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 TonyBallioni (talk | contribs) at 01:32, 25 September 2023 (→‎ygm: new section). 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]

Note: I rarely check my email, so if you send me something important, you should probably let me know.

Bored? Check out User:NinjaRobotPirate/Games for a list of video games that are probably notable. I listed most of the sources, so you don't even have to find them.

Please move the article from LLC to entertainment company

For this clear reason here, I reported through Wikipedia:Requested moves the technical request to see if you could move the article from LLC to entertainment company in Crunchyroll LLC for example, and the truth is that it is uncomfortable for me to see how Google compares Crunchyroll with that of the parent company of the same name and Funimation for its part with Crunchyroll the corporation, but days after this the request was rejected telling me that there were several Crunchyroll companies here. Natural disambiguation would work better than parenthetical disambiguation. And as if the entire disambiguations did not exist after all and there is a possibility to see if there is a consensus on whether or not to move the article from the aforementioned parent company. 190.167.118.147 (talk) 07:01, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It's difficult to understand exactly what you want, but try Wikipedia:Requested moves/Controversial. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 14:30, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I want the article to be fixed by moving the topic from LLC to an entertainment company so that I can first correct the comma in the initial part, and even though, having requested the move, there has been a confusion in the Google search between Crunchyroll and Funimation, I would like you to The situation between the corporation (Funimation) and an entertainment company (Crunchyroll) should be resolved and so many unnecessary disambiguations or redirects created by various users should be deleted.

Something for example my review here: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requested_moves/Technical_requests&diff=prev&oldid=1162912520 190.167.121.71 (talk) 02:20, 2 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Dude, just follow the instructions in the page I linked above. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 02:33, 2 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

False disrupting accusations.

I should mention that my partial block wasn’t fair. If you think requesting a move on Talk:War in Donbas (2014-2022) as a non-ECU is disrupting, you’re wrong! Plus, this rule is nonsense as talk pages are not affected by vandalism and many other non-ECU users who have requested a move on that type of page weren’t partially blocked. So I suggest you remove my block, as you are currently targeting new users. I advise you read Wikipedia:Please do not bite the newcomers. If you feel offended by this, I can guarantee I also feel offended by your actions. BestWikiDog (talk) 12:36, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked for sock puppetry. But to make things clear, I have the best wiki dog. She's pretty big, so arguing with her about this probably isn't wise. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 15:13, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – July 2023

News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2023).

Administrator changes

added Novem Linguae
removed

Bureaucrat changes

removed MBisanz

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Arbitration

  • Two arbitration cases are currently open. Proposed decisions are expected 5 July 2023 for the Scottywong case and 9 July 2023 for the AlisonW case.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:58, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

AFDs and possible sockpuppets

Hello, NinjaRobotPirate,

I saw your recent block of Meegvun and their sockpuppet Gerblinpete. Almost daily, I review all of the week's AFD discussions and on occasion notice editors who create an account and then head right over to AFD land to share their opinions on whether articles should be deleted or kept. I often go to their talk page to discourage them from participating in AFDs until they have more editing experience...sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. The other day, I came upon Whinyharedy and thought I'd alert you in case they looked familiar to previously blocked editors who were active in AFDs. So far, they've only participated in one AFD so they are unlike other editors whom I've given warnings to but after seeing your block of Gerblinpete, I thought I ask you what you thought.

If it would be okay, maybe I could share these observations when I see newly created accounts dive straight into discussing policies and notability in deletion discussions after having an account less than a day. I run into a couple of these precocious editors every week. Thanks and I hope you had a great weekend. ;-) Liz Read! Talk! 02:29, 3 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know, it's hard to say. If you look at Special:Diff/1162913732, the edit is dated incorrectly, as if Whinyharedy is manually typing out the timestamp. I've seen people do that sometimes because they don't realize that a signature adds it automatically. The edit also copies the previous vote, which sometimes indicates a newer user who's unsure of protocol (or a very lazy sock). The "enwikilink" edit summary sounds like someone who has cross-wiki experience. This is a bit odd for someone with no linked global accounts, but it could be an IP editor who created an account. I think there's probably enough justification to take a peek at the CU data, but, then again, it can all be explained away, too. So, I guess on this editor, I'd probably learn toward keeping an eye out for further suspicious edits instead of doing anything right away. It's odd how so many new editors go directly to AfD. I tried to collect some of my thoughts at User:NinjaRobotPirate/Identifying sock puppets, though it's not really deep.

I don't mind looking at suspicious editors if you happen find them. I think you're somewhere around my age, so you probably remember a time when you could just turn off your computer, and the internet went away. It's so hard to get away from the internet now. When you turn off your computer now, the internet is still there, beeping at you and sending you texts on your smartphone, tablets, and everything else you own. But I'm only a CU for as long as I'm logged into Wikipedia. I can at least get a rest from that if I go outside. So, I generally don't feel overworked. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 03:41, 3 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, here's another new editor who raised my suspicions just now, Gus1001. They have only been an editor for two days and their first edits were to a DId you know template! I don't even know how DYK works, how would a new editor know about this obscure, backstage part of Wikipedia, much less decide to edit there after creating an account. I almost wish there was an encyclopedia of sockpuppets and trolls so we could leaf through it and say, "Oh, that X again, editing DYK (or ITN or creating categories or football templates, etc.) ! They are back as account Y!" Since there isn't an open directory to send us to the correct SPI case, we editors just hope that CUers and SPI clerks have an encyclopedic recall of socks they've encountered in the past. But I'll take a look at User:NinjaRobotPirate/Identifying sock puppets, thanks for letting me know.
Oh, and Gus1001 stopped their DYK activity to post a "Happy July 4th" message on Deepfriedokra's talk page so they might have either helped them in the past or blocked their previous accounts. Again, strange that a 2 day old account would know where to find a holiday template. Thanks again. Liz Read! Talk! 23:53, 8 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
There's a private wiki accessible to checkusers and stewards, but that doesn't really help anyone else. It turns out this is Eltomas2003 (talk · contribs). I cheated and found a tagged sock on the same IP address, so I can't really claim to have an encyclopedic knowledge. But it turns out the previous sock was pestering ProtoDrake about DYK, so that makes it pretty obvious in retrospect. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 00:37, 9 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Liz, Eltomas2003 shadows video game related media with a focus on pushing to GA/DYK, usually harassing/stalking Protodrake's efforts in the same area. @NinjaRobotPirate, I got glock handled. -- ferret (talk) 01:02, 9 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I generally don't have a good instinct for spotting socks, especially ones that have had successful second careers at Wikipedia, but I do notice brand new accounts that head drectly for administrative areas like AFD and DYK. Glad you have ways of "ferreting" out new socks when they show up. Liz Read! Talk! 03:53, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, NRP,
I just came across User:ウィ貴公子, an account created years ago but you just came to life tonight creating categories and category redirects which is not a new editor activity. Their interest is baseball but their editing didn't seem familiar to me. Just running it by you. Thanks. Liz Read! Talk! 05:31, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
NO ウィ貴公子 (talk) 05:34, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Wow, editing for one day, I'm impressed you found this mention of your username. Liz Read! Talk! 06:24, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
From Special:CentralAuth/ウィ貴公子 you can see the editor has almost 12K edits on Japanese Wikipedia, which I think would go a long way toward explaining their skill at editing. That's a quick way of seeing how experienced an editor is across various projects. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 13:06, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Liz As info if you link a user directly, that will ping them and alert them to the mention. If you don't want to draw their attention use a template like {{noping}}. -- ferret (talk) 14:30, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, my well, I guess I owe them an apology. I'll post on their talk page.
Here's another one, I think Krijtat is blocked editor AISORESNAVY (whose account is stale). Krijtat continues to write false articles about himself (he's 18, a CEO and handles Grammy award winners) and if you look at the deleted history of Noahkrijtat, both accounts created this article. Thanks. Liz Read! Talk! 05:18, 17 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
One can only assume that they're socks of Noahkungsin, who created Krijtat pages. I gotta go to sleep now, but I could look deeper later. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 05:30, 17 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It looks like if you do a search for krijtat, the only hits are related to this. We could probably salt or even blacklist these titles, but sometimes it's easier to just give younger sock puppeteers their own personal draft article they can use like a sandbox. Hopefully, we can channel all (or most of) their disruption there instead of somewhere else that might be more tedious to clean up, like trying to find hoaxes they added to mainspace articles. The downside is that the draft sometimes wastes the time of other volunteers, who treat it as if it's legitimate and try to help the sock puppeteer write it. So I usually get tired of it and salt the titles eventually. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 17:53, 17 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Pretty ducky but

Would you be willing to check these two? -- ferret (talk) 01:26, 5 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

 Confirmed to User:AardWKIA9A. I want to poke around a bit more, though, because it looks like there's more. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 01:33, 5 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
All confirmed to Rickwas99:
Several of these accounts are blocked on ar.wiki for socking, too. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 01:52, 5 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I forgot I duck blocked one before. Didn't quite expect the nest though. Thanks -- ferret (talk) 02:47, 5 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

off-wiki discussion?

I unsure about the propriety of notifying other (any?) editors about this, but I thought I'd run it past you, first. If I shouldn't've, and shouldn't notify further, please let me know; I just thought off-wiki mischaracterization of editors' discussion might warrant a heads-up:

As a participant in the AFD of William David Volk, I wanted you to be aware of this essay mischaracterizing your collective conclusion, which was further posted here. — Fourthords | =Λ= | 16:13, 5 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it's too late to canvass people to the deletion discussion, so I doubt it's an issue for Wikipedia. Honestly, I didn't click the link. If it were The New York Times, I'd probably click it, but Medium is a glorified blogging website. Does it really matter what some blogger says? Because I've never really thought so. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 18:40, 5 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

One more thing about User:Rickwas99

He's also made User:LancedSoul. So can you blocked User:LancedSoul cause User:LancedSoul is a sockpuppet made by User:Rickwas99 too, can you do that?--~~ MLJ 657 (talk) 16:46, 8 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That's a rather strong accusation. I just checked for socks of Rickwas99 and didn't see anyone like that. What evidence do you have? NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 16:59, 8 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It appears MLJ657 is going around making baseless allegations of this nature. They are probably revenge attacks. I have had to revert several factually dubious edits by this editor in recent weeks, such as was the case here. Therefore I wouldn't put any stock in these accusations; they can go to the SPI page and file a case with appropriate diffs if they have a genuine case. Betty Logan (talk) 19:24, 13 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Block evasion by User:DiscoSlasher

Has been inserting incorrect information to articles where sources do say that. YourBidz (talk) 20:49, 8 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No, Dudenik69 is definitely not Emiliogogo. It's User:JShanley98 if it's anyone. But you're pretty obviously Sinlu22. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 21:26, 8 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Follow-up on User Block

Hi NinjaRobotPirate,

I wanted to seek your assistance on User:Amaury's actions, noting that you have previously blocked Amaury. I initially contacted Administrator Beeblebrox who referred me to you, and expressed some agreement with the issues presented. A brief review for the reasons for your block shows some similarities with this case, in that Amaury refused to constructively engage in warnings made as part of the dispute resolution process. Further, Amaury questioned the actions of an admin is this case, similar to the case you previously handled.

I recently posted a warning on a third users (User:IJBall) talk page requesting IJBall to stop making personal attacks on various other editors. Amaury reverted the message twice [31], [32], falsely claiming the message was illegitimate, and minimizing the IJball's actions, while quoting WP:DTTR, when I didn't actually use a template. Given that I'd had to revert Amaury twice [1], [2] and warned Amaury against disruptions of WP:DR attempts in the edit summaries, I posted a warning to Amaury's user page. Only then did Amaury stop reverting my warning. IJball was later blocked after ignoring the warning, in part due to the personal attacks which I warned for.

More recently, Amaury showed up at a WP:AN3 discussion relating to me. Amaury doubled-down on the previous accusations made relating to WP:DTTR [3][4]. Amaury further casted aspersions [5], accusing me of having "a history of edit warring" and "dragging another user to ANEW over some supposed technical violation seems to me like it was just done out of spite, despite not having any interaction me beyond the above-mentioned incident. Additionally, Amaury criticized User:Daniel Case, the admin who blocked IJball, saying "I personally don't think the block was warranted to begin with, nor do I agree with the rationale given for the block, especially considering he wasn't given the chance to respond to the ANEW report", which seems to be WP:IDHT, when the user has been blocked for the violation.

As I pointed out at WP:AN3, WP:DTTR is a essay, not WP:PAG. A user's right to contact or warn another user is not diminished simply because the user has been on WP longer then the other. I find Amaury's actions to be a clear disruption of WP:DR process. I believe that this attitude of simply reverting/blocking a less senior user's attempts at conflict resolution to be extremely disruptive. I further note that this both times I have interacted with Amaury, Amaury has inserted himself into good-faith attempts at WP:DR, and disrupted the attempts, without being initially involved.

Please let me know what you think and if further action is warranted. Thank you for your assistance. Carter00000 (talk) 16:53, 9 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand why you keep referring to people as "this user", "the user", and "a user". I gave up trying to figure out who you're talking about. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 17:06, 9 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I apologize for the confusing prose. I have corrected the references to people to use their usernames. Please help to take a look again. Thank you. Carter00000 (talk) 17:17, 9 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
OK, well, Amaury seems to be putting a whole lot of weight on some random essay. I edited the essay to explicitly state that nobody is bound by it. If people want to wield it like a weapon, they can get consensus to promote it to a guideline. I get that this is probably a lot less than you were hoping for, but maybe it will resolve the issue in the short term. If it devolves into wikihounding, like constantly showing up to berate you in various forums, an admin could take further steps. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 18:40, 9 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for amending the essay to clarify it is not WP:PAG. I'm sure this will be useful not only for this case, but for many other users as well, as the essay is often similarly cited. However, it seems that another editor, Oiyarbepsy, has already reverted some of the changes, including the clarification that the essay is not policy.
Additionally, I feel that Amaury may need further guidance to disengage from this issue. As you mentioned previously, I should take further action if Amaury showed up at various forums to wikihound me. I note that after you replied, Amaury has shown up at various pages [1], [2], [3], posting essentially similar entries, in an attempt to wikilawyer and minimize his actions. I note that Amaury was aware of your reply, given that one entry was placed under your reply.
I further note that an IP has shown up at Amaury's talk page, seemingly in an attempt to troll/harass me, by posting a baseless accusation that I'm a sockpuppet of Simulation12, a user banned more then 14 years ago. Given that there are no other talk page messages relating to this case visible on the talk page, this is likely either logged-out editing by Amaury, or a meat-puppet (potentially IJball, who was blocked during this incident). A search of both usernames on the SPI case page shows that they are both involved in multiple previous SPI investigations on Simulation12. I further note that Amaury has edited after the message was posted, yet he has not removed the message.
Please take a look and let me know what you think. Thanks. Carter00000 (talk) 05:24, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Well, that's the problem with Wikipedia: anyone can edit it. There's a header at the top of WP:DTTR that says it's an essay, so someone might think that my change was redundant. I obviously disagree, but if someone thought it improved the essay, they could add it back or start a discussion on the talk page. If people keep citing this essay like it's some rule that must be followed, maybe it should be rewritten from scratch over the objections of the people who are wielding it like a policy – but that would require consensus. You're not posting diffs, so I'm not really sure what you're directing me toward. You're talking to the wrong admin if you want someone to go searching for a key sentence in a sea of words – I'm visually impaired, so it's not something that I can do comfortably. Furthermore, the links seem to go to existing discussions that you already mentioned. The IP editor is definitely stirring things up, but why would IJBall request to be indefinitely blocked, then start stirring things up by posting as an IP editor? Yes, it could happen, but I don't really see the point. IJBall could simply take back the request to be indefinitely blocked and would probably be unblocked within minutes. I can block the IP if it continues posting random accusations without following through on them at the appropriate noticeboard, but I'd recommend you just stop watching everything that Amaury does and everything that happens around Amaury. You're just going to get yourself worked up over little things. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 14:17, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your reply. I will keep an eye on the IP and will let you know if there are any further issues related to the IP. Carter00000 (talk) 14:24, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, NinjaRobotPirate. Please note that there is already a discussion about this at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Carter00000 reported by User:GWA88 (Result: ), where everything that the OP has said here was already said there in some form or another. In my opinion, this appears to be some form of canvassing. In this particular case, my block log is irrelevant, so no idea why they're bringing it up. There is no pattern of whatever here. I only reverted the OP twice on IJBall's talk page, which IJBall himself later reverted the next attempt. The inappropriate warning left on my talk page that I reverted doesn't count, as per WP:BLANKING. I stopped reverting because I wasn't going to play games and also because of EW, not because of the inappropriate warning. Additionally, the reason given in IJBall's block log was edit warring and incivility, so I don't know why the user keeps claiming personal attacks, as incivility and personal attacks are not the same thing. Generally speaking, neither should happen, but they are not strictly the same thing. I should also note that, despite the OP's claims, I did not criticize Daniel, I said I disagreed with the block. I didn't even mention Daniel's name because I was talking about the block itself, not who did it. Even if I had been talking specifically about Daniel being the one who did the blocking, disagreeing with an action he did does not mean I am criticizing him, it just means I am (respectfully) disagreeing with it. In any case, unlike the OP, I am not looking for any of kind action to be taken against them by coming here and posting this and am just replying. I am also not interested in discussing this in three or four different places and will stick to making any further comments at ANEW, so this will be my only comment here on this particular subject. Amaury • 19:22, 9 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Reporting 50.84.157.62

50.84.157.62 (talk · contribs)

I can't tell that this IP might be Rishabisajakepauler because they have a bad habit of adding "singles" to articles [4] [5]. And it appears they are doing again in Honestly, Nevermind [6], what do you think of it? TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 02:43, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I wasn't really sure, either, but going by the response at User talk:50.84.2.226 from a while back, it does seem a whole lot more likely. I'm convinced enough to block. When you're not sure, sometimes it helps to try finding other IP editors on the same IP range who've made similar edits. It's not always easy to spot them, but they occasionally leave more evidence behind. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 02:59, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, if you looked at those two refs next to Falling Back, it says “single”. the Beibs in the Trap edit that User:TheAmazingPeanuts reverted is perfectly well-written per WP:SINGLE? from the Billboard ref although it was not me. Can you please explain this? 24.173.65.146 (talk) 04:24, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Concerning Abuse Of Wikipedia Email

Is there anyway to block a user from using Wikipedia email? Blocked user HounganC (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki) is continuing to harass me via Wikipedia email--Mr Fink (talk) 20:26, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, that can be disabled, but don't reply to the emails. Replying will reveal your email address, and there's nothing that Wikipedia can do to stop someone from emailing you if they already know your email address. If you want to reply to emails from Wikipedia users, it might be best to set up a separate email account dedicated to just that purpose. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 20:32, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Understood. I've sent all of their harassing emails to the trash without replying, either way.--Mr Fink (talk) 20:40, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Teslagrad 2

You accidentally uploaded a duplicate of the cover for Tails of Iron instead of the cover for Teslagrad 2. Waxworker (talk) 18:47, 11 July 2023 (UTC).[reply]

Oh, I'll look at that. I usually delete the files after I upload them, but I might have the original here still. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 18:48, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Re Damolisher/Skyler Lovefist

Just a note - I mentioned in the SPI in the title about how the sock was created two days after the blocking of the sockmaster. Are you able to initiate a sleeper search just in case? I don't know how long the IP block that goes with the account block goes for but I assume it's not long. Addicted4517 (talk) 05:38, 12 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Whens someone is blocked, the last IP address they used is automatically blocked by the software for 24 hours. I already looked at the CheckUser data, though. As I said at the SPI case, the two accounts geolocate to the same city. The automated blocks are a bit pointless, and I don't know why we even do them. When it's appropriate, I usually do longer blocks on my own once I see the CU data. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 14:25, 12 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

July 2023 "warning"

Now that Nyxaros got the last word and put me in my place with some stinging criticism (ouch! I hope it's not WP:DBO behavior to call someone's behavior "bizarre"), I think we're done here! NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 00:48, 13 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

I don't understand your extremely rude attitude. I don't think it's OK to delete a sentence without even reading the corresponding section and then threaten to block a user (you previously said that I should be "banned" because what I wrote was "stupid" before) by accusing them of adding "unsourced information" for reverting to the already existing information to the page. If this exaggerated aggressive attitude continues, I'm sure it will be taken into account by other admins. ภץאคгöร 20:04, 12 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ooh, digging up old wiki-drama. That's one my favorite games! "should Nyxaros decide to unretire, they will need to clean up their act". In another discussion, two people supported indefinitely blocking you, and nobody opposed. Next time someone reports you to an admin board, you're probably getting site banned. I doubt you can wiggle out of it three times in a row. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 21:26, 12 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't dig any "drama", I remembered our last interaction as soon as I saw your offensive statements on my talk page and pointed that out as it is clear that you have a personal problem with me from something that I don't know (and frankly don't care about). You are obviously hostile for no reason that you have spent your time finding "old drama"s (for some reason) that have nothing to do with your invalid "final warning" or your bizarre behavior. Keep doing what you're doing as long as you don't bother me or interact with me, especially in this WP:DBO and WP:SARC manner. ภץאคгöร 22:37, 12 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

You've got mail!

Hello, NinjaRobotPirate. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 16:03, 14 July 2023 (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.

-- ferret (talk) 16:03, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

TTT24 sock block

Thanks for the latest block. The recent spate of activity by the most recent sock seems to be overlapping with user:OwlHousier, another recently created account making significantly more advanced edits than a new user would. I don't know if you checked that one, but it smells suspicious to me. oknazevad (talk) 16:53, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, looks like there's a few of them on that IP range:
I blocked them all. Thanks for mentioning that. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 00:10, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Socks of Juan Branco, again

You are the admin that blocked user:username1789, the last sock of Juan Branco. Now, user: Imagritte is a further sock (after Brancojuan, Elahadji, Username1789, RoxxorOscar, Paulk12, and probably several others):

  • It was ceated on 28 April 2023, after username1789 was blocked on 14 March 2023.
  • All these socks are WP:SPA focused only on Juan Branco, except that, because of the semi-protection of the article, Imagritte edited other unprotected articles before.
  • The unique objective of these socks is to embellish the article in favour of its subject.
  • All these socks show a unbelievable knowledge (for new users) of Wikipedia rules; see [7] for example).
  • All these socks are very aggresive against opponents and distords WP rules for denying good faith to them. This is to be compared the the behaviour of Juan Banco (see Talk:Juan Branco#Threads).

I believe that this is sufficient to block Imagitte as a sockpuppett. If you are no willing to do this block, please, let me know here. D.Lazard (talk) 14:36, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @NinjaRobotPirate, please tell me if I really need to respond to this. Anyway, please also take a look at these 2 singlepurpose very occasional accounts that both woke up 2 weeks ago: @Ebtpmus (only edits Juan Branco) and @Delfield (almost only edits Juan Branco and the schools he attended : Sciences Po, Ecole Normale Supérieure..; to add controversies). And especially the second one, which I recently noticed has the same first and last letters as @D.Lazard and both have 8 characters. Please also keep me in touch, Imagritte (talk) 14:57, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, looks like the same person to me. Same IP range as a previous sock, though he was trying to get around some of my range blocks by using a VPN. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 17:19, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Paulk12 seems to have been a earlier sockpuppet. Active until end of Feb when he disappears (blocked).
Then appears username1789, active in March only.
And when blocked too then appears imagritte in April. Which has since scored 85+ edits of Branco's article, in the span of 3 months.
None of those 3 users actually overlap in time in editing this article.
imagritte in the process deleted any information on the page which is NOT favorable to Branco such as :
- accusation of manipulation of WP article,
- information that he posed as a WP administrator to threaten another contributor by writting a letter to his employer
- indictment for rape. Ebtpmus (talk) 18:12, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I think all the accounts are already blocked. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 18:48, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed. Thanks.
But good to keep track of the sequence: I am afraid it won't be long until yet another brand new user starts dedicating a lot attention to this article and posting the very same controversial text, word for word. Ebtpmus (talk) 20:10, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
To editor Ebtpmus: It is because of previous such sequences that the page Juan Branco is semi-protected. So, such a disruption cannot be done by IP-users and new users. It is probably for this reason that Imagritte edited first other articles. As sockpuppets cannot be detected before disruption, the best method is to keep the article on your watchlist, and, when you suspect a new sockpuppet, to open a WP:SPI or to ask an administrator or a WP:checkuser. WP:extended confirmed protection would also be possible, but, with it, you will not be able to edit the article. D.Lazard (talk) 00:25, 19 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
To editor D.Lazard: Thanks for the info. Happy to learn about the nuts and bolts of WP. Out of curiosity I was looking at the other activity of imagritte and a lot of his edits consist of creation of "new" articles but barely any content in it, often a mere couple of lines and nothing more. This indeed corroborates your interpretation. Ebtpmus (talk) 08:28, 19 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Looking at fr:talk:Juan Branco, I see posts by two socks of Juan Branco, namely "imagritte" and "brancojuan". I suspect also "chouette bougonne" to be a third sock. Maybe, you could signal this to French checkusers. D.Lazard (talk) 12:31, 19 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

From Special:CentralAuth/Brancojuan, you can see that Brancojuan is already blocked on both English Wikipedia and French Wikipedia. You can enable an option to see when editors are blocked in your preferences. This only affects English Wikipedia, but it's helpful when you're looking for sock puppets here. After all, I can't make people any more blocked than they already are, and the checkuser data is purged after 90 days. I retagged the sock puppets of Salmasalma2 as sock puppets of Brancojuan, but if someone is already blocked, I think our job is mostly done already. You don't have to report them to me.

If you want to report an account on French Wikipedia as a sock puppet, I think you can do so at fr:Wikipédia:Vérificateur d'adresses IP/Requêtes. I'm honestly not very familiar with how French Wikipedia is run. I don't have any evidence that Chouette bougonne is a sock puppet, so I can't really pass along that name to anyone. You should post whatever evidence you have at French Wikipedia. I can pass along the checkuser data I've seen from Imagritte, though. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 16:21, 19 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks D.Lazard (talk) 17:12, 19 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
As to your comments on "chouette bougonne". I had exchanges some time ago with that user about the French version that made me suspect sockpuppetry as well. Typically, modifying article in a war edit pattern without talk, suppressing first account sources and replacing them with less complete sources, rephrasing / summarizing that first account source but that happened to be painting Branco in a more favorable light.
However, the activity pattern is much less "Branco centric" and a lot less suspicious, generally speaking. Ebtpmus (talk) 18:17, 19 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Imagritte has been blocked on FR:WP.
I don't think Chouette Bougonne is a sockpupett. Durifon (talk) 11:53, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Reporting 68.134.192.160

68.134.192.160 (talk · contribs)

I believe that BlaccCrab might be block evasion yet again by using this IP [8] [9]. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 07:15, 20 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

BlaccCrab has a history of editing Gucci Mane discography, so this is likely him [10] [11]. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 15:36, 20 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, looks like him. Blocked for a few months. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 18:55, 20 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

New message from Picard's Facepalm

Hello, NinjaRobotPirate. You have new messages at Picard's Facepalm's talk page.
Message added 15:01, 20 July 2023 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Picard's Facepalm (talk) 15:01, 20 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Mic check 1, 2.... is this thing on? Picard's Facepalm (talk) 21:35, 24 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Well, if you leave some talkback thing on my talk page, it'll probably get put on the backburner indefinitely as I get distracted by pings, backlogs, and admin tasks that need to be done. I'll take a look once I'm done creating a category for Netflix games. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 21:38, 24 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Cool - no worries. I'm sure you are busy - thanks for your consideration. Take your time. :) Picard's Facepalm (talk) 21:39, 24 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

PA from IP

Mind taking a look at this edit? Seems like a personal attack, thanks. --GoneIn60 (talk) 15:47, 23 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like that IP editor has been repeated blanking sourced content. The personal attack is just icing on the cake, I guess. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 18:08, 23 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]


How to confess to sockpuppetry without really trying

It always amuses me to see such total giveaway edits as this one, asking "why did you block me", from an account which had never been blocked. It is totally obvious to me which block it referred to, and I would have blocked the account in response to that giveaway post, but as it turned out it was irrelevant, as you made a CU block anyway. Still amusing, though. JBW (talk) 15:43, 24 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, sometimes they're a bit obvious about it. When they're too obvious, that also makes me a bit suspicious. Usually those are children (the kind who lie about eating chocolate when their faces are covered in it), but sometimes it's a joe job from a troll. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 17:22, 24 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, and it's important to be on the lookout to avoid being caught out by those trolls and joejobbers. This time, though, there was no doubt at all. There were two accounts and an IP range which I was 95% certain were the same person, on behavioural evidence. I have in fact blocked many editors with lower degree of certainty, but this time I had a feeling that the editor might cooperate in removing the remaining 5% of doubt if I gave them an opportunity to do so. I put a non-anon-only block on the range for a while, specifically to see whether one or both of the accounts would say anything indicating they were blocked. Sure enough, they walked right into the trap. That removed the residual element of doubt, and I was ready to follow through with the block, but found you had got in there first. What made me think this was the kind of person who might be naive enough to do that? I don't really know, just an impression from what I'd seen of them. JBW (talk) 08:07, 26 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Damolisher/SkylerLovefist 2

First off - if I found the right block I noticed that you gave his range a three month holiday. Good move. But I think we need to watch out for new accounts in October, judging by his current conduct on the SkylerLovefist talk page. He won't let it go. Maybe Czello should have left it alone but I don't blame him for responding. I recommend Skyler's talk page access be revoked given his conduct will also prevent any unblock request from going through to the point of it being so obviously an abuse of process. Addicted4517 (talk) 00:00, 25 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I can't comment on any IP addresses because of local and global policy. Generally speaking, though, people can usually evade their block if they are either persistent or patient enough. They usually get caught regardless. I like to think of my philosophy as the "ghost theory of sock puppetry" because sock puppeteers are a lot like how ghosts are portrayed in classic ghost stories. They're obsessive about completing unfinished tasks they started while they were unblocked, and they haunt the same articles forever, where they repeat the same actions forever. If they could escape this depressing fate, they wouldn't be engaging in sock puppetry in the first place. So, I'm not usually too worried about whether we'll catch them. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 00:25, 25 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
That's all fair, but what about revoking his talk page access? Addicted4517 (talk) 00:38, 25 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I generally don't like doing that just because someone is being a bit argumentative with random users who show up on their talk page. If people stopped posting, the sock puppet presumably would, too. If someone leaves racist rants, posts offensive images, or pesters people with repeated pings, that'd be different. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 00:48, 25 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Blocking IMMAGRITE

Hello,

This is Juan Branco. I just discovered that you blocked User talk:Imagritte, thinking it was me. It isn't.

How to prove it ? I don't know, you let me know.

I haven't participated on WP on any other account than brancojuan and another explicitly linked account (cambodiacambodia), thus never using SP, unlike what is being purported.

On the other hand, two French individuals, User talk:D.Lazard and Ebeptmus have waged a campaign on WP EN since the "Griveaux Case" and february 2019, making hundreds (litterally) of edits on this page, which was until then consensual. They systematically distort sources, add false information, and produce derogatory comments on my behalf, thus having an important effect on my career and reputation.

I have refused to intervene other than in a assumed fashion on the discussion page, and with WP teams. But this is producing heavy political effects, as I'm involved, as a lawyer, in the defense of important causes with international impact, as with Senegal recently.

I do consider that there is an important issue here and suggest you look at it closely. 198.167.211.53 (talk) 16:44, 25 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Right, an IP editor on a VPN service comes to my talk page to tell me that someone I blocked isn't a sock puppet. That's totally believable and not sketchy at all. Blocked for legal threats, and thanks for letting me know about the VPN. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 16:59, 25 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Please, look also on talk:Juan Branco#Intervention of the person involved. I think that this section must be deleted. I do not believe that these "criminal complaints" may be accepted by any court. But, if they are, what should I do? D.Lazard (talk) 17:04, 25 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@D.Lazard: you could delete the post; it was presumably made by a blocked editor, and WP:BANREVERT lets you remove their edits. As far as the legal threats go, you should probably contact the Wikimedia Foundation's Trust and Safety group. They would probably know better than us what to do. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 17:23, 25 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I would kindly suggest NOT to delete it. Indeed, there are several disparaging and obviously false statement made here and under the article talk page which in itself constitutes defamation. It would be useful to keep that for the record, to shed light on the character and coming in continuity of previous threats made to Wikipedia editors. And as proof, should that defamation lawsuit ever come. Ebtpmus (talk) 14:02, 26 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I learn that people are talking about me here on the French Wikipedia without having the elementary politeness to notify me.
For information, I am not making a favorable contribution to Juan Branco (nor unfavorable). I am neutral. If I revoked the changes, it's not that I'm in favor of him. It's that Ebtpmus's modifications are bad and mostly irrelevant.
By the way if you check the history, you would see that I restore negative information that is deleted by ip and disposables accounts. Chouette bougonne (talk) 09:11, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@D.Lazard @Ebtpmus for information. Chouette bougonne (talk) 09:20, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion moved

I recently pinged you at Wikipedia:Village pump (technical). The discussion has now been moved to Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard#Massive wide-ranging IP block on Airtel India users. JBW (talk) 17:30, 25 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

OK. You might consider leaving a {{Moved discussion to}} pointer behind. It helps people find where a discussion went. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 17:38, 25 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
 Done Thanks for reminding me about that template, which I had forgotten about. If I had remembered it, it would have saved me the trouble of posting to each individual user talk page about it. JBW (talk) 18:00, 25 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, I had to do a search or two to find it. It's not really the sort of thing you memorize. I've got half the speedy deletion criteria memorized, but the others don't really matter. If I need to know what A2 is, I can look it up. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 23:54, 25 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Weirdness at Ali Cook

There's been some suspicious editing from the IP 59.103.216.187 (talk+ · tag · contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · proxy check · block user · block log · cross-wiki contribs · CheckUser (log)), as well as the brand-new accounts KerzneR.T (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki) and Zahid Mujtaba (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki). I noticed that you've previously blocked some accounts that edited the page for UPE/socking, so I figured I'd give you a heads-up in case you weren't already aware. — SamX [talk · contribs] 23:40, 25 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I forgot I blocked those accounts. The registered accounts are almost certainly Asad.Alam, who seems to create a few throwaway single-purpose accounts for each article he edits. no No comment with respect to IP address(es). NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 00:23, 26 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Smile Kids Jr. with TeenNick Sockpuppet

Hello, NinjaRobotPirate,

We have another sockpuppet of that Smile Kids Jr. with TeenNick variety, User:Hey Did (see Deleted contributions). I don't remember the name of the sockmaster to file this request at SPI so I'm just looking for an active checkuser and you seem to be one right now! Everyone else I checked took the weekend off. Can't blame them! Liz Read! Talk! 03:33, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That's Jeremiah Caquias. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 13:14, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
That's right. I'll try to remember that name. He's pretty easy to spot. Liz Read! Talk! 03:13, 1 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Abusing multiple accounts

These accounts (User:Bevertus, User:AlKastO, User:Markuss86) continue making the same pattern of disruptive edits, by going from page to page altering image sizes unnecessarily in info boxes, after being asked to stop. SpinnDoctor (talk) 18:50, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

These guys are  Confirmed to a bunch of accounts. I'm never going to remember this, so I'll just note that I tagged them as sock puppets of BouwMaster. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 20:15, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You should also ban Topanius (talk · contribs) (inactive since July 2022), because it is clearly the same person per Editor Interaction Analyser. – sbaio 14:14, 10 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Blocked that one, too. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 15:38, 10 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The banned user has resurfaced with a new account, and is back at the nonsense once again under the name Salinger33 (talk · contribs) SpinnDoctor (talk) 20:59, 19 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, that one is confirmed and blocked, too. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 21:22, 19 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sock of TotalTruthTeller

New user User:Norgwendoll already restoring non-notable articles, with the same edits like User:Nurseline247. GreenishPickle! (🔔) 22:01, 2 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That and a couple more. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 22:31, 2 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Reporting BoxxyBoy

BoxxyBoy (talk · contribs)

This editor has a bad habit of getting into edit wars with other editors [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] [20] [21]. The editor has been blocked for edit warring in the past and continues to do the same thing as before. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 07:03, 5 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You have started an unneeded edit war due to your reverting of my edits. First off: don't stalk my history. That is weird. Second: don't change the formatting; I am following the accepted format that is seen on many, MANY other music pages. Leave me be, and take your disruptive editing somewhere else. Thank you. Do not mention or contact me again. If you do I will delete it. BoxxyBoy (talk) 07:07, 5 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@BoxxyBoy: Watch your attitude. I wasn't being disruptive; I reverted your edits because they go against Wikipedia's guidelines. Maybe you should read it (WP:MOS). You can't edit articles in your own way. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 07:20, 5 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@BoxxyBoy: You are not allowed to remove this discussion. This is not your talk page. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 07:38, 5 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It looks like I missed all the drama, and there were even heavy metal bands involved. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 13:19, 5 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – August 2023

News and updates for administrators from the past month (July 2023).

Administrator changes

added Firefangledfeathers
removed

Interface administrator changes

added Novem Linguae

Technical news

Arbitration

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:54, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/UniBrill/Archive

Hi, as you can see, on June 24, you said that 1st Contributor was "unlikely at best". I bring this up first because of WP:ANI#Obvious persistent vandalism and second because when I looked at 1st's global contributions, I noticed that on June 26, Elcobbola blocked 1st as a suspected sock of UniBrill01. 1st has made many more edits at en.wiki since the time of your finding; could you maybe take another look? Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 11:48, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Well, not sock--but meat. Technically {{possible}}, and see behaviour I noted here. Эlcobbola talk 11:55, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I often wish we had different templates for meat puppets. Thanks for clarifying.--Bbb23 (talk) 12:12, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
FWIW, I note the SPI here found "a different IP range", whereas they were the same range on the Commons--albeit wide, as I referenced in the diff above. Commons data are here if they would be of assistance. Forgive the formatting; the Investigate tool is not export-friendly). Эlcobbola talk 14:03, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, 1st Contributor and UniBrill are on the same wide IP range now at English Wikipedia, too, and they're using different smartphones from the same manufacturer, as noted on Commons. I don't really know what that is on the spectrum of CU templates, but "possible" sounds good to me. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 16:13, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Does anyone have a problem with me blocking 1st as a suspected sock?--Bbb23 (talk) 21:59, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I don't really remember the details of the case (if I knew them before), so I'd defer to your judgment. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 22:31, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, done.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:52, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
FYI: 1st Contributor has finally admitted they are UniBrill.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:25, 10 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I would have expected endless denials, but I guess the Commons block complicates things. Well, there's always the standard offer now, I guess. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 17:36, 10 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure I follow with respect to the Commons block; it's from 26 June 2023, more than a month before the 8 August 2023 en.wiki block. Do you mean having continued on en.wiki after the Commons block diminishes prospects for an appeal? Эlcobbola talk 19:06, 10 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I mean the Commons block makes it harder to deny everything and try to continue on as if nothing is amiss. It's also harder to argue that two independent projects both came to wrong conclusion. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 19:53, 10 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. (It didn't stop him from trying at least four post-en.wiki block denials--[22][23][24][25]--including my personal favourite from the stable of perennial sock expressions of false indignation: "a shock" in the best tradition of the good Captain Renault. Very deep hole now.) Эlcobbola talk 20:04, 10 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

More of the same?

Hi, NinjaRobotPirate, I hope you're keeping well! You deleted this as G5 a couple of weeks ago, but as you can see it's now back in our midst. More of the same, perhaps? Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 21:18, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, that'd be User:Hpushkas318, who also created Wikipedia:WikiProject Johnny Depp. Three guesses what this sock puppeteer's favorite topic is. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 22:18, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Guess who's back!

Our MasonKim friend has returned! See diff. Thanks. --GoneIn60 (talk) 17:08, 9 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I don't see how that could be anyone but him with the roller coasters, box office grosses, and masonkim clips. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 17:41, 9 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nyxaros

Could you take a look at the Baldur's Gate 3 related edits from Nyxaros? I'm very WP:INVOLVED, but I see you've final warned them before, and their talk page is a train of 1-2 serious warnings a month that are removed with snarky/hostile edit summaries. This communication form is extremely disruptive. -- ferret (talk) 17:07, 10 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I could take a look, though I'm not really sure what to do about Nyxaros. I've felt for a while that the editor was on the cusp of an indefinite block, which was seemingly validated by an unclosed discussion at ANI to indefinitely lock Nyxaros a little while ago. Sometimes I think it should go back to the community and get a formal close, all proper-like. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 17:44, 10 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I debated going to ANI, but... I don't know. Seems like a years long issue that keeps getting a pass. In the end this immediate situation is resolved, but it's not just the incivility, there's an element of CIR inability to understand what was even going on, or a subtle English comprehension issue. -- ferret (talk) 18:19, 10 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, I'd agree with "a years long issue that keeps getting a pass", but it's hard figure out exactly what to do about an editor like this. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 22:20, 10 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Danielle Lindemann

Hello. You might want to block 71.168.214.135 following 174.229.194.225, as attempts to remove the UPE tag from Danielle Lindemann's page have resumed. Suitskvarts (talk) 18:50, 10 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not really sure what's going on at that page, but I semi-protected it, which should help cut down on the suspected undisclosed paid editing. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 18:59, 10 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Request

A little ways back you nailed 92.9.0.0/21 for block-evasion by WP:Sockpuppet investigations/TheCurrencyGuy. Not only has he returned there. But he also is using at least 89.240.240.0/21, 89.240.206.0/21. The recent edits from all three are identical, and all show TCG's weird obsession with removing ISO currency codes from Wikipedia, or using STG for British pounds (example). Additionally you can see cases where he reverted Bbb23 after a previous IP was blocked to reinstate his preferred version (e.g. 1 2 3). Anyway, if you would do the needful here I'd appreciate it.

Given the mobile ranges in question, and the fact that he only periodically uses accounts, I don't see a need for a full filing to check for sleepers, but if you believe otherwise I'll defer to your judgment. 74.73.224.126 (talk) 12:33, 11 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I've blocked the three ranges, two for three months, and one for one month. I'm not all that comfortable blocking such wide ranges, but I didn't see much collateral damage, if any. NRP, if you think any of the blocks should be amended, feel free.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:21, 11 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I can say that JohnnySausage, BillyPancake, and SilasTheSauce and are all  Confirmed to EldritchEditor and Bogatyr90. I poked around a bit more after finding them, but I didn't see anyone else obvious enough to block. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 15:55, 11 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The two that have edits are pretty obvious behavioral WP:DUCKs, so I guess he is starting to use more accounts again. As an added note 92.12.136.0/21 is also pretty clearly him. I may look into an LTA tracking filter for this given the nature of TalkTalk IPs, and may look into writing up a proper LTA page so these can just be reported on AIV without taking too much time. I'm still busy over the weekend so that will have to wait a few days at least frankly I probably should've avoided looking at Wikipedia today given my schedule, but it is what it is. 74.73.224.126 (talk) 16:30, 11 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

QC

Could I get a check on The Game Lover 2023? Based on their edit, I'm confident they are an IP based user who has numerous blocks for disruption and unsourced editing, and possibly other accounts, but I've just stumbled onto this case last night and don't have the full picture. They've only edited on two days, and today they immediately restored terrible content I deleted from a draft that their IPs had been building up. Pretty clearly them, but a sweep would be good. -- ferret (talk) 13:41, 11 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I remember seeing that account. TGL2023 doesn't seem to have any other accounts but has probably been blocked a couple times under various IP addresses. no No comment on any specific IP addresses, of course. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 15:00, 11 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A lightly used CensoredScribe?

Yttapsgnob caught my eye. Appears to have initially started after Wahspsneh was blocked. Also spotted Redlagnog. Extremely old, but in looking at this, also noticed the 2016 Kcorilol. -- ferret (talk) 07:24, 12 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, Yttapsgnob, Moozknay, Bmoworeh, and Redlagnog are all  Confirmed to each other and on the same IP address as previous CensoredScribe socks. Ponyo checked Kcorilol while the account was still fresh and didn't block. Could be almost any reason for that, I guess, including maybe her dinner was getting cold. Mike V and a couple other CUs also ran checks. It gives me some pause to see the account is still unblocked after that much CU activity, but there does seem to be a focus on superheroes and categories. The tricky bit is that's usually CensoredScribe, but there are a couple other possibilities, too, such as Atomic Meltdown. I personally would probably leave the account alone until it becomes fresh again. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 13:45, 12 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Ugh, the entire category tree should be burned to the ground and redesigned from scratch. There's literally no other way to repair his damage. -- ferret (talk) 14:12, 12 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I try not to look at categories too much. It's too frustrating. Even ignoring all the sock-created categories out there, many categories were made because some random editor decided we need something like Category:Fictional characters incorrectly presumed dead. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 18:20, 12 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock

Dear administrator Apparently my IP address has blocked by you before I made an account! May I ask you why it shows this error?

Sincerely Wiki centers (talk) 11:32, 12 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Well, you're obviously routing your IP traffic through data centers, which is usually indicative of using a VPN service. To prevent abuse, those networks are usually blocked as soon as we find them. Those are "hard blocked" so nobody can use them, whether logged-in or not, unless they have IP block exemption. The only IP blocks I see on your account from me, though, are just generic range blocks designed to prevent block evasion. Those only affect logged-out users who don't have an account. I usually label them with as much information in the block log as I'm comfortable without violating the site's privacy policy. So, I can't really give you detailed information, like who it's designed to stop from editing. Most of the time, though sometimes not, they also prevent account creation. The point is stop people from creating sock puppet accounts, so there's going to be collateral damage occasionally. I would like the option to use precision tools, but we often only have sledgehammers available. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 14:05, 12 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/ScienceAdvisor

Sl4pdasher is a new account whose first edits were to try to undelete Artlist, a target of SA socks. After a break, their next action was to create the Bleff SPI. Could all be coincidence, but .... --Bbb23 (talk) 15:01, 12 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Plus MasterCanner9. They're both  Confirmed to Doggerela77 and Seeyouincourt, which were tagged as suspected socks. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 17:41, 12 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! --Bbb23 (talk) 17:53, 12 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Why suspected paid edits?

Why have you tagged Danielle_Lindemann page as likely being paid edits? I don't know her but she denied this on social media and seems credible. Page looks fine to me. Yyyikes (talk) 20:27, 14 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The person who wrote it was part of a likely spam ring that went around using multiple accounts to puff up biographies and remove COI tags. If you're sure there's no paid editing going on at that article, you could remove the tag. If I remember correctly, part of the evidence I used to come to that conclusion was based on the website's logs, but those logs are only kept for 90 days. Given that elapsed time, it's hard for me to remember the exact details any more, and I don't really feel like going looking for more evidence now, over three months later. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 21:22, 14 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, I think you misfired. I'll remove it. Tx Yyyikes (talk) 01:23, 15 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Possible block evasion by BoxxyBoy

172.58.180.176 (talk · contribs)

I believe that the recently blocked editor BoxxyBoy is evading their block by using this IP address [26] [27]. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 02:43, 15 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You're not really making this easy for me. Who's BoxxyBoy, and why do you think this is him? NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 02:46, 15 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I reported him earlier this month for edit warring with other editors. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 02:54, 15 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
They made some questionable edits in the article Trilogy [28] [29] [30] in the past, which why I think this edit might be related. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 03:08, 15 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I think that's the wrong geolocation for BoxxyBoy. I did a range block anyway because it looks like a different sock puppeteer. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 03:34, 15 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, sorry for bugging you. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 03:37, 15 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Possible Juan Branco block evasion

I think there might be another Imagritte sockpuppet [31] or connected account. Imagritte was blocked on 18 July 2023 on English Wiki and on 29 July 2023 on French Wiki.[32]. Neo Trixma was created on 30 July 2023. The new account edits across a number of articles, but the only bold type (more than 500 bytes) edits are on Juan Branco and two articles (2023 Nigerien coup d'état and 2023 Hawaii wildfires) that were created since 26 July 2023 and therefore do not have any history of being edited by Juan Branco sockpuppets. On the Juan Branco article the edits are promotional, adding stuff from his CV and removing less flattering information.[33] On French Wiki [34] they have edited at least two of the same articles as Imagritte, for example [35]. Southdevonian (talk) 10:31, 15 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It's definitely suspicious. However, the writing style seems a little different, and the geolocation is also different. Probably suspicious enough to block right now, but it might be better to hold off for better evidence. Could also be a meat puppet. If too many suspicious new users come to the article, I could increase the protection to extended confirmed protection, but the recent edits imply that there's been news coverage of Juan Branco, right? So, I guess one has to allow for the possibility that a few random strangers will show up. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 14:25, 15 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. I will keep an open mind. Southdevonian (talk) 19:24, 15 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Definitely not a random stranger. Persistent disruptive and POV editing on Juan Branco. Southdevonian (talk) 02:00, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I gave a contentious topics alert. If there's POV pushing or disruptive editing after that, they can be topic banned. Or I guess I could page block them. But you'd need to post evidence, preferably in the form of diffs. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 02:42, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Southdevonian (talk) 22:20, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Another suspicious user could be added to the watch list.
User BlackSun16 on French WP, created on Feb 20th 2023, the very same day another user Paulk12 got blocked for sockpuppetry of Branco.
Makes 4 edits upon creation in the space of 5 minutes for a total of ... 18 characters .
Then disappears until August 19th, and on that day makes a whopping 68'500 characters addition to Branco's French article.
Barring a similarly unusual single contribution to the page of Emmanuel Todd, 99% of his edits in volume (characters) are about Branco (article + talk page).
Also that's literally a mere hours before user Neo Trixma (now blocked for sockpuppetry) shows up on Branco's page and starts vocally supporting the changes put forward by Blacksun16.
Ebtpmus (talk) 22:44, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
BlackSun16 made their first edit today on en.wiki at Talk:Juan Branco (the user created their account on en.wiki back in February 2023).--Bbb23 (talk) 16:19, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
For what it's worth, that account is on a different mobile carrier than any of the others I've seen. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 18:35, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Mentions you

ILoveDCComics is a very strange new user. Their first edit on August 6 was to report a stale IP to AIV. A few hours later they commented at AIV like a clerk in this edit telling another user to report their complaint to you rather than to AIV. They redirected their userpage to the article DC Comics (I've never thought that should be permissible, but I believe it's the reverse that is subject to speedy deletion). Their article edits are mainly to video games with edit summaries that sound like an experienced user, and then finally, they reported two "stale" users to WP:AN. All odd and suspicious.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:49, 16 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, that's Tkgood. I think that was originally someone from Ferret's rogues gallery. Over time, he seems to have shifted into mine after he started wading into articles on my watchlist. He mostly edits video games, films, and film production companies. I've done range blocks all over the place, but he keeps popping up. I don't think I've ever even seen a bad penny, but I'm sure you know how the idiom goes. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 01:06, 16 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Don't know that one. Maybe now I'll remember if he pops up again, but I wouldn't count on it. So many bad pennies. Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 01:30, 16 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Bbb23 Deceptive user caught socking couple years ago. Be mindful of reading responses to them, their final block was due to trying to fake Wikilinks of policies to IP phishing sites. -- ferret (talk) 03:03, 16 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Juan Branco, again

Could you check user "Neo Trixma‎". They started editing on 30 july, 12 days after the block of Imagritte, and, as Imagritte, they focuse on Juan Branco, with a similar behavior on the talk page. D.Lazard (talk) 12:59, 17 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@D.Lazard: See the section "Possible Juan Branco block evasion" above.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:36, 17 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You've got mail

Hello, NinjaRobotPirate. Please check your email; you've got mail!
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.Doug Weller talk 15:09, 17 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

... and one from me too. Sorry for not proof-reading it: sue = sure. JBW (talk) 19:27, 17 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sleeper/range check

Would you mind checking Gaywyatt, Ps5pro and Pejand and see if you can craft a suitable range block? Category:Wikipedia sockpuppets of Adshead123 -- ferret (talk) 23:44, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I can slow him down, at least. I'm not sure exactly how this ISP works, but it looks I could do some targeted range blocks. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 00:02, 27 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Quack quack

I hesitate to ask for a check, this seems too obvious (esp editing both enwiki and nowiki), but I want to be sure. Could you look at Pederjo99 and Pjording? -- ferret (talk) 13:52, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, no real surprises here. They're confirmed. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 14:10, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. -- ferret (talk) 14:13, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – September 2023

News and updates for administrators from the past month (August 2023).

Guideline and policy news

  • Following an RfC, TFAs will be automatically semi-protected the day before it is on the main page and through the day after.
  • A discussion at WP:VPP about revision deletion and oversight for dead names found that [s]ysops can choose to use revdel if, in their view, it's the right tool for this situation, and they need not default to oversight. But oversight could well be right where there's a particularly high risk to the person. Use your judgment.

Technical news

Arbitration

  • The SmallCat dispute case has closed. As part of the final decision, editors participating in XfD have been reminded to be careful about forming local consensus which may or may not reflect the broader community consensus. Regular closers of XfD forums were also encouraged to note when broader community discussion, or changes to policies and guidelines, would be helpful.

Miscellaneous

  • Tech tip: The "Browse history interactively" banner shown at the top of Special:Diff can be used to easily look through a history, assemble composite diffs, or find out what archive something wound up in.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:22, 1 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

YGM

Sent you an email asking for a 2O. -- ferret (talk) 20:51, 8 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Possible block evasion by Rishabisajakepauler

CG7000 (talk · contribs)

I think this account is related to Rishabisajakepauler. I said that because after user Binksternet reverted Rishabisajakepauler's edit, this user restored it back up. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 18:34, 9 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

To me it looks like CG7000 reverted me simply because it was annoying for them to have the song article disappear shortly after they added a genre. Binksternet (talk) 18:40, 9 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Binksternet: Since you are good at sock puppetry, I take your word that this user is not related to Rishabisajakepauler. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 18:47, 9 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Well, CG7000 seems to be editing some topics that typically wouldn't interest Rishabisajakepauler, so maybe just keep an eye to see if he restores more edits. CG7000, if you see this, you might consider that you're allowed to restore edits made by blocked editors, but you take responsibility for the edit. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 18:58, 9 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
After looking at some of their edits, it seems like this editor only adds unsourced genres to articles. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 19:04, 9 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

New sockpuppet?

Hi, you blocked User:TonyJrVSG as a sockpuppet a little while ago. FYI: User:VSGTonyJr has just been created. Dorsetonian (talk) 19:20, 12 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It's always nice to see a blocked editor essentially say "yep, you were right, I'm a disruptive sock puppeteer who should have been blocked". NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 19:53, 12 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Question regarding critical lead on Alice in Wonderland

Hi, I hope I'm not bothering you but I just have a quick question regarding the edits that you undid that I made on Alice in Wonderland (2010 film). I recently did find a source on Screen Rant that pointed to the film having mostly mixed reviews and aggregating why it received mixed reviews and I don't know if it was a valid source or not. I did put it in the film's talk page as a debate. I just hope you can clarify whether or not it would be a valid source for Wikipedia. I would understand if it was not and we can leave the page as is. Thanks and I hope this can resolve the matter! Adamtb24 (talk) 01:10, 14 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Screen Rant is not really what I'd call a reliable source (I think it's a glorified content mill), but WP:RSP lists it as "marginally reliable". The rest of the statement would also have to be sourced before that part returned. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 02:01, 14 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Understood. I'll see if I can find any articles though in the mean time, I'll keep it as is. Thank you for clearing it up and I apologize if my edits were initially unconstructive to the article. Have a good day. Adamtb24 (talk) 02:30, 14 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Reporting possible block evasion by BlaccCrab

2601:1C2:1801:D80:D7F:382F:DE80:11E5 (talk · contribs)

I think BlaccCrab is block evasion again by using this IP [36] [37] [38] [39]. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 04:34, 15 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This editor is using another IP [40] [41], going by the behavior, I believe that is BlaccCrab. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 05:21, 15 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Went from my phone to my laptop lol. so sorry for my very deliberate cross device disruptions 2601:1C2:1801:D80:48F1:68D1:892B:933C (talk) 07:41, 15 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
TheAmazingPeanuts has said themselves that they're "never good at singles" according to a discussion on their talk page from 2018. "Meltdown" is a single according to Travis Scott's discography page. Why would it not be listed as such on the album page? I can take the L for not having a proper source, but the fact that they're allowed to constantly make unfounded claims like this towards Wikipedia users/guests and waste the time of staff, even though they've said before they aren't even good with the subject at hand is ridiculous. I'll take the word of Ss112 before you, nut. 2601:1C2:1801:D80:48F1:68D1:892B:933C (talk) 08:45, 15 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
That looks like the wrong geolocation for BlaccCrab. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 16:48, 15 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, but the behavior is similar to BlaccCrab. I wouldn't be surprised if this editor is Rishabisajakepauler or anyone else who has been blocked previously. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 17:02, 15 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Unblocking 82.237.212.183

Hi @NinjaRobotPirate, Would you also consider unblocking 82.237.212.183 (talk · contribs · WHOIS)? It doesn't look suspicious, yet has been blocked indefinitely several years ago. Cheers, — kashmīrī TALK 17:51, 15 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I came here for a different reason, wondered why some dumbass would indefinitely block an IP, then realized I'm the dumbass. I probably meant for this to be a 3-year block and slipped onto the wrong setting in the block interface. I've unblocked. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 23:54, 15 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
"I'm the dumbass" happens to most of us more often than we'd care to admit, I think. Sometimes I preview an edit four or five times, get everything perfect, make one last incredibly minor tweak, and save the edit. Then when the page loads, I see that I've broken the infobox, and the image doesn't load any more. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 00:23, 16 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

2601:1c0:4401:f60::/64

Hi NinjaRobotPirate, I see you recently blocked 2601:1c0:4401:f60::/64. That activity is continued at 2601:601:51C:6A8:4D49:CA1F:3CB5:D334, 2601:601:51C:A47:E530:E9E5:B590:2100, 2601:601:51C:2D16:612F:DB7E:1100:4008, 2601:601:51C:D94:6487:982:C0FF:2E5D, 2601:601:51C:811:E15D:3D87:821D:CE85. Best, MarioGom (talk) 21:49, 15 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That's an odd IP range. There's an admin on it and also an indefinitely blocked editor who got their talk page access revoked for personal attacks. Could be a wifi hotspot or some wireless service for Comcast subscribers, I guess. I blocked the /48 for a few months, and I guess we'll see what happens after that. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 00:42, 16 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ongoing LTA and page ownership behavior from editor acting as if they WP:OWN articles

This user https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Nyxaros is engaging in a pattern of esoteric edit warring over mostly film articles. The Oppenheimer film page in particular, over typically petty issues. Saw you had warned him before, and have a strong acumen vis-à-vis film article etiquette. The editor makes occasional personal attacks, going as far as mocking another editor in a borderline racist tone over their use of Hawaiian slang (i.e. “brah”).

Lemme know if you need more specifics. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:280:CB04:668D:204D:A5AC:EFD1:B0F1 (talk) 00:22, 18 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

And you're evading a block. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 02:33, 18 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
This, this, this, and "brah". ภץאคгöร 07:59, 19 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You've got mail

Hello, NinjaRobotPirate. Please check your email; you've got mail!
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.-- ferret (talk) 00:22, 20 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Related Sony pages on Wikipedia

Here I have two users who come to mess up two of several articles related to Sony, a Japanese conglomerate that owns numerous subsidiary companies, divisions and limited liabilities. For example, these two users should not be here on Wikipedia (See:WP:NOTHERE), what they do is come to mess up the infoboxes and initial prayers to those affected (which by the way in past discussions the request regarding the latter's move was rejected). See edit patterns here:

Semsaa: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and once again here, here and here.

Nokuarikuruarimoki: 1, 2, 3, 4.

These are the edit's diff that the two users left and it is strange to me that they have changed or that they have been mixed from Limited liability company to subsidiaries to the infoboxes using parentheses to make it look more comfortable and this is a real mess.

PS, I forgot to leave user's contributions here:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Semsaaa

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Nokuarikuruarimoki

190.80.137.31 (talk) 18:30, 20 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm only going to tell you this once more. I don't know anything about Crunchyroll or its history, and I have no idea idea what you're talking about. If you think there's a problem, report it to WP:ANI. If you post on my talk page again about Sony or Crunchyroll, I'm going to revert it. It's not my problem, and I can't understand your English. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 20:42, 20 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Where Do We Go from Here? (Asking Alexandria album)

Hello NinjaRobotPirate, recently there has been a continuing disruptive editing on this latter page. The disruptive editing is coming from two different IP addresses. One is always blocked and it starts with 41.10 and the other starts with 105.243 or 105.246. You can check it in this history here. I know that I should have not engage with it because it only escalated and created an edit war so I apologize for that but the situation needs to be handled. Thanks. --Tobi999tomas (talk) 09:50, 24 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The IP editor is saying that the review is from Metal Hammer, which seems like a possibility. It's tough to tell exactly who's right or what the arguments are, though, because neither of you have discussed the issue on Talk:Where Do We Go from Here? (Asking Alexandria album). I fully protected the page for a couple days to force discussion on the talk page. It's not easy to tell what to do when an IP editor insists on edit warring – communicating with them is difficult. But you have to at least try, and you know what they say: it takes two to edit war. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 12:56, 24 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ygm

TonyBallioni (talk) 01:32, 25 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:NinjaRobotPirate&oldid=1176959124"