User talk:Blablubbs

Suspect me

sock
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
Hello Blablubbs, Violating Wikipedia's rules is against the wiki community, I know this. I have joined this community after learning everything.Yes, I want to make Emiway Bantai, because I am a fan of them. Is it wrong to be a fan or not, and you can't even write and do this come under the purview of doubt? And I want to make Arishfa Khan and not Arshifa Khan - sandbox. You checked my sandbox but are still blaming me.I am not what you are thinking, and soon you will find out. Thank you 𝐃𝐚𝐝𝐚𝐑𝐚𝐰𝐚𝐧🇮🇳 15:34, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Phoenix man

sock
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
Hello, please have a look at this? I am suspected as a Sockpuppet. Hope you can verify whether I'm a sock. Kindly please do it fast if you can. The false allegation disappoints! Sharath Abhivadyah Talk Page 01:16, 3 April 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/KızılBörü1071

Should I add a report for Special:Contributions/Turgut Alp 500000; or should we just go straight to DENY and get blocks on sight without further bureaucracy? RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 16:58, 3 April 2021 (UTC)

RandomCanadian, I'm probably not the best person to ask about that specific master, but for active abuse in obvious LTA cases, AIV is usually fine in my opinion, especially for throwaways – cases at SPI can linger for extended periods of time, and looking over the archives, it seems like CU isn't able to do much more than give you confirmation. You can file, of course, but personally I probably wouldn't. Best, Blablubbs|talk 17:13, 3 April 2021 (UTC)

Ok thanks, already at AIV anyway. Cheers, RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 17:18, 3 April 2021 (UTC)

And now blocked by ToBeFree. Cheers, RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 20:44, 3 April 2021 (UTC)

Oh, hey. Well, that probably answers the question. I personally prefer WP:SPI for sockpuppet reports, still, as sockpuppetry reports at AIV are rarely as straightforward and easy to act on as the reporter believes them to be. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 20:46, 3 April 2021 (UTC)

@ToBeFree: Had I not linked the LTA page from AIV? Understand that reports might not be "as straightforward and easy to act on as the reporter believes them to be"; (and I probably shouldn't go into too much details about it, BEANS and whatnot, since this one has been at it for the past few months); but AIV is usually the fastest route (maybe a more effective solution for this would be warranted)... RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 20:58, 3 April 2021 (UTC)

LTA pages can also be linked to from SPI case pages. My main point is that AIV is only, and can remain only, a quick report venue because the reports there do not require a lot of investigation independently on who reviews them. LTAs may require some familiarity with the LTA. Relying purely on a user-created LTA description page when blocking a user isn't possible; I always have to look at the listed users' contributions, compare them and then make the decision. Even for obvious LTAs, this is often a more complicated process than blocking a regular vandal. For me, that's okay; I often take 10 or more minutes to deal with such cases. If every administrator does that, AIV gets backlogged quickly. Or rather, AIV gets backlogged because others don't want to take that time. Those who do monitor SPI, not AIV. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 21:12, 3 April 2021 (UTC)

Your recent action on SPI case closing

sock
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
You may be interested in this. Krepson (talk) 00:41, 4 April 2021 (UTC) Thanks, I reverted that as well. Blablubbs|talk 00:44, 4 April 2021 (UTC)

Responding To Message

Hello Blablubbs. Thank you for your note and for bringing these issues to my attention. I am a consultant with JustAnswer, and I am working on a project to refresh public-facing content about JustAnswer’s business. In the case of JustAnswer’s Wikipedia page, my primary intent was to correct content that is no longer accurate due to JustAnswer changing its business model a few years ago.

I sincerely apologize for not adhering to the policies you referenced in your message. I am new to Wikipedia, and I was unaware of these specific requirements. Besides reviewing the policies and terms you provided, can you please advise me on the appropriate next steps?

Thank you for your assistance. Respectfully, Juspub (talk) 03:26, 8 April 2021 (UTC)Juspub

Hi Juspub; no worries, and thanks for being transparent. Am I correct in assuming that "Juspub" stands for "JustAnswer publicity" or similar? If that is the case, you will have to get renamed, since Wikipedia doesn't allow usernames implying shared use (see our username policy); you can apply for a rename at WP:CHUS. The second thing you will have to do is clearly disclose your connection on your userpage and ideally on the talk pages of articles you have a COI with. As a paid editor, you are strongly discouraged from editing articles directly; instead you should file edit requests; we have a handy wizard to do so here. You may also want to see our plain and simple conflict of interest guide for more information. I hope this helps, please let me know if you have any other questions. Best, Blablubbs|talk 11:34, 8 April 2021 (UTC)

Hi Blablubbs. Thank you for your reply and counsel. Per your direction, I have disclosed my connection to JustAnswer on my userpage and the talk page of the article. My username will not be shared, and it’s actually just a coincidence that it sounds like “JustAnswer Publicity”. I will research the “edit requests” and wizard you kindly provided and will adhere to this process to request any future changes to the article. I’ve sincerely tried to remain non-promotional, objective and fact-based (citing each comment while avoiding re-articulation from sourced articles). I'm hoping to have the “advertising” template / flag removed at the top of the article, which I will submit through “edit requests”. Before I do that, I'd greatly appreciate any additional feedback you might have on the objectivity of the article contents, and if anything specific stands out as promotional to you. Thanks again for all your time and help! Juspub (talk) 21:45, 8 April 2021 (UTC)Juspub

Juspub, happy to help. To be frank with you, the content you've added is highly promotional; it reads, essentially, like a re-hashed PR press release or product catalogue, beginning with the first sentence is an online question and answer site that connects customers with experts across 700 categories including tech support, legal, mechanic, home improvement, veterinary, medical and more, 24 hours a day is not encyclopaedic content. Most of the content on the page appears to be aimed at making JustAnswer look good to potential customers – and that's not really what we're for. The entire lead (which is too long – content should be split into sections and the lead should be a short summary of those) is essentially "this is what the company has to say about its own product", even if secondary sources are used. The article will need a thorough rewrite, I'm afraid. Best, Blablubbs|talk 23:57, 8 April 2021 (UTC)

Move

Hello again! In case you have notifications disabled, I wanted to let you know I've replied here and updated the draft based on your feedback. Do you have a moment to take another look? Thanks again! Inkian Jason (talk) 15:09, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Replied elsewhere, sorry for the delay :). Blablubbs|talk 16:01, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the note on my talk page. I've responded there and hope you continue discussion as needed at Talk:Move_(company)#Proposed_updates. Thanks again! Inkian Jason (talk) 19:07, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Maximus Inc.

Hi Blablubbs! Thank you again for replying to my introduction request. I am not sure if you saw, I have also left a reply to the discussion you started about "Due weight" in the article. Both you and Z1720 raised some very interesting points. I think that a draft that I have prepared might help with addressing some of the key issues. Were you able to take a look at that yet? Also, I have a query about the Maximus logo. I left a message on the logo file talk page but have not received any response, do you happen to know anything about logo file licensing? Thank you in advance. HSMaximus (talk) 17:49, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Hi HSMaximus, sorry for the late reply. I haven't gotten to the page yet, and I can't promise that I will; for the most part, I've been fairly busy with other things recently. As for the logo: I'm very far from an expert in copyright, but I think the bot-placed tag there is because the image is both tagged as being in the public domain, and as a non-free file, and those things conflict with each other. I'm not a lawyer, so proceed at your own risk, but my personal assumption is that the image is probably indeed in the public domain because it does not cross the threshold of originality, and is hence ok to upload as a high-res file or upload to commons. You may want to see WP:PDFONT and c:COM:TOO United States about that. Best, Blablubbs|talk 16:07, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Further concerns

I think you may not realize the possibility of outing in what you have been discussing at the VP. . Please take further concerns to a suitable forum, such as arbcom. DGG ( talk ) 23:35, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

DGG, to be quite honest, I'm not entirely sure what the outing concern with regard to that specific question is; my question was whether it is okay to participate in discussions internal to the project with two undisclosed accounts as long as there's no overlap?, which is implied by your action and does not relate to any specific individual. My understanding of policy was that undisclosed alternative accounts were not to be used in discussions internal to the project in general – I'm not bothered if that isn't the case, but it would be relevant to my work as an SPI clerk if I am misinterpreting policy there. Best, Blablubbs|talk 23:57, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

It seem obvious to me that further discussion on this line will lead to revealing the identity of the other account. I I do not consider this suitable for discussion on a page devoted to purely technical matters. As you're aware from SPI , there's an inherent tension between the objectives of privacy and deal with puppetry. I am not sure myself how to proceed, which is why I have listed it on the checkuser list for further advice. DGG ( talk ) 04:40, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

DGG, I do think there's some questions here which need clarifying, but I will respect your request to not continue this on-wiki. I have sent an email to User:Arbitration Committee outlining my questions. I hope they will provide some public clarity to the ambiguity in WP:ILLEGIT which we all are struggling with. -- RoySmith (talk) 15:34, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

DGG, I'm going to keep this intentionally vague, but Sam has repeatedly violated WP:SOCK in the past by editing the same articles both with his alt (which is not hard to find) and as an IP, in most cases without any sort of adequate disclosure. The Sam at Megaputer account itself also has overlap with both the other named account and the IP. That's a textbook violation of WP:ILLEGIT. Given that Sam has e.g. expressed interest in obtaining the sensitive researcher user right, his alt's conduct is absolutely relevant to the Sam at Megaputer account, and I think it's a stretch to say that there isn't at the very least evasion of scrutiny going on here. Blablubbs|talk 17:12, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

Blablubbs, Care to send the violations off to ArbCom by email? That would be most helpful. CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 20:41, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

CaptainEek will do, likely tomorrow. :) Blablubbs|talk 22:12, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

I have asked arb com again, and they suggest I should tell you it is being discussed by them, and you should write to them if you have anything you wish to add about this. There's nothing further I can do here. DGG ( talk ) 11:36, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Tagging on Louisehynes11

It looks like you have tagged the above user as blocked indefinitely, but they were only blocked for 31 hours. You may want to fix that. ~ Aseleste (t, e | c, l) 05:14, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

Fixed, thank you. :) Blablubbs|talk 11:23, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

Why did you revert out my edits?

Hi. I edited the sweepstake wikipedia page. Forgive me, I'm new to this, but it looks like you just deleted all my work? Why? Of course, I'm happy to discuss and explain (and defend if necessary) my work. Thank you...

Thejokethief (talk) 18:24, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

Hi, Thejokethief. Do you have any connection to goldenheartsgames.com? Blablubbs|talk 18:25, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

Yes! I am cofounder and CEO of Golden Hearts Games. That's why I have this knowledge and want it to be included in relevant Wikipedia pages. Is that OK? Thejokethief (talk) 15:16, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

@Thejokethief: it is not, I'm afraid. You have a strong conflict of interest and you should not be editing any pages related to your company, at least not directly. In the two substantial edits you have made, you inserted links to Goldenhearts 3 and 6 times, respectively. Wikipedia is not a platform for search engine optimisation, and external links should not be placed in articles. Please do not continue to insert backlinks to your website; doing so will likely result in your being blocked from editing. Please review our policies on paid editing, conflicts of interest and promotion thoroughly before making any further edits. Blablubbs|talk 15:20, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Ah. OK, apologies, I did not consider that and obviously did not review those policies before making my edits. Of course, I will not do this again. Still, we think the business model we are bringing to market is worth Wikipedia's notice. And some of our competitors in this space are linked to from Wikipedia. What if any process might you recommend for us to work with Wikipedia? Thank you.

Thejokethief (talk) 15:29, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Thejokethief Wikipedia isn't a business directory and we generally discourage individuals from writing about their own companies - see the introduction to WP:Conflict of interest. If your business is significant enough to merit encyclopedic coverage, someone without a connection to the subject will write about it eventually. The existence of other inappropriate content on Wikipedia does not mean that such content is encouraged, merely that no one has gotten around to removing it yet. Spicy (talk) 15:45, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Sockpuppet question

Hi Blablubbs. I found your name on the list of sockpuppet investigations clerks. I am convinced that the editor Igorikrasti is a sockpuppet of the recently blocked editor Deltagammaz, as the editing patterns of the two accounts seem similar to me, and specifically, both accounts have made numerous edits to Chamath Palihapitiya, mostly content that reflects negatively on the subject. But because I work for Chamath's company Social Capital (as I've disclosed), I'm not sure it's appropriate for me to file a sockpuppet investigation in this case. Do you think you could take a quick look at the situation? Thank you, CarmenCatSC (talk) 19:50, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for the heads up CarmenCatSC, I'll take a look as soon as I find time. Blablubbs|talk 22:14, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Well, that didn't take long, this quacked rather intensely. Talked to a steward, account now globally locked, both tagged. This traces back to an older SPI, but I'd have to look into that connection more (there's some weirdness involved) to be able to say more. Blablubbs|talk 23:11, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Nice work

I'd been following Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/SpareSeiko and it finally came to resolution and wanted to thank for your time and effort rooting them out. Extortion could threaten the entire project left unchecked. -- GreenC 02:39, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

Thank you, GreenC – though much of the credit here has to go to MarioGom. I'm glad the whole saga seems to be coming to an end. Blablubbs|talk 08:52, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

Well thank you also MarioGom. This gang will likely continue but now we know them a little better. -- GreenC 15:39, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

Also, I am a programmer and can do some type of work if you foresee a way to automate reports that would help you. No guarantees I can do the work but can consider ideas that are not too involved. Given the lack of people willing and skilled to track bad actors on the Internet (not just Wikipedia) automation is a way to help leverage detection. -- GreenC 15:44, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

Regarding the SPI case

Hi Blablubbs, I have replied to your query at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Dipsikharay25. Thank you. Run n Fly (talk) 11:37, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

Handled, thanks. Blablubbs|talk 11:46, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

A message from Aladdin.digi

Hey buddy thank you so much for creating my account. May I get some assist? Aladdin.digi (talk) 20:41, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Hi Aladdin.digi. What can I help you with? Blablubbs|talk 10:14, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

You rock!

		The Barnstar of Diligence
		Not only for disentangling a complex SPI, but for being willing to clerk SPIs at all, and for taking this one on while under the scrutiny of training Fiddle Faddle 18:39, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Fiddle Faddle 18:39, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Thank you Fiddle Faddle, I'm glad I could help – thanks for noticing and reporting. :) Blablubbs|talk 20:13, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

There were loads of folk talking about it, but no-one grasped the nettle, so I did, albeit imperfectly Fiddle Faddle 20:14, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Timtrent, Now if we could just convince him to get his own mop.... -- RoySmith (talk) 21:41, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

@RoySmith Perhaps, and yet there is no true need for one in the role. RFA nowadays is truly awful. I cannot see why anyone would submit themselves to it Fiddle Faddle 22:08, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Thank you both – maybe some day. :) Blablubbs|talk 23:38, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

I think adminship is a difficult choice. I have made that choice and I do not ever see myself altering it. Fiddle Faddle 16:01, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for closing a Sockpuppetry investigation on me

I really appreciate it that you closed the SPI on me, because I love editing TV related stuff. LooneyTraceYT No Pets allowed • contribs 15:13, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

@LooneyTraceYT: Glad if I could help. Having looked over your edits in the course of the investigation, I do want to give you some unsolicited advice: Please take care to not rush into things on Wikipedia, especially when it concerns administrative areas. For example, you should not be adding block notices as a non-admin, as you did here. Similarly, it isn't necessary to report username violations for users who registered years ago and never edited. Please also take care to not bite the newcomers; for example, this user uses what's called a dynamic IP address. They aren't deliberately using multiple IP addresses, that's just the way their computer works. Note also that not providing an edit summary is not, on its own, a reason to revert an edit ([1][2][3]). When reverting people, keep in mind that they are likely acting with good intentions, regardless of whether their edits are suboptimal or not, and remember to always explain your reverts clearly; for example, I'm not sure what you meant when you reverted these two edits [4][5] as "unreliable". I know you mean well, but Wikipedia can be a confusing place and it's important to take it slow. I take the approach that whenever I'm unsure about something, I try to ask somebody who might know what to do; if you ever need help or have any questions, you could ask at the teahouse, or reach out to me on my talk page. Best, Blablubbs|talk 15:46, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

I am a real girl after all!

Thanks for getting an account set up for me. I know it seems silly, but there was a small tidbit of information I found tremendously helpful and I wanted to include it in the article about a certain fish. Normally, I would let it go as it wasn't a very pressing issue, but the thought occurred to me that I may wish to edit something in the future. I would have to go through the process then, so I may as well bite the bullet and take care of it now. Account created. Article edited. User happy. Thank you. NicevilleJenn (talk) 15:18, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

@NicevilleJenn: Happy to help! I don't think that's silly at all – people adding small tidbits of helpful information is what this place runs on. :) Thanks for your contribution; I hope you stick around. Please feel free to reach out if you have any questions. Best, Blablubbs|talk 15:23, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Re:Suspected Sockpuppets

Good day Blablubbs! I dropped by to ask something from you. Well, the block placed on me was recently lifted as I have proven that Ajhenson21 and Gardo Versace 16 are not associated with my accounts. That being said, can I ask you to remove all tags from these accounts stating that they are suspected sockpuppets of mine or are my sockpuppets since it has been proven beyond a shadow of doubt that they are not related to me.

I would likewise want to bring to your attention Albe23413 and his long list of sockpuppets as I suspect the sockpuppets that were suspected to have been connected to me is actually his sockpuppets. All the hallmarks of his editing behavior are present in the accounts that were linked to me.

Warmest regards Gardo Versace (talk) 16:50, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

And can the SPI be merged back into Ajhenson21? aeschyIus (talk) 21:42, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

Well if you're going to merge the SPIs, you might as well merge it with this one. Of the 10 accounts listed as a sockpuppet of Albe23413, I reported about 60% o them to either Bbb23 or NinjaRobotPirate. So when his next sockpuppet account Ajhenson21 was blocked, he thought it was me that reported him that's why I was the subject of attacks from this account, even trying to run me out of wikipedia as can be seen here. What's both funny and concerning there is that the user wanted to implicate me as a sockppupet of Ajhenson21, but would later turnout to be a sock itself. As can be gleaned from my history, I have never interacted with Ajhenson21 and/or Jricaplaza and yet I was being attacked. That's why the suspicion that the accounts related to Ajhenson21 are sockpuppets of Albe23413 - that Ajhenson21 himself is not a sockmaster but is a mere sockpuppet of Albe23413. Nobody has more axe to grind with me more than Albe23413 and his army of socks, the last time he was blocked around June or July, it was particularly gruesome that hurled cuss words at me. Users Superastig and the ever reliable NinjaRobotPirate would attest to the fact that Albe23413 hold major beef against me which would be the motivation against this smear campaign against me. Note too, that the editing patterns between them are the same - All interested in Philippine TV shows pages, especially Ang Probinsyano, as well as pages relating to typhoons. I hope that a CU can be run between Ajhenson21 and Albe23413 in order to confirm my suspicion and to narrow down the real culprit so we can focus our efforts on a more defined enemy. Gardo Versace (talk) 22:28, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

Hi Gardo Versace – my apologies that this happened to you. I can't do the merging myself – @Girth Summit: you mentioned that you'd tidy up the SPI – anything I can help with? Best, Blablubbs|talk 14:18, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

I pinged GeneralNotability and L235 to ask for their assistance with the SPI tidy-up (see my talk). It's not a straightforward move from GV to Ajhenson21 though, because there was a 2017 case against GV that needs to be retained - I thought that I would probably make a mess if I tried to sort it out solo, do you know what needs to be done?

Gardo Versace - once the SPI is tidied up, all the tags will be changed to reflect the new case. Please don't change/remove them just yet. GirthSummit _(blether) 14:45, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

@Girth Summit: I may be wrong about all of this, but I think splitting histories isn't possible; so I'm assuming the way to do this would be to merge Ajhenson into Albe23413 (delete Albe, move on Ajhenson over it top, restore the old revisions), and then perform a cut-and-paste move that splits the Versace SPI into its own case again (while providing attribution via the edit summary). Blablubbs|talk 15:54, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

Page protection

Hey, given the recent trolling, would you like me to semi-protect your user page for a few days? _signed, Rosguill ^talk 18:05, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

@Rosguill: Thanks, but I think I'm good for now – I'd prefer keeping it open so that new users who come across me via ACC welcomes can get in touch. I might take you up on the offer if it keeps going, though :). Blablubbs|talk 18:11, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

Another possible sock

There is an user @Ndusskjraidmsjai: editing on Iraqi related articles. See other users @Hpskawyocbauddkmajakriao: and @Awawpshdmxn:. Beshogur (talk) 20:51, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

@Beshogur: I'm really not at all certain pinging suspected socks is the most intelligent thing you'll have done today. Nick (talk) 20:55, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

Beshogur, good catch; that's them, I'll try to find a steward. I do concur with Nick though; when reporting people for socking, especially LTAs, use something like {{noping}} instead of notifying them directly. Best, Blablubbs|talk 22:30, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

And locked :). Blablubbs|talk 22:55, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

I'm sorry. Thanks. Beshogur (talk) 23:29, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

No worries Beshogur, and happy to help. :) Blablubbs|talk 23:30, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

Thanks!

That was a bit of fun while I was away. Thank you very much for caring about the integrity of these articles! --10mmsocket (talk) 12:36, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

@10mmsocket, glad if I could help :). I'm not particularly involved in the topic area though, I came across it while clerking an SPI case – you may want to report future socks there as they pop up; I think we might have to play Whac-A-Mole for a bit. Blablubbs|talk 12:38, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

There might be another sock b.t.w. User:User1-GFP. Should I add it to the original report? --10mmsocket (talk) 12:41, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Another new sock? FPOS05 (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki) --10mmsocket (talk) 16:09, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

10mmsocket, yep, will add to the case, thanks. Blablubbs|talk 16:14, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Question...

Hi Blablubbs! How are you doing on this fine day? I'm still reverting vandalism, and I'm enjoying myself very much! How's the weather in your part of the world? Here in Queensland, Australia, it has been pouring with rain for two days straight! Cheers, Hockeycatcat (talk) 09:30, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

A pie for you!

Thank you for your page on German sources. It was quite helpful. Scorpions13256 (talk) 20:31, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, Scorpions13256! I'm glad you found it helpful (and this reminds me to finally expand it some more). :) Best, --Blablubbs|talk 20:42, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

editing a redirect

I used the tool on the main WP:SPI page, and I can see what went wrong: I didn't type the name with a capital M. This might be something that needs to get fixed, as I can't imagine I'm the first (or last) person to do this. I'm going to dig into the tool, see what I can do.

In the meantime: thanks for fixing that for me. I had no idea I'd even done it. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 13:20, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

MPants at work, happy to help, and agreed with the tool part – it would be great if you find a fix (this also makes me wonder if the Twinkle sock reporting option fixes caps automatically). Good catch by the way, I've endorsed the check. Best, Blablubbs|talk 13:28, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

I dug down to the code that runs the tool and found the documentation behind it, and unfortunately, there's no easy fix. The Extension:Inputbox tool doesn't have robust validation, and doesn't have any method of honoring redirects, so it needs to be fixed on the server side. I'm thinking this might be worth bringing up on WP:VPT, which I intend to do shortly.

Also, I'm not familiar with the twinkle sock reporting tool, but if it has a text input box, then it almost certainly has this same problem.

Finally, I don't think we've interacted before, and it's been a pleasure to meet you. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 14:11, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

@MPants at work: Thanks for looking. I'm not sure how often this happens (and for new filings where no case exists under the correct name, a simple page move does the trick), but if it is a problem and a "real" technical fix isn't feasible, an edit filter that looks for creations of SPI subpages that start with non-capital letters and then warns or disallows might be an interim solution. If you use Twinkle, the reporting menu is at TW->ARV->Select "sockpuppet" or "sockpuppeteer" in the dropdown menu; new reports automatically insert the master name and I assume Twinkle aborts if you report sockpuppets of a nonexistent master, so this would probably only be an issue in edge cases.

The pleasure is all mine – and thanks for writing NONAZIS, it's probably my favourite piece of sort-of-policy on Wikipedia. Best, Blablubbs|talk 14:29, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

Unfair judgment

My reason for unblock request was accepted by a reviewer. They were convicing .You just stressed on the similarity of our ideas, while Mz7 focused on the writing style of me and Ghazaalch. I really appriciate him for his carful investigation. I wonder if you update the SPI and explaine that I and Ghazaalch are not same user.Saff V. (talk) 13:11, 29 April 2021 (UTC)