Template talk:Blocked sockpuppet

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search


{{Editprotected}} Can someone please categorize this template into Category:Sockpuppet templates? Thanks. Cheers, Lights 02:03, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done. Cheers. --MZMcBride 02:06, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Question[edit]

{{editprotected}}

What is the point of the template {{Sockpuppetproven}}, as it is identical to this one? Should it be redirected to this one? The sunder king 12:33, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
I've redirected Template:Blockedsockpuppet to this template. Cheers. --MZMcBride 02:06, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

problems with "evidence" parameter[edit]

{{editprotected}}

Please look at this, the template is displaying the contributions link instead of the two diffs provided on the "evidence" parameter.

(Could this be related to {{Sockpuppet}} not having a evidence parameter?) --Enric Naval (talk) 21:57, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

N Not a specific request. Please provide the code that you want to have changed.  Sandstein  21:12, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
Uh, well, I was sorta expecting that someone else investigated the bug :P Oh, well, I'll see if I can check it in a sandbox and find the exact problem. --Enric Naval (talk) 00:37, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Feature request: Date[edit]

It would be really nice if this template could display the date that the account was blocked on. I don't know how easy that would be, but it would be very convenient for me. WhatamIdoing (talk) 02:46, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

"current autoblocks" feature not working[edit]

Clicking "current autoblocks" leads to an error message (which boils down to "Toolserver user eagle's account has expired"). Shall we remove the link for now? BencherliteTalk 00:55, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

Template-protected edit request on 19 June 2014[edit]

I'd like to nominate this page for deletion with the following rationale:

Is this of really any use since we've got Template:Sockpuppet and we can supply confirmed as a parameter to that to make it look just like this template but with some more links and customizability? This seems like a duplicate of sockpuppet|Username|confirmed with double braces around it.

Gparyani (talk) 05:31, 19 June 2014 (UTC)

Not done Nominating templates for deletion or merger should be done at WP:TFD, not in an edit request. SiBr4 (talk) 06:55, 19 June 2014 (UTC)
User:SiBr4: I tried to use Twinkle to do it. It automatically listed it there and notified the author, but it encountered an error when trying to add the deletion notice to the template. The sole purpose of this edit request was to add the "being considered for deletion" template to this template. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gparyani (talkcontribs) 18:28, 19 June 2014 (UTC)‎
Now done. Next time please make clear what exact change you are requesting. SiBr4 (talk) 19:39, 19 June 2014 (UTC)
Pictogram voting wait.svg Already done by SiBr4. — {{U|Technical 13}} (etc) 19:41, 19 June 2014 (UTC)

Appearence issue[edit]

This template currently reads: "This account has been confirmed by a CheckUser as a sock puppet of Foo (talk · contribs · logs) and has been blocked indefinitely." However, the template documentation says, "This template is used for confirmed sock puppets who have been blocked (usually without the requirement of a CheckUser;" So the template wording perhaps needs to be fixed to remove the "confirmed by CheckUser" language and perhaps replace with something like "confirmed by behavioral evidence"? This is an issue for socks with stale CU data or those socks who move around. Montanabw(talk) 23:34, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit template-protected}} template. The only way to confirm is be matching IPs and user agent strings (which requires checkuser). It can't be "confirmed" by behavioral evidence, only suspected. I do expect if you check the archives of this template or of the SPI you will find this discussion has been had in the past. Those socks for which you say this is an issue can't be confirmed. @Callanec, DoRD, Deskana, Mike V, GorillaWarfare, Guerillero, and Dougweller: are our active CUs that I'm aware of, and I'd like to get a little feedback from some of them before carrying out this request. Thanks. — {{U|Technical 13}} (etc) 13:55, 30 April 2015 (UTC)
I think that either the template or the instructions need editing then, as they contradict one another. Though I think it helpful to put the sockpuppets confirmed by behavioral evidence into something stronger than a "suspected sockpuppets" category (because that can create the "but it wasn't a proven fact, maaaaannn..." drahmahz) as CU data is stale after time has passed (people move, etc.) and really good socks hop IPs anyway. (There is one I suspect at the moment is editing via computer on one account and via mobile phone for another) I noticed this was a problem with the ItsLassieTime sock drawer when I created the LTA, there were 2-3 suspected socks that weren't confirmed or blocked (they quit editing or were not static IPs), and then some that were confirmed by behavioral evidence and blocked. So there is a need for slightly different categories. Whatever gets us there. Montanabw(talk) 17:12, 30 April 2015 (UTC)
Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: This template isn't meant for use with sockpuppets blocked on the basis of behavioural evidence; it uses the "confirmed" parameter of {{Sockpuppet}}, which is documented as follows: "A CU has  Confirmed that the accounts are related" (emphasis mine). It appears to be used where a CU was conducted in the absence of an SPI. The documentation needs clarifying but anybody can do that, therefore I'm disabling the edit request. Alakzi (talk) 17:38, 30 April 2015 (UTC)