User talk:Malibu Sapphire
Welcome!
[edit]Hi Malibu Sapphire! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.
As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:
Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.
If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:
If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:
Happy editing! NoonIcarus (talk) 17:06, 23 September 2023 (UTC)
Offsite coordination
[edit]Have you reported this to WP:ANI? This seems like an extremely serious situation Dronebogus (talk) 04:34, 8 October 2023 (UTC)
- The evidence is offwiki, do you think that is the best venue? I just wanted to make sure you knew about it, because I was curious about this diff, where he mentions others agreeing, and changes we to I - [1] Malibu Sapphire (talk) 06:10, 8 October 2023 (UTC)
- Yes, though you should explain how to get past the member lock. You should also look into https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:73.206.160.3?markasread=293524155&markasreadwiki=enwiki#c-73.206.160.3-20231008074300-Note_to_someone_who_needs_to_know_this. which seems to have additional evidence this is some kind of major conspiracy relating to certain editors with connections to The Greyzone Dronebogus (talk) 08:49, 8 October 2023 (UTC)
- I added a simple method to seeing the content to the SPI report Malibu Sapphire (talk) 16:09, 8 October 2023 (UTC)
- Yes, though you should explain how to get past the member lock. You should also look into https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:73.206.160.3?markasread=293524155&markasreadwiki=enwiki#c-73.206.160.3-20231008074300-Note_to_someone_who_needs_to_know_this. which seems to have additional evidence this is some kind of major conspiracy relating to certain editors with connections to The Greyzone Dronebogus (talk) 08:49, 8 October 2023 (UTC)
October 2023
[edit]
Wikipedia's technical logs indicate that this user account has been or may be used abusively. It has been blocked indefinitely from editing to prevent abuse.
Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.
If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should review the guide to appealing blocks, and then appeal your block by adding the following text below this notice:
Administrators: Checkusers have access to confidential system logs not accessible by the public or by administrators due to the Wikimedia Foundation's privacy policy. You must not loosen or remove this block, or issue an IP block exemption, without consulting with a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee. Administrators who undo checkuser blocks without permission from a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee may be summarily desysopped. --Blablubbs (talk) 16:55, 8 October 2023 (UTC)
Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.
If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should review the guide to appealing blocks, and then appeal your block by adding the following text below this notice:
{{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}}. Note that anything you post in your unblock request will be public, so you may alternatively use the Unblock Ticket Request System to submit an appeal if it contains information that must be private.Administrators: Checkusers have access to confidential system logs not accessible by the public or by administrators due to the Wikimedia Foundation's privacy policy. You must not loosen or remove this block, or issue an IP block exemption, without consulting with a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee. Administrators who undo checkuser blocks without permission from a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee may be summarily desysopped.
- Blablubbs, please provide evidence against this user. Malibu Sapphire seems to be a good-faith editor who just happened to provide evidence against a troublesome editor (who is very disruptive here and is coordinating off-wiki in attacks and planned doxxing of good-faith editors here) who is being protected for some weird reason. Malibu has not been disruptive and they provided evidence of these malign off-wiki activities. That is good for Wikipedia. Doug Weller can shed light on this situation.
- I will also note that there is a concerted effort to delete/revert evidence that is useful to Wikipedia. Unfortunately it is being provided by a number of IPs that are accused of being abusive/evaders/socks, etc. What's sad is that their information is good and vouched for by experienced editors here. This action by you plays into that cover-up of good evidence, whether you like it or not. You may not have realized this was going on and I'm sure you're acting in good faith. Please provide information so we can clear up what appears to be an injustice to a good editor. I am not a disinterested party here but one who is being threatened with doxxing by this off-wiki activity. Editors here who are threatened with doxxing need this evidence, the kind being provided by Malibu.
- I can't know, but suspect that a better analysis of Malibu would produce a somewhat similar report as you filed for DroneBogus. They were targeted by Philo, who is part of the group working off-wiki against good faith editors here. Their activities need to be exposed and they should be sanctioned, not protected. -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 18:00, 11 October 2023 (UTC)
- @Valjean: The evidence is that CU conclusively connects them to this sockfarm. The specifics are open to review by any other checkuser – including Doug – or by arbcom. --Blablubbs (talk) 19:14, 11 October 2023 (UTC)
- Too bad, because their evidence is legitimately helpful to Wikipedia and to the safety of some editors. Doxxing has radically altered my life and the safety of my family. Now I'm being threatened by it again, and this evidence is needed. Those apparently planning it are being protected by the suppression of this evidence, so I don't see how this is good for the community. This is an IAR situation.
- I understand that your hands are apparently tied, but maybe you should consider IAR in this case. Thanks for replying, and carry on the good work. -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 19:20, 11 October 2023 (UTC)
- @Valjean: The evidence is that CU conclusively connects them to this sockfarm. The specifics are open to review by any other checkuser – including Doug – or by arbcom. --Blablubbs (talk) 19:14, 11 October 2023 (UTC)