in 2015 due to the value of that portal. See the news in Indian TV channel https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VFQD-8GJHYU . See the news in NEWS paper https://www.manoramaonline.com/environment/green-heroes/new-gen-agriculture.html . if you want more than I can search and share the links of many news papers. If you dont understand the languages in local news then dont think that the page(entekrishi.com) has no value. I am a Kerala person. I belong to that NGO. We know the value of their portal and the use of that portal in Kerala. That portal is not owned by any privet company or group. That portal is controlled by a NGO of farmers. Please help them to modify the content if they written that page like advertisement. Please restore and if you take issue with any of the content, post in Talk and revise rather than delete. Please please please help farmers in Kerala — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jaisonje (talk • contribs) 07:09, 5 December 2019 (UTC)

@Jaisonje: See WP:42 and WP:NUKE for why it was deleted. Read our policy on editing with a conflict of interest and this guide on how to write articles that won't be deleted before trying again. Ian.thomson (talk) 08:16, 5 December 2019 (UTC)

My page got deleted for "Blatant hoax"

So after making my page of my fictional country (even precise it was, no harm was done), it gets deleted for "blatant hoax". The worst part is that I never said it existed IRL, I said it was fictional. I find this removal very unfair as I also spent hours of work on it. I'd like to appeal this deletion, please. Thank you for your understanding. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Brice Tavan (talk • contribs) 14:28, 5 December 2019 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not a place for you to screw around. If you persist, you risk being blocked.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:30, 5 December 2019 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Brice Tavan, your fantasy still exists on fandom.com. Keep it there. Don't confuse it with the real world. Cabayi (talk) 15:10, 5 December 2019 (UTC)

Cabayi, they have no standards there. What website would allow a period after a section title? What is this world coming to? Drmies (talk) 15:28, 6 December 2019 (UTC)

Exactly so Drmies. You wouldn't see that kind of anarchy in any of the fantasy countries at nationstates.net or iiwiki.us. Cabayi (talk) 17:14, 6 December 2019 (UTC)

Q

Hi Bbb--I'm dropping this here because you placed a CU block on Franny3249 (talk · contribs), who I see now was a sock of DinoP5568135 (talk · contribs). I checked an IP that Binksternet suspected was evading a block on Glam metal fan 5150 (talk · contribs), and it's very duckish, but CU led me to Franny. Can you maybe have a look at both accounts, and figure out what's going on? Is Dino clever? Thank you so much, Drmies (talk) 15:27, 6 December 2019 (UTC)

Unless they've moved or on vacation, Glam is  Unrelated.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:38, 6 December 2019 (UTC)

Right. But maybe they're cloned. Truth is stranger than fiction sometimes, Bbb. Thanks! Drmies (talk) 16:13, 6 December 2019 (UTC)

More Bothiman crap

Hey man, I just discovered Dindotas who is an obvious Bothiman sock. I don't know why this one didn't show up in recent CU checks, but it's been alive since late November. Could I please ask you to look around for others? I'll block this one. Thank you, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 05:39, 7 December 2019 (UTC)

I didn't see any others. CU checks are not foolproof, particularly when socks use different ranges.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:54, 7 December 2019 (UTC)

Request for temporary protection to my user talk page

Would it be possible to request to have temporary protection to my user talk page? Because I've received quite a few messages recently, and none of them were of any value. (If you check the last ones that I've received, you'll know why I've labelled them as not having any value) I was thinking of requesting that my talk page be temporarily protected so that only users with autoconfirmed status and up can post messages on my user talk page. ― C.Syde (talk | contribs) 11:59, 7 December 2019 (UTC)

Done for one month this time. Happy Holidays!--Bbb23 (talk) 13:52, 7 December 2019 (UTC)

Same person?

I was looking at Talk:Inter Milan#THE LOGOOOOOO!!! and for some reason my gut was telling me that Kalabio and Super Mirai Trunks might be the same person. Today, Super Mirai Trunks popped up again asking the same weird question! I don't know what's going on, just thought it was weird and let you know if you wanted to investigate, cheers. Govvy (talk) 12:39, 7 December 2019 (UTC)

Kalabio hasn't edited since October 15. Super Mirai Trunks didn't start editing until November 7. Other than the intersection on the Talk page, in what other ways have the two users been disruptive? If they were editing at the same time, it would be different.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:17, 7 December 2019 (UTC)

It's more of what is written and how it's written, "I'm an Italian Inter Milan fan, watch out for trolls!!!" written by Kalabio, and "and since I'm an Inter fan, it really bothers me." written by the other guy. Same type of writing style to me, kinda makes me think it's the same person on two different accounts. That's about all I can say. Govvy (talk) 14:32, 7 December 2019 (UTC)

You're not grasping my point. Assuming they are the same person, is what they are doing sufficiently abusive to constitute socking, particularly since the older account stopped editing before the newer account began?--Bbb23 (talk) 14:36, 7 December 2019 (UTC)

Not much on the English wiki contrib... Okay.. nm then! :/ Govvy (talk) 15:58, 7 December 2019 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Icewhiz

Hi, I noticed some users claimed I may be a sockmaster of Batbash or JoeZ451. Can I initiate a sockpuppet investigation of myself, and if I can, how can I do that?--Paul Siebert (talk) 04:59, 8 December 2019 (UTC)

Who besides My very best wishes is accusing you? You can respond at the SPI if you wish, although that kind of back-and-forth is usually unproductive. You cannot request an investigation of yourself, though. "On some Wikimedia projects, an editor's IP addresses may be checked upon their request, typically to prove innocence against a sockpuppet allegation. Such checks are not allowed on the English Wikipedia and such requests will not be granted." (WP:CHK).--Bbb23 (talk) 14:00, 8 December 2019 (UTC)

I'd be surprised if there is a connection, but someone may want to frame you (I don't think MBLV is trying to do this, but maybe someone else has created a sock to make a connection, perhaps just to throw more chaos into this). There is a new account which was discussed at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/LoganTheWatermelon/Archive which someone observed may look like someone's attempt to suggest I am socking (a lot of their edits are effectively copying my votes at AfDs with virtually the same rationale). Coincidence? Shrug.

Anyway, I came here to ask Bbb23 about 1) the usefulness of behavioral analysis. In recent SPIs I was involved in it didn't seem to matter; and checkusers don't seem to even comment on whether it is useful or not, it seems simply ignored, with comments limited to 'different IP/proxy=inconclusive'. And if so, 2) what recourse is there when new account that looks behavioraly like an old one to several users use proxies? Are they immune to SPI, despite behavioral evidence? What behavioral evidence is sufficient, outside of the sock plainly saying they are a sock of an old account? And why aren't the proxies they use blocked? TIA. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 05:52, 8 December 2019 (UTC)

Behavioral evidence is mandatory at SPI. The analysis of it vis-a-vis technical evidence varies from report to report, and I cannot give you a one-size-fits-all answer. Proxies are not always blocked; that too varies based on the proxy.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:03, 8 December 2019 (UTC)

I only replied with comments to the ping by Piotrus on SPI. This is probably Batbash. If I wanted to submit an SPI request about any user, I would do it. Not at this point. My very best wishes (talk) 16:15, 8 December 2019 (UTC)

But you also accused Paul of violating policy. If you're not prepared to follow through on that, you shouldn't have done so: it constitutes a personal attack.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:19, 8 December 2019 (UTC)

OK, I clarified my statement on SPI. I do not accuse Paul of violating the policy, and my comments are mostly related to the Joe (the SPI subject) who I think coordinate his activity with editing by Paul; all my comments were made in proper place and supported by diffs. My very best wishes (talk) 16:35, 8 December 2019 (UTC)