Jump to content

User talk:Sir Sputnik/Archive 8

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 5Archive 6Archive 7Archive 8Archive 9Archive 10Archive 11

Administrators' newsletter – December 2018

News and updates for administrators from the past month (November 2018).

Administrator changes

readded Al Ameer son • Randykitty • Spartaz
removed Boson • Daniel J. Leivick • Efe • Esanchez7587 • Fred Bauder • Garzo • Martijn Hoekstra • Orangemike

Interface administrator changes

removedDeryck Chan

Guideline and policy news

  • Following a request for comment, the Mediation Committee is now closed and will no longer be accepting case requests.
  • A request for comment is in progress to determine whether members of the Bot Approvals Group should satisfy activity requirements in order to remain in that role.
  • A request for comment is in progress regarding whether to change the administrator inactivity policy, such that administrators "who have made no logged administrative actions for at least 12 months may be desysopped". Currently, the policy states that administrators "who have made neither edits nor administrative actions for at least 12 months may be desysopped".
  • A proposal has been made to temporarily restrict editing of the Main Page to interface administrators in order to mitigate the impact of compromised accounts.

Technical news

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

  • In late November, an attacker compromised multiple accounts, including at least four administrator accounts, and used them to vandalize Wikipedia. If you have ever used your current password on any other website, you should change it immediately. Sharing the same password across multiple websites makes your account vulnerable, especially if your password was used on a website that suffered a data breach. As these incidents have shown, these concerns are not pure fantasies.
  • Wikipedia policy requires administrators to have strong passwords. To further reinforce security, administrators should also consider enabling two-factor authentication. A committed identity can be used to verify that you are the true account owner in the event that your account is compromised and/or you are unable to log in.

Obituaries

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:36, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

089baby sock?

Is Chhengly a sock of 089baby? I am not sure but when I was checking All AFC leagues in 2018 and 2019, I saw the user created 2019 Cambodian League. Hhkohh (talk) 13:39, 12 December 2018 (UTC)

@Hhkohh: it sure looks like it to me. Sir Sputnik (talk) 03:13, 13 December 2018 (UTC)

New to Wikipedia, need help!

Hi! Thanks for looking into my SPI: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Cvbhnjmk,. Could you explain what does "Already blocked" mean in the admin comment? Thanks! NewlyHookedToWiki (talk) 06:09, 18 December 2018 (UTC)

@NewlyHookedToWiki: What that means is by the time I looked at the case, the account was already blocked so no further action was needed. Sir Sputnik (talk) 13:57, 18 December 2018 (UTC)
Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by NewlyHookedToWiki (talk • contribs) 15:57, 18 December 2018 (UTC)

Hi

Hi, I'm sorry to bother you. If you remember this case, there's been a long history of sockpuppetry on Jodie Foster's page. Soon after you blocked the last sock, XYaz.1997 popped up to make similarly hagiographic edits at Foster's page. To be honest, this is getting a bit out of hand with new accounts popping up every time one is blocked. Is there any permanent solution to this? Krimuk2.0 (talk) 14:15, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

@Krimuk2.0: If they're consistently editing the same articles, you can report the RPP. You'll not Jodie Foster is already under pending changes. Preempting edits on the article level is often a good way to discourage sockpuppetry. If there's a strong enough pattern an edit filter might be an option. I don't think that's feasible here, but it's not really my area of expertise. At the the end of the day though, WP:BRI is likely the best option. Sir Sputnik (talk) 21:34, 20 December 2018 (UTC)
And here's one more: Abb.1997. :( Krimuk2.0 (talk) 18:57, 26 December 2018 (UTC)
Within three days, the next one: X01.1997. Krimuk2.0 (talk) 19:55, 29 December 2018 (UTC)
@Krimuk2.0: I don't mind you reporting these here, but please don't use my talk page as alternative to filing a proper SPI report. Documentation and evidence are important, especially since you and I aren't the only ones working this case. Sir Sputnik (talk) 16:10, 1 January 2019 (UTC)

Merry Christmas and happy 2019!

Merry Christmas and happy new year! I was happy to see you have a successful RfA during 2018. I hope you will edit more happily in 2019 Hhkohh (talk) 12:40, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

Disputed G4

I do not think G4 applied to Sidd Chaudhuri (basketballer) which you deleted as a recreation of Sidd Chaudhuri (basketball). The pages were clearly "not substantially identical". Could you please undelete and reopen the AfD? 🎄BethNaught🎄 (talk) 15:44, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

@BethNaught: I have to disagree with that assessment. The new page adds a player profile section that rehashes information already in the infobox, and a brief description of his early life. Neither of these changes are significant; they certainly have no bearing on notability. That being said, it's also entirely moot since the page is also G5 eligible. Sir Sputnik (talk) 16:16, 26 December 2018 (UTC)
I still believe you're wrong. The "early life" and "high school career" sections add new information with new sources (however rubbish they may be). I'd take it to DRV, if it weren't for the G5. 🎄BethNaught🎄 (talk) 16:22, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – January 2019

News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2018).

Guideline and policy news

  1. G14 (new): Disambiguation pages that disambiguate only zero or one existing pages are now covered under the new G14 criterion (discussion). This is {{db-disambig}}; the text is unchanged and candidates may be found in Category:Candidates for speedy deletion as unnecessary disambiguation pages.
  2. R4 (new): Redirects in the file namespace (and no file links) that have the same name as a file or redirect at Commons are now covered under the new R4 criterion (discussion). This is {{db-redircom}}; the text is unchanged.
  3. G13 (expanded): Userspace drafts containing only the default Article Wizard text are now covered under G13 along with other drafts (discussion). Such blank drafts are now eligible after six months rather than one year, and taggers continue to use {{db-blankdraft}}.

Technical news

  • Starting on December 13, the Wikimedia Foundation security team implemented new password policy and requirements. Privileged accounts (administrators, bureaucrats, checkusers, oversighters, interface administrators, bots, edit filter managers/helpers, template editors, et al.) must have a password at least 10 characters in length. All accounts must have a password:
  1. At least 8 characters in length
  2. Not in the 100,000 most popular passwords (defined by the Password Blacklist library)
  3. Different from their username
User accounts not meeting these requirements will be prompted to update their password accordingly. More information is available on MediaWiki.org.
  • Blocked administrators may now block the administrator that blocked them. This was done to mitigate the possibility that a compromised administrator account would block all other active administrators, complementing the removal of the ability to unblock oneself outside of self-imposed blocks. A request for comment is currently in progress to determine whether the blocking policy should be updated regarding this change.
  • {{Copyvio-revdel}} now has a link to open the history with the RevDel checkboxes already filled in.

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

  • Accounts continue to be compromised on a regular basis. Evidence shows this is entirely due to the accounts having the same password that was used on another website that suffered a data breach. If you have ever used your current password on any other website, you should change it immediately.
  • Around 22% of admins have enabled two-factor authentication, up from 20% in June 2018. If you haven't already enabled it, please consider doing so. Regardless of whether you use 2FA, please practice appropriate account security by ensuring your password is secure and unique to Wikimedia.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:39, 1 January 2019 (UTC)

Check your email

Hello, Sir Sputnik. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template. — ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 01:28, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
It's just an email with my reply re: the message you left on my user talk page earlier. ;-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 01:28, 16 January 2019 (UTC)

Al-Madaʾinī

You speedied this at my request. Can you undo that, please? Thanks. Srnec (talk) 02:37, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

@Srnec:  Done. Sir Sputnik (talk) 02:39, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

Tollexrism | Sebastian Osigwe's page not restored

Hi there! I created the page of a Swiss-born Nigerian goalkeeper that plays for SC Kriens in the second division of Switzerland leagues, Sebastian Osigwe. The page has been deleted twice. I'd like to know the rationale behind this, since the information were thoroughly researched and genuine. And I'd also like to know if it would be re-uploaded very soon. It was last deleted in November, I'd waited till now but it has not been made live. Thanks for your help, Sir Sputnik.

Tollexrism (talk) 10:28, 30 January 2019 (UTC)

Spi

I’m confused by your close here? It’s an obvious sock and also likely related to wizznaddy. Praxidicae (talk) 21:10, 30 January 2019 (UTC)

and clearly kjsopro and kjsopro20 are one in the same. Praxidicae (talk) 21:12, 30 January 2019 (UTC)
Answered at on case page. Sir Sputnik (talk) 23:43, 30 January 2019 (UTC)

Fishiness

It seems a little odd this one-month old account is making contributions in a manner similar to that of an experienced user. They have been putting out templates such as {{uw-v4}} and using terms like "rvv" that, from my experience, wouldn't typically be used by new users. "Flap" in the username also reminds me of a LTA case, particularly this one. It'd be slightly premature to start an SPI lacking adequate evidence whilst the user has done nothing significant to warrant a check. However, I think there should be some behind-the-scenes effort to determine if this really is a good faith user or a chronic block evader who's masking as a newcomer similar to 1. What do you think? -- Flooded w/them 100s 06:56, 1 February 2019 (UTC)

@Flooded with them hundreds: Given that there's no reason to assume bad faith here, there's not much to be done other beyond simple observation. That being said, I can tell you for sure that this isn't Ljlas20. Sir Sputnik (talk) 03:01, 3 February 2019 (UTC)
Hmm.. good to know. -- Flooded w/them 100s 16:41, 5 February 2019 (UTC)

User:C0mradess

Hi Sir Sputnik. You indefinitely blocked this editor a few days ago per SOCK, but they might have come back as IPs 180.190.50.114, 180.190.35.217 and 180.190.39.105. It seems unlikely that three random IPs would just show up and start editing User:C0mradess/sandbox. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:18, 3 February 2019 (UTC)

@Marchjuly: Thanks for letting me know. I've reblocked the master account, and protected the sandbox page to prevent further IP socking. Sir Sputnik (talk) 19:21, 3 February 2019 (UTC)
Would you consider blocking the sockmaster indefinitely? It has engaged only in vandalism/disruptive editing and has what could be considered an offensive username. As far as I can tell, the articles in the sanboxes are fake/hoaxes too. Thanks. 72 (talk) 01:19, 4 February 2019 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – February 2019

News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2019).

Administrator changes

added Enterprisey • JJMC89
readded BorgQueen
removed Harro5 • Jenks24 • Graft • R. Baley

Interface administrator changes

removedEnterprisey

Guideline and policy news

  • A request for comment is currently open to reevaluate the activity requirements for administrators.
  • Administrators who are blocked have the technical ability to block the administrator who blocked their own account. A recent request for comment has amended the blocking policy to clarify that this ability should only be used in exceptional circumstances, such as account compromises, where there is a clear and immediate need.
  • A request for comment closed with a consensus in favor of deprecating The Sun as a permissible reference, and creating an edit filter to warn users who attempt to cite it.

Technical news

  • A discussion regarding an overhaul of the format and appearance of Wikipedia:Requests for page protection is in progress (permalink). The proposed changes will make it easier to create requests for those who are not using Twinkle. The workflow for administrators at this venue will largely be unchanged. Additionally, there are plans to archive requests similar to how it is done at WP:PERM, where historical records are kept so that prior requests can more easily be searched for.

Miscellaneous

  • Voting in the 2019 Steward elections will begin on 08 February 2019, 14:00 (UTC) and end on 28 February 2019, 13:59 (UTC). The confirmation process of current stewards is being held in parallel. You can automatically check your eligibility to vote.
  • A new IRC bot is available that allows you to subscribe to notifications when specific filters are tripped. This requires that your IRC handle be identified.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:16, 4 February 2019 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/IcaroJudah

My comments disappeared during your merge. Can you please restore them? --Guerillero | Parlez Moi 04:36, 9 February 2019 (UTC)

A sockpuppeteer User:O_oranus block

Hi, as a result of Sockpuppet investigations/O oranus which I filed, you have blocked the three named accounts I reported there. I am a bit curious however, that sock users Mamanus & Maman2014352 got blocked indefinitely, while a sockmaster O_Oranus has been blocked for 3 days. That account made only four edits, and all of them on 15 January, so I doubt such short block will even get noticed, let alone make any trouble to the user.

Hence my question: is a 3–day length of block some mistake or did you choose it for a reason? --CiaPan (talk) 16:11, 10 February 2019 (UTC)

P.S. Please answer here, I'm watching. CiaPan (talk)

@CiaPan: Block's against puppet accounts are always indefinite. These blocks are more against the account than the person operating them. The idea being that if we want to prevent someone from using multiple accounts we're going to shut down their secondary accounts permanently. Blocks against master accounts on the other hand are against the person operating it, and so are variable in length depending on circumstance. One to three days is a typical block length in cases like this, where the editor had a clean block log up to that point and there aren't non-sockpuppetry reasons for the block to be longer. I hope that clears things up. Sir Sputnik (talk) 16:42, 10 February 2019 (UTC)
Yup, it does. Despite my quite long presence on Wikipedia I am not very familiar with admistrative rules and practice, so I sometimes ask such obvious questions to learn something. Thank you. --CiaPan (talk) 16:49, 10 February 2019 (UTC)

Cristian Pușcaș and Cristian Nicușor Pușcaș

Hi Sir Sputnik. The article Cristian Pușcaș was deleted in 2012 and was subsequently salted after recreation. There is now an article at Cristian Nicușor Pușcaș, does this now meet WP:NFOOTY? Thanks. Tassedethe (talk) 21:52, 10 February 2019 (UTC)

@Tassedethe: Yes. He's played in Liga I, a fully pro league. Sir Sputnik (talk) 22:39, 10 February 2019 (UTC)

Clerk training subpages

Hi Sir Sputnik! Hope all is well with you. We're taking on some new SPI clerks, and I was trying to find your training pages in your subpages? I planned to steal them from Katie, who in turn stole them from Bbb23. Thanks :) TonyBallioni (talk) 06:53, 26 February 2019 (UTC)

@TonyBallioni: (talk page stalker) is it too late to ask to sign up? --DannyS712 (talk) 07:12, 26 February 2019 (UTC)
Also, you may have been looking for User:Sir Sputnik/Clerking, User:Sir Sputnik/sock warn, User:Sir Sputnik/spihelper update.js, and/or User:Sir Sputnik/ClerkAtWork --DannyS712 (talk) 07:15, 26 February 2019 (UTC)
Thank you. You may request at the clerk's noticeboard. We check it from time to time when more clerks are needed, and pull from that list. I don't have the time right now to take on more than one trainee, but other CUs may.
Sir Sputnik, the /Clerking one may be what I was looking for, but I thought you may have had a different page. If I'm crazy, you're free to tell me as always . TonyBallioni (talk) 07:20, 26 February 2019 (UTC)
 Done thanks --DannyS712 (talk) 07:26, 26 February 2019 (UTC)
@TonyBallioni: Nope that's the only training page, though I'm honestly a little surprised it's still there. Katie had said she was going to delete it, but I guess never got around to it. Gab and Sro23 have similar pages at User:GeneralizationsAreBad/Clerking and User:Sro23/Clerking, if you want to have look. Sir Sputnik (talk) 14:55, 26 February 2019 (UTC)
Thanks. Those are also useful :). I went ahead and deleted your page since all the others are deleted and you said Katie meant to. You're of course free to reverse my deletion if you want. TonyBallioni (talk) 21:07, 26 February 2019 (UTC)

Older LTA

@Sir Sputnik and DoRD: Hello. I just wanted to let you know that Doingitwellordoingitwrong and those other accounts at that SPI are probably socks of an older LTA, Iniced (also see Iniced's SPI). The behavior and IP sock activity is almost identical to the kind of abuse seen from recent IP socks of Iniced over the past year. (Some of those IP socks also went cross-wiki, usually on Meta.) I didn't comment on the newer SPI because I already have enough LTAs targeting me. LightandDark2000 🌀 (talk) 21:18, 26 February 2019 (UTC)

Cross language Wikipedia sock - advice

Hi Sir Sputnik, I was wondering if you could provide some advice. I have today come across an AfD that seemed somewhat opinionated which triggered my curiosity. There seems to be a bit of a cross-language sockpuppetry going on - or at least a suspicion. Naj'entus was part of a sock investigation on ru.wikipedia which resulted in socks Openlydialectic and Niqabu being blocked over there. en.wikipedia had this sock investigation which resulted in Niqabu being blocked by Bbb23. Naj'entus is also blocked over here. Openlydialectic continues being an active user on en.wp, though blocked on ru.wp as part of their investigation. There seems some connection. ru.wp sock investigation Thanks. pseudonym Jake Brockman talk 09:27, 1 March 2019 (UTC)

@Jake Brockman: The main reason Openlydialectic wasn't blocked on enwiki with the others is that the account didn't exist yet. In that context, treat them like any other suspected sock. Report them to SPI with the relevant evidence. An explanation of the evidence from the Russian SPI would be a good place to start, if you're able to translate it. I hope that helps. Sir Sputnik (talk) 16:01, 2 March 2019 (UTC)
Thanks. I have reached out to see if Ymblanter can help me undertand the Russian SPI. Once I have the facts, I will raise. pseudonym Jake Brockman talk 19:25, 2 March 2019 (UTC)
I blocked indef.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:33, 2 March 2019 (UTC)


User:DavidJanet and User:DavidJanet88 appear to be sockpuppets of User:Otto4711

I don't exactly know enough about Wikipedia to know how to formally go about accusing someone of sockpuppetry, but this Reddit post seems to have some convincing evidence of a new case.

https://www.reddit.com/r/daverubin/comments/aw9yuv/dave_rubins_husbands_wikipedia_sockpuppets/

2607:FEA8:8400:1E9D:612E:B0C2:233D:D2D0 (talk) 16:13, 2 March 2019 (UTC)

A page I found on the new page feed that was previously AFD in 2012

Here Elvis Karić, not sure if this guy is more notable now or not. (If not then it should be salted with Elvis Karic, if he is, then that should be a redirect) Thanks. Wgolf (talk) 01:31, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

@Wgolf: As the nominator in the last AfD, I'm considered WP:INVOLVED so can't do any admin work on this age. I've tagged for speedy deletion per WP:G4. Sir Sputnik (talk) 01:40, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – March 2019

News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2019).

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • A new tool is available to help determine if a given IP is an open proxy/VPN/webhost/compromised host.

Arbitration

  • The Arbitration Committee announced two new OTRS queues. Both are meant solely for cases involving private information; other cases will continue to be handled at the appropriate venues (e.g., WP:COIN or WP:SPI).
    • paid-en-wp@wikipedia.org has been set up to receive private evidence related to abusive paid editing.
    • checkuser-en-wp@wikipedia.org has been set up to receive private requests for CheckUser. For instance, requests for IP block exemption for anonymous proxy editing should now be sent to this address instead of the functionaries-en list.

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:13, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

Magnus Lindberg (disambiguation)

The only page (other than the primary topic at the base name) being disambiguated is Magnus Lindberg (Swedish musician) since per WP:2DABS a DAB isn't needed. The previous version of the template was clearer in that if there is a primary topic and there are only a total of 2 topics (meaning only 1 needs disambiguation) the DAB is deleted as unnecessary. Crouch, Swale (talk) 12:02, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

@Crouch, Swale: Thank you for clarifying. Sir Sputnik (talk) 03:02, 6 March 2019 (UTC)

Kunal Kamra

Can you please help me understand why Kunal Kamra was deleted when there was only one SPA tagging it as G4. There are too many sources [1][2][3][4][5] establishing the notability. Should it be deleted because it was deleted once? Accesscrawl (talk) 15:42, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

@Accesscrawl: Essentially yes. The recreated article was almost identical to the one deleted in June 2018, meaning everything that was said in that AfD still applies. You don't get to unilaterally overturn community decisions like that. To allow for recreation, you have to show that something has meaningfully changed. Sir Sputnik (talk) 22:56, 5 March 2019 (UTC)
Thanks for clarifying. My bad. Accesscrawl (talk) 02:32, 6 March 2019 (UTC)
If you review the sources above you will find that they come after the AfD. What about these sources[6][7][8] from 2019? Subject easily pass WP:GNG. Or may be G4 is applied only when the content isn't fresh compared to the deleted one? Let me know how the article can be recreated. Accesscrawl (talk) 08:52, 7 March 2019 (UTC)
@Accesscrawl: It's not me you need to convince, but rather the editors who voted to delete the page in first place. I probably wouldn't speedy delete a recreation with these sources and corresponding content added, but there's no guarantee that it would survive a second AfD, and I don't know enough about the subject to make that determination. Sir Sputnik (talk) 02:25, 8 March 2019 (UTC)
I thought the same, hence I went through AfC. It was reviewed by Rosguill and he mentioned

I'm honestly really surprised that this was deleted at AfD last time it was in the new page queue.

i was surprised by the g4 filing by SPA. Many AfD votes were skeptical about the topic being TOOSOON, but that is already chalked out by the references I've mentioned above.Accesscrawl (talk) 06:57, 8 March 2019 (UTC)

Confused...

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log/block&page=User%3AKeeleduck

@Cabayi: I'm confused too. I'm in the process of writing up a comment on the issue on the investigation page. Sir Sputnik (talk) 16:37, 6 March 2019 (UTC)

Sorry, pushed the wrong button and my post went before I'd finished writing. So...

GoughEngUK Special:CentralAuth/GoughEngUK was created 15 Aug 2016.

Keeleduck Special:CentralAuth/Keeleduck was created 15 Feb 2019 & blocked as a sock of GoughEngUK - https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log/block&page=User%3AKeeleduck (even though the "UK" was missed off the username).

Why refile the case under Keeleduck?? Cabayi (talk) 16:41, 6 March 2019 (UTC)

@Cabayi: Two reasons. First, I misread the dates. I thought Keeleduck was the older account. Second, it's usually better to not treat accounts blocked under the username policy as sockmasters. This type of block usually a soft block allowing for the creation of new accounts, so evading that block isn't automatically sockpuppetry. We also generally want avoid giving additional exposure to inappropriate usernames. Sir Sputnik (talk) 16:46, 6 March 2019 (UTC)
Thanks for clarifying. Cabayi (talk) 16:53, 6 March 2019 (UTC)

Wikiproject United Nations: We need you!

Dear Sir Sputnik, I noticed your name was under the participants' list of WikiProject United Nations. I wanted to invite you to contribute to the advancement of this project. Here's how you can do so: 1. Select the latest CC BY SA publications for which no articles have been created yet available here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_United_Nations/Open_Access_text/Education_publications 2. Follow the instructions available here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:Adding_open_license_text_to_Wikipedia 3. Add the text to Wikipedia (either by creating new articles or adding content to existing ones). Since these are available under CC BY SA, you can copy/paste content and/or edit if need be. 4. Attribute the text using the 'Free-content attribution' template in the 'Sources' section. 5. Add your contribution in the table here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_United_Nations/Open_Access_text/Education_publications Don't hesitate to reach out if you have any questions! Looking forward to working with you on enriching Wikipedia, one article at a time:)! C.recalde — Preceding unsigned comment added by C.recalde (talk • contribs) 11:25, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

User:Whole Foods 12,250,226,6/sandbox

It's related to this SPI. -★- PlyrStar93 →Message me. ← 05:28, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

@PlyrStar93: Based on what evidence? Sir Sputnik (talk) 13:19, 11 March 2019 (UTC)
Username pattern, see this (IP address + location as username); also this (some of the accounts add welcome templates to talk pages of their other socks). -★- PlyrStar93 →Message me. ← 13:23, 11 March 2019 (UTC)
@PlyrStar93: Thank you. Sir Sputnik (talk) 23:12, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

Page deletion

Thank you for killing Neopeius/Awards -- I forgot to put User: in front of it. ;^^ --Neopeius (talk) 02:45, 12 March 2019 (UTC)

spi

The edit history of Lakshmi shows Sarvesh09 editing on 8 Mar, shortly before Sarvesh130. Not sure whether you want to tie it to this case before archiving? Regards, Cabayi (talk) 10:33, 13 March 2019 (UTC)

Some socks

Hi admin! Can you please check Special:Contributions/Asad_Most_Movie and Special:Contributions/Noor_most_Movie?

Also, there is a case you know Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Shameel Done:

  • User:Shameel_muhammad
  • User:Ahmed_SK_PC
  • User:IAhmed_Shameel

Thanks! M. Billoo 05:11, 16 March 2019 (UTC)

Quacking sounds

Noticed a familiar title in an AfD (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mohamad Tiregar), heard some quacking, and commented there, but thought I should also drop a note here since you've dealt with Zahra 1369 relatively recently (Mohammad Tiregar (Actor), Draft:Mohammad Tiregar-(Actor)). Bakazaka (talk) 08:24, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

CU

Thanks for the explanation. Shame that nobody bothered to look into this at all and now we have an editor I am 99.9% sure is a sock happily editing away... GiantSnowman 14:38, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

For what it's worth, SS, Drive765 is a  Confirmed match to ASWE323, and both are possible matches to Woking123. —DoRD (talk)​ 15:00, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – April 2019

News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2019).

Technical news

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

  • Two more administrator accounts were compromised. Evidence has shown that these attacks, like previous incidents, were due to reusing a password that was used on another website that suffered a data breach. If you have ever used your current password on any other website, you should change it immediately. All admins are strongly encouraged to enable two-factor authentication, please consider doing so. Please always practice appropriate account security by ensuring your password is secure and unique to Wikimedia.
  • As a reminder, according to WP:NOQUORUM, administrators looking to close or relist an AfD should evaluate a nomination that has received few or no comments as if it were a proposed deletion (PROD) prior to determining whether it should be relisted.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:57, 7 April 2019 (UTC)

spi question

I was looking at archiving Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Hurricanelover101 but remembered an overlapping case I archived yesterday at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Fly High in the Sky/Archive which was closed without any action or CU as all the accounts were blocked already. Where to archive? Archive on FHITS, or add a cross-spi note and archive at H101? Cabayi (talk) 09:00, 17 April 2019 (UTC)

@Cabayi: FHITS is clearly the master account here, the cases will need to be merged. I'll take care of it. Sir Sputnik (talk) 17:35, 17 April 2019 (UTC)

Notice

Hello, the user you tagged, User:さとみよ, was not at all a sockpuppet but a beginner Wikipedian participating in an editathon class in Japanese Wikipedia. I know you meant well, but I would like to notify you that the whole university was blocked and our editathon class was severely affected. The list of the participants was posted in my project page in Japanese Wikipedia. --saebou (talk) 05:18, 25 April 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 special circular

Icon of a white exclamation mark within a black triangle
 Administrators must secure their accounts

The Arbitration Committee may require a new RfA if your account is compromised.

View additional information

This message was sent to all administrators following a recent motion. Thank you for your attention. For the Arbitration Committee, Cameron11598 02:50, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

Administrator account security (Correction to Arbcom 2019 special circular)

ArbCom would like to apologise and correct our previous mass message in light of the response from the community.

Since November 2018, six administrator accounts have been compromised and temporarily desysopped. In an effort to help improve account security, our intention was to remind administrators of existing policies on account security — that they are required to "have strong passwords and follow appropriate personal security practices." We have updated our procedures to ensure that we enforce these policies more strictly in the future. The policies themselves have not changed. In particular, two-factor authentication remains an optional means of adding extra security to your account. The choice not to enable 2FA will not be considered when deciding to restore sysop privileges to administrator accounts that were compromised.

We are sorry for the wording of our previous message, which did not accurately convey this, and deeply regret the tone in which it was delivered.

For the Arbitration Committee, -Cameron11598 21:04, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – May 2019

News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2019).

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • XTools Admin Stats, a tool to list admins by administrative actions, has been revamped to support more types of log entries such as AbuseFilter changes. Two additional tools have been integrated into it as well: Steward Stats and Patroller Stats.

Arbitration

  • In response to the continuing compromise of administrator accounts, the Arbitration Committee passed a motion amending the procedures for return of permissions (diff). In such cases, the committee will review all available information to determine whether the administrator followed "appropriate personal security practices" before restoring permissions; administrators found failing to have adequately done so will not be resysopped automatically. All current administrators have been notified of this change.
  • Following a formal ratification process, the arbitration policy has been amended (diff). Specifically, the two-thirds majority required to remove or suspend an arbitrator now excludes (1) the arbitrator facing suspension or removal, and (2) any inactive arbitrator who does not respond within 30 days to attempts to solicit their feedback on the resolution through all known methods of communication.

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:37, 5 May 2019 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Jamesmaharrison

Hi Sir Sputnik, I wanted to come back to this investigation, specifically the IP editors. Just after my conversation with the main editor yesterday and their admission to be connected to the subject, there has been another IP edit from the same ISP and general location. This may need to be looked at again. Of course I have also posted this on the COI noticeboard, but there's clear, though subtle, puppetry going here, too. Many thanks! pseudonym Jake Brockman talk 08:53, 9 May 2019 (UTC)

@Jake Brockman: I'm going to guess you mean the IP edits to Draft:Rupert Lee-Browne dated 9 May. When referring to specific edits in a sockpuppetry claim, please clearly identify them, preferably by linking to them. It makes my job so much easier if you do. If there are other edits please let me know. That being said, if there aren't other edits, everything I said in the investigation still applies. For editing while logged out to cross the line into sockpuppetry, it has to be done with clear intent of concealing one's identity or gaming the system, and I don't see that here. Deceptive EWLO tends to be far more systematic. Sir Sputnik (talk) 00:08, 11 May 2019 (UTC)
Hi there... thanks for the response. I should have been clearer about the edits, I do apologise. I understand that EWLO is often more systematic, though I would argue that there are elements in the making here which - in connection with the COI - should be balanced against each other as preventative admin action. It can be assumed that the user in question has been an undisclosed paid editor for the best part of a decade who only partially self-declared after some pressure, here and here. In the second diff, there is a clear admission how the marketing industry is flouting WP rules, and yes, thanks to him for offering to make our rules more industry friendly and I shall make best efforts to be more forthcoming to paid editors... The user did continue to state that he would not edit any more following the partial disclosure. Those two edits on 9 May I regard as "testing the water" and actually connecting himself by leaving a message on the IP editor's talk page is rubbing it in, knowing the sock investigation was closed at that point. I believe we should show more resolve against this kind of behaviour by economically involved editors, to be honest... pseudonym Jake Brockman talk 06:47, 11 May 2019 (UTC)
Addendum: the second user has now become more active on the article, probably preparing it for resubmission from a clean user.diff. pseudonym Jake Brockman talk 06:32, 12 May 2019 (UTC)
@Jake Brockman: Thanks for following up on this. With more to go on from the second account, I've endorsed the case for CheckUser attention. Sir Sputnik (talk) 16:37, 12 May 2019 (UTC)
Great, thanks! I wouldn't be surprised if that comes back negative, though. They may have outsourced the job by now. The IP editors are probably more interesting, but I understand the privacy concerns. pseudonym Jake Brockman talk 16:40, 12 May 2019 (UTC)


Next Conservative Party (UK) leadership election

Thanks for changing the protection level on this! Bondegezou (talk) 17:05, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

Sockpuppet Investigation

@Sir Sputnik: Hello there. I am just enquiring as to the reason you closed the sockpuppet investigation case into WritingPro1234. A new investigation case that I opened, into the user She-Hulka, was merged with the WritingPro1234 case because it is suspected that they are the same person. Although I believe the previous WritingPro1234 case had indeed been concluded, the new She-Hulka case had not yet been deliberated upon. It had only just been merged. Perhaps you closed the case in error? ChocolateTrain (talk) 14:09, 26 May 2019 (UTC)

@ChocolateTrain: This was not an error. The editor appears to have stopped editing while logged out of their own accord, so no further action is needed. Sir Sputnik (talk) 16:04, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
@Sir Sputnik: My apologies. Thank you for clarifying that. ChocolateTrain (talk) 22:53, 26 May 2019 (UTC)

Regarding the block of Ozar77

Hello Sir Sputnik, I see you closed an investigation against Ozar77 and blocked him. I thank you for that. However, both users you blocked as per that investigation were a part of my own more detailed investigation. Since your investigation cites the exact same finding as one I had listed, I can not tell whether it was an independent investigation and no one has even seen mine yet, or my investigation is getting broken down into simpler parts because I made it too complicated and convoluted or made some other mistakes in the process. I have been active for only 2 months and know well only those parts of wikipedia that I've come across or gotten involved with before. So, any help/ guidance would be appreciated. Thanks! Usedtobecool TALK 03:10, 6 June 2019 (UTC)

@Usedtobecool: You've done nothing wrong here. I was simply unaware that this was a duplicate report. At any given time there are typically between 50 and 100 open investigations, too many for one person keep straight in their head, so duplication like this will sometimes go unnoticed, unfortunately. Sir Sputnik (talk) 20:23, 8 June 2019 (UTC)
I see. Thanks for taking the time. Usedtobecool TALK 06:24, 9 June 2019 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – June 2019

News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2019).

Administrator changes

removed Andonic • Consumed Crustacean • Enigmaman • Euryalus • EWS23 • HereToHelp • Nv8200pa • Peripitus • StringTheory11 • Vejvančický

CheckUser changes

removed Ivanvector

Guideline and policy news

  • An RfC seeks to clarify whether WP:OUTING should include information on just the English Wikipedia or any Wikimedia project.
  • An RfC on WT:RfA concluded that Requests for adminship and bureaucratship are discussions seeking to build consensus.
  • An RfC proposal to make the templates for discussion (TfD) process more like the requested moves (RM) process, i.e. "as a clearinghouse of template discussions", was closed as successful.

Technical news

  • The CSD feature of Twinkle now allows admins to notify page creators of deletion if the page had not been tagged. The default behavior matches that of tagging notifications, and replaces the ability to open the user talk page upon deletion. You can customize which criteria receive notifications in your Twinkle preferences: look for Notify page creator when deleting under these criteria.
  • Twinkle's d-batch (batch delete) feature now supports deleting subpages (and related redirects and talk pages) of each page. The pages will be listed first but use with caution! The und-batch (batch undelete) option can now also restore talk pages.

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:49, 8 June 2019 (UTC)

Playback singer

Can you please revert the edits of a sock of User:Unilexis on playback singer?

They have already been reverted by others. Sir Sputnik (talk) 01:59, 12 June 2019 (UTC)

TransferMarkt

Hello, I've noticed that you regularly remove citations and references that are sourced from transfermarkt. Would it be possible for you to replace these citations with a citation needed so one can go through and find a new source for information. I now understand that transfermarkt isn't considered to be a reliable source, but I think it would be helpful for newer editors, such as myself, if the citations are replaced with a citation needed instead of being outright removed and the information being left un-sourced. Thank you, The Neon Narwhal (talk) 03:49, 19 June 2019 (UTC)

Hisham Hendi

Hello Sir, Sputnik. Please move the earlier page on Hisham Hendi to a draft and Ill'll add references from there, and ask for review, before moving it to main article. I believe the deletion was unfair on the basis that the update was inferior than the previous version and that can be fixed by adding different references and ask for review before moving it. Thank you. Kiambiroiro (talk) 07:50, 19 June 2019 (UTC)

In fairness to the creator

of Daniele Di Bari, I'd assumed they were the one added the one reference. But I now see that in this edit you swapped Transfermarkt—which is the one place I can find this player mentioned, and see my PROD statement regarding its looking there as if he never got beyond the youth team—for Soccerway, which is Daniela Di Bari [it], a female player whom I suspect is notable, only I'm not sure whether the women's leagues are treated with exact parity? (I'd create it but I'm not creating articles here these days in view of the Fram situation.) Different person (and different teams). Yngvadottir (talk) 19:28, 21 June 2019 (UTC)

@Yngvadottir: Close, but not quite. The line breaks in the diff certainly make it look like I added the soccerway reference, but it was there since the beginning (see this.) As for the notability of Daniela Di Bari, it looks to me, at a glance, as though she doesn't meet WP:NFOOTY. Sir Sputnik (talk) 21:15, 21 June 2019 (UTC)
Ah I'm sorry, yes, I did misread. Yngvadottir (talk) 04:24, 22 June 2019 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Suspected Wikipedia sockpuppets of Nikosathens31

A tag has been placed on Category:Suspected Wikipedia sockpuppets of Nikosathens31 requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Liz Read! Talk! 04:33, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – July 2019

News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2019).

Administrator changes

removed 28bytes • Ad Orientem • Ansh666 • Beeblebrox • Boing! said Zebedee • BU Rob13 • Dennis Brown • Deor • DoRD • Floquenbeam1 • Flyguy649 • Fram2 • Gadfium • GB fan • Jonathunder • Kusma • Lectonar • Moink • MSGJ • Nick • Od Mishehu • Rama • Spartaz • Syrthiss • TheDJ • WJBscribe
1Floquenbeam's access was removed, then restored, then removed again.
2Fram's access was removed, then restored, then removed again.

Guideline and policy news

  • In a related matter, the account throttle has been restored to six creations per day as the mitigation activity completed.

Technical news

  • The Wikimedia Foundation's Community health initiative plans to design and build a new user reporting system to make it easier for people experiencing harassment and other forms of abuse to provide accurate information to the appropriate channel for action to be taken. Community feedback is invited.

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:20, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

Transfermarkt

Thanks for the notice! I won't do it again

Steel Dogg (talk) 23:07, 8 July 2019 (UTC)

Transfermarkt

Hey! Why is Transfermarkt not reliable?

Also, the statistics are important to show to the audience, once agents and football club members can check his database in Wikipedia without having to search for it. Why remove it?

Thank you Isa Marcante (talk) 01:02, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

@Isa Marcante: Transfermarkt is considered unreliable for the same reason Wikipedia itself is: Most of the information in the site's database can be edited by its users. To quote the site's login page Whether player, manager, club, or match sheet – as a Transfermarkt user you can edit and complete almost all data yourself. Simply click the gear, fill in the form, and click submit. As for the statistics, they are important, but there comes a point where it becomes to much. If we take Lionel Messi#Career statistics, for example, you'll see the norm is to break down the stats by season. A match by match break, is excessive. Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information, after all. I hope that clears things up. Sir Sputnik (talk) 01:20, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

The list of the clubs he’s playing for cannot be kept? Isa Marcante (talk) 20:05, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for clarifying the Transfermarkt situation and the excessive details table! Isa Marcante (talk) 20:06, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

Clubs

Thank you for your explanation!

Just one question more: the list of clubs he’s been playfing for cannot be kept? Isa Marcante (talk) 02:45, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

@Isa Marcante: It can be provided that there's a reliable source for the list. The only reference in that section of the article was to transfermarkt. Sir Sputnik (talk) 21:00, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

Thank you! Isa Marcante (talk) 17:38, 13 July 2019 (UTC)

dam

i got the wrong order when lodigng the spi case - it should have been manda 1993 - the IP is one of million that the sock has been using... JarrahTree 13:51, 13 July 2019 (UTC)

sorry - that was extra work - thanks for cleaning up...JarrahTree 13:55, 13 July 2019 (UTC)

Page Deletion: Bhavya Bishnoi - Ref. Links

Hi,

This is in regards to the wikipedia page deleted. Mentioned below are the links proving him a notable person, a recognised politician.

[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] NDTV - [13]

Dainik Jagran - [14]

India Today - [15]

India Today - [16]

Hindustan Times - [17]

Economic Times - [18]

My Nation - [19]

Economic Times - [20] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pareshjain09876 (talk • contribs) 04:49, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

@Pareshjain09876: Substantially similar articles about this person have been deleted in the past. Previous versions have cited enough of these sources that it looks to me as if the consensus is that they do not amount sufficient coverage to meet the general notability guideline. If you think enough has changed since the first deletion December, please take the matter to deletion review. Sir Sputnik (talk) 01:43, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ https://www.bhaskar.com/haryana/hisar/news/haryana-news-the-golden-rule-of-congress-is-going-to-come-back-grand-bishnoi-032013-3685447.html
  2. ^ http://www.espncricinfo.com/india/content/player/628217.html
  3. ^ https://areastudies.web.ox.ac.uk/article/bhavya-bishnoi-earns-oxford-blue-for-cricketing-success
  4. ^ https://www.indiatoday.in/lifestyle/music/story/coldplay-mumbai-concert-global-citizen-festival-bhavya-bishnoi-tgelf-lifest-352744-2016-11-18
  5. ^ https://gustavotorresds.github.io/shuruaat-bus/
  6. ^ https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/magazines/travel/in-august-company-trekkers-dont-miss-the-global-himalayan-expedition-in-markha-valley/articleshow/48357579.cms
  7. ^ http://bhajanfoundation.org/
  8. ^ https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Haryana-gets-politically-young/articleshow/10066608.cms
  9. ^ https://www.dailypioneer.com/2013/state-editions/bhajan-lal-grandson-forays-into-politics.html
  10. ^ https://www.sundayguardianlive.com/news/congress-hiring-strategists-haryana-polls
  11. ^ https://qz.com/india/1465348/a-haryana-congress-politician-is-gamifying-his-election-campaign/. Accessed 19 Dec. 2018.
  12. ^ http://www.nayaharyana.com/652/Hissar-Lok-Sabha-seat-Dushyant-Chautala-challenged-to-give-a-Bhavy-Bishnoi.
  13. ^ https://www.ndtv.com/elections/lok-sabha-election-candidates-list-2019/bhavya-bishnoi-07004-2
  14. ^ https://www.jagran.com/elections/haryana-hisar-haryana-lok-sabha-election-2019-triangular-fight-between-leader-sons-dushyant-brijendra-and-bhavya-19213185.html
  15. ^ https://www.indiatoday.in/elections/lok-sabha-2019/story/scions-of-three-political-families-in-hisar-battle-playing-development-cards-to-woo-voters-1519471-2019-05-07
  16. ^ https://www.indiatoday.in/elections/lok-sabha-2019/story/clash-political-families-haryana-lok-sabha-polls-1521317-2019-05-09
  17. ^ https://www.hindustantimes.com/lok-sabha-elections/lok-sabha-elections-2019-riding-on-family-legacy-bhavya-spices-up-contest/story-okoEtzcql5yKPP6l1bx9OK.html
  18. ^ https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/elections/lok-sabha/india/this-oxford-graduate-is-breaking-the-ice-with-women-voters-in-hisar/articleshow/69270904.cms?from=mdr
  19. ^ https://www.mynation.com/india-news/lok-sabha-election-results-2019-hisar-bhavya-bishnoi-dushyant-chautal-face-off-in-hisar-prxtiy
  20. ^ https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/elections/lok-sabha/india/scions-of-three-political-families-slugging-it-out-in-a-triangular-contest/articleshow/69208269.cms
Hi, I have added the reflist here because it was weirding out my thread below. Hope it's acceptable. Thanks! Usedtobecool ✉️ ✨ 12:47, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

Follow up to #Regarding the block of Ozar77

Hello @Sir Sputnik:, the user you blocked with Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Ozar77/Archive is back. I had filed another report at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Dansong22/Archive but it was closed for lack of sufficient evidence.

  • I had uncovered other issues I wanted to raise then, that I didn't because they were blocked. Since, they're back:
Based on their bad faith canvassing here, here, here, here and here, as well as misleading beefing up here, and a lack of understanding of AfD processes demonstrated in those diffs as well as additionally, over here and here, particularly with this, this, this, this, this, this, this, this, this, this, this and this edit,
I would like to ask that they receive an AfD topic ban (or whatever it is called), and their AfD !votes since June 5 be struck, particularly in my articles, for example here, as they have a bias against me, as evidenced by the diffs presented above.
My question to you is: Do I have a sufficient case to make against them? If so, can you take such an action, or is this enough evidence to take it to ANI? I have never gone to ANI, so I don't know what else I ought to try before I register a report there?
There is also a log entry of a deletion of their contribution to ANI on the same date, but I don't know what's in that.
If nothing can be done about my concerns above, I ask that, at the very least, any request for additional permissions from them such as this one be evaluated in light of these issues.
Thanks! Usedtobecool ✉️ ✨ 12:45, 16 July 2019 (UTC)
@Usedtobecool: There's no basis for further sanctions here. They've already been blocked for the behaviour you've documented. That block has since expired, so they are welcome to continue editing, provided they conduct themselves properly, and I see evidence that they haven't. Sir Sputnik (talk) 23:31, 16 July 2019 (UTC)
I thought they'd only been made aware of the inappropriateness of socking, and may not know that disruption and canvassing are taken (by admins too) as serious issues as well, since it's clear from their edits that they think non-admins need not be listened to. Since this doesn't require action, I am glad I brought this up with you before going to the ANI. Thanks for your time and the timely response! Usedtobecool ✉️ ✨ 08:12, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

Iraqi Premier League topic

Hi Sir Sputnik. I would like to ask if you could help with an issue we're facing now in the Iraqi Premier League topic.

Basically there are contradicting sources about the league winners in 2002/03 and 2013/14. The sources at the moment are very shaky to say the least and I think an admin should have a look at it.

https://ahdaaf.me/2019/07/16/iraqs-post-truth-wikipedia-league-champions-how-four-titles-became-six/?cbg_tz=-120

The Wiki editor won't be convinced by what I say and won't change his opinion. Could you please help?

Steel Dogg (talk) 10:31, 21 July 2019 (UTC)

@Steel Dogg: I know precious little of Iraqi football, so I'm not really in a position to provide much help here. If can't reach an agreement, I would suggest soliciting input from the broader editorship. WT:FOOTY would be a good venue for this. That being said, if the source you've cited here, is the only basis for your position, you might want to reconsider. The source appears to be self-published, and therefore not reliable. We also generally need to be very careful when using that reference Wikipedia. Circular reporting can be a real problem. I hope that helps. Sir Sputnik (talk) 00:39, 22 July 2019 (UTC)

Hi Sputnik, thanks for answering! No, there are way more sources available to strenghten my argument. The link I sent was to clarify the situation here. I'll check out WT:FOOTY.

Steel Dogg (talk) 13:35, 22 July 2019 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – August 2019

News and updates for administrators from the past month (July 2019).

Guideline and policy news

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

  • Following a research project on masking IP addresses, the Foundation is starting a new project to improve the privacy of IP editors. The result of this project may significantly change administrative and counter-vandalism workflows. The project is in the very early stages of discussions and there is no concrete plan yet. Admins and the broader community are encouraged to leave feedback on the talk page.
  • The new page reviewer right is bundled with the admin tool set. Many admins regularly help out at Special:NewPagesFeed, but they may not be aware of improvements, changes, and new tools for the Curation system. Stay up to date by subscribing here to the NPP newsletter that appears every two months, and/or putting the reviewers' talk page on your watchlist.

    Since the introduction of temporary user rights, it is becoming more usual to accord the New Page Reviewer right on a probationary period of 3 to 6 months in the first instance. This avoids rights removal for inactivity at a later stage and enables a review of their work before according the right on a permanent basis.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:24, 3 August 2019 (UTC)

Very educational, thanks

Thanks for clearing up Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Playballz. I've saved a link to the case in my Wikipedia bookmarks as your tagging was very instructive. --kingboyk (talk) 02:26, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

About Tom Donegan (footballer, born 1992)

Hi Sir Sputnik,
The Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tom Donegan says "The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it."

I have heedlessly gone ahead and modified it. I think that might be a good little application of WP:IAR. (I don't like "Ignore all rules". I think it should be "Ignore one rule")

Your thoughts about this?

Pete AU aka --Shirt58 (talk) 11:15, 31 August 2019 (UTC)

@Shirt58: Honestly, I think there probably should be some standardized way of denoting this sort of thing, since the problem isn't unique to this AfD, but in the absence of this, your approach seems perfectly reasonable. Sir Sputnik (talk) 14:23, 31 August 2019 (UTC)

Why deleting

Hi Sir Sputnik

About the topics that I edited, namely Jihad Madlool, Ismail Hashim, Nawaf Sallal, Sajjad Abdul Kadhim, Hussam Malek and Ahmed Muhsin Ashour. They belong to sports figures, some of them former players and have become professional coaches in recognized leagues, and some of them have played for their national teams, and some have played in the AFC Champions League. I do not understand why are you trying to delete them after I made a great effort in editing them. I hope you step back from this step. ميناء (talk) 22:10, 1 September 2019 (UTC)

@ميناء: We've been over this before. Per WP:NFOOTBALL, in order to have an article on Wikipedia, a footballer must have played in one of the fully professional leagues listed here, or for their country's senior national team. None of them have verifiably done either. Now you claim in the article on Nawaf Sallal that he has played for Iraq. I can find no sources to confirm that he has. If you can provide such sources, I'll gladly withdraw the nomination. Sir Sputnik (talk) 23:00, 1 September 2019 (UTC)
I do not understand what you mean, what do you mean (you claim). You mean I intentionally write wrong information. But what do I benefit from that. It seems that you have a personal reason with me for this talk. Thanks anyway. ميناء (talk) 23:23, 1 September 2019 (UTC)
@ميناء: You mean I intentionally write wrong information. No, I don't. What I mean is that you have written that Sallal has played for Iraq without any sources that say that he has. Sir Sputnik (talk) 23:36, 1 September 2019 (UTC)
There are sources for all these sports figures. Which I wrote about them is widely known locally. But the search for these sources requires a great effort, because they are lost during the war against Iraq. It may have taken a long time to find those sources. A few days are not enough in exchange for the loss of all my efforts in editing these subjects. This is illogical. ميناء (talk) 23:48, 1 September 2019 (UTC)
In that case, you've published these articles too early. If you'd like to keep them as drafts in you userspace, so you can keep working on them, I'll happily move them there for you, but in their current form these articles do not belong in the mainspace. Sir Sputnik (talk) 00:05, 2 September 2019 (UTC)
Maybe it's early for you. But this information may be lost after a while, especially when I am an old man and I suffer from cancer and I may die at any moment. Overall I liked to add utility, worked hard, spent a great effort, and did what I could.ميناء (talk) 00:12, 2 September 2019 (UTC)
Your personal situation, while regrettable, does not factor into the notability evaluation. Sir Sputnik (talk) 00:39, 2 September 2019 (UTC)
No, no, I didn't mention my position in order to you feel pity on me, or you sympathize with me. I mentioned it just to show the truth. Damn to edit. Delete everything you like. ميناء (talk) 00:57, 2 September 2019 (UTC)
Ismail Hashim is currently working as a professional goalkeeper coach in the Iraqi Premier League, I mentioned the source, so why delete. ميناء (talk) 01:13, 2 September 2019 (UTC)
Jihad Madlool worked as a professional coach in the Iranian league, I mentioned the source, so why delete. ميناء (talk) 01:15, 2 September 2019 (UTC)
Ahmed Muhsin Ashour played in the AFC Champions League, and the source in the link,[9] , so why delete. ميناء (talk) 01:25, 2 September 2019 (UTC)
Nawaf Sallal played in the AFC Champions League, and the source in the link,[10] , so why delete. ميناء (talk) 01:32, 2 September 2019 (UTC)
Sajjad Abdul Kadhim played in the AFC Champions League, and the source in the link,[11] , so why delete. ميناء (talk) 01:34, 2 September 2019 (UTC)
Hussam Malek played in the FIFA U-20 World Cup, and the source in the link,[12]. ميناء (talk) 01:39, 2 September 2019 (UTC)
So, is that enough and makes you undo the deletion. ميناء (talk) 01:43, 2 September 2019 (UTC)
As I've explained to you above, in order to have an article on Wikipedia a footballer must satisfy the criteria laid out at WP:NFOOTBALL. These criteria are having played in one of the fully professional league listed at WP:FPL or for a senior national team. None of them have played in any of the listed leagues. You say that some of them have played for Iraq, but I can find no sources to actually confirm this. If you can provide sources showing that these players have played for the Iraqi national football team, I will gladly withdraw the nominations. If not, the articles should be deleted. Sir Sputnik (talk) 01:48, 2 September 2019 (UTC)
Ok, thanks. ميناء (talk) 02:03, 2 September 2019 (UTC)
Nawaf Sallal played for Iraq against Saudi Arabia and Korea in 2009, and the source in this link : [13] ميناء (talk) 18:03, 2 September 2019 (UTC)
For notability purposes played means having appeared in a match, either in the starting 11 or coming off the substitutes bench. Sorry if this wasn't clear. The source shows only that he was called up. According to this match report he did not actually play the match against Korea Republic. I've not been able to locate a complete report for the match against Saudi Arabia, so he may have played that match, but it remains unconfirmed. Sir Sputnik (talk) 18:27, 2 September 2019 (UTC)
There is no recorded report on the two matches, but the two matches were broadcast and the player appeared in the squad, the two matches are friendly, and all players participated, and this is clear to anyone who understands football. Nawaf Sallal was in the team as in the report. ميناء (talk) 18:36, 2 September 2019 (UTC)
In that case, any appearances are unverifiable and cannot contribute to notability, since notability requires verifiable evidence. Sir Sputnik (talk) 18:53, 2 September 2019 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – September 2019

News and updates for administrators from the past month (August 2019).

Administrator changes

added Bradv • Chetsford • Izno
readded Floquenbeam • Lectonar
removed DESiegel • Jake Wartenberg • Rjanag • Topbanana

CheckUser changes

removed Callanecc • LFaraone • There'sNoTime

Oversight changes

removed Callanecc • Fox • HJ Mitchell • LFaraone • There'sNoTime

Technical news

  • Editors using the mobile website on Wikipedia can opt-in to new advanced features via your settings page. This will give access to more interface links, special pages, and tools.
  • The advanced version of the edit review pages (recent changes, watchlist, and related changes) now includes two new filters. These filters are for "All contents" and "All discussions". They will filter the view to just those namespaces.

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:37, 7 September 2019 (UTC)


Murtadha Alkanany

The footballer has played in a fully pro league, playing at Eliteserien for Vålerenga Fotball in the 2014 and 2015 seasons, as indicated by the player's page on this link [14]. So why you recommend deleting it. ميناء (talk) 13:13, 8 September 2019 (UTC)

The source says he played in G19 Interkrets, the under 19 division, not Eliteserien. Sir Sputnik (talk) 13:17, 8 September 2019 (UTC)
But the source says he played for Vålerenga and Vålerenga 2, but does not mean that he played for the first team as well. ميناء (talk) 13:25, 8 September 2019 (UTC)
If you click on the number of appearances for a particular team, it'll expand a table showing the details of the matches played, including which competition the match was in. All of Alkanany's appearances for Valerenga were at the under 19 level. Sir Sputnik (talk) 13:43, 8 September 2019 (UTC)
I didn’t find it, but why the source difference between Vålerenga and Vålerenga 2 ?. ميناء (talk) 13:53, 8 September 2019 (UTC)
Then let me explain it once more in a little more detail. In the table on club statistics (Klubbstastikk), in the column on total number of matches (Total antall kamper), if you click on any of the numbers, a table showing details of the matches played appears. One of the columns identifies the tournament (Turnering) that the match belongs to. Alkanany 4 appearances in 2014 of Valerenga were all in G19 Interkrets. 4 of the 7 appearnces in 2015 were in G19 Interkrets, the other three in NM G19 Telenor Cup. None of them were in Tippeligaen (the name of the Norwegian top flight at the time). Sir Sputnik (talk) 14:41, 8 September 2019 (UTC)

Dilshad002

I see you blocked Dilshad002 for 3 weeks due to sockpuppetry. I upped it to a month for using another sockpuppet, KajalDubey, to create the identical article. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 00:41, 23 September 2019 (UTC)

More Reggieplata socks?

Worth looking into, I think. They're about 30 miles from the most recent suspected sock IP. –Skywatcher68 (talk) 19:00, 27 September 2019 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – October 2019

News and updates for administrators from the past month (September 2019).

Guideline and policy news

  • Following a discussion, a new criterion for speedy category renaming was added: C2F: One eponymous article, which applies if the category contains only an eponymous article or media file, provided that the category has not otherwise been emptied shortly before the nomination. The default outcome is an upmerge to the parent categories.

Technical news

  • As previously noted, tighter password requirements for Administrators were put in place last year. Wikipedia should now alert you if your password is less than 10 characters long and thus too short.

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

  • The Community Tech team has been working on a system for temporarily watching pages, and welcomes feedback.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:55, 2 October 2019 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Admin's Barnstar
Thank you for your tireless work as a clerk and patrolling admin at SPI. It is noticed and deeply appreciated by all of us :) TonyBallioni (talk) 23:31, 6 October 2019 (UTC)

Draft to main space

Hello, Article Danny El-Hage has been mistakenly moved back to draft. Kindly move article Danny El-Hage back to main space. Regards Amsport12345 (talk) 14:27, 13 October 2019 (UTC)

Re:CSD denial of List of accolades received by Ishqbaaaz

Hi, I'm a bit confused by your CSD denial reason. Based on the SPI the 2 users are CU confirmed to each other and no issues have been raised? Based on the block logs as well they're blocked as CU-confirmed socks. Also, the 2 users that were confirmed were ABTHEBOSS and Sid505, the user raised in the comments has no bearing on the validity of the blocks as it's a matter of finding the master. Thanks, Kb03 (talk) 19:58, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

@Kb03: Based on the information we have right now ABTHEBOSS is the master account. Unless a connection to a previously blocked account is established, their edits are not block evasion, and therefore not G5 eligible. Sir Sputnik (talk) 20:15, 16 October 2019 (UTC)
Sir Sputnik, Ah, I was getting 2 different times for blocks (because apparently I can't read). I apologise. Have a good one! Kb03 (talk) 23:26, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

AAFT University of Media and Arts

Hi there. I see you deleted AAFT University of Media and Arts, I presume this was because someone recreated it over the redirect. You did not recreate the original redirect though, so I went ahead and did that. Perhaps protection of the redirect so the article cannot be recreated is in place? Just an idea. --Muhandes (talk) 16:25, 19 October 2019 (UTC)

@Muhandes: I have no objection to the redirect, but page protection would be premature. Protection serves primarily to deal with persistent problems. This page has been recreated just once. Sir Sputnik (talk) 16:30, 19 October 2019 (UTC)
Sure thing. --Muhandes (talk) 16:32, 19 October 2019 (UTC)


Block this IP

Hello Sir Sputnik, can you block this IP range, 210.187.0.0/16 indefinitely because this IP doing long-term abuse here by changing birth dates. I have reverted some of edits by this IP recently.––Fandi89 (talk) 03:02, 20 October 2019 (UTC)

@Fandi89: There are a number of reasons I can't accept your request. First /16 IP ranges are very wide. Blocking ranges this wide would almost always cause significant collateral damage. This range is no exception. Second, due to the changing nature of IP addresses, most home internet connections get a new one on a fairly regular basis, blocks against IP's may not be indefinite. An indefinite block would also be grossly disproportionate the level of disruption caused. Finally, the editor in question has been inadequately warned. Only after an editor has been asked to stop their disruptive behaviour may they blocked. That has not happened here. Sir Sputnik (talk) 00:51, 21 October 2019 (UTC)

Happy Adminship Anniversary!

Happy Adminship Anniversary!

Have a very happy adminship anniversary on your special day!

Best wishes, CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 07:11, 21 October 2019 (UTC)

Happy Adminship Anniversary!

Wishing Sir Sputnik a very happy adminship anniversary on behalf of the Birthday Committee! Best wishes! PATH SLOPU 09:10, 21 October 2019 (UTC)


Precious anniversary

A year ago ...
Fußball
... you were recipient
no. 2056 of Precious,
a prize of QAI!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:48, 24 October 2019 (UTC)

Your revert of my G3 speedy deletion template

Having looked more into the deletion policies, I have only become more and more doubtful of your revert of the G3 speedy deletion template, that I put on the May 2016 Dürümlü bombing article. Every single word in the article, is based on biased unreliable sources. Aside from the bit that is completely contradicted by its source. (which is also biased, but in the other way) Every part of the article, without exception, is unverified and biased, and purely meant to libel. How does that not qualify as "blatant and obvious misinformation, blatant hoaxes"? (to quote WP:G3) Or maybe WP:G10?--85.228.52.251 (talk) 08:33, 25 October 2019 (UTC)

Simmerdon3448

Simmerdon3448 is apparently going through his usual routine of shifting the blame onto other users while refusing to acknowledge his own behavior while blocked. Do you think it would be wise to revoke his talk page access? The Grand Delusion(Send a message) 00:17, 1 November 2019 (UTC)

@The Grand Delusion: Absolutely not. TPA revocation is a tool to be used very sparingly. Unless they are doing what you're describing in formal, frivolous unblock requests, or there's a more serious problem (personal attacks, legal threats etc.), it's use not warranted. Sir Sputnik (talk) 00:53, 1 November 2019 (UTC)

Infinity Train

I was busy doing an edit on the page because we all know the show will return as a full series on HBO Max, but was interrupted by you protecting it. Can you please add the notice on the main page? We all know that the full series will be like this. BaldiBasicsFan (talk)

@BaldiBasicsFan: No. The whole point of the page protection was to prevent further edit warring over this issue. Please discuss the matter with the other editors involved. Sir Sputnik (talk) 15:17, 1 November 2019 (UTC)
@Sir Sputnik: OK. The person who vandalized the page should be blocked anyway. Make sure that a note should also be included. BaldiBasicsFan (talk)

Declining speedy deletion of User:Dwlr/Dreamworld Resort

Hi. You declined the speedy deletion for the page User:Dwlr/Dreamworld Resort but if you notice in the history, the page was created by one of the socks User:Marexe so it does qualify for WP:G5. Pkbwcgs (talk) 16:08, 2 November 2019 (UTC)

@Pkbwcgs: I did notice that. However, the page was created on 22 January 2011; Dwlr wasn't blocked until 4 February. Creating the page may have been sockpuppetry, but wasn't block evasion, which is the requirement for WP:G5. Sir Sputnik (talk) 16:12, 2 November 2019 (UTC)
Okay. Thanks for clarifying. Pkbwcgs (talk) 16:14, 2 November 2019 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – November 2019

News and updates for administrators from the past month (October 2019).

Guideline and policy news

  • A related RfC is seeking the community's sentiment for a binding desysop procedure.

Arbitration

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:15, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

Transfermark is not reliable

I have seen that you have removed transfermarkt external links on many pages. Can you please elaborate the statement "transfermark is not reliable"?--AirWolf talk 17:00, 9 November 2019 (UTC)

@AirWolf: Much of the site's content is user edited. To quote the site's login page: Whether player info, coach info, club info, or match report – as a Transfermarkt user, you can edit and add to almost all data by yourself. Simply click the gear, fill in the form and click submit. Sir Sputnik (talk) 17:28, 9 November 2019 (UTC)

Block query

Back on 25 October you blocked the IP Special:Contributions/85.228.51.229 citing block evasion, but I can't figure out which block was being evaded. I extended a block on that IP's CIDR range for 3 months not long after, and they've ended up on IP 213.113.121.42 complaining that they were blocked inappropriately. Do you have any more info you can share on your block of that IP? Feel free to email me if you prefer. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 04:41, 17 November 2019 (UTC)

@Ivanvector: A few hours before I made that block Bbb23 had blocked another IP in the same range (Special:Contributions/85.228.52.251) per not NOTHERE. I don't believe there's a registered account involved here, if that's what you're trying to figure out. Sir Sputnik (talk) 04:57, 17 November 2019 (UTC)
Okay, that helps. Thanks. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 04:59, 17 November 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:10, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Broken SPI Archive

I was looking though some archived SPI cases, and I found one where after a center point, the cu template stops working as of most of the other templates. Do you have any idea of what should be done about this? Page is This SPI, it breaks at around 22 March 2018. Thank you. LakesideMinersCome Talk To Me! 16:13, 22 November 2019 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) Interesting, the page seems to be hitting a transclusion limit on calls to {{checkuser}} - past the point where the renderer hits the limit, no more templates are transcluded on the rest of the page. I'm not sure what to do about it but we may need to simplify the template code. For Krajoyn it's safe to ignore for now, that's already an archive of an archive. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 16:27, 22 November 2019 (UTC)

editToken

Hello Sir Sputnik,

Your script User:Sir Sputnik/spihelper update.js is no longer functional because it attempts to get an editToken from mw.user.tokens. The script should instead get a csrfToken. editTokens were removed from mw.user.tokens on October 3, 2019 at Phabricator during this edit as they were redundant to csrfTokens.– BrandonXLF (talk) 00:06, 25 November 2019 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – December 2019

News and updates for administrators from the past month (November 2019).

Administrator changes

added EvergreenFir • ToBeFree
removed Akhilleus • Athaenara • John Vandenberg • Melchoir • MichaelQSchmidt • NeilN • Youngamerican • 😂

CheckUser changes

readded Beeblebrox
removed Deskana

Interface administrator changes

readded Evad37

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:48, 2 December 2019 (UTC)

Email reply

Ok. Go ahead. It's your call. Not too happy about it due to username and website, but if they stick to the rules it is ok. -- Alexf(talk) 00:01, 7 December 2019 (UTC)

Transfermarkt

But as StretfordEnd.co.uk is a privately owned website and currently up for sale, it is also user-edited. They may declare themselves as the "official statistics website" but they aren't actually officially endorsed in any capacity. I would argue transfermarkt is just as reliable (and clearly more so in this case as the statistics on StretfordEnd.co.uk are simply inaccurate). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Th998 (talk • contribs) 00:22, 11 December 2019 (UTC)

That's very fair, I may indeed do that. Cheers.

Kamerfer Kadın‎

Hi, Sir Sputnik! Are you sure about this? Did you read my note at Talk:Kamerfer Kadın‎, I wonder? My take is that the subsequent histmerge of an earlier version of the page does not disqualify it for G5 – this page was created ex novo by a sock. I'm interested to know how others see this. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 10:56, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

(Talk page stalker of Justlettersandnumbers) I was about to drop you a note but see I've been beaten to the mark. But given the comment I'm interested to know how others see this above I shall post anyway - my non-definitive conclusion was that: the current article was created by Internetexpert41 on 14 October [15]; Internetexpert41 is a sock of Physo172; Physo172 was blocked on 30 September - ergo, it appears to me that the article was created by a blocked user. Dorsetonian (talk) 14:16, 20 December 2019 (UTC)
@Justlettersandnumbers: You're right, I didn't notice the histmerge. I agree with your assessment, that under the circumstances, the page is G5 eligible. Sir Sputnik (talk) 22:09, 20 December 2019 (UTC)
Thanks, Sir Sputnik, and indeed to Dorsetonian too! I should have made clear that there was no kind of criticism implied in my question. Anyway, the page has been draftified so it's all a bit moot at this point. Since no-one seemed too sure of how our policy applies in this sort of situation, I've started a discussion about the general case here. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 23:38, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

Good luck

豊かな十年へようこそ/WELCOME TO THE D20s

Miraclepine wishes you a Merry Christmas, a Happy New Year, and a prosperous decade of change and fortune.
このミラPはSir Sputnikたちのメリークリスマスも新年も変革と幸運の豊かな十年をおめでとうございます！
フレフレ、みんなの未来！/GOOD LUCK WITH YOUR FUTURE!
ミラP 02:43, 25 December 2019 (UTC)

Transfermarkt Substitute

Hey there, thanks for your recent pass through the new HFX Wanderers chronicle I put up. Would you have a recommendation for a Transfermarkt alternative to note total senior caps for players? I originally had in mind the FIFA match reports, but if one player gets a lot of caps, it'd make too many references and it would be untidy.Lucky Strike (talk) 13:13, 31 December 2019 (UTC)

@Lckystrke: I usually try to find a database site that is local to the relevant country, though I don't know of one specifically for Canada. Failing that, Soccerway is usually my go to source for Soccer stats. As for FIFA, I know they used to maintain player profiles, but haven't been able to find them since they last restructured their website, not that I've tried terribly hard. I hope that helps. Sir Sputnik (talk) 19:39, 31 December 2019 (UTC)


Administrators' newsletter – January 2020

News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2019).

Guideline and policy news

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:07, 4 January 2020 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – February 2020

News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2020).

Guideline and policy news

  • Following a request for comment, partial blocks are now enabled on the English Wikipedia. This functionality allows administrators to block users from editing specific pages or namespaces rather than the entire site. A draft policy is being workshopped at Wikipedia:Partial blocks.
  • The request for comment seeking the community's sentiment for a binding desysop procedure closed with wide-spread support for an alternative desysoping procedure based on community input. No proposed process received consensus.

Technical news

  • Twinkle now supports partial blocking. There is a small checkbox that toggles the "partial" status for both blocks and templating. There is currently one template: {{uw-pblock}}.
  • When trying to move a page, if the target title already exists then a warning message is shown. The warning message will now include a link to the target title. [16]

Arbitration

  • Following a recent arbitration case, the Arbitration Committee reminded administrators that checkuser and oversight blocks must not be reversed or modified without prior consultation with the checkuser or oversighter who placed the block, the respective functionary team, or the Arbitration Committee.

Miscellaneous


Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:06, 1 February 2020 (UTC)

Lotfi Baccouche

You have removed from the article the date of the player's death. It's quite possible you are formally right and the source does not meet WP standards of reliability. However, the fact is that Lotfi Baccouche is dead. You can also see it here, on FB page of the fans of his club Étoile du Sahel, which is formally not a reliable source for wiki as well but I would argue it's hardly believable that such a post of mourning is factually incorrect. Andrei Romanenko (talk) 17:52, 5 February 2020 (UTC)

Bkay123

Hi, you closed Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Bkay123 with the comment "Both have already been blocked." They've only been partially blocked, from mainspace only. Is there a change in policy I'm unaware of? Thanks, Cabayi (talk) 07:23, 19 February 2020 (UTC)

@Cabayi: You're not missing anything here. I didn't recognize the partial blocks for what they were. Thanks for pointing out my error. Sir Sputnik (talk) 22:02, 19 February 2020 (UTC)
Thanks. The first time I saw a partially blocked account in the popups I thought the dotted underline to the username looked cool and wondered how to get that effect on my username. Now I know what it means, not so much. Cabayi (talk) 22:14, 19 February 2020 (UTC)

transfermarkt

Hi, can you tell me more about transfermarkt.com being not reliable source, I'm not disagreeing, just I always considered it to be reliable and found it correct most of the times. What would you recommend as an alternative for values, and contract start / end dates? Wolfmartyn (talk) 17:00, 25 February 2020 (UTC)

@Wolfmartyn: Transfermarkt's stats database is user edited. To quote its login page: Whether player info, coach info, club info, or match report – as a Transfermarkt user, you can edit and add to almost all data by yourself. For contract dates, your best bet will probably be transfer announcements for the player in question, either from their club's website or from sporting news outlets (i.e. BBC Sports for England, kicker for Germany). Market valuations are not something we should be reporting on in the vast majority of cases, as they are inherently speculative and not widely covered in reliable sources. Sir Sputnik (talk) 22:04, 25 February 2020 (UTC)

Transfermarkt.com not being a reliable source

Dear Sir Sputnik,

You are stating that www.transfermarkt.com is not a reliable source, because it is user-edited. Can you please tell me which website you do consider reliable? In the world of football transfermarkt.com is considered one of the most reliable (free) websites. This of course does not mean that all data is correct, also in this case the height mentioned (183cm) at transfermarkt.com was (just like at all websites I know) incorrect. The problem is that all websites that I know and that you probably consider 'reliable' (for example FIFA.com) are providing this incorrect height of 183cm of this football player. I can only speculate why this is, it looks like many website are copying (in this case incorrect) data from other websites without investigating thoroughly themselves, or maybe they are still using the height of this football player when he as a teenager played at U17 and U20 World Cups. Either way I was not able to edit his height in Transfermarkt.com myself. Therefore I sent transfermarkt.com an email to investigate this and have it corrected. They told me their data-scout was going to contact his current football club to re-check the data. A few days later I saw his height was corrected to 187cm in Transfermarkt.com. So can you please advise me what to do so that Wikipedia does no longer show an incorrect height of this football player?

Thank you in advance for your help! Dgsm2013 (talk) 00:49, 29 February 2020 (UTC)

Bobby Edwards

Bobby Edwards (soccer) played 4 games for Portadown FC so therefore he has played games. Freefalling660 (talk) 13:54, 29 February 2020 (UTC)

@Freefalling660: Per WP:FPL, the NIFL Premiership is not a fully professional league, so the games has played do not satisfy WP:NFOOTBALL. Sir Sputnik (talk) 14:46, 29 February 2020 (UTC)
Alright thank you for letting me know. I moved it to my userspace until he plays a professional game. Freefalling660 (talk) 18:48, 29 February 2020 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – March 2020

News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2020).

Guideline and policy news

  • Following an RfC, the blocking policy was changed to state that sysops must not undo or alter CheckUser or Oversight blocks, rather than should not.
  • A request for comment confirmed that sandboxes of established but inactive editors may not be blanked due solely to inactivity.

Technical news

  • Following a discussion, Twinkle's default CSD behavior will soon change, most likely this week. After the change, Twinkle will default to "tagging mode" if there is no CSD tag present, and default to "deletion mode" if there is a CSD tag present. You will be able to always default to "deletion mode" (the current behavior) using your Twinkle preferences.

Miscellaneous


Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:21, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

Noticed a Sock puppet!

Hello administrator! Please check the contributions of user:Murgh Krahi, without having any page remover he had converted so many pages with only have 200-300 edit showing from his edit. I had noticed that user for stop this activity without permission to changing the page names. tuxr 16:19, 16 March 2020 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tuxr (talk • contribs)

Dear Sir Sputnik

User:Siamfootball always vandalize Wikipedia on Transfermarkt is not considered a reliable source, and should not be cited in articles. 110.169.30.61 (talk) 10:08, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

talk Check your grammar brother.

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Sir_Sputnik/Archive_8&oldid=1211816269"