Jump to content

User talk:NinjaRobotPirate/Archive2021-2

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

Re: IP:Block Exemption

Hello, NinjaRobotPirate. You have new messages at LaceyUF's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

avoiding bias

"I believe the best way to avoid bias is to edit articles about which one is apathetic (thus, 1980s death metal)." :D

I love it. Thanks for saying it! - Zulu Kane (talk) 14:16, 30 June 2021 (UTC)

It's probably not a unique thought, but it (hopefully) helps to reduce drama. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 00:13, 2 July 2021 (UTC)

Ducks

Melinda1984 and AnimaniacsMan are clear ducks, along with IPs 67.8.217.215 and 2603:9001:4C0C:5925:0:0:0:0/64. AnimaniacsMan was created after I blocked the other three in May, but I didn't make the connection till I blocked AnimaniacsMan for the second time today. Looking for other sleepers or an older master before tagging up. -- ferret (talk) 21:06, 1 July 2021 (UTC)

They're confirmed to each other, but the results are a little weird, which I guess is going to start up again now that people are leaving home and socializing. Joshuas origami Australia is pretty likely but could be a coworker, friend, or something like that. I have to say, I much preferred it when everyone just stayed at home on their on their own residential ISP. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 22:29, 1 July 2021 (UTC)
Blocked and tagged the two used. Will let the other lie for now since it's a month old and unused, likely won't be I think. -- ferret (talk) 23:51, 1 July 2021 (UTC)
Yeah, probably not worth blocking. The weird thing is that both accounts use a variety of devices, like three different mobile devices. I can't even imagine doing that. I don't know what I'm going to do when I have to finally give up my keyboard and over-engineered gaming PCs. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 01:11, 2 July 2021 (UTC)

Mangue Seco

Looks like the same person back again - 2001:8004:2762:7BDB:8CAA:BEAF:B89C:1CF7. I'm going to request page protection. Laterthanyouthink (talk) 05:51, 2 July 2021 (UTC)

Yeah, will probably be back a few more times, too. I keep blocking IPs, and new ones keep popping up. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 06:53, 2 July 2021 (UTC)
Here's another - 49.182.108.105 - editing same pages as the IP above. Cheers, Bahudhara (talk) 06:59, 2 July 2021 (UTC)
Blocked that one, too. Empty "history" sections are a giveaway. Also edits to adventure/travel topics, such as adventure films, visas, safaris, that sort of thing. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 07:06, 2 July 2021 (UTC)

User Alandyept

Hi. Can you check whether the User Enronsap is a sock puppet of User Alandyept? 06:20, 2 July 2021 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 150.129.101.67 (talk)

Dude, what's up the cross-posting? This is an evidence-free accusation, too. I don't see the connection between Kerala cuisine and Ryzen CPUs. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 07:08, 2 July 2021 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – July 2021

News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2021).

Guideline and policy news

  • Consensus has been reached to delete all books in the book namespace. There was rough consensus that the deleted books should still be available on request at WP:REFUND even after the namespace is removed.
  • An RfC is open to discuss the next steps following a trial which automatically applied pending changes to TFAs.

Technical news

  • IP addresses of unregistered users are to be hidden from everyone. There is a rough draft of how IP addresses may be shown to users who need to see them. This currently details allowing administrators, checkusers, stewards and those with a new usergroup to view the full IP address of unregistered users. Editors with at least 500 edits and an account over a year old will be able to see all but the end of the IP address in the proposal. The ability to see the IP addresses hidden behind the mask would be dependent on agreeing to not share the parts of the IP address they can see with those who do not have access to the same information. Accessing part of or the full IP address of a masked editor would also be logged. Comments on the draft are being welcomed at the talk page.

Arbitration

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:27, 3 July 2021 (UTC)

My blocking

Hey there. (I wanted to message you on my talk page but you didn’t seem to notice it)

Was my block for all the countless warnings you gave me over the last few years? Oh, and I’ll have to give you credit for just popping up on some random page to revert an edit before blocking it, like did I trigger some edit filter or something?

Luigitehplumber (talk) 10:36, 4 July 2021 (UTC)

I find it rather confusing that you're still adding unsourced content, as in this edit, right after being blocked for adding unsourced content. The next block will be indefinite, and I'll require you to explain how sourcing works on Wikipedia to be unblocked. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 03:11, 5 July 2021 (UTC)
Harry here again. As I can't use my main account to say what i'm saying (as it's blocked), i'm having to use my IP address to say this. Even after my week block expires I'm still staying on the hiatus I previously announced on my talk page. This is mainly because, i'll be honest, being watched over every edit I do now by you (or so I can think) is not only unfair (as some people still get away from adding unsourced material, as well as you revert edits that already aren't sourced) but I really don't want my block to be indefnite. Yes, I was genuinely angry at both blocks but there's nothing I can do about it.

Just to be on the safe side, maybe block my IP so I can be honest on what I said (as I do have a tendency to forget about it as I am obsessed with the site and editing), but still. And on another note, do you seem to have some dislike to me considering you immediately blocked me after the 31-hour one expired. 81.104.97.124 (talk) 15:14, 6 July 2021 (UTC)

Exceedingly ill-advised. NRP, since you're already handling this, I decided not to block the IP or extend the master's block. I've warned this editor a few times over the years myself. -- ferret (talk) 15:23, 6 July 2021 (UTC)
Oh, and for you Ferret, I apologise for jumping ahead as well. Looks like I’m in for more than I asked for... 81.104.97.124 (talk) 15:29, 6 July 2021 (UTC)
Dude... I don't really understand how someone can have so much good-faith zeal to improve the encyclopedia and yet be so clueless about policy. All you need to do is include citations for the content you add. And not evade blocks. You're making this so much harder on yourself. There are things that I would add to Wikipedia but haven't because I can't find a citation. For example, I mostly rewrote The Elder Scrolls#Setting from scratch. It's quite detailed in many respects, it's still missing some basic stuff, such as H.P. Lovecraft's influence on the setting. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 22:04, 6 July 2021 (UTC)
It's like warning someone about their COI: "read the policy and declare your COI", and you have to keep saying it. Drmies (talk) 22:07, 6 July 2021 (UTC)

Well, I’m unblocked now and ready for a fresh start. My anger left me, so I decided to return back today.

So basically, all I need to do is citatise more and that will prevent my indefinite block then. Oh, and about the Rescue Heroes page, I changed it two weeks ago because the end credits said “Canada-China”. Luigitehplumber (talk) 15:55, 12 July 2021 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
Really appreciate your efforts! Cheerful Squirrel (talk) 03:23, 5 July 2021 (UTC)

Ntrr123 SPI close

Hi! Thank you for handling Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Ntrr123. I have a comment on your close, while I agree everything that needed to be done (blocked socks) was done, for file keeping though I have a comment. This should be merged to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Zaid Zayd, and it should be clear that Ntrr123 (who you cleared of any wrong doing, and was filed as the suspected master as the oldest account filed but was not the locus of suspicion). Thanks!--Eostrix  (🦉 hoot hoot🦉) 08:54, 7 July 2021 (UTC)

I dunno, strikes me as a bit bureaucratic. But I guess it's not me that has to do it, so why not. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 01:39, 8 July 2021 (UTC)

unblock me

i dont know why i have been blocked i have done nothing bad i dont even know why i was blocked but i know i have not written anything bad i had just edited one page and added few sentences of character which was true but still i was blocked unblock me Witness0987654321 (talk) 10:48, 7 July 2021 (UTC)

59.153.232.0/21

Hello NinjaRobotPirate, I am a sysop of viwiki. I detect that this IP range tries to vandal articles related to "National football team" topic. Once you banned this range, please offer me more ranges if you know that I can consider setting a block on viwiki. Thank you! Alphama (talk) 14:25, 7 July 2021 (UTC)

Well, I'm not sure how much information I can release. But the following IP ranges are related to that one:
There's probably more, but that's what I can find quickly. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 01:21, 8 July 2021 (UTC)
Thank you and I will have some investigations on these ranges. PS: I detected some usernames, such as "Bjnrop05", "Bjnrop06", etc are related to this vandalism. Alphama (talk) 06:13, 8 July 2021 (UTC)
For what it's worth, Bjnrop06 is probably unrelated. The global and local CheckUser policies make it difficult for me to say as much as I'd like. I could probably create a page on the CheckUser wiki with lots more information, but access would be restricted to CheckUsers and Stewards. This makes it a bit limited in its usefulness, but once IP addresses become masked, it could potentially make a lot of this easier to discuss on-wiki. On the other hand, I don't understand why the WMF is doing this when they could just disable IP editing altogether. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 06:50, 8 July 2021 (UTC)
WMF may want to hide the IP addresses as the only way to protect users from any threat, supposed from the government or stakeholders. But sadly, this mechanism can not work well to counter against the "clever" sockpuppets. In some cases, we probably conclude the strong relationship between a user and an IP range but to prove this at CU is another story. Depend on the editing culture of every language edition, we can conclude that IP editing should be blocked or not. Well, actually in our project, the rate between good faith and bad faith coming IP editing may be 50/50. Since we currently lack administration staff, I feel it is better to see there is no IP editing here. Alphama (talk) 10:23, 8 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello, please consider this CU check Bingrojb to proceed to this case if needed on enwiki. Note that it is related to [1]. Thank you! Alphama (talk) 15:11, 10 July 2021 (UTC)

I don't think any of those accounts exist on English Wikipedia. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 21:15, 10 July 2021 (UTC)

Sweep?

Uploading picture account and Uploading Pictures account 2. This is pretty obvious duck, both for the name and the editing focus (Some AFD/delsort work + video game characters, etc), but I'm not sure this is the earliest master. -- ferret (talk) 21:46, 7 July 2021 (UTC)

The two accounts are on different continents, which is pretty weird. Uploading Pictures account 2 is probably Mike MacRae aka FrozenFan2, though. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 01:58, 8 July 2021 (UTC)
Really strange. The editing overlap really seemed to be there on top of the name and timing. The first Uploading though did drop a retiring banner. PlayerSacha? Guess it doesn't matter overly since already blocked indef. -- ferret (talk) 02:01, 8 July 2021 (UTC)
Well, there's also some evidence that UPA2 is Bigshowandkane64. It's so hard to tell all these people apart when there's zillions of edits across every IP range. My first thought for #1 was PlayerSascha, too, but as far as I can tell PlayerSascha is on yet another different continent than everyone else. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 02:07, 8 July 2021 (UTC)

Quick check

I have reason to suspect that the newly-created account above is a continuation of the blocked account, hitting the same types of articles (railroads, trains, stations, etc.) and making similar comments like this one. Was hoping you could perform a quick check to confirm suspicions, and then if you prefer, I can open a new SPI. Thanks. --GoneIn60 (talk) 01:00, 8 July 2021 (UTC)

No, I don't think they're the same person. They live in different cities. 16C seems to have two other accounts (16ConcordsSSC, Railroad Preservationist), but there's no rule against simply creating a couple alternate accounts. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 02:24, 8 July 2021 (UTC)
OK, fair enough. Thanks for checking! --GoneIn60 (talk) 02:38, 8 July 2021 (UTC)
FWIW, I also ran a brief user comparison report: Interaction Timeline
It's just so odd there are so many overlapping article contributions, and 16C launched within days of the other account getting blocked. --GoneIn60 (talk) 03:07, 8 July 2021 (UTC)

Revoking TPA

Hello NinjaRobotPirate, would it be possible to revoke the TPA of Bleeding monkey brains 69420 (talk · contribs) as they are abusing it? Best, Pahunkat (talk) 19:04, 8 July 2021 (UTC)

I second this. Zinnober9 (talk) 19:09, 8 July 2021 (UTC)
How odd. I wonder if it's a poorly-written script. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 23:09, 8 July 2021 (UTC)
I think it's just a troll, see the first revert. Pahunkat (talk) 07:56, 9 July 2021 (UTC)

About distributors

I wanna ask you something.

When it comes to international distributors for Pre-2007 Paramount/Universal movies, do we use United International Pictures as a whole or just Paramount Pictures/Universal Pictures (through United International Pictures)? I’m asking in terms of international movies and such.

Oh, and as for Columbia movies, does it have to be Sony Pictures Releasing or whatever the source says? I’m just nervous that everything is gonna go wrong and I’ll suffer from an indefinite block. Luigitehplumber (talk) 02:24, 13 July 2021 (UTC)

I find most aspects of the film industry to be boring, so I'm sorry, but I don't really know what you're talking about as far as the content issues go. I know nothing about Sony or Paramount beyond what any random person on the street could tell you. Whatever the sources say, that's what Wikipedia says. So, for example, if Box Office Mojo says that Columbia Pictures distributed a film, that's what Wikipedia says. I couldn't care less whether Sony is listed as a production company, distributor, or anything else – as long as it's cited to a reliable source. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 03:19, 13 July 2021 (UTC)

Block evasion by Rishabisajakepauler

108.217.3.222 (talk · contribs)

The editor is evades their block yet again [2] [3] [4]. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 02:37, 13 July 2021 (UTC)

Reblocked, this time for three months. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 03:21, 13 July 2021 (UTC)
73.243.247.201 (talk · contribs) Possible block evasion by Rishabisajakepauler [5] [6] [7] [8]. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 04:31, 21 September 2021 (UTC)
83.71.71.107 (talk · contribs) Possible block evasion by Rishabisajakepauler [9] [10]. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 08:07, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
Have you see my comments? TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 05:01, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
Sorry, no. I often miss stuff if it gets posted to old sections. That IP looks like it's in a different country than most of the others. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 05:07, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
Okay, but what about this IP 73.243.247.201 (talk · contribs). TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 05:18, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

Hi NinjaRobotPirate, I know you've asked me before not to ping you in SPi cases, so I hope you don't mind me asking you to please kindly check out Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Rishabisajakepauler again, there's currently three reports there. I just fear this sock will continue abusing those IPs the longer those reports remain open. Thank you. AshMusique (talk) 11:09, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

Yeah, I haven't looked at the SPI backlog in a little while. I've been busy with some other stuff. I'll try to look at it, but Wikipedia has something like 50 CheckUsers now. I personally think having this many CheckUsers on a single project is absurd, but one nice thing about it is that I don't really feel compelled to deal with every backlog any more. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 03:58, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

Block evasion by MakaveliReed

2603:300A:10A:EC00:389D:AF7C:F0C2:EE71 (talk · contribs)

The editor is yet again changing date ranges for no reason [11] [12] [13] [14]. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 15:28, 13 July 2021 (UTC)

Blocked that one, too. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 23:40, 13 July 2021 (UTC)
2600:1702:1BF0:3550:D436:539:5D28:5C0C (talk · contribs) 2601:240:E200:58C0:0:0:0:21AC (talk · contribs) Block evasion by MakaveliReed [15] [16] [17] [18]. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 04:49, 25 August 2021 (UTC)
Range blocked both of them. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 09:27, 25 August 2021 (UTC)

User:Basudev Routizer

Same as User:Crypto Satanz and User:GlowingHash? Do you think they were attempting to get all each of those accounts extended confirmed permissions? OhNoitsJamie Talk 15:41, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

I think that's Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/יניב הורון. The logged-out edits make it seem more likely. At any rate, it's someone creating undisclosed extended confirmed socks to edit in Israel-Palestine articles. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 15:46, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Reporting Chiade85

Chiade85 (talk · contribs)

This editor is adding unsourced or poorly sourced content in articles [19] [20] [21]. They also edit warring as well [22] [23] [24] [25]. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 15:57, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

87.115.90.245 (talk · contribs) I just find out that the editor is another account as well. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 16:11, 16 July 2021 (UTC)
It looks like you're both edit warring. If that's him, editing while logged out isn't necessarily a problem by itself. The policy is at WP:LOGOUT. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 16:55, 16 July 2021 (UTC)
I realize that was a mistake on my part. Chiade85 added a whole list of features in the lead [26] and I reverted it because (WP:TOOMUCH) [27], I did restore it back but I only added half of the features list [28]. Chiade85 reverted the whole list back in the lead, which is already in the lead [29], I reverted that edit because the editor didn't see the edits that I made before [30], the editor add it back in the lead again [31] and that's what happened. Sorry I handled that issue poorly. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 17:36, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

@NinjaRobotPirate: I made changes to the Holiday, Pharrell Williams and Shoot for the stars pages as I was adding information. I admit the edits I have made on shoot for the stars were spam and has started an edit war between me and Peanuts however the edits to Holiday and Pharrell Williams discography are very minor edits. On the Holiday page I stated that Holiday is from the Platinum edition of the album which is confirmed already on that page as it previously stated in the main body of information which has now been changed for some odd reason despite this single being stated by KSI himself that it was the Platinum edition only. I didn't realise that it had been changed. On the Pharrell Williams page I re added one of the guest appearances exactly how it was originally through copy and paste so that the font matched the font of all other guest appearances as it was spaced into the middle of the box. I added a few spaces in between the lines which did nothing aside from fulfil my goal. If anything is "unsourced" or incorrect then that is not me as I said I copy and pasted the information already provided on the page just adding spaces. Amazing Peanuts is digging up information and random edits to make me look bad to you so that I get reported or banned. As I said I understand the edits to Shoot for the Stars is spam so I have added it to the talk page to see what other users think and who they believe to be correct. Me or peanuts. Chiade85 (talk) 20:21, 16 July 2021 (GMT+1)

You two should probably have this discussion on the article's talk page and try to come to a consensus before some hardass sees all the edit warring that's going on. I understand how frustrating it is to get reverted by someone who you're sure is wrong, but sometimes you have to just ignore it and try to deal. And if someone says your edits are unsourced, add a citation. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 04:57, 17 July 2021 (UTC)
If you didn't notice already, there already a discussion at the article's talk page and we have stop edit the article hours ago, with the recent revert by Gerda Arendt [32]. Chiade85 has since quit Wikipedia [33]. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 05:37, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

Suspicious

All of this editor's edits today are sketchy.[34] I noticed because of the Julianne Moore edits, but I suspect they're all subtle vandalism. Grandpallama (talk) 22:58, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

I hate trying to figure out if someone is clueless, using reliable sources that I don't know about, or a hoaxer. From earlier edits, this editor may be using Google Knowledge Graph as a source, which is madness. Nobody even knows where Google is scraping that data from, but some of it comes from Wikimedia projects. I blocked the editor for 31 hours and left a note about sourcing. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 04:27, 17 July 2021 (UTC)
I checked out the other names, and all the edits look like they introduced errors. Even if they are using the Google Knowledge Graph, seven edits of that nature within six minutes for such widely disparate people is odd; like you say, though, trying to figure out if someone is doing it deliberately or just out of complete incompetence probably doesn't matter, since all roads lead to Rome. Thanks for taking a look! Grandpallama (talk) 14:31, 17 July 2021 (UTC)
Actually, after going back further into their edit history and finding more problems, I also found pretty obvious socking in May. I'll open up an SPI. Grandpallama (talk) 14:46, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

Blocked user is back seems so

Hello. It is me again and well... seems to this user CsShko0 (talk · contribs) is the same as ShkoDevAct (talk · contribs), ShkoHazhar (talk · contribs), Shko0Dev (talk · contribs), Shko-Zero (talk · contribs), and ShukaIQ (talk · contribs). Would be great is you could check about. Thank you. Nubia86 (talk) 22:44, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

 Confirmed and blocked. I wonder why I didn't do a range block last time. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 22:59, 19 July 2021 (UTC)
Thank you...⚘! Nubia86 (talk) 23:49, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello. I suspect about this one Agency9111 (talk · contribs). Nubia86 (talk) 20:07, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

Blocked. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 21:39, 20 August 2021 (UTC)
Agency9111 (talk · contribs) pretty much messed this Isis Hunting Club, would be good to you check. Seems to he removed the existing page and added some his stuff. It appear to it was about the Rasheed Bank but he renamed it and added a lot of his "things". Nubia86 (talk) 00:07, 21 August 2021 (UTC)
I moved it back to the original title. I also ran some key phrases through Google, and it looks like the text was copy-pasted. It should be all cleaned up now. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 00:27, 21 August 2021 (UTC)

Back and already blocked NationalistMan (talk · contribs) and WorkersMan (talk · contribs) but should go all under ShkoDevAct (talk · contribs). Nubia86 (talk) 16:15, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

Also this one NationalismMan (talk · contribs), already blocked but by my fast checking of that accounts edits I am almost totally sure all 3 are under this sock master ShkoDevAct (talk · contribs). You know, totally the same editing patterns, articles etc as ShkoDevAct and his numerous socks. Nubia86 (talk) 11:13, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

Hello. Ehhh seems again. Idk what is that anymore:Shkoo0o (talk · contribs). Nubia86 (talk) 03:06, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

I don't understand what you're trying to say. And the linked account is already blocked. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 22:28, 4 November 2021 (UTC)

Hi

Shadowwarrior8 (talk · contribs) and DavidMDCXI (talk · contribs) similar edits Islamic modernism, Rashid Rida.178.222.116.108 (talk) 05:30, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

Self-admitted sock

Hello. Could you please block ForestFireStarter ASAP? Please see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Filipz123. This is a self-admitted sockpuppet, so really a no-brainer. Unfortunately, the sock still continues to send me silly messages, and, more importantly, edit war in articles. I always find this extremely frustrating when I report these socks at SPI and nothing happens, nobody reads it, while the sock keeps restoring his edits in articles, and nobody can stop him (besides, good editors risk being unfairly blocked for 3RR violation by admins unfamiliar with the case) because the SPI have been half-abandoned for at least the last year or two.

I think there should be a direct shortcut, some "red button" for editors reporting at least these most toxic sockpuppets on Wikipedia, the worst long-term abusers like Filipz123, when the SPI page doesn't really work anymore. Is it OK to mass-ping all admins involved in the archives? I know it's not a nice thing to do, but what else can a desperate editor do? Is it OK to contact the admins directly? As a person who has been dealing with vandals, socks and spammers for 16 years on Wikipedia, I can tell you this is a long-standing, deep problem that only keeps getting worse. I think Wikipedia really needs systemic reforms not only to protect itself from chronic sockpuppets, vandals and spammers, but also to help good editors who, at the moment, especially with the desperately understaffed administrative areas like SPI, are pretty much helpless.

But the most acute problem right now: could you please block ForestFireStarter? :-) Thanks.—J. M. (talk) 17:44, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

Ugh, please don't ping admins from SPI cases. Most of those admins are already overworked. There really aren't all that many admins who handle backlogs. My solution would be minimum activity requirements to keep one's admin rights, but the community has rejected that. Frequently, that means the only way to get anything done is to pass an RFA yourself and skip over the bureaucracy. But if something is particularly easy to resolve, like an admitted sock, you could post that here on my talk page. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 19:05, 24 July 2021 (UTC)
AIV might handle a report of "obvious sock, self-admit" as well. Though it can back up also. I also will respond usually to clear cut cases if asked. -- ferret (talk) 19:35, 24 July 2021 (UTC)
Thank you both for your replies.—J. M. (talk) 20:04, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

You've got mail

Hello, NinjaRobotPirate. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template. Doug Weller talk 14:04, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

SPI case mentioning you

FYI, the new SPI case Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Coldplay48 mentions some blocks you made in May 2020. Binksternet (talk) 15:48, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

Sock check

You earlier blocked this user who is now socking as Mealiyta and is a confirmed match to Nimesh Pathora on a sister wikipedia site (Wikidata) after a report I made there. But blocking process is very slow there, and as such it will take ages to get them globally locked. Can you check and block Mealiyta + Nimesh Pathora and check for more socks? Then we shall find them globally locked faster. Abhishek0831996 (talk) 17:21, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

I suggest you file a case at WP:SPI. I don't remember anything about this case, and your request here is incredibly vague. It doesn't even mention the suspected sock master, Showbiz826. I tried poking around, but it's pointless because I don't even know what I'm supposed to be looking for. There are thousands of user accounts on this ISP who all have the same user agent. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 17:56, 27 July 2021 (UTC)
I am not sure where this should be filed on Wikipedia that's why I avoid filing here in the first place. Showbiz can't be him because Showbiz is interested in Indian social groups and professional wrestling, none of them are edited by Pseudo Nihilist. You can read results on Wikidata. Abhishek0831996 (talk) 04:46, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Admin's Barnstar
Keep Up... CocoGT (talk) 03:33, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Who this might be

Hey NRP. Your 'block evasion' comment here hints that this might be a person you know from previous experience. Can you provide me any details, by email if necessary? I also asked Number 57 but he does not remember how that person first came to his attention. Number 57 believes that GiofaniRahman and Dustyveil are the same person. My own interest comes from a remark by someone at WP:AN3 as to someone being a sock of Dustyveil. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 19:31, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

@Number 57 and EdJohnston: Dustyveil, Peilin22, GiofaniRahman, and anyone else who goes on massive blanking sprees in association football articles is User:Albertpda. Use extended confirmed protection on any article they edit, please, especially if it's hit with multiple socks. I don't know how much I can say here in the open, but this sock puppeteer actually believes that his blanking sprees cause the teams to win more games. He will send multiple sock puppets to blank out entire sections of the articles, often removing 20KB or more. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 20:39, 28 July 2021 (UTC)
Thanks. The case at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Albertpda/Archive is instructive. EdJohnston (talk) 22:50, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Request to kindly allow these edits to stay

Mr. NinjaRobotPirate, please revert this edit. https://en.m.wiki.x.io/wiki/Special:MobileDiff/1036205746.

They are good faith edits. They are corrections of references, page numbers, additional citations from better sources and distinguish between the Vokkaligas and Lingayat communities.

I appeal to your better conscience and sincerely request you to reconsider that reversal.

Remember, Wikipedia is about consensus and making an encyclopedia; it's not about winning. Occasionally we all lose sight of that, but there are more important things in life than debates on Wikipedia. We're all here to make a better encyclopedia, and there is room for everyone. -NinjaRobotPirate

Thank you. 2409:4071:4E15:4E49:7D19:D26:3573:30F2 (talk) 06:21, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Block-evading sock puppets don't get to edit Wikipedia. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 11:37, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

2401:4900:40C9:E92D:71A7:9D81:44A:3D21

Moving this from Ohnoitsjamie's talk page.
2401:4900:40C9:E92D:71A7:9D81:44A:3D21 was used yesterday. So were many other IPs from 2401:4900:0:0:0:0:0:0/32 range, which you range-blocked a week ago. Could you take a look again? --2405:201:4013:8066:9D24:D1EC:50F5:8C (talk) 00:17, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

I'm not sure what exactly the problem is? This is a partial block that stops anonymous and registered users from editing certain pages (AnEsonGib, Cr1TiKaL, EZTV, IDubbbz, Joji (musician), KSI, Ryan Higa, TommyInnit and Wilbur Soot). Any other page can be freely edited. The point is stop one block-evading editor from disrupting those individual pages. Since Bigg Boss OTT isn't on the list of prohibited pages, the IP editor can edit that page. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 01:49, 1 August 2021 (UTC)
Hey, I tried reaching out to admins at ANI, but it has been 2 days and no-one has responded. Could you take a look at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#2401:4900:0:0:0:0:0:0/32 range and possible intervention or let me know where I should be taking this? I have been stalking their edits for 3 days now, and it's becoming tiring. --2405:201:4013:8058:745B:1A8B:2164:31BF (talk) 22:19, 2 August 2021 (UTC)
Dude, it's a huge IP range. I doubt most people are going to want to look into this. But I did look through a random sample of edits, and most were disruptive. I blocked Special:Contributions/2401:4900:0:0:0:0:0:0/33 for a month but left account creation on. I guess we can see what happens with that. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 00:41, 3 August 2021 (UTC)
Thank you :-) 2405:201:4013:8058:745B:1A8B:2164:31BF (talk) 00:50, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – July 2021

News and updates for administrators from the past month (July 2021).

Guideline and policy news

  • An RfC is open to add a delay of one week from nomination to deletion for G13 speedy deletions.

Technical news

  • Last week all wikis were very slow or not accessible for 30 minutes. This was due to server lag caused by regenerating dynamic lists on the Russian Wikinews after a large bulk import. (T287380)

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:18, 1 August 2021 (UTC)
I can't believe this is really a thing: "Following an amendment request, the committee has clarified that the Talk page exception to the 500/30 rule in remedy 5 of the Palestine-Israel articles 4 case does not apply to requested move discussions." It's like a parody from a third-rate clone of The Onion that's dedicated to obscure geek culture. Other headlines: "Bored IT worker admits to years of trolling in comment sections of tech websites." and "Middle-aged nerd still plays Civilization II obsessively and listens to Rush albums on repeat." NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 15:05, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

Bithdate reliable source

Thanks for fixing my edit to Anthony Tyler Quinn. I did not know imdb.com was user-generated. Is encyclopedia.com considered sufficiently reliable for a BLP? Useight (talk) 19:51, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

There are a couple obscure exceptions, such as when writing credits on the IMDb are signed off by the WGA and when the MPAA signs off on the MPAA rating. Encyclopedia.com says the site aggregates content from various sources, so I guess it would depend on the original source. WP:DOB says birth dates should be "widely published by reliable sources". When I want to find information on American celebrities, I usually go to TV Guide, Entertainment Weekly, or People. People, for example, is known for working with celebrities. It's not what I would consider a rock solid source for controversial facts, but it's not a gossipy tabloid, either. If information is in People, that probably means that a celebrity wants it out there. EW is more into entertainment news than celebrity culture, but the two are pretty strongly related. TV Guide has a trove of information from before the internet. WP:RSP might be useful as a quick reference. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 00:17, 3 August 2021 (UTC)
Thanks. Useight (talk) 14:58, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

Email

Hello, NinjaRobotPirate. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

--Chris | Crazycomputers (talk) 15:14, 9 August 2021 (UTC)

Sandalkhushi

Hi, you recently CU-blocked HenryBrownz as a sock of Anshsaini0304 (talk · contribs). Now Sandalkhushi (talk · contribs) has appeared at Talk:Saini, taking up the tendentious battle that Anshsaini was fighting. Heck of a coincincidence but I am on mobile & tracking this stuff is hard work. - Sitush (talk) 07:44, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

 Confirmed (and also tried to create an account named "Bhtrlprshnt", which a filter disallowed). People like this don't usually give up after three accounts, sadly. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 08:07, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
Thanks. The emergency ambulance I have called for a neighbour is still to turn up but you are quick! Fancy a new job? - Sitush (talk) 08:11, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
I keep weird hours. That's disturbing about the ambulance, though. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 08:36, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
Yep, 7 hours and waiting - he collapsed in front of me having only been out of hospital for a week after heart valve replacement. Banged his head & is on blood thinners, so am reluctant to move him even though he is conscious (he is sleeping on floor right now). Meanwhile, WP distracts me and Bhalal1978 (talk · contribs) may be the latest Anshsaini sock. - Sitush (talk) 08:41, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
Bharal1978 (talk · contribs), sorry. - Sitush (talk) 08:47, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
Now blocked by SpacemanSpiff. - Sitush (talk) 14:59, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
Could still be him, but it looks different in the CU tool. I have very little understanding of this topic, though. The worst part of having family members who are paramedics is that they tell stories during dinner. There's probably a totally screwed up story behind that ambulance, and you probably don't want to know about it. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 17:37, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
Yeah, one of mine is in the police and stuff happens. In this case, we were told around 1000 that there was a 400-call queue & we should risk moving him to hospital because he was talking. So we did.
There is a bit of a tell in that editor's last talk page post - he uses the same sort of construct to say we should be seeking a solution (that suits him) rather than leaving the article as it is. All of the accounts you have blocked used much the same phrasing. - Sitush (talk) 19:01, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Stubes99

Please take a look at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Stubes99, a blatant sock-puppetry case that is open for 10 days. You blocked a previous illegal account and I think you are familiar with this editor now. 86.120.179.32 (talk) 17:22, 16 August 2021 (UTC)

Fallen Kingdom

Experiencing trickle disruption from an IP range that occurs once every few months or so:

Just looking for some advice here (not asking for any action to be taken at this point). Would you suggest waiting until this gets to a ridiculous number before raising the issue at ANI, and is it possible to block an IP range from editing a particular article only? Also, you may notice diff3 is different than the other edits, but it matches the same disruption to the plot summary we're seeing from other IPs over time. The phrasing "impaled on a Triceratops skull" or "fell on a skull of a Triceratops" has been discussed at great length and opposed on the article's talk page. Thanks in advance. --GoneIn60 (talk) 03:30, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

Yes, it's possible to do a partial block on an IP range, which can stop people from editing up to 10 specific articles. At one point, the WMF also talked about possibly implementing some other features, such as per-page edit filters, but they abandoned all that complicated stuff in favor of pinging people from edit summaries. Well, anyway, if someone pops up once every few months to do something mildly disruptive, I personally would probably just revert it. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 05:45, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

Sweep

@Yamla: KandaharJoe is pretty clearly TheUrbanKhan. I haven't blocked yet though. -- ferret (talk) 15:08, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

I went ahead and blocked actually. -- ferret (talk) 15:23, 19 August 2021 (UTC)
I dunno, looks like everything's already been taken care of. If you want my opinion, though, Chicken Police should probably not be a red link. I might look into that later. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 23:32, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

Albertpda

TM02052? --Bbb23 (talk) 01:52, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

Definitely... and TH02042, too. P.T.T.HUONG~751993 showed up on the same /32, but my guess is that this is just some random person. I guess we'll know for sure after the account becomes autoconfirmed, though. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 06:59, 20 August 2021 (UTC)
Thanks a lot.--Bbb23 (talk) 12:48, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

User:Cloudbearer

I just blocked another sock - BrianTeig. Btw, I'm almost certain this is Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/The abominable Wiki troll, based on the pattern of vandalism plus the focus on professional wrestling. Sro23 (talk) 11:47, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

Yeah, the thought had occurred to me, too, but only after I'd already tagged them. And it had been a while since I blocked TAWT, so I wasn't 100% sure. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 12:43, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

Persistent editor (14)

Our old friend is back! At first, I issued warnings like I usually do until it dawned on me this was the range that was blocked for 6 months:

Some of the warnings:

And there's more where that came from. Like before, there's probably 3 or 4 decent edits for every 1 or 2 that are disruptive. --GoneIn60 (talk) 20:40, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

Yeah, that's got to be the same person as before. I blocked for a year this time. Should be safe. I've seen these Comcast IP addresses stay allocated to the same person for longer than that. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 21:49, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

User:BlackPhilliptheGoat

Hi, I believe the above user is a sockpuppet of EmilGogo who you blocked the other day. They're posting the exact same info to The Thing (1982 film) as Emil was under Groovybmovie. Darkwarriorblake / SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE! 09:37, 21 August 2021 (UTC)

Yep, that's him.  Confirmed and blocked. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 11:07, 21 August 2021 (UTC)

Regarding Supermann

Hello @NinjaRobotPirate, Supermann has accused me of persecuting him when I warned him about his edit here. He promptly initiated a discussion saying that it was persecution and I was acting in bad faith. Further in the discussion he mentions he is trying to state I am labelling him as guilty before innocent. Regardless of the actual discussion, I am somewhat taken aback by his methods and behaviour in handling a response to his contributions. I was curious about making a post on the admin noticeboard but then I noticed your comment here. This is definitely not his first time and most likely won't be his last...he has clearly violated his final warning, and I worry that his behaviour will hurt other users trying to help. Is there anything that could be done about this? Thanks in advance. Sleptlapps (talk) 01:53, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

I don't know. Seems kind of borderline to me. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 03:44, 23 August 2021 (UTC)
@NinjaRobotPirate, the problem isn't the severity of his behaviour, but the fact that this has been going on for a long time now and nothing has happened about it. @Supermann constantly edits something violating the rules and then harasses other users for trying to help him. Doesn't Wikipedia only allow for so many cases of harassment before measures are taken place to prevent this kind of behaviour. I hope you reconsider, thanks. Sleptlapps (talk) 09:35, 23 August 2021 (UTC)
Pushy, aren't you. I'll have to remember that next one of your sock puppets shows up. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 11:31, 23 August 2021 (UTC)
Appreciate the comraderies. Thank you so much for the leniency. I will watch my tone and stop editing for some time. Happy to be just a reader instead of a writer for a while. Hope you stay well. Supermann (talk) 17:51, 26 August 2021 (UTC)

Sweeper for Muhammad Alfarezal

If you'd be so kind as to sweep for I love you, Muhammad Alfarezal 2 and MAlfarezal. All three socks blocked in the last month. -- ferret (talk) 02:08, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

It looks like you're not the first to notice this sock, and there are some range blocks already. If more show up, I can try to plug the holes. There are some I can do now, and I'm kind of wavering on one of them because it looks like it'll have some collateral. I can give it a try, see what happens, and unblock it if there are too many complaints. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 03:09, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

Suspected Sock

Could you take a look at Serpentine67? He seems to be a sock of Vicky4197 who was banned for sock-puppetry with Crowned467. They seem to be targeting the same pages and POV pushing Bunt caste. 2409:4071:2303:E902:7429:858:B4EE:A0CB (talk) 08:20, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

Could you check at 2409:4071:2303:E902:7429:858:B4EE:A0CB being an anonymous user he's engaging in an edit war,he is definitely a sock puppet, and over that on Mayura Verma's page he's accusing me of giving a POV push for Jainism despite giving proper backing documents, and on Alupa dynasty page he is accusing me of vandalism because I'm removing unsourced Jainism POV push. Serpentine67 (talk) 08:44, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

On Mayura Verma/Sharma page there's absolutely no proper citations to prove his brahmin origin, all the links or citations are dead, yet to maintain the neutrality i have not removed the brahmin POV push. Serpentine67 (talk) 08:47, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

I think you're both socks, but Serpentine67 is the easier one to prove. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 13:05, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

User talk:NinjaRobotPirate/Archive2021-1#Return of the sockpuppet

Hi there,

Just seen that some remarkably familiar edits have begun popping up on the United Arab Emirates national football team page again.

Coincidentally Special:Contributions/42.113.144.205 is also Geolocated in the same region of Vietnam as the previous sockpuppets.

Spooky stuff,

Felixsv7 (talk) 08:36, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

Yes, that's definitely block evasion. I semi-protected the article. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 12:36, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
Cheers bud, have a good one Felixsv7 (talk) 12:40, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
The user has returned as Special:Contributions/1.55.171.129 on the Croatia national football team. Same pattern of changing headings and merging sections. Also same Geolocation. Felixsv7 (talk) 23:16, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
Blocked, and a few more articles protected. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 04:45, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Eh?

I would never call you such a thing. I've noticed a tendency among us to become increasingly intolerant, sometimes hostile, and abrupt. All signs of burnout. We are all tired of being combination cop, and trash hauler. The need is more admins. Can't get it to happen. No answers, merely despair and disengagement. --Deepfriedokra (talk) 10:47, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

Yes, there's definitely some burnout. I'm good for another few years, though. Honestly, I'm not really sure I buy into the whole "we need more admins" thing. We've already got more than 1000. If half of them quit tomorrow, I doubt we'd even notice it. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 12:55, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

Reporting Dhgthereaper

Dhgthereaper (talk · contribs)

This editor is using multiple accounts for disruptive editing, they keep adding "Max Al-Zubaidi" in articles without adding a source [35] [36] [37] [38]. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 08:55, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

That’s not me, dumbass. People are adding what they see on the credits. You seem to think it’s the North Koreans or something. I’m reporting you for disruptive editing by deleting sourced material without double checking the source and looking for credits. I am also reporting you for false claims regarding multiple accounts and for multiple attempts at fabricating claims, including the claim that multiple users are the same without verifying how different the IP addresses are. Dhgthereaper (talk) 09:08, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

@Dhgthereaper: You are not adding sourced content whatsoever and you are false information in articles. I'm not convinced you are telling me the truth. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 09:25, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

My man my name’s not even “Mack” what the hell. I added in sourced content a while back but after you kept taking it off I gave up. Don’t try to come at me when you see other people trying to add the same content with similar sources and you get mad because you were wrong to take mine off. And FYI, I’m editing to keep stuff up to date, not to convince some random mf on the internet called “TheAmazingPeanuts.” Only thing that’s “Amazing” is how stubborn you are and how baseless your claim is especially considering the fact that a simple IP address check would confirm that it isn’t the same user but you are too lazy to do this. I would recommend you either do your job to the fullest, verify sources and added content, or simply get off the platform to keep it a healthy and accurate community—but you can’t fail to do any of the three. Dhgthereaper (talk) 09:34, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Dude, you're evading a block. Can't you just add a citation to a reliable source instead of continuing to add the same unsourced content that got you blocked in the first place? NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 06:53, 2 September 2021 (UTC)
The editor has made this edit recently. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 09:17, 2 September 2021 (UTC)
I semi-protected the page again, but that's not a sock. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 09:38, 2 September 2021 (UTC)
Really? The edits look very similar to each other. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 09:55, 2 September 2021 (UTC)
I closed those tabs hours ago, but the geolocation looked totally different. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 12:36, 2 September 2021 (UTC)
FYI: just partial-rangeblocked this user for attempting to make the same additions, from an IP range that geolocates to Georgetown. OhNoitsJamie Talk 20:17, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

Long term abuse

Could you please have a look at this SPI (regarding a self-confessed block evading sock)? Since concepts like consensus and RfC mean nothing to them, the only thing that is preventing them now from creating another havoc is the fact that the article was protected for LTA (following their latest attempt); but knowing their modus operandi, they will in most likelihood resume their disruption as soon as they are autoconfirmed. Many thanks. M.Bitton (talk) 23:40, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Done. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 06:42, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

Socks, possibly meat

Vanesa34233, Mariya968, Vera7567 and Florentia56 look like socks, though it could be meat. Florentia56 posted on a talk page that they, as "I", had kept trying to add a song to Smoke on the Water, where I found at least 4 accounts doing that with shared topic scope. The account names seem to follow a pattern. -- ferret (talk) 02:56, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

Probably Vanessa566. They're on a kind of wide IP range, but most are confirmed to each other. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 07:12, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

Possible sock of cwf7

Hi. You were involved in the blocking of User:Cwf97 and some of their sockpuppets about a year ago. I came across a new editor with some similar editing patterns. Do you think User:Flowersnf could be another sock? Editor interaction]. Thanks. StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 16:22, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

Yeah,  Confirmed to suspected sock, Corey2003. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 17:39, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – September 2021

News and updates for administrators from the past month (August 2021).

Administrator changes

readded Jake Wartenberg
removed Emperor • Viridian Bovary
renamed Ashleyyoursmile → Viridian Bovary

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • The Score extension has been re-enabled on public wikis. It has been updated, but has been placed in safe mode to address unresolved security issues. Further information on the security issues can be found on the mediawiki page.

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:45, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

re:Cult

I don't think your short description is supported by the content of article. Since you are correct about the size a short description should be I have proposed a new description. "Social group with unusual beliefs". Editor2020 (talk) 23:49, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

Sure, that's fine. It doesn't really matter that much, though; this is just a "short description", not "one-line summary of all the text in the article". This is why it's only supposed to be 40 characters, which means that you're going to write something that isn't a summary. It's just a few words to tell people if they're reading the correct article or not. If someone is looking for "exterminator", and they end up on "the terminator" because of autocorrect or something, all they need to know is that "exterminator" is pest control and "terminator" is a Hollywood film. They don't need to know that "terminator" is a "1984 science fiction action-horror film starring Arnold Schwarzenegger and Linda Hamilton". NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 03:55, 5 September 2021 (UTC)
Thank you. I'll try. Editor2020 (talk) 19:36, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

Three things

Hello again. Could you please block CanadaResident777 and HrvatWhoLovesIceCream? Both are sockpuppets of Filipz123 again (please see the SPI page again). Behaviourally, they're WP:DUCK, and checkuser says the former is "very likely" him, and the latter is "technically indistinguishable" from his previous blocked account. So, a straighforward case again, the only thing that's missing again is an admin who finally does it, five weeks after I reported it.

Generally—and I've been talking about it for about a year—Wikipedia is in the deepest crisis since I started editing in 2005. Administrators don't do their job anymore. Their apathy towards urgent issues and downright laziness is at an all-time high. Many requests at many places are ignored or archived for inactivity, even if they're unambiguously clear. Critically important areas like WP:SPI are abandoned and dysfunctional. This has disastrous consequences. Some of the most persistent and harmful sockupppets in the history of the project now know Wikipedia is currently defenceless, come back and create dozens of accounts. Because even if editors can see them and report them, admins don't care anymore.

How come? Filipz123 is perhaps the most toxic user of all time on Wikipedia. The "success ratio" of the reports on his SPI page is very high, because people who report him are experienced editors who know him very well. They're not clueless newbies who are just guessing. Admins who used to visit the case in the past knew that and blocked newly reported socks quickly. How come they don't do that anymore? How come they don't have that page on their watchlist when it's one of the most prolific and harmful sockmasters of all time and when he's still active? This used to be automatic in the past. All admins who work on SPI should have the most prominent cases like Filipz123 on their watchlist. At least the admins who used to deal with the cases in the past. There even used to be admins who specialised in this case. They don't visit the page anymore. When I report another sock today, I'm lucky if I get a reply after 3 weeks, confirming that it's indeed him—and that's it! Nothing happens. Yep, you're right, it's him, checkuser-confirmed. So, let's keep doing nothing and let him freely disrupt Wikipedia. How come the checkuser who confirms the accounts refuses to reply? How come the admin who requested the checkuser doesn't have the decency to respond? An admin who replies to an SPI request, requests a checkuser and gets a confirmation that the reported account is indeed a sockpuppet should automatically come back (and quickly, not after two months) and either block the user or at least explain why they don't do it. It's their job, that' s why they're an admin.

In my opinion, admins who blatantly refuse to do their job should be desysopped, because they're becoming as harmful as the socks themselves (it doesn't matter that they're volunteers—it's a job they agreed to do, and if they don't do it, they shouldn't be admins). The fact that they're not held accountable for their inactivity in my opinion supports the crisis Wikipedia is in. It's not that the admins have a wikibreak or don't have time—this is not about desysopping inactive accounts. They're still here, still editing, but simply decide to ignore urgent, serious and unambiguously clear cases, even the ones they're involved in—yes, the SPI is a tricky area, it needs some investigative work, so ignoring it is more comfortable. Again, this was unthinkable several years ago. The project used to work. It doesn't work anymore, and it keeps getting worse. If this goes on, I think Wikipedia should follow Google Knol's example and shut down the whole project completely, before vandals and socks destroy the articles.

(P.S. In the meantime, Filipz123 is now probably creating and using other accounts and keeps doing the same disruptive things over and over. See the topic on my talk page for an example. Should I even bother reporting it? Should I even bother doing anything anymore on Wikipedia? Reporting or requesting anything these days is an exercise in infinite futility.)—J. M. (talk) 19:10, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

J. M., I would like to take exception to your comment that admins who blatantly refuse to do their job should be desysopped...speaking as the SPI clerk whom you are obliquely referring to when you say How come the admin who requested the checkuser doesn't have the decency to respond? (The answer, by the way, is that clerks generally do not "own" cases, I generally do not watchlist cases unless I am quite familiar with them, and nobody has pinged me since I endorsed the case, so it makes no sense to accuse me of "not responding"). Wikipedia is not compulsory and demanding that we act is not going to move things any faster. I, for one, am of the opinion that administrators do not have a "duty to act" (that is, you cannot request some kind of discipline for an admin not using their tools, whether or not the inaction is intentional), though I'm not sure exactly that aligns with the community's feelings. Regardless. If you start demanding admins work in areas they're not comfortable, we'll just tend to get lower-quality work (God forbid I start doing discussion closures...). If you start demanding admins work in areas they're already working (but are apparently not working enough), you're just going to burn them out. I consider myself quite good at SPI work, but maintaining my "professional paranoia" at just the right level to work at SPI and digging through complex cases for too long runs me very close to wikiburnout, which is why I might spend time doing (heaven forbid!) other things or even just working on simple cases. Do you want to clear the SPI backlog? Become an SPI clerk. Go through RfA or get good candidates to RfA. But don't yell at a bunch of volunteers because they're spending their time on things other than the specific task you want done. GeneralNotability (talk) 20:00, 7 September 2021 (UTC)
Seconding GeneralNotability. -- ferret (talk) 20:08, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

Hello. It notified me that you mentioned me here. It is news to me that I have been associated with this person. I don't know what to say other than that I am indeed not that person. (Is it because of my original name?) I'm sure you can check my edit history to confirm that I'm not a vandal. I guess it is the internet so there is no way for me to definitively prove this. I'm not a very active user anyways. CanadaResident777 (talk) 22:30, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

Well, J. M., if you think something needs to be done on English Wikipedia, it's easiest if you do it yourself. I feel like I'm repeating myself, though. I'm pretty sure I've told you this before. There are 1000+ administrators on English Wikipedia. I agree that many of them are pretty much useless – basically just hat collectors. But if you push too hard, it will just end up causing the people are getting things done to burn out and leave. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 05:46, 8 September 2021 (UTC)

Robin Antin

I did put a ref in the comment https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:V2BB-NKN 82.39.220.87 (talk) 16:15, 9 September 2021 (UTC)

Well, citations belong in the article, not in the edit summary. Please see Referencing for beginners. But I don't see how a genealogy website is a reliable source. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 07:40, 10 September 2021 (UTC)
It's not a commercial genealogy website, it's the database of the Mormons. They believe it is part of their duty to God to unite families [1]. I think they should be given some credibility as they are doing it with a great deal of integrity. 82.39.220.87 (talk) 09:39, 10 September 2021 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ https://newsroom.churchofjesuschrist.org/topic/genealogy
Sources have to satisfy the requirements of our policies. See discussions like Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 229#prabook/geni.com/Familysearch. Generally speaking, genealogy websites and user-generated content are not considered usable for citations on Wikipedia. Our definition of a reliable source is a bit strict, especially when it comes to biographies. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 15:54, 10 September 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for your time, I am sorry to have caused a problem, I will not edit anything else.

Please stop

I have two devices, only on one do I have an account. On my other device you have blocked me twice for absolutely no reason. Do you just block people for fun? Seriously, stop abusing your power. Lystrolaspis (talk) 19:56, 10 September 2021 (UTC)

Geez. How many accounts do you have, anyway? So far, I see:
And yet, I've never blocked any of them. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 20:51, 10 September 2021 (UTC)

I have a shared IP address Lystrolaspis (talk) 20:59, 10 September 2021 (UTC)

Uh huh. I personally prefer the "it's my little brother" excuse. It's is a true classic. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 21:21, 10 September 2021 (UTC)

My other is an IP, that YOU blocked. Lystrolaspis (talk) 21:00, 10 September 2021 (UTC)

And still, do you have anything better to do than block random ip’s all day Lystrolaspis (talk) 21:24, 10 September 2021 (UTC)

I never vandalized, or did anything that could possibly be controversial Lystrolaspis (talk) 21:27, 10 September 2021 (UTC)

W4TTHRTHGT

You might want to indef block W4TTHRTHGT (talk · contribs). It's an LTA (I can't remember which sorry) who has been active this past week. Thanks. -- Longhair\talk 20:26, 10 September 2021 (UTC)

@Longhair: It's User:Nate Speed. Favonian (talk) 20:31, 10 September 2021 (UTC)
That's them. Good work :D -- Longhair\talk 20:32, 10 September 2021 (UTC)

W4TTHRTHGT

Hello NinjaRobotPirate, did you mean to block W4TTHRTHGT for only 31 hrs? They look like WP:LTA/NS to me. Pahunkat (talk) 20:28, 10 September 2021 (UTC)

Yes, it's Nate Speed. I must have misclicked. I've done that twice now, so I wonder if maybe some user interface element changed. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 20:30, 10 September 2021 (UTC)

Edit war socking / evasion

Could you please check Tkcmgl12 and Kissingyou12? Both edit with similar tags and have the hallmarks of the Korean IP who has been disruptively editing Jun Matsumoto. Both show confirmed gaming, with Tkcmgl12 gaming to autoconfirmed to edit past protection, while Kissingyou12 went to 500 edits before repeating a similar edit at Jun. They may also geolocate to Nepal, there were two editors involved at Jun last month. -- ferret (talk) 11:51, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

The following are all confirmed to each other:
But there are so many proxies used here, I doubt that I found everything. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 15:21, 14 September 2021 (UTC)
Blocked and tagged. I noted the earliest apparent master, Tkcmgl12, is already sockblocked on Commons a couple years ago. -- ferret (talk) 20:59, 14 September 2021 (UTC)
This just popped up into my watchlist but holy crap that is a lot of socks. I honestly wonder which of the accounts is the original user. Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry | Discord: Blaze Wolf#0001 (talk) 21:00, 14 September 2021 (UTC)
Tkcmgl12 is years older than the rest. -- ferret (talk) 21:22, 14 September 2021 (UTC)
Wow. I wonder how many times we'll have to block them before they stop. Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry | Discord: Blaze Wolf#0001 (talk) 22:02, 14 September 2021 (UTC)
One more sweep please? I've blocked another sock, one IPv4 and an IPv6 range. -- ferret (talk) 12:17, 20 September 2021 (UTC)
You mean Sponsorshippp? That was created on a web host. I blocked it. There are several bots that go around blocking open proxies and VPNs, so I don't go out of my way to find them any more. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 17:42, 20 September 2021 (UTC)
Found yet another one. 14.4.118.146 ― Blaze The WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#0001 18:10, 20 September 2021 (UTC)

USB Headphones thing

I noticed that you said that when you plugged in your USB Headset you heard a voice saying "Mic On", that sounds a lot like what happens when I plug in my headset. Would the headset you're referring to happen to be a Corsair VOID headset? Just asking out of curiosity! Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry | Discord: Blaze Wolf#0001 (talk) 22:05, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

Yes, it's a Corsair. I had a set of Superlux headphones, but I broke them. They were cheap but sounded great. And they didn't talk to me. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 02:27, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
Ah dang. So maybe it's just a common thing with USB Headsets to have a voice telling you that your mic is on. My current set of headphones (Corsair Void Pro) I"m fairly sure have so far lasted longer than any of my other headsets which is good. Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry | Discord: Blaze Wolf#0001 (talk) 13:05, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
I don't think it's common for USB. But it is for Bluetooth and wireless ones. -- ferret (talk) 13:08, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
The majority of headphones that are wireless are bluetooth from what I"ve seen. Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry | Discord: Blaze Wolf#0001 (talk) 13:15, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

NPA

Hi NRP. Would you be willing to address the personal attack in this edit? I get that they're frustrated with me for reverting their initial edits to this article, but between this and their weird vandalism of my talkpage [39][40], they're crossing a line. The vast majority of their initial edit was plot bloat and interpretation, and even their initial pared-down version was adding unnecessary wordiness and their own interpretive language for the final scene. I probably could've handled the initial interaction better (no, I'm sure I could have), but the unrelenting snark and combativeness make me suspect we'd have ended up at the same place, anyway. They're showing a rather precocious knowledge of policies and essays, too, although the fact that they didn't know how to sign their username suggests they are really new. Grandpallama (talk) 15:53, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

Well, I left a comment... but I just wanted to learn if QLED is worthwhile technology or not. And I still don't know anything about QLED except that it's "commonly used to improve LED backlighting". NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 20:30, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
Per the comment, I think it makes sense for me and my "obnoxiously large ego" to walk away from the article for a while. Thank you for weighing in. Grandpallama (talk) 20:39, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

Reporting Seenthatbattheairport and 138.121.33.84

Seenthatbattheairport (talk · contribs) 138.121.33.84 (talk · contribs)

This user has been adding unsourced content in several articles, such as Astroworld [41] [42] [43]. The user also have a history of editing the article Playboi Carti discography as well [44] [45] [46] [47]. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 07:58, 19 September 2021 (UTC)

Indefinitely blocked. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 14:23, 19 September 2021 (UTC)

Unidentified sock spammer

Can you have a look at what is going on here? [48] It seems like in the last 24 hours there were three new accounts made to revert against four different users. There was also an IP on the 19th of September reverting back to the same revision as the other sock accounts. I'm not sure which sock it is but could you ban them and put the page under protection? It would really help alot, thank you! Ayaltimo (talk) 22:35, 19 September 2021 (UTC)

Almost certainly Roculator. I put it under extended confirmed for a while. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 02:36, 20 September 2021 (UTC)

Can you please check this out? [49] Two accounts were made just today with both sharing similar grammar, both have digits at the end of their name and editing at a two-hour range difference. Ayaltimo (talk) 23:25, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

Probably the same person. I can warn them, I guess. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 00:23, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

Seems like this person is not listening to your warnings because the person decided to make another account yet again. Made the same exact changes too. [50] Ayaltimo (talk) 12:45, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

I blocked them all and semi-protected the article. I don't understand why someone would even do that. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 16:12, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

Shit233333334 is back doing his usual business. [51] Can you please delete the two new articles he has made? [52] [53] Ayaltimo (talk) 15:23, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

He created this article and came back on here to make some edits. [54] He's also restored articles that were previously deleted by his socks. Ayaltimo (talk) 00:15, 01 October 2021 (UTC)
At the very least, that's PaullyMatthews. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 03:29, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

It seems like he's back again. He just undo my revision against his previous sock. [55] Ayaltimo (talk) 16:58, 06 October 2021 (UTC)

Hey Ninja, could you please check this out? [56] It seems like he's back and just restored the battle of Luuq article you've previously deleted. [57] Ayaltimo (talk) 05:48, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
Yes, that's the same person. Blocked. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 04:56, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

Hello Ninja, I hope you're having a great day. The sock puppet is back and just undid both of your revisions. [58] [59] Ayaltimo (talk) 13:43, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

This sock puppet undid all my revisions when I was reverting his previous sock edits [60] Delete his made article too. His other sock made that. [61] Ayaltimo (talk) 15:55, 26 October 2021 (UTC)
That's a sock of Roculator. I'm not sure what you want deleted. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 16:00, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

Yeah, it's one of Walkerdude47 socks. I undid one of its revisions until I realized the whole page was made by the same person. The article seems made up too. If you look here [62]. I just undid Roculator's revision and brought back the original version which states Ottoman's victory. If you look at his revision [63] The user intently made it seem like it was a victory for Abyssinians against the Ottomans when, in fact, the Ottomans actually established a province in modern-day Eritrea. This user is an etho-nationalist pushing propaganda. Could you also please re-name the article Ottoman-Solomonic war to its original name? It was previously called Ottoman conquest of Habesh before the sock vandalism. Ayaltimo (talk) 17:37, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

You should be able to move the page yourself. I don't know anything about that stuff. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 18:17, 26 October 2021 (UTC)
Can you please check this out? It seems like PaullyMatthews is back. [64] Ayaltimo (talk) 10:58, 30 October 2021 (UTC)
Yes, probably him. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 10:15, 30 October 2021 (UTC)

This is not the same other two socks I usually report but I recognize this sock. This sock master usually switches to a new sock every week to conduct block evasion. You can see from the timeline: [65] [66] [67] Makes clan articles on his first sock [68] [69] and third sock [70]. The interest is also the same. Ayaltimo (talk) 01:56, 05 November 2021 (UTC)

I don't really know anything about this... you should probably report it to WP:SPI with evidence. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 01:59, 5 November 2021 (UTC)
Alright, I will make sure to do that but can you have a look at this, please? [71] It's the one you've commonly dealt with. Ayaltimo (talk) 22:55, 05 November 2021 (UTC)
It looks like it was already handled. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 02:15, 6 November 2021 (UTC)
Can you have a look at this SPI, please? Walkerdude47 is back. [72] and PaullyMatthews is back too. His new sock puppet just undid one of your revisions. [73] Ayaltimo (talk) 02:03, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

unprotect article

Hello sir,

my english is not the best as my main language is swedish and serbian, and small russian but i recently came across a project called 'verdis'. its a micronation europe. (https://verdisgov.org/)

it looks as the past of these admin protected articles were heavily messed with by supporters and non-supporters of that movement, but it looks like they gained a lot of media attention (how i heard of them) and i was wondering if it could be unprotected incase they reach even larger media? pages: Verdis and Free Republic of Verdis. i was told by another admin on wikipedia that you were the one that blocked page.

i saw verdis on sputnik, a russian owned news station.

here some links:

in past 48 hours: https://rs.sputniknews.com/20210919/za-liberland-su-mnogi-culi-ali-izmedju-srbije-i-hrvatske-je-nikla-jos-jedna-drzava-1129955656.html https://www.vecernji.hr/vijesti/osnovali-drzavu-na-nasem-spornom-teritoriju-cilj-nam-je-pomirenje-naroda-1524432 https://www.total-croatia-news.com/politics/56208-verdis-republic https://www.b92.net/zivot/vesti.php?yyyy=2021&mm=09&dd=20&nav_id=1925054

in past: https://www.rtl.hr/buzzara/virealno/3500391/liberland-20-kako-jedan-cetrnaestogodisnjak-stvara-drzavu-izmedju-hrvatske-i-srbije/ https://likaclub.eu/cetrnaestogodisnjak-osniva-novu-drzavu-izmedu-hrvatske-i-srbije/

i didnt search much but those are what i find.

could be unprotected incase someone wants to make article of it in the future?

look forward to your response SandroFan91 (talk) 08:22, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) @SandroFan91: The articles you linked to are red links. Would you possibly be wanting the Russian pages to be unprotected (if they exist)? ― Blaze The WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#0001 16:19, 21 September 2021 (UTC)
No, it's been spammed by a banned editor. Funny you should mention Swedish because the person who has been spamming it is User:SwedenAviator. I'm sure that's just a coincidence, though. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 22:06, 21 September 2021 (UTC)
Interesting. Thanks for letting me know that they're salt protected. ― Blaze The WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#0001 22:08, 21 September 2021 (UTC)
hi, so is 'unsalt' still possible? SandroFan91 (talk) 03:31, 22 September 2021 (UTC)
p.s. I not intend to create page but I think should be unblocked. they on a lot of media in balkans right now. @ User:NinjaRobotPirate can this be done? also i find more links: https://www.b92.net/info/vesti/index.php?dd=20&mm=09&nav_category=12&nav_id=1925323&yyyy=2021 https://www.total-croatia-news.com/politics/56208-verdis-republic https://vecer.mk/balkan/osnovaa-drzhava-na/ SandroFan91 (talk) 09:28, 22 September 2021 (UTC)
The correct path is going to be to create a draft and have it reviewed by AFC. If AFC accepts it, they will handle requesting unsalt. There's little point in unprotecting without suitable content to review in this particular case. If you're not interested in doing that work, I wouldn't worry over the protection. -- ferret (talk) 12:05, 22 September 2021 (UTC)
@ ferret i am unable to create a draft. it says i still need admin access SandroFan91 (talk) 01:30, 23 September 2021 (UTC)
Well, there's always your sandbox, but I suspect this should probably just be left alone. -- ferret (talk) 01:31, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

Report on IP you've blocked...

NinjaRobotPirate, the IP editor you have blocked at 97.33.64.0/18 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · block user · block log) has been minor harassing me on my Meta talk page, and is apparently the same editor as 76.127.153.104 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log). Just letting you know, so you can handle this as you see fit... Thanks. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 22:25, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

Looks like the same person. Meta has stricter standards than English Wikipedia, so you might be able to get that IP blocked if it continues to bother you, but you'd have to contact a Meta administrator. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 22:47, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

Hey NinjaRobotPirate, I’m here to explain myself that I’ve done none of those false clams he’s saying about me. He’s the one that started this situation, I was only following the policy and adding sources of Jess Harnell’s birth date and place in the infobox. Plus, he’s the one that harassed me in the edit summaries telling me to stop were I’ve done nothing wrong. He’s also the one that started the edit war, not me. I have physical evidence to prove it. He’s just blaming me for everything over the problems he caused in the first place. I swear, that’s the entire truth. I’ve done none of those things. But I did confess that I did curse at him by mistake on the Meta Wiki on his talk page, but that’s because he’s refusing to listen to me because I asked him politely to stop with his abrasive editing, that’s all. Please don’t listen to a single word he says about me, because that’s all 100% not true. 50.79.183.249 (talk) 17:17, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

André Sogliuzzo

Google exists for a reason when it comes to a full date of birth for people. Here it is. 24.138.192.89 (talk) 04:15, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

Don't care. Content has to be cited to a reliable source, and it's the burden of the person who wants to add content to find that source, not mine. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 17:16, 29 September 2021 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) To add on to this, Google search is never a reliable source. It's only used to find reliable sources. ― Blaze The WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 17:20, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

Your block of 2603:8081:506:b6b3::/64 on September 8

You may want to look into contribs of User:104.153.241.65, may be one of the problem users with new IP. Saw some similar-style edit overlaps on Isaac Hanson and Draft:Cyranek. --Denniss (talk) 07:36, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

Yeah, probably. Blocked. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 17:56, 30 September 2021 (UTC)
Can you check 104.153.241.67 (talk) [74] as well? ― Qwerfjkltalk 19:48, 30 September 2021 (UTC)
Range blocked for 6 months. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 03:17, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – October 2021

News and updates for administrators from the past month (September 2021).

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Arbitration

  • A motion has standardised the 500/30 (extended confirmed) restrictions placed by the Arbitration Committee. The standardised restriction is now listed in the Arbitration Committee's procedures.
  • Following the closure of the Iranian politics case, standard discretionary sanctions are authorized for all edits about, and all pages related to, post-1978 Iranian politics, broadly construed.
  • The Arbitration Committee encourages uninvolved administrators to use the discretionary sanctions procedure in topic areas where it is authorised to facilitate consensus in RfCs. This includes, but is not limited to, enforcing sectioned comments, word/diff limits and moratoriums on a particular topic from being brought in an RfC for up to a year.

Miscellaneous

  • Editors have approved expanding the trial of Growth Features from 2% of new accounts to 25%, and the share of newcomers getting mentorship from 2% to 5%. Experienced editors are invited to add themselves to the mentor list.
  • The community consultation phase of the 2021 CheckUser and Oversight appointments process is open for editors to provide comments and ask questions to candidates.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:04, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

RE: Aquinasthomes1

Just out of curiosity, how did you determine that Aquinasthomes1 was a sock of JohnGotten? As a patroller, I'd like to be on the lookout for certain tells, especially considering Aquinas was an editor who I'd worked with regularly and I didn't even notice the connection. Curbon7 (talk) 01:58, 4 October 2021 (UTC)

I don't remember much about that. Maybe look at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/JohnGotten. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 04:33, 4 October 2021 (UTC)

Request to deal with a vandal

Would it be at all possible if I could ask your help in dealing with a vandalism-only account, Kevinpooprocks (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki), who is vandalizing pages by inserting large amounts of nonsense, reverting, and then reinserting exact same nonsense over and over? Thank you!--Mr Fink (talk) 05:04, 4 October 2021 (UTC)

CU Block

You blocked this IP: http://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Special:Contributions/37.142.173.176

Who was it? --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 17:34, 5 October 2021 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) Not an appropriate question, is it? NRP blocked a range, not just that IP, and it's a CU block, meaning they can't answer the question.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:44, 5 October 2021 (UTC)
Yeah, see Wikipedia:CheckUser#CheckUser and the privacy policy. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 18:20, 5 October 2021 (UTC)

Quack

@MetaWiz4331 and RockWolf4432: The latter started after Bbb23's block of the former. Similar topic space, both have created a category for a video game composer, similar name composition, editing tags. Worth a sweep or just duck block? -- ferret (talk) 18:38, 5 October 2021 (UTC)

Well following the creation of RockWolf4432's user page, it's even more blatant. Blocked. -- ferret (talk) 21:32, 5 October 2021 (UTC)

Dc comics

Can you explain to me why you are removing my edits ? I’m simply listing one of dc comics most popular characters. It’s not like I’m listing every single character. JRobinson99 (talk) 19:46, 5 October 2021 (UTC)

You have an entire talk page full of warnings and explanations. Wikipedia is a general encyclopedia, not a database of miscellaneous facts. Wikia is what you're looking for if you want to a comprehensive database of fictional characters. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 04:36, 6 October 2021 (UTC)

Israel national football team

Hey!

There have been several reverted edits without discussion on the page that I mentioned above but the latest came with the summary "not your country - KEEP OUT".

The user in question is most likely the following IP addresses:

Felixsv7 (talk) 18:25, 12 October 2021 (UTC)

That looks like a sock to me. I semi-protected the article for a month. Let me know if it continues. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 04:12, 13 October 2021 (UTC)
Thanks, shall do. Have a good one Felixsv7 (talk) 10:15, 13 October 2021 (UTC)

Block evasion by Cool a123

I need your assistance with a persistent block evader. Could you please issue a block on 2603:8000:401:0:0:0:0:0/48? The editor is a sock puppet of Cool a123, and they have been creating new accounts and IP hopping over the last 10 months. I've had little success in resolving this issue because the editor keeps returning with new accounts, and I haven't gotten much help from other admins that I have reported the editor to. I've either been ignored, or the editor is handed blocks that are only 1 or 2 weeks long. The IP that is mentioned above needs to be /48 range blocked, otherwise the editor will return with different variants of 2603:8000:401. I'm only going to report this IP for now, as it is the one that I've noticed that is being used more frequently. If I see any other IP's coming from their location, I'll give you a heads up. Thank you. Yowashi (talk) 04:16, 13 October 2021 (UTC)

Well, it's block evasion by 2603:8000:401:53f::/64, at least. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 04:29, 13 October 2021 (UTC)

IP block

Hi. Saw you were the blocking admin on this IP address 2401:4900:5A41:D29C:0:0:1221:3526. You might need to broaden the block as they are going after another page now. Cheers, --Meanderingbartender (talk) 13:45, 13 October 2021 (UTC)

It's a partial block on an IP range that stops people from editing certain pages. It's not supposed to stop everyone on the ISP from editing every page. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 06:07, 14 October 2021 (UTC)

More sockpuppets

Hello NinjaRobotPirate, I saw that you blocked the following users: User:MehmetTheFirst, User:Hapansi, User:Snowfalke91, User:AlSulim, User:Odavarehad, User:Mediocre Leqacy. They are sockpuppets of which account? Hayleez (talk) 16:18, 13 October 2021 (UTC)

I don't know. Try looking at whatever articles they've edited and skimming over the history to find blocked editors with trollish usernames. That's what I did, but it got boring, so I stopped doing it and played video games instead. User:LucyAyoubFan looks like a very good bet, though: Special:Diff/983521764, Special:Diff/1049489482. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 06:17, 14 October 2021 (UTC)

You've got mail!

Hello, NinjaRobotPirate. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 20:23, 13 October 2021 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

-- ferret (talk) 20:23, 13 October 2021 (UTC)

This issue ended up resolved due to further disruption by the user in question. -- ferret (talk) 22:18, 13 October 2021 (UTC)

Persistent sockpuppetry

Hi. I was wondering whether there is anything that can done to stop a blocked editor from IP socking. I did ask a similar question here, but it was archived before anyone had a chance to answer it. Rayooni has been IP socking long before their block, which hasn't prevented them from continuing just like before (as if nothing happened). They have been using the following ranges: 88.201.76.189/16, 89.148.46.199/16 and to a lesser extent 109.161.192.239/16. Their connection to the first two has already been covered in the SPI. For the last range, when the edits of 109.161.192.205 were reverted by myself, the sock master complained about it on my talk page (thus admitting that it's their IP). Their edits with their usual edit summaries ("Added" and "Fixed") tend to be related to Morocco and sometimes Algeria. Reporting every single IP (such as this, which has restored the last sock's edit) is not really an option, as they'd be using another IP by the time someone looks at the SPI, so I'm not really sure what else to do. Thanks. M.Bitton (talk) 22:04, 13 October 2021 (UTC)

Well, if it's just a few articles that they're habitually editing, a partial block would work. Or page protection. Otherwise, it's basically limited to very wide range blocks, assuming they're actually on multiple /16s instead of smaller IP ranges on the /16. Why do you think it's a /16? None of the edits on Special:Contributions/88.201.128.0/17 look like they follow that pattern. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 06:35, 14 October 2021 (UTC)
The /16 was just to highlight the wide ranges they are using. A partial block would work: a /17 on the first two (88.201.81.189/17 & 89.148.46.199/17) and maybe a /20 or even a /23 on the third (109.161.192.239/20) should in theory be enough to slow them down. Ultimately, whatever you can do to hinder their ability to sock would be very much appreciated. Thanks. M.Bitton (talk) 23:07, 14 October 2021 (UTC)
I'll take a look at those ranges later. If we're lucky, it'll be easy to identify collateral damage via the CU tool, but sometimes the stars simply don't align. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 04:49, 15 October 2021 (UTC)
I did some blocks, but some of them are anon-only with account creation enabled. I'm not sure how much that will help, but it will keep the collateral damage down. I guess we can revisit this if it doesn't help. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 05:16, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
Many thanks. Best, M.Bitton (talk) 12:41, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

Extending articles covered by a range block

I see your name a couple of times in this block. A number of pages I watch (a different subject area to the pages covered by this block) are being disruptively edited by addresses within that range, and I'm wondering if it is possible (and how should I go about requesting) to block based on a category of articles? I've made a number or reports at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Vallabharebel, but temporarily blocking IP addresses does not prevent future disruptive editing. I've also logged at WP:ANI but not had a reply there yet. Many thanks. Spike 'em (talk) 09:38, 14 October 2021 (UTC)

Partial blocks can only affect up to 10 articles. There are ways around it, but it's tedious. I did a hard block, which prevents logged-in editors from editing those articles, so adding a bunch of articles is not necessarily a good thing. Every time an article is added to that partial block, it causes more collateral damage. It would be better to do a different, anon-only block on smaller IP ranges. If you tell me what articles you want partially blocked and why, that would help. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 04:29, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

Participation in a signpost interview

Hi NinjaRobotPirate, hope that you're well. I was wondering if you'd be able to participate in a Signpost interview in your capacity as a contributor to WikiProject Actors and Filmmakers? I am enthusiastic about these interviews because they help remind other Wikipedians about the passionate and diverse group of volunteers that edit Wikipedia, and into the many discussions and editors that inhabit our space, nooks and crannies. If you had time to even answer a few questions here (User:Tom (LT)/sandbox/WikiProject actors and filmmakers interview draft) I'd be very grateful :). Tom (LT) (talk) 22:44, 14 October 2021 (UTC)

I don't know about the Signpost. It strikes me as Wikipedia's version of the Daily Mail. I stopped reading it a while ago, though, back when it was publishing hit pieces and unfunny "humor" articles that seemed more like trolling. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 04:19, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

John Ventimiglia

You reverted the addition of the birth date, but it was already on wikidata: http://m.wikidata.org/wiki/Q1338401 Ictlogist (talk) 14:17, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

Where it had previously been imported from Enwiki, improperly sourced to a unreliable source. Wikidata's sourcing guidelines are much looser than Enwikis. That content is on Wikidata does not make it suitable for inclusion here. -- ferret (talk) 14:54, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
And that is a sad state of affairs. Their sourcing guidelines should be tighter, as many depend on them. --Deepfriedokra (talk) 18:33, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

Constant sockpuppetry on Asking Alexandria

Hello, NinjaRobotPirate. There are constant edits of a sockpuppet on the pages of Asking Alexandria. An example is here: http://en.wiki.x.io/w/index.php?title=From_Death_to_Destiny&action=history Not only that he is the sockpuppet, he is constantly not adding reliable sources to support his edits. Can you do something about it please? Thanks. --Tobi999tomas (talk) 15:25, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

Why do you think this is a sock puppet? NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 03:13, 17 October 2021 (UTC)
Regarding of why he is, it already happened before with this IP address: http://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Special:Contributions/89.96.87.18 It seems to me that the user is using multiple IP adresses to edit the pages. --Tobi999tomas (talk) 12:52, 17 October 2021 (UTC)
That's not sockpuppetry. IP users often have their IPs change through zero fault of their own, completely outside of their control. Please don't admin shop either. -- ferret (talk) 13:48, 17 October 2021 (UTC)

Seriously

Wow! no one ever put it to me like this before. UTRS appeal #49534 I mean kiddingly-- all seriousness aside. --Deepfriedokra (talk) 18:31, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

I'm tempted to look, but can I log into UTRS using my Wikipedia credentials? NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 03:24, 17 October 2021 (UTC)
(talk page watcher) Yup, it's just an OAuth popup, no other login required. --Blablubbs (talk) 10:00, 17 October 2021 (UTC)
That block shouldn't really shouldn't affect most people. It's only when people mess with it that it should cause noticeable collateral damage. I'd be surprised if people had a reason to appeal it. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 04:26, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

Blocked user again

Hello, I wrote to you some days ago (Blocked user is back seems so) but maybe you didn't saw it. So this blocked user ShkoDevAct (talk · contribs) seems back now as Shkoo0o (talk · contribs) and Shko01 (talk · contribs)... Nubia86 (talk) 15:37, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

Sorry, I'm a little visually impaired, and I sometimes miss new posts in old threads. If you want me to be sure to see something, it's often better to just make a new post at the bottom. It's easier for me to keep track of posts like that. I have trouble finding new posts when they're buried in the middle of lots of text. Or you could just keep poking me until I see it. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 03:08, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

Hello NinjaRobotPirate. Ehhh seems again one more ShadowSiege (talk · contribs) 🙄...Nubia86 (talk) 22:24, 4 November 2021 (UTC)

Here this one ☝️. That (Blocked user is back seems so) is old messages. Sorry so much about bothering you 😔 but that sock is pretty active... Nubia86 (talk) 22:40, 4 November 2021 (UTC)

Suspicious account

Compare [75] to the edit by an account you recently CU-blocked [76]. These articles are constantly being targeted by disruptive editors, so this edit may well just be reinserting the correct date rather than socking, but it might be worth a CU check on the new account. I'd file this at SPI but I don't know who the master is. Thanks for your trouble, ☿ Apaugasma (talk ☉) 18:16, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

Yeah, that's User:PaullyMatthews. At least, that's the oldest account that I've seen so far. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 03:28, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

Bulgarian Oversection Anon

89.253.139.3 (talk · contribs) continues to utterly fail to understand WP:OVERSECTION. It is wilful ignorance at this point and as soon as the 1 month block you gave expired they went right back to doing what they were doing before. I'd appreciate if you'd take another look at it. 77.85.161.210 (talk · contribs) may also be a sockpuppet. -- 109.77.193.38 (talk) 15:11, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

I blocked the two main IP addresses used for 3 months. I doubt we'll ever get any kind of communication from this person. Some leeway has to be granted for IP editors given Mediawiki's quirks and limitations, but communication and collaboration are required on an open wiki. Unfortunately, some people have decided that they're going to help us whether we want it or not, and they're not going to waste their time debating the merits of their edits. My sister is like that – if you make your tea the wrong way, she will take the tea away from you and make it the right way. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 01:34, 23 October 2021 (UTC)
I understand... making tea properly is an important part of Ninja tradition.
It is a pity, if the Anon Bulgarian was only doing some work to expand the articles he might have a reasonable excuse to add those headings. Also I think people need to be a little crazy/obsessive compulsive to do this, and there are all different kinds of crazy. Some editors can be encouraged to color within the lines, others not so much. Thanks. -- 109.77.193.38 (talk) 03:01, 23 October 2021 (UTC)
My sister would probably make as good a CheckUser as me. The problem is that she would ban every single person from English Wikipedia within a week. I might survive the purge because she likes me, but I don't see much hope the rest of you. But, yeah, there's probably a necessary quotient of crazy or obsessive. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 03:48, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

Vietnamese IP returns

I would like to apologize for not contacting you earlier but I didn't think he was the same guy who was causing an edit conflict in the UAE national team until he started making the same edits over and starting another unnecessary editing conflict, this IP Special:Contributions/42.112.7.78 has been disrupting edits in UAE football articles and had an editing conflict in certain football clubs most notably the Shabab Al Ahli, would you mind looking into him further? Badass Flare (talk) 14:01, 23 October 2021‎ (UTC)

I semi-protected some articles, which might help. At some point, I'll probably have to do some harsh range blocks, though. It looks like there are a stream of IPs edit warring to blank articles. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 00:40, 24 October 2021 (UTC)

Muzaffarids (Somalia)

You dealt with some sockpuppetry at this page earlier this year. I was hoping you could take a look at the latest. Thanks, Srnec (talk) 02:29, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

Can you explain what the situation is? Are you saying that User1978199 is sock puppet of someone? I'm sorry, but I don't keep an eye on these articles, so I'm kind of clueless about what's going on. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 04:16, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

You reversed sveral sourced edits

NinajaRobot, u been reverting several sourced edits by multiple acount users on Ethiopian History pages. Why tho? MartinJacker (talk) 12:38, 28 October 2021 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – November 2021

News and updates for administrators from the past month (October 2021).

Guideline and policy news

  • Phase 2 of the 2021 RfA review has commenced which will discuss potential solutions to address the 8 issues found in Phase 1. Proposed solutions that achieve consensus will be implemented and you may propose solutions till 07 November 2021.

Technical news

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:44, 1 November 2021 (UTC)

88.201.0.0/17 IP block

Hello,

By blocking 88.201.0.0/17 you basically blocked like half of Bahrain. I have to reset my internet connection like 4-5 times each time I get a 88.201.xxx.xxx IP from my ISP which is very annoying, please remove that block. Alawadhi3000 (talk) 14:23, 5 November 2021 (UTC)

It looks like I probably pressed the wrong key while doing that block and made it affect logged-in editors. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 14:27, 5 November 2021 (UTC)

Bob Bergen

Hello, NinjaRobotPirate. You have new messages at 207.161.86.162's talk page.
Message added 06:08, 9 November 2021 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Special:Contributions/2001:4454:600::/40

Would you consider what the user on this IP range has been doing on their User talk page abuse while blocked? I noticed they seem to add the banned and blocked templates on their own Talk pages without parameters, even reverting AnomieBOT's substitutions in doing so. Perhaps it might be best to revoke Talk page access as well? Jalen Folf (talk) 05:09, 12 November 2021 (UTC)

What does it really matter, though? They're not pinging you from their talk page or making work for anyone, are they? NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 19:59, 12 November 2021 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
Thank you for fighting the good fight against the block evaders and sock puppets. I see your thorough work so often on my watchlist. It's probably a thankless task so I thought I'd say Thanks! Kerry (talk) 11:58, 12 November 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for the note. Yeah, it can be pretty tedious. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 20:19, 12 November 2021 (UTC)

How to find unsuccessful login attempts by user (using the CU tool)

Hello NRP. On my talk page a user has been complaining about multiple unsuccessful attempts to log in to his account (by other people who seem to be trying to harass him). Per T253802 I understand that data about unsuccessful logins is now kept in the logs. In fact, I sometimes see those failed attempts going by when I'm checking something else. If you use this capability, can you tell me how to search by the name of the targeted user? Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 00:06, 15 November 2021 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) EdJohnston, I don't believe there's a way to check by targeted user, only by IP (since it's logged as a failed login attempt for that IP, but there isn't a corresponding log entry attached to the account). Makes some sense to me; after all, they'd have to create pseudo-"accounts" to attach a login to if someone tried to log into a nonexistent account. GeneralNotability (talk) 01:38, 15 November 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for the reply. In the case mentioned on my talk page, the users in question suspect a particular guy (who they are in dispute with) of making the failed login attempts. But there is no on-wiki evidence that I can see which would point to him being the culprit. So it's a question of a failed login from a totally unknown IP. This doesn't add up to success unless I'm missing something. I wonder if any other CUs have used this capability successfully. Of course a CU might spot a failed login entry totally by chance (while checking something else) and that might be useful info for some sock case. But in terms of tracing harassment of a named editor from an unknown source, I don't see how it is supposed to work. EdJohnston (talk) 02:07, 15 November 2021 (UTC)
I don't think there's a way to track that harassment back to a specific person unless you're already suspicious of someone. You could run a check on the suspicious person, get their IP, and check the activity on that IP. It's weird that MediaWiki doesn't tell you what IP address is trying to log in to your account. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 03:54, 15 November 2021 (UTC)
phab:T174388 appears to be the relevant request, open for several years but currently no progress. Aklapper notes there is no box full of coders with too much time who could fix all and any incoming bug reports (clearly, WMF needs to put more coders into boxes!) GeneralNotability (talk) 04:01, 15 November 2021 (UTC)
Well, you're not going to rope me into writing code. I know how this stuff goes. You get talked into being an administrator, then you get talked into being a checkuser, then you get talked into writing a few regular expressions, and then one day and you're fixing bugs in MediaWiki without even knowing how it got that point. I'm not going to live through "Once in a Lifetime". NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 04:14, 15 November 2021 (UTC)
WMF is too poor; perhaps we should donate some boxes. Usedtobecool ☎️ 04:59, 15 November 2021 (UTC)
The title is "Show the IP address of the login attempt in the Echo notification". As of 2018 the change was still 'work in progress'. Just a small matter of some tests failing. Moving forward to 2021, there is a technical problem still blocking progress. Something about how to surface the notifications. The last entry is from August 2021 by User:KHarlan (WMF), who seems to understand the issue. So maybe people have not forgotten about this. EdJohnston (talk) 19:25, 15 November 2021 (UTC)

Block evasion by Mdd97

The editor evades their block by using this range 2607:FEA8:E1F:7AD0:0:0:0:0/64 (talk · contribs). For example, the editor has edit the article Heaven or Hell back in March [77], and again last month with a another account [78]. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 20:44, 16 November 2021 (UTC)

Yeah, seems pretty similar. Blocked for a few months. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 04:04, 17 November 2021 (UTC)

Jamia Mosque, Harar

Hi. The article Jamia Mosque, Harar may have been created by a sock, but I believe that the topic is a notable topic, and the article needs work. Is there a policy that requires deletion of sock created articles? By the way, I am not a sock puppet, I have edited Wikipedia since 2005. Would there be a problem if I created a new article at Jamia Mosque, Harar, using some of what I have already written, and without the copyright violation of the sock? --Bejnar (talk) 15:27, 19 November 2021 (UTC)

It would probably be best if you rewrote the article in your own words without using what the sock created if there are potential copyright issues. You can take ownership of what the sock wrote, but then you become responsible for any policy violations, such as copyright or NPOV. And this sock tends to have problems with NPOV. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 15:34, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
That was my intent. I note that another potential sock [Afarcommander1271-2 has attempted to place the Jamia Mosque, Harar article back at Jami Mosque. I reverted. --Bejnar (talk) 16:01, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
Yeah, there's a bunch of them every day. This is a pretty persistent POV pusher. I hope I don't have to go scrubbing copyright violations now, too. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 16:12, 19 November 2021 (UTC)

New message from JalenFolf

 You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/PaullyMatthews. We may have found another account in this sock farm. Jalen Folf (talk) 18:35, 19 November 2021 (UTC)

He's back

Hi there,

Some oddly familiar edits are occurring on the Timor-Leste national football team page... Felixsv7 (talk) 12:56, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

Yeah, that whole IP range is nothing but blanking sprees by him. I blocked for six months, which should help somewhat. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 17:49, 20 November 2021 (UTC)
He's returned, this time on Myanmar national football team under the guise of Special:Contributions/183.91.11.102. Felixsv7 (talk) 14:35, 25 November 2021 (UTC)

JuanRomero2008

Hi, was wondering if you could check out JuanRomero2008 (talk · contribs)? That user and some IPs have (re)created a lot of similar, obvious hoax drafts - see my CSD log#November 2021. I wasn't sure if they are like a unfamiliar editor trying to craft their own fictional world on Wikipedia, or maybe one of the regulars, so I just left a warning past the 20+ CSD notices. Thank you! Best, Bridget (talk) 03:28, 21 November 2021 (UTC)

Younger editors often decide to add their fanfiction to Wikipedia. It doesn't look particularly familiar to me. If there are more accounts doing it, I could run a CU, though. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 06:02, 21 November 2021 (UTC)

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. 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 2021 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) 00:15, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

Nine levels of partial block, for a /32 range

Hello NRP. Please see block log of this /32 range. He has now started reverting at Zoho Corporation, one of the articles on my watchlist and I noticed that you did the original block. Even though this range is wide (/32) there might be a case for a regular site-wide block with the original duration? Are we getting any net benefit from the non-partial-blocked edits from Special:Contributions/2401:4900:0:0:0:0:0:0/32? EdJohnston (talk) 17:52, 26 November 2021 (UTC)

If you want to make a soft block, just block two /33s. There is no reason to modify that block, which is why I keep telling people to stop doing it. It looks like nobody is ever going to listen to me, so I should probably just wash my hands of it and stop trying to fix the problems when people screw it up. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 00:34, 27 November 2021 (UTC)

Dealing with persistent sockpuppeters

Hi, I've recently encountered the account GermanConquest [79] who strongly appears to be a sockpuppet of user ItalianConquest, who has been banned for sockpuppetry already and has created at least three other sockpuppets - the previous sockpuppet investigations can be viewed here [80]. I have made a SPI report for the sockpuppet GermanConquest, but I was wondering what the appropriate avenue is to take when dealing with the user in this instance, as it seems like they intend to just keep making sockpuppets and getting banned in order to perpetuate their edit warring on pages such as Milan and Italiotes. Thanks. Tamptonato (talk) 06:24, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

I can semi-protect the articles. Out of curiosity, does this person ever rant about feminism or the differences between the suicide rates of men and women? Or make maps and try to edit war to keep them in articles? NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 07:09, 28 November 2021 (UTC)
No, not really, it seems that they are more focused on their very specific content dispute struggle on the Milan article, that has something to do with boosting the status of the city? I cannot honestly tell their intentions as I do not really have much knowledge of context surrounding the city, but I would guess it has something to with the user's strong sense of regionalism or something like that. Tamptonato (talk) 07:33, 28 November 2021 (UTC)
It still sounds like User:SuperSucker. He was mostly into Brexit, the Western world, suicide rates, and men's rights, but he had other interests, too. Plus, he said he was from Italy originally. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 12:03, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

Greetings

Hi, I've emailed the oversight team, may be worth revdel until they act. http://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Special:Contributions/2600:1700:1EA0:5290:5C48:4656:26F7:8E53 thank you.--John Cline (talk) 07:30, 2 December 2021 (UTC)

Looks like I'm a couple hours too late. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 09:08, 2 December 2021 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – December 2021

News and updates for administrators from the past month (November 2021).

Administrator changes

removed A Train • Berean Hunter • Epbr123 • GermanJoe • Sanchom • Mysid

Technical news

  • Unregistered editors using the mobile website are now able to receive notices to indicate they have talk page messages. The notice looks similar to what is already present on desktop, and will be displayed on when viewing any page except mainspace and when editing any page. (T284642)
  • The limit on the number of emails a user can send per day has been made global instead of per-wiki to help prevent abuse. (T293866)

Arbitration


Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:25, 3 December 2021 (UTC)

Administrators will no longer be autopatrolled

A recently closed Request for Comment (RFC) reached consensus to remove Autopatrolled from the administrator user group. You may, similarly as with Edit Filter Manager, choose to self-assign this permission to yourself. This will be implemented the week of December 13th, but if you wish to self-assign you may do so now. To find out when the change has gone live or if you have any questions please visit the Administrator's Noticeboard. 20:06, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

YGM

Hello, NinjaRobotPirate. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Regards, Yamaguchi先生 (talk) 20:38, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

Hello. Potential block evasion

Hello. This user 58.182.176.169 (talk · contribs) seems as doing a little block evasion with this 58.182.150.117 (talk · contribs) saw some similar interests and articles edited. So it could be to it is the same user. Nubia86 (talk) 02:25, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

Yeah, blocked a bit longer this time. These IP addresses seem to stick for a very long time. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 09:14, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

Reporting disruptive editor

There's an editor who is using multiple accounts for adding false scores in music-related articles, such as To Pimp a Butterfly [81] [82] [83] [84]. I'm sure these edits are from the same editor [85] [86]. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 21:53, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

I'm too tired to look at this right now... will look later if nobody else handles it. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 03:52, 11 December 2021 (UTC)

LTA IP?

2600:8807:2905:9E00:9488:2ABE:9D19:3F71/44 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

This user is currently active vandalising and I had to revert them on a good few pages. I don't know the IP too well but I saw you reverting them multiple times for block evasion, hence I notify you as you will know where to file the range in case of a block. Regards, IceWelder [✉] 14:23, 11 December 2021 (UTC)

As far as I remember, it's just some random but persistent IP editor who's been repeatedly blocked. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 02:32, 12 December 2021 (UTC)

MsChif Date of Birth

Hi NinjaRobotPirate, I have now added a referecne to MsChif's date of birth. It's from this site [[87]]. Sorry about not ediitng without a referecne. Her date of birth was on here a few months ago and soemhow got deleted. It's there now and if you have a chance take a look please. Kingzwest (talk)

If you check Wikipedia:WikiProject Professional wrestling/Sources, this website is under their list of "unproven sources". I'd be a bit wary of relying on it for biographical details, but it's at least sourced to something now. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 18:47, 14 December 2021 (UTC)

You've got mail

Hello, NinjaRobotPirate. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template. Doug Weller talk 11:50, 15 December 2021 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

Thanks for the tip! If you want to know why I put Fox 2000 Pictures' name on Everyone's Hero, check the list of releases on the studios' page.

27JHADENSMOCHAS5 (talk) 03:53, 17 December 2021 (UTC)

You need to cite a reliable source. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 05:03, 17 December 2021 (UTC)

Songs of the season

Holiday cheer
Here is a snowman a gift a boar's head and something blue for your listening pleasure. Enjoy and have a wonderful 2022 N. MarnetteD|Talk 19:10, 19 December 2021 (UTC)

You've got mail

Hello, NinjaRobotPirate. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template. Doug Weller talk 10:50, 20 December 2021 (UTC)

Block evasion by MakaveliReed

2601:240:CF02:38F0:BD19:3AF6:83D:432B (talk · contribs)

MakaveliReed is back again and as before adding changing date ranges in articles. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 05:47, 24 December 2021 (UTC)

Range blocked. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 06:16, 24 December 2021 (UTC)

Page Protection Change

So, I hear you were the one who semi-protected the Malignant page until January 9, 2022, if hardly a re-adding date does not get removed. There has been an official day where the film gets re-added to HBO Max, and that is January 27. Somehow, it got removed even if it was real. Can you change the protection settings to indefinite? It would be cool. Also, can you do the same to untitled Mario film due to vandalism? That page has been protected 4 times, and I need it changed to indefinite, if you can do that for me. AVeganKid (talk) 23:41, 24 December 2021 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but I'm not sure what you're talking about. Malignant redirects to Malignancy, and neither of those pages seem to be protected, nor do I seem to have semi-protected them previously. I'm also not sure what you're talking about with the rest of this post. Maybe you should make your request via WP:RFPP using templates so that it's more clear what you want done. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 02:11, 25 December 2021 (UTC)
Where? AVeganKid (talk) 05:01, 25 December 2021 (UTC)

Foreign language draft and a joke

Draft:Domantas Pipiras

The draft is in a foreign language. Prose is full of external links. The images are claiming to be a professional Basketball player, you can tell that's not Michael Jordan and I don't know much about Basketball, but I think the article subject is white, anyway they're both photoshopped. I tried to XFD it but kept getting errors. Any input? - FlightTime (open channel) 02:35, 25 December 2021 (UTC)

It looks like a hoax to me. Google Translate makes it sound like this is the best player to have ever lived. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 05:05, 25 December 2021 (UTC)
Cool, me also. Thanx and happy days - FlightTime (open channel) 05:07, 25 December 2021 (UTC)

Indefinite semi-protection at Malignant (2021 film) and The Many Saints of Newark

Hi, NinjaRobotPirate. Could indefinite with no day selected be a good idea for Malignant (2021 film) and The Many Saints of Newark? Malignant had persistent sockpuppets editing the page, while the other page has been semi-protected too many times for a year and it still is, so... I need someone to indefinitely semi-protect both of these before 2022, and you are the one I trust. Even under semi-protection, unconfirmed accounts can suggest edits on the talk page using the appropriate template. Is there something that has been proved? Could you please let me know when you have indefinitely protected the two pages? AVeganKid (talk) 07:39, 25 December 2021 (UTC)

Indefinite extended-confirmed protection at Untitled Mario film

Hi, NinjaRobotPirate. I was also thinking that Untitled Mario film needs to be extended-confirmed protected. There has been persistent disruptive editing from unconfirmed users, and it has been protected a lot. I also changed my thoughts. Since I don't have the access yet, can you please extended-confirmed protect the Untitled Mario film page, after you indefinitely semi-protect both Malignant (2021 film) and The Many Saints of Newark. For the untitled Mario film page, it should only be edited by users who have at least 500 edits. That's what can now stop the disruptive editing. Be sure to let me know when it has been done. Thank you. AVeganKid (talk) 07:43, 25 December 2021 (UTC)

I don't see why these pages need stronger protection. ECP, for example, is for pages that continue to be disrupted after semi-protection. It's not done just to lock down pages that might eventually get disrupted by someone in the future. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 06:54, 26 December 2021 (UTC)
I also don't understand these comments. Daniel (talk) 10:42, 28 December 2021 (UTC)

December 2021

Hello, I noticed you were having problems with me putting true facts with Lance Robertson and his true DOB. The first time when I was unable to even submit it with FamousBirthdays as a source I mentioned that it was the source in my editing description (which in my opinion helps) and then when I find another source that was accepted you still weren't pleased with it. What sources do you recommend to find factual information about celebrities birthdays?Thomasthedarkenguine (talk) 06:31, 31 December 2021 (UTC)

Happy New Year!

All the best wishes to you, your family and friends !!! Theonewithreason (talk) 31.December 2021 (UTC)

Merchandise giveaway nomination

A t-shirt!
A token of thanks
Hi NinjaRobotPirate! I've nominated you (along with all other active admins) to receive a solstice season gift from the WMF. Talk page stalkers are invited to comment at the nomination. Enjoy! Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}} talk ~~~~~
A snowflake!

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:50, 31 December 2021 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wiki.x.io/w/index.php?title=User_talk:NinjaRobotPirate/Archive2021-2&oldid=1067164615"