Jump to content

User talk:NinjaRobotPirate/Archive2023-1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Serial sourcing policy violator needs a block

Hello, and Happy New Year. You may remember from that big discussion on WP:V and sourcing that we participated in regarding radio and related articles back in August/September 2022. Since you obviously understood the importance of WP:V/WP:CS/WP:NOR, et al, I decided to contact you regarding the problem with User:CRussG. This editor has warnings on his talk page going back at least as far as April 2017 from numerous other editors for adding unsourced material to various articles. He does not appear to engage them in discussion as a consistent habit, as at least one editor implores them to respond after an initial messages go unanswered (though he did respond to a more recent message). If you search for the word "source" on his talk page, you'll see all these messages. I first contacted him in August 2018 regarding his adding uncited content to Carolyn Beug, but he continued to attract warnings for the same behavior subsequent to this, right up to December 2022. I think this editor needs a considerable block, since he doens't seem to be getting the message, and doesn't seem to care. Please help. Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 18:57, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

I left a message. Maybe a non-templated message from an admin will have better results. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 20:07, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

Happy New Year, NinjaRobotPirate!

Happy New Year!

NinjaRobotPirate,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
— Moops ⋠T⋡ 03:01, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

   Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

— Moops ⋠T⋡ 03:01, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

Question regarding an aggressive user

I've noticed that you have addressed the user Peter Teflon Christ recently, who responded to you in a manner consistent with their character in general on Wikipedia. While they are not necessarily a vandal, they have a history of problematic behavior, and as you are a more experienced/administrative user than myself, I wanted to ask if behavior like the examples of below, such as:

Unbalanced diatribes: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Woovee&diff=prev&oldid=1112787102

Insults: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Spirituals_(Santigold_album)&diff=prev&oldid=1112777546 https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Spirituals_(Santigold_album)&diff=prev&oldid=1112786189

Changing an editor's post title: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Teflon_Peter_Christ&diff=next&oldid=1087061487

Whatever this is: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Spirituals_(Santigold_album)&diff=prev&oldid=1112787859

... is this worth pursuing with the Administrator's noticeboard/Incidents page? Or does this rudeness fall short of what's considered abusive by Wikipedia's standards? It's not a big deal for me to get insulted, but when I see it as a pattern, I hope it can be dealt with. Thanks. YouCanDoBetter (talk) 00:50, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

Yeah, best bet would probably be to post to WP:ANI and get an uninvolved admin to block him. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 02:48, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
Sounds good, here's the link to the discussion, in case you're interested: Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Teflon Christ YouCanDoBetter (talk) 03:37, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

Happy Sixth Adminship Anniversary!

Administrators' newsletter – January 2023

News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2022).

Guideline and policy news

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

  • Voting for the Sound Logo has closed and the winner is expected to be announced February to April 2023.
  • Tech tip: You can view information about IP addresses in a centralised location using bullseye which won the Newcomer award in the recent Coolest Tool Awards.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:09, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

Erwin Tulfo birthday

There is like a post in birthday of Tulfo. It was posted on August 12 in facebook and also, I saw his bio in KAMI that his birthday is August 10, 1964. Can I include that as a reference? WikiCentral24 (talk) 01:36, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

I don't know. I haven't seen it. If Erwin Tulfo posted from a verified account that his birthday was August 12, 1964, that would be OK, though. If he didn't say that exact statement, then it wouldn't be OK. For example, if it was someone just saying "happy birthday", that doesn't count because people say that on the wrong day sometimes, and it doesn't include the year. I have no idea who or what KAMI is. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 03:49, 7 January 2023 (UTC)
Website in my area uhm i dont know WikiCentral24 (talk) 07:26, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

Precious anniversary

Precious
Six years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:01, 8 January 2023 (UTC)

Phone IP blocked despite having never used it for wikipedia

Hi, it says you blocked my phone's IP range almost 2 years ago, back in 2021. The reason was "Ip range belongs to common sockpuppet". I've never used Wikipedia on my phone before (i only just started editing recently) so i'm assuming it was a mistake. AGoodSongNeverDies 21:16, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

I feel like Roger Murtaugh in Lethal Weapon: "I'm too old for this shit." NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 22:41, 12 January 2023 (UTC)
Facepalm Facepalm BilCat (talk) 22:45, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

Most odd

As you can see, the article interaction is enormous given that Santosh Aggarwal has made only 380 edits (although at a rapid clip) compared to China's 18K+. However, the tag platforms are different, and I can't see a rational reason for the discussion at Commons if they are the same person or even meat puppets, but, nonetheless, I thought I'd at least show it to you.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:31, 15 January 2023 (UTC)

Yeah, pretty weird. Turns out they're confirmed. Reminds me of someone who'd have long, deep conversations with his socks. Sometimes he and his socks debated themes in his favorite anime. The debate got so heated once that he requested intervention by functionaries. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 20:14, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
Yeah, I've seen weird behavior by socks many a time, but I really don't see why it was even necessary to have that conversation at Commons, although I suppose if I hadn't seen it, I might have blocked on my own. Indeed, I almost decided to let it go and not even report it. Good thing I didn't. Thanks much.--Bbb23 (talk) 21:44, 15 January 2023 (UTC)

"Unchained" 1955 Movie

Please add Todd Duncan as Bill Howard

He was one of the main protagonists as well as a star in his own right; he should be in credits after main star. 98.186.195.124 (talk) 20:37, 18 January 2023 (UTC)

You mean Unchained (film)? I don't know anything about that. The article doesn't seem to be protected, so you can add it yourself. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 21:54, 18 January 2023 (UTC)

explain

can you explain which article are talk? FPP (talk) 04:57, 19 January 2023 (UTC)

Uhh... what? If you mean what article you're not allowed to add unsourced biographical details to, that would be all of them. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 04:59, 19 January 2023 (UTC)

reliable source

You left me a message about IMDB not being a reliable source. That's ok. But now I have a question: The best source for the content of the trivia section I added in Serendipity (film) is the film itself. I have the film on DVD. So I checked the scenes, took screenshots and proofed that the made statement is correct. Now: How do I "translate" that into Wikipedia? Yqzuvwj (talk) 15:38, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

Well, you can't. You can only summarize what a reliable source has already said. If The New York Times doesn't care, neither does Wikipedia. Doing it yourself is original research and is forbidden by policy. If you want to tell the world about interesting trivia that's not found in reliable sources, there are plenty of other websites where you can use for that, such as TV Tropes, the IMDb, and various blogs. You can't do that on Wikipedia, though. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 15:52, 20 January 2023 (UTC)
Thanks for your answer. But that raises another question. When someone writes a plot summary in Wikipedia he or she usually has no sources other than the film itself. Why is that ok then? Yqzuvwj (talk) 16:17, 20 January 2023 (UTC)
There's some discussion of this at Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Writing about fiction#Analysis and interpretation. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 16:46, 20 January 2023 (UTC)
Thanks. Yqzuvwj (talk) 22:02, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

You might want to look at this - another sock?

[1] - since you have CU details you're the best one to check - or not. Thanks. Doug Weller talk 16:36, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

You mean the IP editor on Philomathes2357's talk page? I haven't really followed this drama. I'm pretty sure that's not Raxy, if that's what people are intimating. Probably not anyone else who's popped up so far, either. If random people are popping up out of nowhere to be disruptive, you could always semi-protect the talk page. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 18:01, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

Hello-one suspected sock

Hello again, after long time. Article Military, talk page of that article,

  • 1. Requested move 21 January 2023- srapa (talk · contribs)
  • 2. Merge Armed forces to Military-

DickyP (talk · contribs)

Both users the same content, the same objections on that page, so I suspect that is the same person with a sock account. Nubia86 (talk) 04:52, 21 January 2023 (UTC)

That does look a bit suspicious, but the older account hasn't been used in months. It's possible it's someone who forgot their password. The accounts also don't have any overlapping edits except for that one talk page. If both accounts vote in the current discussion, that'd definitely be something we could investigate. I'll try to remember to keep an eye on the accounts, though. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 05:21, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
@Nubia86 I just copied his or her arguments, are the comments on the discussion page copyrighted? Srapa (talk) 08:53, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
So in that case, you don't have that 1926 edition of Webster. And you don't have naval friends who are bothered about. That is DickyP's Webster and DickyP's navy dudes! You see, if that is your case, you can totally relax. Nubia86 (talk) 17:56, 21 January 2023 (UTC)

A little help at AIV

And perhaps block the disruptive little IP? Thanks, 2601:19E:4180:6D50:0:0:0:3F00 (talk) 04:53, 21 January 2023 (UTC)

A beer for you!

TY for blocking that IP at long last! Cheers! — Moops ⋠T⋡ 05:09, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
You're welcome. Unfortunately, AIV can get a little backlogged around 05:00 UTC. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 05:15, 21 January 2023 (UTC)

Editing

Why am i being blocked? Brock2118 (talk) 23:43, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

I have no idea what you're talking about. You'll have to follow the instructions you see on your screen. If you don't do that, you'll just end up confused and dissatisfied, like fans of 1899. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 23:53, 24 January 2023 (UTC)
(talk page watcher) Odd, since the user hasn't been blocked. However, I did have some trouble making edits and logging in today, so perhaps the user also experienced some similar issues. BilCat (talk) 00:43, 25 January 2023 (UTC)
Could be an autoblock. They should probably be made easier to appeal. The whole unblock process is stuck in the early 2000s. Wikipedia is like the land that time forgot. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 02:28, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

Possible block evasion

MickyJFan6790 (talk · contribs)

I believe this account is related to RedactedUser300 who been blocked in November of last year [2] [3] [4] [5]. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 19:10, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

YeetaSkeeta is stale, but MickyJFan6790 is  Confirmed to RedactedUser300. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 19:50, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – February 2023

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

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • The Vector 2022 skin has become the default for desktop users of the English Wikipedia.

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

  • Voting in the 2023 Steward elections will begin on 05 February 2023, 21:00 (UTC) and end on 26 February 2023, 21:00 (UTC). The confirmation process of current stewards is being held in parallel. You can automatically check your eligibility to vote.
  • Voting in the 2023 Community Wishlist Survey will begin on 10 February 2023 and end on 24 February 2023. You can submit, discuss and revise proposals until 6 February 2023.
  • Tech tip: Syntax highlighting is available in both the 2011 and 2017 Wikitext editors. It can help make editing paragraphs with many references or complicated templates easier.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:38, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

Why was the edit on Mahua Moitra page reverted despite having

I have provided the references for the same. Can you please explain why you are unnecessarily moderating valid edits? 122.172.241.221 (talk) 08:12, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

Banned editors are not allowed to edit English Wikipedia. Bans apply to all editing, good or bad. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 16:01, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

Possible block evasion by Talonjay

Jefente (talk · contribs)

I believe this editor is related to Talonjay who blocked for genre warring [6] [7]. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 10:17, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Yeah, that's him. Same IP address. Reminds me of the lockdowns in the US. Everyone stayed on their own IP address for months at a time. It was very nice. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 15:17, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Reporting Das Kittles

Das Kittles (talk · contribs)

I think this editor is not being here to build an encyclopedia by making unconstructive edits in articles [8] [9] [10] and admits it at their user page [11]. This editor also made a comment on my talk page [12], I don't think this editor is here to be serious. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 22:34, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Well, I guess it's nice when they label themselves as vandals so we don't have to do any guesswork. At least with the young ones, there's hope that they'll eventually mature. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 00:12, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

Question for this person

You blocked this person https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/41.223.53.0/24 and I have a question for them about the Danny Coulson page. CarverSindile (talk) 22:15, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

That's too bad. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 22:32, 16 February 2023 (UTC)
Ok.CarverSindile (talk) 01:49, 19 February 2023 (UTC)


ygm

Hi, Ninja. I've just sent you an email. JBW (talk) 18:27, 19 February 2023 (UTC) ... and another one. JBW (talk) 18:34, 19 February 2023 (UTC)

Reporting Phuc180802

Phuc180802 (talk · contribs)

This editor keep removing content in the article Channel Orange without explaining why [13] [14] [15]. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 11:29, 21 February 2023 (UTC)

Blocked two weeks this time. He's already blocked indefinitely on Vietnamese Wikipedia, which doesn't make me feel confident this behavior is going to change. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 15:16, 21 February 2023 (UTC)

Recurring problems with WP:V/WP:NOR violators on two-way radio

Hi. Two editors who were among those in that drawn-out conflict last year who argued against including citation or excluding info based on editors' personal knowledge, Chetvorno and Fountains of Bryn Mawr, having been making edits that violate WP:V, WP:NOR, and that in general, I believe are disruptive. The relevant edits and edit summaries can be seen in the article history, and the conflict is further illustrated on Chetvorno's talk page and my own, in which Fountains of Bryn attempted to argue that calling disruptive edits disruptive edits is in itself disruptive, (No, I'm not joking), falsely citing WP:DAPE in support of this canard. Chetvorno has subseqently continued to disrupt the lede section of the article, employing a rationale that I believe is not logically sound. I have issued a final warning to Chetvorno for his continued edits, but I thought I'd let you know to keep a heads-up. Nightscream (talk) 01:36, 22 February 2023 (UTC

I'm not really sure I understand what the dispute is even about, and there's nothing on Talk:Two-way radio. Is this about whether two-way radios "usually" or "always" use half duplex communications? In case anyone tries to argue the facts of the matter, I'll say up front that telecommunications technology tends to bore me. If you've got a source, why not post what the source says on the talk page and explain your position? That would at least clear up what the dispute is about. And maybe they'll agree with you after you explain it. It can sometimes feel quite tedious, but we're supposed to use talk pages. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 03:35, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
I did add sources to the article. It's where the definition given in the last version of the article before they started violating policy came from! Prior to my rewrite of the lede on January 17, whose information is derived entirely from the sources I cited, the entire lede was uncited, as seen here.
I attempted to communicate with both editors on both my talk page and Chetvorno's and as i pointed out above, they engaged in the same type of dishonest manipulation that they've been doing to date. On Chetvorno's talk page, he claimed that I was the "only" editor who supported the version that I did (as if this somehow an immutable status that cannot change with when other editors join the matter), and that he and Fountains represent a "consensus" that supports his version. I'm not making that up; he actually argued that he and one other editor can be a "cosensus". Go ahead and check out his talk page to see this.
I have now engaged with them on the article's talk page, in which I asked Chetvorno the following:
I asked him point-blank whether his claims that the version I wrote (in which all of the information comes directly from the sources are cited) is "misleading" is derived from the cited sources, or whether it's his personal viewpoint.
I also asked him why he left a passage without a citation in his last edit. In the prior version, that passage had a cite.
I asked him how the new source he cited in the lede for the term's definition, Page 811 of The Modern Dictionary of Electronics, justifies his edits, given that the sole definition given for the term on that page is "Radiotelephone communications between fixed points (base stations) and portable units", which neither matches his insisted version nor justifies removing the partial definition I added away from the lede and down to the article body.
I do not anticipate any straightforward answers from him, given the way he and the others went silent when I asked him questions in that discussion last year, but hey, I asked the questions nonetheless. If he does not answer, then it is reasonable to observe that he is making edits based on his personal viewpoints and preferred vision for the passage, rather than on what the cited sources say, and this includes removing a source-supported definition for the term out of the lede without just cause, and leaving a passage without the citation it previously had, which is not an editorial dispute, but clear policy violations.
Will you monitor this?
The topic bores me too. I didn't intervene based on my level of interest or boredom. I intervened on the basis of the anti-citation brigade's persistent attempts to push their preferred practices of adding material based on their personal knowledge/opinion/experience/analysis, and I'm asking you to monitor the matter/intervene for the same reason. Nightscream (talk) 16:00, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
Dude, if it requires that many words and paragraphs to explain what's going on, maybe you should take it to WP:ANI. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 22:49, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
Ninja, it's a clear-cut case of policy violation, just as it was last year. Chetvorno has added material based on their personal knowledge, which violates WP:NOR/WP:V, removed a portion of the definition of the term from the lede without just cause, and left a passage that was previously cited without a citation. I asked him and others point blank about this on the talk page, and not suprisingly, they go silent, refusing to respond. Just read the talk page. (Is this a more appropriately succinct summary)? It's a no-brainer. Please just read the tp discussion. Or look at the edits. Nightscream (talk) 15:50, 23 February 2023 (UTC)
Ninja, the other editors are now continuing to edit the article again, without having answered any of my questions on the talk page, and having abandoned the discussion, their last post on it having been on Feburary 27. Isn't this is a blockable offense. Can you please intervene? Your interest in the general topic of the article or lackthereoff should not be a relevant criterion. They are violating policy and making disruptive edits, and ignoring the talk page discussion. Please respond. Nightscream (talk) 07:00, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
I don't understand why this is specifically my problem. I already suggested that you take this to ANI. If I have to be more blunt, OK: please stop badgering me about this and take your issue to ANI. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 19:00, 5 March 2023 (UTC)

User:64.183.239.42 editing again

You blocked User:64.183.239.42 for block evasion 1 year ago, for 1 year. Since being unblocked, they have continued to edit similar articles. Please block again if you think it is the same block-evader. I really don’t know what to do, so i posted on WP:ANI, to which the user responded something like “unfortunately, the block has expired”, which almost proves they are the same user. I was then told to ask you, so here I am. What do you think? Illusion Flame (talk) 00:01, 26 February 2023 (UTC)

Blocked again. Seems like a static IP, so I made it 2 years this time. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 03:26, 26 February 2023 (UTC)

Thanks! Illusion Flame (talk) 11:56, 26 February 2023 (UTC)

Blocked for some reason?

I've never edited a page. Only used talk and have only spoke like 3 times! Why did you block me? 2601:84:4501:78E0:C9DE:B6CF:8A4E:8962 (talk) 00:17, 26 February 2023 (UTC)

Hi I'm the same person in an account now. Should be fixed now. Apologise Baconcartoonist (talk) 00:22, 26 February 2023 (UTC)
Apologies*** Baconcartoonist (talk) 00:22, 26 February 2023 (UTC)
Assuming you're not talking about an account that I blocked, you may have run into one of my range blocks designed to stop vandalism. Most of them are only for IP editors and won't affect people who have an account. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 03:34, 26 February 2023 (UTC)

Protection

Hello, I saw that you increase a new protection level for a page, Vietnam, in 2021 and it is extend-protection and is long ago. I guess it might be necessary for you now to reduce the protection level? 2001:EE0:1A53:79C4:D875:7BF6:E04A:B301 (talk) 14:11, 27 February 2023 (UTC)

There were only two posts to the talk page this month, and both were vandalism. It doesn't seem to be impacting the page much. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 15:04, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
Usually, a page like this requires a lot of updates. A couple of requests don't tell how many possible updates could have been made. So this is rather overly preventive. 2001:EE0:1A53:79C4:D875:7BF6:E04A:B301 (talk) 15:44, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
I think you can reduce the protection level because this discourages new edits and updates to the page. 2001:EE0:1A18:3D0A:2015:8EC7:678D:535C (talk) 15:14, 28 February 2023 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – March 2023

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

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

  • The 2023 appointees for the Ombuds commission are AGK, Ameisenigel, Bennylin, Daniuu, Emufarmers, Faendalimas, JJMC89, MdsShakil, Minorax and Renvoy as regular members and Zabe as advisory members.
  • Following the 2023 Steward Elections, the following editors have been appointed as stewards: Mykola7, Superpes15, and Xaosflux.
  • The Terms of Use update cycle has started, which includes a [p]roposal for better addressing undisclosed paid editing. Feedback is being accepted until 24 April 2023.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:19, 1 March 2023 (UTC)

General Sanctions Violation on Michael Jackson’s Page

Hello, NinjaRobotPirate. Can you please have a look at the ongoing discussion and edit warring on Michael Jackson? Why isn't the General sanction no longer applicable to that page? How is the editor Bluesatellite getting away with this? As you can see [here], there is no consensus, and an ongoing discussion. The editor seems to not understand what consensus is and have started to edit war. Please provide attention to this matter when you can.TruthGuardians (talk) 15:50, 1 March 2023 (UTC)

I fully protected the page for a couple days and notified Bluesatellite of general sanctions. Probably the best way to proceed to hold a request for comment, which will bring in uninvolved editors to help solve the dispute. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 16:57, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
Thank you for the action taken. Can you also please restore the last known stable version of the edit as well? The conversation was still on going and the editor reverted many other editors multiple times. The current edit is not agreed upon and thus should be a reflection of what the original edit before the edit warring. Thanks, Ninja. TruthGuardians (talk) 17:12, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
There's an ironic page about that. Admins don't usually get involved in content disputes. If there's an obvious consensus on the talk page to change the content, one could use {{Edit fully-protected}} to request implementation of that consensus. But it needs to be obvious. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 21:06, 1 March 2023 (UTC)

Possible block evasion

151.115.33.130 (talk · contribs) 151.115.45.193 (talk · contribs) 151.115.57.207 (talk · contribs)

I think there's an blocked editor who using multiple accounts for block evasion [16] [17] [18] [19]. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 04:55, 3 March 2023 (UTC)

That's probably a VPN service. We typically block them, so that one is blocked now, too. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 14:54, 3 March 2023 (UTC)

Glitch

Hey, yesterday you declined an unblock request (as you should have) as the response didn't come from the blocked persons IP which is 24.244.29.40. I am pretty sure that is the person that was posting inappropriate things that I removed earlier in the week. Anyway, my IP is 75.159.21.252 as you saw & pointed out. For whatever reason, I believe you guys were blocking the person from the other IP, as you should have, but somehow, I got blocked as well. Possible glitch?! You can see that my actual revisions on the living persons biography come from 2001:56a:fbe3:6e00:d988:5f7b:20e8:2eca. So I wanted to apologize for the confusion as I was the one requesting the unblocking and it wasn't until you said it was a different IP, did I ask my friend to help me better understand and find out what my IP was as I'm technically challenged. Again, sorry as I was pleading the case for someone who acted inappropriately to be unblocked thinking it was me. I should just stay off the internet. Haha 2001:56A:FBE3:6E00:D988:5F7B:20E8:2ECA (talk) 02:31, 10 March 2023 (UTC)

By default, a block prevents the affected account or IP user from editing anything but their own talk page. If anyone can edit the talk page of a different account or IP address, they're not blocked. For a block to act differently, it would have to be a partial block, which is easily visible. If your IP address is being affected by blocks meant for a different IP address, there are two reasons why that might happen. The first one is because your IP traffic is being routed through that IP address for whatever reason – maybe a VPN if it's a school or work IP address. The second reason is a bug in our software, which is always possible but seems a bit unlikely. Mediawiki often feels like something from 1999, but it's actually quite impressive how well it works. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 04:17, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
Thanks so much for your reply. It seemed like a partial block. I can't remember exactly what it said on the block notification and I didn't think to screenshot it. I will say this, I had to call my service provider cuz there is some messed up stuff happening with my phone. Im connected to wifi pretty much all day everyday & suddenly, starting on this passed Monday, my data is being completely used up even tho I'm at home, and absolutely connected to wifi. They are trouble-shooting it as that isn't the only issues I am having. But, none the less, I will be more conscious of what's happening on here and how things work. This was a very big eye opener. Thanks again 2001:56A:FBE3:6E00:D988:5F7B:20E8:2ECA (talk) 05:20, 10 March 2023 (UTC)

2402:3A80:0:0:0:0:0:0/32

This Vodafone India mobile IP range is still manipulated for disruptive editing and vandalisms in Indian pages following your block expired.1 . Airtel India and Jio India mobile are blocked already.117.252.204.173 (talk) 07:01, 10 March 2023 (UTC)

My range block expired a long time ago. I don't even remember what it was about. And, really, any /32 will look disruptive. You'd have to be more specific. I don't feel like looking at hundreds of edits to see if there's been excessive disruption on this wide IP range. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 20:58, 10 March 2023 (UTC)

Reporting Hugzhoni

Hugzhoni (talk · contribs)

This editor is not being here to build an encyclopedia [20] [21], they also use another account as well [22]. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 04:06, 11 March 2023 (UTC)

The riddle of the Sphinx...

Hello,

I found missing information on the following link https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sphinx, searched for information on the subject on Wikipedia and added information already existing on Wikipedia. 

They have been deleted and I consider it a censorship of the truth.
Please help me to remove these users (Apokryltaros and HMSLavender) who are deleting posts because of the censorship they practice.

Thank you very much, 

Aurelian Virgil Dragne Aurelian Virgil Dragne (talk) 04:59, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
Maybe you'd have better luck adding that to as a "see also" link? A sphinx, after all, is a mythological beast. The other editors seem to think that a rock outcropping is off-topic for the article body. It's hard to tell exactly what their objection is because they're not using edit summaries, but that'd be my guess. To be diplomatic, you could suggest it on Talk:Sphinx to see if anyone has objections to that. @Apokryltaros and HMSLavender: it would help a lot if you guys used edit summaries. Rollback is supposed to be for vandalism, and if your only objection is formatting, WP:PRESERVE is pretty clear that reverting because of poor formatting is not a good idea. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 05:19, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
Or perhaps discuss it at Talk:Sphinx while limiting one's accusations of censorship? Edit summaries filled with such sorts of accusations tend to arouse suspicion. I mean, I've seen too many unconstructive edits made by "enemies of censorship" who turned out to be vandals or obsessed with pushing some specific point of view. My apologies for assuming such.--Mr Fink (talk) 05:29, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
Hello, Apokryltaros,
Is this your real name?
Your message is in keeping with your attitude, as the Latins used to say: VERITAS ODIUM PARIT...
So, i think: si tacuisses, philosophus mansisses...
Thanks,
Aurelian Virgil Dragne Aurelian Virgil Dragne (talk) 05:50, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
You're not going to convince anyone of anything beyond having a bad attitude and no manners if you enhance your false accusations of censorship with insults poorly disguised as haughtiness. Mr Fink (talk) 15:56, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
NRP, see this editors talk page where copy/paste makes it look like you posted there. This business of someone with a username that clearly isn't their own and asking others about their real names... In any case, we may have a CIR issue. Doug Weller talk 08:52, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
Hello, Doug Waller,
I seem to have annoyed a lot of people because I've added to the already existing Wikipedia information on that Sphinx article. The attached statements were not written by me, before you accuse me, you might want to look up what happened. There is a history with ISO DATES.
I didn't offend anyone, I wrote the obvious about what happened with my post.
I'm sorry I came to the conclusion that the information is censored on Wikipedia by certain users.
A few minutes after I posted, my post was deleted the reason being a trivial font .
Thank you,
Aurelian Virgil Dragne Aurelian Virgil Dragne (talk) 11:47, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
@Aurelian Virgil Dragne I did not revert your edit on grounds of inaccuracy; it was very poorly formatted - however, I would like to apologise that I've decided to revert on that reason alone, instead of fixing the format or using a custom edit summary; it's apparent that the reversion led you to think that I was censoring your edits. lavender|(formerly HMSSolent)|lambast 15:46, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
Thanks man, it means a lot.
Peace & love Aurelian Virgil Dragne (talk) 19:04, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

Reponse

Do you have a response? That's just rude if you ignore my comments. Regards, Willbb234 13:53, 15 March 2023 (UTC)

A response to what? If you're talking about your block, follow the instructions in Help:I have been blocked to appeal it. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 14:25, 15 March 2023 (UTC)

The response to the block made on my talk page 4 days ago. Willbb234 14:51, 15 March 2023 (UTC)

You mean this edit? As far as I can tell, you're just ranting about some other editor in contradiction to the guidance of WP:NOTTHEM. I believe my block was correct, so I will not be removing it. If you want another admin to review the block, you need follow the instructions I just posted above. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 17:18, 15 March 2023 (UTC)

What a load of shit. You should learn to live with the consequences of your actions. You can't just block good editors and turn the other way. Typical admin behaviour. Willbb234 01:17, 16 March 2023 (UTC)

130.156.51.191

Hi! Can you have a look at this ? [23] unsourced additions today. Timur9008 (talk) 18:13, 15 March 2023 (UTC)

Someone from New Jersey who obsessively adds unsourced categories? Pretty sure that's block evasion. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 21:01, 15 March 2023 (UTC)

Another block evasion?

This IP seems to be another you previously blocked. Bakkster Man (talk) 15:02, 16 March 2023 (UTC)

I doubt it. You'd have to show me what block they're evading. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 17:15, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
This edit in particular appears to be a continuation of this user which you had previously blocked. Apologies for the previous lack of detail. Bakkster Man (talk) 17:40, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
The new IP editor is not a racist vandal, which is what the range block is stopping. I still don't see how any of this is block evasion. You'd have to show me evidence of racist vandalism. Your user page says you've got two degrees in engineering. You know what CIDR is, right? That's a very wide IP range that likely covers all the IP addresses allocated to Verizon Wireless in that city. I did that block to stop a racist vandal from hopping around on various IP addresses throughout the city. That doesn't make the entire city subject to "block evasion" just because they happen to a Verizon customer.

I don't really understand how cellular networks work. I never cared about them when they first became so ubiquitous, and there have been several "generations" since then. So whenever I try to read "intro to how cellular technology works", I start falling asleep after the second paragraph. As far as I understand it, though, cellular towers don't have individual IP addresses. Instead, they operate from a large pool. On Verizon Wireless, this seems to usually be a /40, but it sometimes varies from a /39 to /42. So, you have to block the entire pool of available IP addresses if you want to stop someone from editing. Otherwise, they just reset their smartphone's connection until they get an unblocked IP address. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 18:52, 16 March 2023 (UTC)

Who's the block evader?

So earlier, I've reported 99.33.56.27 for block evasion by an IP you blocked for block evasion (107.128.58.52). Do you know who's the block evader, by chance? LilianaUwU (talk / contributions) 20:32, 17 March 2023 (UTC)

Yes, but, as a CheckUser, I'd rather not talk about IP addresses and who may be behind them. Go to YouTube and watch some of the old videos from the Emergency Broadcast Network: link. Then tell me which one is your favorite. I still won't tell you anything about that IP address, but I may respect your taste in music. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 23:14, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
yoicks -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 19:34, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
Ha. It's like a concentrated blast of postmodernism in bite-size chunks set to techno music. But some of the videos are actually pretty easy to watch. They're not all at Residents levels of weirdness. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 20:06, 20 March 2023 (UTC)

Edits on Web series page

I'm referring to your edit on Web series in which you said "section will likely be removed if it's not properly sourced". I apologize for my one edit in which I mentioned you or others where I noted my annoyance with the edit, but my feelings about keeping a section about LGBT representation remain. There is bound to be MORE representation in other web series, which are not animated, so I think it makes sense to at least have ONE section of the article. Anyway, I just thought I'd share my feelings about it and I cut down the section as much as I could, removing any possible "bad" sources, to only a few sentences. Historyday01 (talk) 17:49, 19 March 2023 (UTC)

Well, unless reliable sources directly discuss the topic, it doesn't belong on Wikipedia. It doesn't matter if there are discussions on Twitter, Reddit, Facebook, or other social media websites. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 20:44, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
It is my understanding that Twitter and Reddit CAN be used if it is only used sparingly, and doesn't comprise a majority of a sources on a page. I don't believe that section would fall into either of those categories. Social media sites CAN be cited on here, its just that reliable sources are better. Historyday01 (talk) 02:28, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
Any Twitter user can claim to a famous person, and Twitter does not engage in any verification any more. It's no more believable than if I claimed to be the King of England on my talk page, and my royal statements went into the king's article. Reddit is a discussion forum. It's not reliable for anything. An example of a reliable source is The New York Times or the BBC. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 03:57, 20 March 2023 (UTC)

Invitation

You are invited to this this section of the Administrator noticeboard, regarding the layout of the cast section of The Rock. BattleshipMan (talk) 04:57, 20 March 2023 (UTC)

Alice in Wonderland critical reception.

Please, let's not be hasty. I don't want to engage in an editor war, but my argument was that the overall percentage of critical reception matters more than the classifications and labels, not to ignore any sources. And other Wikipedia articles on movies don't normally mention Rotten Tomatoes and/or Metacritic on the top sections. So why should this article be any different? Furthermore, as you know, Alice in Wonderland (2010) was given a 51% approval rating on RT, which means 49% of critics disliked it, which is not what other people call "negative".

But if you still don't agree to this, than I have nothing more to say. Brian K. Tyler (talk) 02:46, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

Also, like I said before, you can go to the "Critical Reception" section for full detail. Brian K. Tyler (talk) 02:51, 26 March 2023 (UTC)
I couldn't care less about your personal opinions on what makes a film have a mixed reception. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 03:10, 26 March 2023 (UTC)
Okay, fine. But ภץאคгöร seems to be in agreement with me on this. Brian K. Tyler (talk) 03:54, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

User:2604:2D80:AB02:A100:0:0:0:0/64

Hi NinjaRobotPirate, can you look into this IP range again? See this AN/I thread, and refer to this thread from your talk page archive. AP 499D25 (talk) 11:10, 29 March 2023 (UTC)

I blocked it for 6 months this time. Should give us a break for a while. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 15:59, 29 March 2023 (UTC)
@NinjaRobotPirate They seem to be back again under 104.235.0.0/16, an IP range that you blocked back in November last year, they left a message on my talk page also claiming they are not related to Larrypage2009. I take that, however this IP's recent edits to user talk namespace look rather disruptive to me, such as on this page. Maybe p-block them from user talk namespace? AP 499D25 (talk) 04:15, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
No, I think it's a bad idea to partially block people from namespaces used for collaboration. There are few constructive edits or accounts coming from that IP range. It's mostly just blocked vandals and not-here types who are soon to be blocked. Better to just close the valve. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 13:52, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
Got it, thanks. I got the partial block idea from very large IP ranges that were blocked from editing certain talk namespaces to "reduce collateral", such as this one. AP 499D25 (talk) 03:39, 31 March 2023 (UTC)

Scorpia

Hey Ninja. Was wondering if I could nominate the Scorpia article. As you were the one who made it I thought it would be appropriate to ask you first. GamerPro64 20:20, 29 March 2023 (UTC)

I'm not really a fan of some of the later changes, which messed up the flow of the sentences. "CGW editor Johnny Wilson described Scorpia as "one of the most refreshing people you could ever meet" and praised her encyclopedic knowledge of games' puzzles. He cited one example where the two clashed" – how does that even make sense? She's refreshing, and here's an example where we clashed. In my opinion, the additions need reworking to properly integrate them into the flow that I established instead of randomly sprinkling them throughout the article as anecdotes that are completely disconnected from the surrounding sentences. But maybe I'm getting too worked up over issues are unlikely to come up outside of a FAC. I guess a GA only has to make coherent sense. If you think it's ready, go for it, but I'd do some copy-editing first. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 20:51, 29 March 2023 (UTC)
I'm also not a fan of "The Digital Antiquarian" as a source, but Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games/Archive 130#Digital Antiquarian? is the only time I've seen it discussed, and that was years ago. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 20:56, 29 March 2023 (UTC)
Yeah doing another go around should be done before nominating. Thanks. GamerPro64 01:20, 30 March 2023 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – April 2023

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

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Arbitration

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:11, 4 April 2023 (UTC)

Reporting disruptive editor

Do you remember I reported that editor in May of last year who is using multiple accounts for making questionable edits in articles without explanation by using this range. It appears they are back again and still making the same edits as before but now with this range. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 09:52, 8 April 2023 (UTC)

You have a good memory. I blocked the IP range for a year this time. It seems to stick to one customer for a very long time, and Berean Hunter did a CheckUser block on a previous IP range. From his actions, it looks like this is block evasion, but I can't find any notes about who that might be. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 14:45, 8 April 2023 (UTC)

Reduce the protection level

Please can you reduce the protection level for the page Vietnam? The current protection constrict updates and improvements to the page. 2001:EE0:226:C4F4:F66C:B9BB:39CB:C059 (talk) 05:22, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

I wouldn't make it editable by IP editors even if I did reduce the protection level. Why not just create an account? NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 06:18, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
My concern is with the protection being too high so it drives away potential contributors. 2001:EE0:226:C4F4:F66C:B9BB:39CB:C059 (talk) 06:48, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

The David Kendrick/Bastille Incident

I would first like to state that I am A: not a sockpuppet for Angela Criss (I hope my contrib history proves that well enough), and B: Just really happy that the stupid rumor of David Kendrick joining Bastille is finally over after that many years.

Now that being said, would it be okay for me to re-add (at least with modifications for compliance) the entry of this whole six-year long debacle on the list of wikipedia hoaxes? I don't believe I was the first person to notice this particular edit, but I did notice it six years ago, and would check back every few years whenever I saw that someone else was doing it all over again. Now, I perfectly understand if this isn't necessarily the kind of thing that would normally go on this page (though personally, after combing through, I do think it fits in with other similar incidences), but it was definitely a moment of pride to see that rumor finally put to bed, and logged away on the grand list of all the other noteworthy posts. I'm aware the entry was added by the spammer themselves (oddly enough) but just wanted to ask permission if it would be okay to restore it, without arousing suspicion that my profile was also a sockpuppet.

Additionally, I would like to say that this false rumor did make into a music blog about David Kendrick and his current band, Xiu Xiu, as well as him being erroneously listed as a member of the band by mods on the official Bastille subreddit.

Thank you for any answer and for all your work to this wonderful site! JesseAF13 (talk) 08:01, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

I didn't spend much time looking at the individual edits once I recognized a known hoaxer was making them, and I bulk-removed them. If there were any edits that weren't problematic in some way (such as vandalism), you could restore them. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 13:54, 19 April 2023 (UTC)
Thanks pal! I understand, and thanks again. JesseAF13 (talk) 17:29, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

The Browning

Hello NinjaRobotPirate, for the last couple of days there has been a disruptive editing from an unknown IP address. Although the IP looks different every time, the first five numbers looks the same and the editing is identical. Here is the Revision history. --Tobi999tomas (talk) 13:17, 29 April 2023 (UTC)

Lots of disruption coming from that IP range. I blocked 120.16.0.0/16 for a week. That should help, but it might just start up again. That's usually how these things go. Let me know, and I can try longer range blocks or page protection. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 15:08, 29 April 2023 (UTC)
So it has been one week and it is still ongoing; Revision history. Tobi999tomas (talk) 05:13, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

WP:ANI#Jexta8866

I realized after that the way I phrased my comment to you was not optimal because you could not respond, which would mean you didn't officially "object", and I would have no way of knowing. Also, I wanted to make sure you noticed my added comment about undisclosed paid editing. So, better phrased, is it okay with you if I block everyone? I'm not sure if you were referring to temporal or page overlap, but either way, personally I think the person should be indeffed. Tagged as proven (if you're okay with the blocks)?--Bbb23 (talk) 20:04, 29 April 2023 (UTC)

Yeah, that seems fine. The technical and behavioral evidence seem pretty convincing to me, but if you squint at it in the right way, you could maybe try to justify it as "I'm separating my edits between music and wrestling", and I wouldn't be too surprised if one of the accounts also said, "I was teaching my friend how to edit Wikipedia." NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 21:56, 29 April 2023 (UTC)
Has a lot of friends.  Done under the theory that the block belongs to the person, not the account, Jexta8866 was clearly disruptive, so all of their accounts should be blocked. Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:09, 29 April 2023 (UTC)

IP disruption

If you have time, would appreciate if you could review the two IP ranges disrupting Revenge of the Mummy. Both geolocate to Orlando and are clearly the same editor. Thank you. -- GoneIn60 (talk) 15:45, 2 May 2023 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) I've blocked the /64. That should be enough here, at a glance. -- ferret (talk) 15:53, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
Much appreciated! --GoneIn60 (talk) 16:41, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
Disruption on rollercoasters? That isn't the newspaper clipper, is it? Geolocation looks wrong, and I don't see them posting any newspaper clippings, but I get a little twitchy when I see disruption on rollercoasters now. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 16:06, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
Haha, well no fortunately not this time! Hasn't resurfaced in a while, although now I'm inclined to run to the nearest solid piece of wood I can find! --GoneIn60 (talk) 16:39, 2 May 2023 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – May 2023

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

Guideline and policy news

  • A request for comment about removing administrative privileges in specified situations is open for feedback.

Technical news

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:23, 3 May 2023 (UTC)
Jimbo got desysoped, eh? Looks like I missed some drama. Guess I'm more disconnected from the project than I thought. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 18:30, 3 May 2023 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) Relevant readings would be User talk:Bradv/Archive 25, User talk:Jimbo Wales/Archive 250#Please respond, ArbCom case request, cumulating in Jimbo resigning the tools. Or for a brief overview, Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2023-04-26/News and notes. AddWittyNameHere 18:44, 3 May 2023 (UTC)
Uh huh. Well, that's certainly interesting. As a sometime Devo fan, I always suspected de-evolution is real. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 20:18, 3 May 2023 (UTC)
Interesting, but perhaps not quite as surprising as it ought to have been. (But then, if we're speaking of folks more disconnected from the project than they realized, ol' Jimbo's pretty much the archetype) AddWittyNameHere 21:21, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

An aside

Hi NRP. Re Special:Diff/1153362069, I don't want to go on a tangent in an active unblock request, but I just wanted to say I appreciate your reply. I'm bipolar too—or, more precisely, have DID-spectrum symptoms that are functionally the same as bipolar disorder except without predictable cycling—and I very much get the challenge of maintaining a consistent tone. I likewise have my symptoms under control, but even there, it's hard to put the same outer persona forward while things shift internally, and that can be very frustrating, even if the effects are far milder than those of, say, an unmitigated manic episode (five years without!).

Hope that's not oversharing; all I mean to say is, apology accepted but also not necessary. Thank you as always for all the great work you do here. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she|they|xe) 22:17, 5 May 2023 (UTC)

Yeah, sometimes it's difficult to deal with the little things. I think I'm getting tired of being a CheckUser, but I often feel like that. It usually passes. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 03:25, 6 May 2023 (UTC)
Yeah, I was in that place the past few months, with respect to adminship. 25 blocks in 2 months after ~1,700 in the preceding 10. At one point I had a desysop request drafted at BN, but then I decided to just declare myself on leave from most admin work, and that helped. Wrote 4 articles, got another to GA, and maybe most importantly just gave myself some time to let some of that seedy back-office jaundice fade away. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she|they|xe) 04:21, 6 May 2023 (UTC)
Not bipolar, but under various adjacent conditions of autism, adhd, anxiety. I turned in checkuser because I was spending some portion of every day worried about the activity requirements and just dwelling on that. Somewhat ironically, my editing returned to roughly "normal" levels a couple weeks after. -- ferret (talk) 15:19, 6 May 2023 (UTC)
It's come and gone for years. But, yes, it helps to change up what you're doing. I've created a lot of articles on video games recently, and I might nominate Johnny Mnemonic (film) for a GA. Some of the advanced permissions mostly just stressors, which is one reason that I didn't want oversight. I can see how CU would be stressful, too, if you dislike soul-crushing work. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 18:48, 6 May 2023 (UTC)
My latest happens to be on a work related to a video game! I know that's also ferret's area of expertise, so feedback welcome from either of y'all. :) -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she|they|xe) 19:02, 6 May 2023 (UTC)
Be forewarned, I'm also a deletionist :P I see a merge discussion is up, but I'm not gonna jump in on that. -- ferret (talk) 19:05, 6 May 2023 (UTC)

Colin Salmon

Hello, I was wondering why it says Colin Salmon is 60-61 being born in 1961-62, this year he would be 61-62. Spectritus (talk) 07:54, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

The source cited says he was 59 years old on the day they published their article, 2021-08-29, and the template calculates his age based on that. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 14:36, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

DJ Luke Nasty

@Ninjarobotpirate:: I oppose deletion under G5. Come on. DJ Luke Nasty's songs "Might Be" and "OTW" charted on the Billboard Hot 100 and are now certified Platinum and Gold. He's notable. Looks to me he meets WP:GNG and I don't see any reason to delete the article under G5 block. 47.40.44.219 (talk) 08:29, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

Reduce protection level

Hello, I'm not interested in editing the page Vietnam but I'm interested in seeing the protection being reduced to semi-protection, since it encourages updates and improvements to the page. 2001:EE0:229:96C7:8368:BC96:2761:411E (talk) 09:51, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

User incivility

Hello there. I noticed you blocked User:Oknazevad some three years ago regarding an incivility issue. Well, I must say that the user is showing such behavior at World Straight Pool Championship. There's a little dispute between me and the user regarding info in the article. However the user started using such salty language which be read in the latest edit summary in article's history. 104.172.112.209 (talk) 05:17, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

Really? How about you stop reverting to a year+ old version of the article with poor formatting and discuss on the talk page instead? Your tendentious edit warring is tiresome. oknazevad (talk) 05:21, 11 May 2023 (UTC)
The use of bullets isn't poor formatting, it's only a different style.
Anyway, as I said in my latest edit summary in the article, some early world championships were challenge matches instead tournaments. It says so in Ralph Greenleaf. Unlike a tournament where all players play a series of matches until only one of them remains, a challenge match involves the champion sitting on top while the challenger has to play some games and rise in the rankings before they take on each other. The challenger also doesn't get much of a prominent position unless he defeats the champion. Because of this, I figure it would be best to just mention the champions in the early events. 104.172.112.209 (talk) 07:17, 11 May 2023 (UTC)
What a mess. It looks like various sock puppets were using the article as a battleground. I think I've blocked everyone who has edited that article in the past two weeks except for you, Oknazevad. I'm tired of blocking people, so I'll just ask you nicely to try to stay civil in your edit summaries and avoid edit warring (regardless of 3RR). NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 14:14, 11 May 2023 (UTC)
Thank you. It was obvious to me, so I let the mask slip a bit, as it were because I don't feel the need to be civil to those not editing in good faith, which inherently includes sock puppets. oknazevad (talk) 14:20, 11 May 2023 (UTC)
Maintaining civility can be challenging at times, but you have to try. There are no exceptions. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 15:11, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

Would you be willing to sweep

Around Huggingface.co? -- ferret (talk) 22:48, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

Mihai Tiuliumeanu 2 is on the same IP range, but doesn't seem to be related except for having a similar username to the sockmaster. It's hard for me to really get a strong feeling on this ISP because I don't think I've ever blocked anyone on it, but I'd say it's kind of unlikely. There are some edits on another project that don't look like vandalism. MihaiBlock and MihaiDVD are already blocked. It looks like Ponyo already got all the easy stuff. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 03:07, 16 May 2023 (UTC)
Those two are definite, so I tagged for the record keeping. Thanks for looking. -- ferret (talk) 03:14, 16 May 2023 (UTC)

46.118.105.96

46.118.105.96 (talk · contribs · WHOIS)

Hi, just came across this IP when anti-vandalism patrolling and noticed they had a CU block by you that recently expired (and they've been editing in a similar pattern since the block was lifted). Could you block them again if you think it's the same person as before? Thanks. 73.67.145.30 (talk) 16:30, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

Aren't you an IP sock, too? But, yes, that IP is probably still allocated to the same person. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 17:32, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

Your warning message on my talk page

Hi. I don't get this. The IP user has started to disrupt Sareee since 30 April.[24] In their last edit,[25] they added 100% misleading and wrong info to the lead section. But you put me and that IP user in a same edit warring basket. They have ignored all of my edit summaries. So because I just warned them one-time and not 3/4-time, I'm guilty too?! Opening a discussion on talk page won't solve anything. The IP is just trolling.[26] --Mann Mann (talk) 17:51, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

That article is written like professional wrestling is a sport instead of a scripted show, mixing reality and fantasy without any kind of barrier. The sources look like blogs. I'm not sure how anyone is supposed to tell what's vandalism on that article. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 18:17, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

Tejashwi Yadav

Hello, I saw you active so requesting for help. Today all of the non-English stuff submitted by IPs on Tejashwi Yadav's page was defamatory and threatening. Kindly delete all revisions of User talk:106.208.248.59 and User talk:2409:4089:19E:72E:9550:A750:DCA8:81AF from that page. Thank you! DreamRimmer (talk) 03:14, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

Well, according to Google Translate, it's certainly creepy. It's gone now. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 04:58, 18 May 2023 (UTC)
Thank you! DreamRimmer (talk) 05:11, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

Checkuser request

Hello, NinjaRobotPirate. Could you check IP editors 213.149.61.118 and 213.149.61.65 (block log), please? Both addresses have performed the same edit to South Park (season 2) within a short span of time, and I believe that it may be the same person performing a sockpuppet edit. Both have performed several edits to other South Park articles, some of which have been reverted by other editors...

I don't know which IP is the sockmaster, nor how many puppets there are. This is why I haven't filed a report at WP:SPI; first time reporting, and unfamiliar with how to report this case. Thank you for your assistance. — CJDOS, Sheridan, OR (talk) 04:00, 19 May 2023 (UTC) (amended 04:23, 19 May 2023 (UTC))

Well, that's just how IP addresses work. On many ISPs, customers are allocated a new IP address every so often. If someone makes disruptive edits from different IP addresses, it's sometimes possible to block all of them from editing. From skimming over those plot summaries, most look like copy-pasted copyright violations. Short plot summaries that end in a question mark are almost always copy-pasted from a TV network. Normal people don't write like that. Another looks like it was copy-pasted from Fandom, which is usually OK as long as it's done with attribution (depending on the license of the Fandom page in question), but most of the stuff written on Fandom is not very good. Looking further, a few of the IPs posting this stuff have already been blocked. So, I did range block the IPs, but it's because they're evading previous blocks, not because they're using multiple IP addresses to edit. I guess the rules are kind of arcane and complex if you're not already familiar with how the internet works, but there's probably a layman's explanation somewhere. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 04:33, 19 May 2023 (UTC)

The Ocean

Hello NinjaRobotPirate, I know that I am here constantly but there is always some disruption from another IP address. Here is the Revision history --Tobi999tomas (talk) 15:13, 19 May 2023 (UTC)

It's not a problem. However, without evidence in the form of diffs that explains what's disruptive, I usually just skim over what's going on, and I'm not really sure what's disruptive about that IP's edits. It looks like the IP is trying to change content they think is wrong and has posted sources to the talk page. If the sources are unreliable, or the IP is edit warring, that'd potentially be something I could act on. Otherwise, it sounds like a content dispute, which should probably be resolved via dispute resolution. I know it's a pain to deal with Wikipedia's bureaucratic processes, but sometimes they work well. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 16:43, 19 May 2023 (UTC)
Ok. The issue has been resolved but there is another IP address that should be checked out. It has been very disruptive and it is not following with guidelines. If I recall correctly, Sputnikmusic is not reliable due to it be deemed as user-generated site even though it has an own staff. But the thing is, the guy is using more IP addresses to gain an upper hand. Revision history Tobi999tomas (talk) 18:43, 29 May 2023 (UTC)
I'm visually impaired, and it's difficult for me to find new messages in the middle of my talk page. It's like trying to find Wally. It's easier for me if you start a new section. Wikipedia:WikiProject Albums/Sources lists Sputnikmusic staff reviews as reliable. I'd probably just let it go. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 18:55, 29 May 2023 (UTC)

Block evasion

Apparently knocking on wood a few weeks ago did nothing. The serial clipper is back and strikes again! diff. Worth noting I haven't detected any disruption yet. Only helpful edits so far, but that's often how it starts out. --GoneIn60 (talk) 03:39, 25 May 2023 (UTC)

 Confirmed and blocked. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 03:57, 25 May 2023 (UTC)

Possible 10+ year hoax found

The AfD discussion has seen some agreement that Lake Zamkaft, which was created in 2012, is probably a hoax. I bring this to your attention since you seem to have contributed to WP:HOAXLIST. I don't know what the procedure is, but you might want to archive the article or something like that. 〜 Festucalex • talk 06:15, 26 May 2023 (UTC)

That's just an unofficial listing of hoaxes, so there a process or procedure. You could add the article to the list yourself if you wanted. For what it's worth, the account that created the article said they have written about a topic they vaguely remember having read about a decade earlier, and this rambling essay looks like it could potentially be the result of early machine translation technology. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 14:49, 26 May 2023 (UTC)
So it's either WP:HOAX or WP:CIR. Great. I'll add it myself when the AfD is closed. 〜 Festucalex • talk 14:53, 26 May 2023 (UTC)
Yeah, both are possibilities. Wikipedia doesn't really have very good defenses against potential hoaxes and has trouble identifying them. Maybe some day we'll have AI that can help flag potential hoaxes instead of telling people convincing half-truths. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 17:21, 26 May 2023 (UTC)
I'm more concerned that AI will increase the number of hoaxes on Wikipedia, since anyone can spin out a half-baked, semi-believable yarn using ChatGPT. I would bet that there actually is some ChatGPT garbage on Wikipedia right now. 〜 Festucalex • talk 18:40, 26 May 2023 (UTC)
There are some. Overt examples, with fake citations and vaguely believable nonsense, have been deleted quickly, but nobody can know what's going on in the more obscure corners of Wikipedia. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 20:40, 26 May 2023 (UTC)

Bullied by an IP

Hey there NRP! This IP left some disturbing (to say the least) edit summaries on my talk page. Could you please delete them? Thanks! CycloneYoris talk! 11:08, 26 May 2023 (UTC)

Yeah, I can get rid of them. Honestly, I think the use of revision deletion has become a bit too common these days, but it's probably too late to start complaining now. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 15:20, 26 May 2023 (UTC)
Thank you! :) CycloneYoris talk! 22:20, 26 May 2023 (UTC)

Reporting disruptive behavior by Zvig47

Zvig47 (talk · contribs)

This editor is being disruptive by removing sourced content and adding unsourced content in articles [27] [28] [29] [30]. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 14:14, 29 May 2023 (UTC)

I will stop. I was simply trying to enhance the article but I see that I was making your job a little harder. I apologize in that aspect. I’ve added sources to the information I wanted to add. I know it’s a privilege to edit here and not a right and I don’t want to take advantage of that privilege. Like I said I wholeheartedly apologize for making your job harder than it needed to be when dealing with me. I will edit more diligently in the future. Zvig47 (talk) 14:16, 29 May 2023 (UTC)
@Zvig47: The sources you added do not work, so I fixed them for you. Next time, make sure you add the sources correctly. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 15:20, 29 May 2023 (UTC)
Well, you've got contradicting statements from reliable sources. If one source says it received mixed reviews and another says it received positive reviews, you can't give undue weight to one of those sources. That said, Metacritic weights sources in ways that nobody understands, and it only determines a consensus based on the sources that it has indexed. So, the problem becomes how you deal with that situation. The issue should probably be dealt with by discussion on the talk page and coming to a consensus based on policy. If you can't come to a consensus, there are several other options for dispute resolution. But, yeah, don't remove sources because you don't like the conclusion reached in them. That's an even worse example of cherry picking. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 16:52, 29 May 2023 (UTC)
Sorry for the late reply. So you're saying that since Metacritic says the album received positive reviews, it doesn't matter what the other source says since it's less reliable than Metacritic? TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 03:57, 2 June 2023 (UTC)
No, I'm saying that you've got contradicting statements from reliable sources. From WP:NPOV: "Avoid stating seriously contested assertions as facts. If different reliable sources make conflicting assertions about a matter, treat these assertions as opinions rather than facts, and do not present them as direct statements." NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 04:00, 2 June 2023 (UTC)
Okay, now I understand. Sorry for my mistake. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 04:18, 2 June 2023 (UTC)

User:Megastar7

We all know that User:Megastar7 is a sockpuppeteer for making User:Rattatast, he also made User:Wubzy too. So can you blocked him because he's also a sockpuppet by User:Megastar7 too?~~-- MLJ 657 (talk) 02:51, 31 May 2023 (UTC)

 Confirmed and blocked, and master blocked indefinitely this time. Given the age of this account, I wouldn't be surprised if there were more. I guess we can just keep blocking them as they pop up. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 03:13, 31 May 2023 (UTC)

Draft:Justyna Zander

Hi NRP, I'm trying to decide whether Draft:Justyna Zander merits a speedy nomination as spam. The subject appears notable, but there's so much autobiographical bilge here that the draft doesn't look easily salvageable. I'm assuming the IPs are all related to the registered account, and the maintenance tags from 2021 suggest that this isn't the first time around. Your thoughts welcome. 2601:19E:4180:6D50:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 03:23, 4 June 2023 (UTC)

I don't think it's got much chance of making it into article space like that, and if it did, it'd probably get deleted pretty quickly for promotion. As a draft, I guess it's not hurting anything, though it probably does qualify for speedy deletion with that much puffery. I guess you could tag it with WP:G11. I probably wouldn't bother unless I couldn't get a word in edgewise, which does happen sometimes when COI editors become protective of their autobiography and don't let anyone remove the puffery. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 03:37, 4 June 2023 (UTC)
Well considered--there's no imperative to do anything at this point. I'll give it at least overnight. Thank you, 2601:19E:4180:6D50:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 03:45, 4 June 2023 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – June 2023

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

Guideline and policy news

  • Following an RfC, editors indefinitely site-banned by community consensus will now have all rights, including sysop, removed.
  • As a part of the Wikimedia Foundation's IP Masking project, a new policy has been created that governs the access to temporary account IP addresses. An associated FAQ has been created and individual communities can increase the requirements to view temporary account IP addresses.

Technical news

  • Bot operators and tool maintainers should schedule time in the coming months to test and update their tools for the effects of IP masking. IP masking will not be deployed to any content wiki until at least October 2023 and is unlikely to be deployed to the English Wikipedia until some time in 2024.

Arbitration

  • The arbitration case World War II and the history of Jews in Poland has been closed. The topic area of Polish history during World War II (1933-1945) and the history of Jews in Poland is subject to a "reliable source consensus-required" contentious topic restriction.

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:33, 5 June 2023 (UTC)

Possible block evasion by ThesePicklesLoveSosa

ThesePicklesLoveSosa (talk · contribs) Mandomanny313 (talk · contribs)

I think this account is related to blocked user ThesePicklesLoveSosa [31] [32] [33] [34]. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 03:38, 6 June 2023 (UTC)

Interestingly, they're probably both socks of User:2019AlwaysLit. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 03:59, 6 June 2023 (UTC)

Disruptive editing

There is an editor who is using multiple accounts to add unsourced recording dates to articles [35] [36] [37] [38]. I believe that these accounts are edited by the same person. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 01:58, 8 June 2023 (UTC)

That's not multiple accounts. That's a person with a dynamic IP address. Just go through the standard warning templates, like {{uw-unsourced1}}, {{uw-unsourced2}}, etc. You don't have to start over with each new IP address. If this is the third time someone on 174.251.240.0/22 has added unsourced content, and you're sure that it's the same person doing it each time, you can use {{uw-unsourced3}} on the newest IP address. It's kind of unlikely that they'll see the warnings, but it's possible. That's probably Verizon Wireless. You can tell that the IP address sometimes (but not always) sticks for a few hours or even a few days. I gave the latest IP editor a level 3 warning, so that's enough warnings for now, I think. If they keep it up, I can do a short range block. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 02:50, 8 June 2023 (UTC)
They still doing it [39] [40] [41] [42]. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 08:34, 10 June 2023 (UTC)
I did a week-long range block on the /22. It looks like this has gone on for a while, so that probably won't stop it, but maybe we'll get lucky. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 14:27, 10 June 2023 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
Thank you for creating many articles on lower-budget games which would otherwise not receive them! Venky64 (talk) 15:00, 8 June 2023 (UTC)
Thanks. Yeah, I've made a lot of them lately. I've got a curated list of notable video games at User:NinjaRobotPirate/Games if anyone is bored. I'll probably get around to most of them eventually. I hope someone else makes the Metroidvania/platform games because I find those boring to write. All the sources are listed right there, so you don't even have to do any work. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 21:04, 8 June 2023 (UTC)
I would like to add, however, that not every article needs that gigantic {{vgreviews}} template. I add it sometimes, but I've come to see it as a bit of an eyesore on small articles. Part of it is just the fact that indie games often don't get a lot of attention, so you have to scrounge for reviews. Part of it is my fault because I'm lazy about writing reception sections. If you filled out the reception so that the template didn't dominate it, I think that'd be fine, but it would take a lot of effort. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 02:20, 9 June 2023 (UTC)

User:Zxcvbnm

Hi, NPR, I have Zxcvbnm's talk page on my watchlist for who knows what reason (searching through their talk page archives, it looks like I declined a CSD of theirs like 5 years ago and that's it), and noticed your block and their appeal. I'm not particularly impressed by the original unblock request itself, but this looks fairly decent as an unblock request, and was thinking of accepting it; what are your thoughts? Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 16:51, 13 June 2023 (UTC)

@Writ Keeper: if you think it's enough, that's OK with me. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 19:41, 13 June 2023 (UTC)

Jean Louisa Kelly

Regarding your recent article protection to stop the edit-warring: The ip's stopped discussion when you protected the article, and have taken up adding more unreliable sources when the protection ended. The ip's are clustered in northern Alabama and Maryland, so there are likely more than one person involved, probably fans of Kelly. I've requested protection at RFPP, but there's a backlog. Can you protect it if someone doesn't get to it sooner? Hipal (talk) 19:15, 14 June 2023 (UTC)

I semi-protected the page for a while. If the IP editor starts communicating more, I could shorten it or something, I guess. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 19:34, 14 June 2023 (UTC)

Query

Hello, NinjaRobotPirate,

You blocked Frenchfriesaredelicious as a sockpuppet of ScienceAdvisor. Well, today, another editor, Kauiltan, moved a draft, Malcolm Collins (author), that Frenchfriesaredelicious spent a lot of time on to main space. I would report this at SPI but I don't see that a SPI case was ever opened so I'm coming directly to you to see if a connection exists. Thank you. Liz Read! Talk! 00:33, 17 June 2023 (UTC)

Hmm. I don't remember that case, but I'll take a look. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 00:41, 17 June 2023 (UTC)
After reading some comments Frenchfriesaredelicious posted on Talk pages that are in line with the activism of Malcolm Collins, I'm beginning to wonder whether he was working on an autobiography. They also mentioned they had an edit on the article as an IP editor. Liz Read! Talk! 00:52, 17 June 2023 (UTC)
I see that Kauiltan edited Simone Collins who just happens to be Malcolm Collins' wife and business partner. Reviewing some of the references in Malcom Collins' article, apparently are pretty well known for being active on social media, especially Reddit. Liz Read! Talk! 00:59, 17 June 2023 (UTC)
Doggerela77 looks like an undisclosed paid editor to me, and, honestly, the CU data looks a little more compelling but still a bit vague. Frenchfriesaredelicious claimed to be using a VPN, and some of them can go a while before getting blocked by one of our proxy-detecting bots. I'd say Kauiltan and Doggerela77 are spammers, socks, or both. Probably both spammers and socks, but I'll block them as "suspected" so we don't have to fuss so much over the CU data. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 01:50, 17 June 2023 (UTC)
Thank you for the checking, NRP. Are there grounds to CSD G5 their work? All of their work, in main space, Draft space and sandboxes seems to involve articles about this couple. Liz Read! Talk! 01:55, 17 June 2023 (UTC)
Yeah, I'd say so. I don't remember exactly, but I think I left Malcolm's article in draft space without tagging it so I could keep track of who edits it. It's on my watchlist. I wish I could leave private notes to myself on Wikipedia like "this is on your watchlist because it was created by a sock puppet". NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 02:01, 17 June 2023 (UTC)
I just moved both articles to Draft space for the moment. We'll see if new editors take them on. That leaves their sandboxes but I guess I can let them be. Thanks again. Liz Read! Talk! 02:53, 17 June 2023 (UTC)

DorsetTiger / BoscombeBackOfTheNet sock

I know you can't confirm this, but if the information is of any use to you, FYI see 92.23.61.7 (talk+ · tag · contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · proxy check · block user · block log · cross-wiki contribs · CheckUser (log)). -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she|they|xe) 15:04, 17 June 2023 (UTC)

I guess I should have watchlisted Cupcakke. Special:Diff/1096543665/Special:Diff/1127269030, Special:Diff/1050157734/Special:Diff/1133705778, Special:Diff/1064907635/Special:Diff/1157464255 make AlexJacques95 look pretty suspicious, too. I'm not really fond of watchlisting more articles about musicians I know nothing about, though. That said, it's too bad The Vamps (British band) is semi-protected. It looks like that's DorsetTiger's favorite band.

I wish these sock puppets were more focused on speed metal and industrial metal, preferably the older stuff, like Carcass and Godflesh. At least then I'd have a chance of understanding what people were talking about. Or the Beastie Boys. Even my mother likes the Beastie Boys, which was a somewhat surprising thing to hear a 70-something baby boomer say. She's been saying that modern music sucks for the past 40+ years, and then in 2023 she's like, "Oh yeah, you gotta fight for your right to party." I think she's messing with me. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 16:10, 17 June 2023 (UTC)

124.168.93.254 block evasion

Hello, I just saw that you blocked 120.17.59.250. Well, they are back as 124.168.93.254 and is doing the same edits (adding that films are box office bombs and changing the reception in the lead). Sigh. Mike Allen 13:28, 20 June 2023 (UTC)

Yeah, I think it's safe to say anyone in the Sydney area who obsessively replaces "received negative reviews" with "was panned by critics" is a block-evading sock. It'll probably be easy to spot them but a long case of Whac-A-Mole. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 14:35, 20 June 2023 (UTC)

sustained date vandalism

Hi, I see you blocked this IP for "sustained date vandalism": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/201.219.239.0/24

There's also another IP range of the same guy who does the same thing for a long time, I checked it with this but maybe you can calculate a better range: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions/45.232.94.123/16 Tehonk (talk) 08:08, 23 June 2023 (UTC)

There doesn't seem to be any date vandalism outside of Special:Contributions/45.232.94.0/24. If there is, you could point it out to me, and I can try to figure out another range block. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 14:40, 23 June 2023 (UTC)

Block evasion by AndrewTheWikiEditor

Andrew has used many IP ranges to disrupt media articles (mostly rappers) including 2601:C6:CF00:3E0:0:0:0:0/64, [43]. This user inserts unsourced births and removing genres from infobox and categories by using "Allmusic" sidebar. Can someone look at this user's Access now? 47.40.45.8 (talk) 04:39, 26 June 2023 (UTC)

Another reincarnation of our block evading editor

Hitting a long list of malls and coasters, and I've had to trail behind and clean some of it up: Grand1993. Looks like they may have been editing from 24.1.85.35 as well at one point, as seen in this edit. Thanks. --GoneIn60 (talk) 12:48, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

Yeah, Grand1993 looks pretty obvious. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 13:44, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

Possible block evasion

Hail4L (talk · contribs)

Possible block evasion by ThesePicklesLoveSosa [44] [45] [46] [47]. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 05:41, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

The overlap is a bit suspicious, but the CheckUser data is different. I don't think they're related. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 13:36, 30 June 2023 (UTC)
Okay, I'll take your word on it. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 17:46, 30 June 2023 (UTC)
Why am I mentioned in this? Hail4L (talk) 21:57, 1 July 2023 (UTC)
Your edits looked similar to that of a blocked vandal. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 22:26, 1 July 2023 (UTC)
Oh nah i dont do that, only time i edit something is when its incorrect or missing information Hail4L (talk) 00:38, 2 July 2023 (UTC)
@Hail4L: Also, why are you using an IP address at the same time? TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 00:44, 2 July 2023 (UTC)
I don't really know. I'm kind of new to Wikipedia sorry, I just created this account to add and fix information on the Gucci Mane wiki Hail4L (talk) 04:42, 2 July 2023 (UTC)

Sudanese Arabs article

hello admin today I would like to Report one user who keeps editing the article and changing the wording of the original article from "Some of them are of Arab and descent, with varying degrees of admixture from Peninsular Arabs" to "Some of them are of Arab and Nubian descent, with varying cases of admixture from Peninsular Arabs". He claims the sources he cited mention this when the first source can't be accessed online, the second source is a book from Amazon online titled "Sudan" with a picture of a guy with a skullcap and the third is a broken link. He is not being honest and is playing around and when I talked to him about it he seemed ignorant and not willing to add other sources to back up his claim. He just changed the wording from the original article and added sources that don't mention what he is saying. He also claims that source 9 about Nubians mentions his claim as well when it was originally numbered source 7 and it just mentions that the rest are of Arabized Nubian descent. Please have him blocked he was blocked before for changing his user name to hello and also he is undoing the reverts of the article I keep doing and lying and adding sources that doesn't mention anything of what he wrote. Please revert it back and give him a warning or block him thank you. Cookiemonster1618 (talk) 13:45, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

I'm offering you a compromise, yet you still haven't responded, reporting won't really do much.
Thank you. Haskko (talk) 13:46, 30 June 2023 (UTC)
You're both edit warring. I fully protected the article for two days, which will hopefully force a bit of discussion and dispute resolution. I understand that every content dispute feels like it's an emergency that must be immediately resolved through endless reverts. I try to go easy on the edit warring blocks, but you two are making it difficult. Filling up the article history with reverts can only result in blocks. If you're absolutely certain that there are behavioral issues that need to be addressed by an administrator, you can take issues to the administrators' noticeboard. For content disputes, you can always get a third opinion or go to the dispute resolution noticeboard. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 15:02, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

Dispute Resolution noticeboard

hello once again admin when I click on the link for 'dispute resolution board' and click on the 'request a resolution' it says that it requires Java script. How can I access it? Cookiemonster1618 (talk) 16:46, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

@Cookiemonster1618: if you have Javascript disabled, I guess you should turn it on. That might be the case if you're using a desktop personal computer and maximized your web browser's security settings, such as enabling private browsing. If you haven't done that, or you're using a more limited device to access the internet, such as a feature phone, HDTV, or video game console, you might just have to go without Javascript and try to make the best of it. You could try asking for assistance on Wikipedia talk:Dispute resolution noticeboard to see if there's another way. Maybe one of the volunteers will start the process for you. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 17:04, 30 June 2023 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:NinjaRobotPirate/Archive2023-1&oldid=1163671921"