User talk:Girth Summit

This is Girth Summit's talk page, where you can send him messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23: 30 days

Mail

Hello, Girth Summit. 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.

EvergreenFir (talk) 17:47, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppet investigations

Hello. I left a comment for you here and thought I should leave one here as well in case you missed it. Zacwill (talk) 14:15, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't get the ping I'm afraid. It looks like you asked that question in three edits, and only added the ping in the second one. It's a quirk of the software that a ping is only issued to the recipient if it is added in a fresh comment on a new line, and if the comment that includes the ping is signed with four tildes. Goodness knows why, but that's the way it works, so if you leave a comment and then afterwards you want to add a ping, it's better to put a new line below with a ping saying 'sorry, forgot to ping you in the comment above'.

Also, you would have been better coming here in the first place - once an SPI case is closed, there shouldn't be any further discussion in that case ideally. And, if you're going to comment, don't put it in the 'Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments' section.

Anyway, since you'd left the comment there, I've replied over there for the archive. If there's anything else you want to say, put it here so we're not cluttering up the archive. Cheers Girth Summit _(blether) 18:11, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the response. I must say, I still don't quite understand how you can be so sure that they're different people when the "very specific change" that the IP was interested in was one that JAMAMBTGE had made. Are you saying that you don't find it all suspicious that now JAMAMBTGE has been banned, a single-purpose IP has turned up to defend his edits? Zacwill (talk) 18:39, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

OK, so if you look at the contributions from that IP, and those of JAMAMBTGE, what similarities and differences do you observe? Girth Summit _(blether) 18:52, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Zacwill I'll tell you what I see. None of this is privileged CU secret stuff, it's all available to any editor. JAMAMBTGE almost always uses the VisualEditor; the IP never does. Before their block, JAMAMBTGE edited almost every day, dotting about a very wide range of articles; the IP edits sporadically, always about the same article. JAMAMBTGE rarely edits between 08:00 and 18:00; that's exactly when the IP is most active. JAMAMBTGE usually does not come back to an article if their edit is reverted - they have done once or twice, but generally they give up after the second revert, and almost never go to an article's talk page. The IP, well, behaves differently.

So much for the publicly viewable information. I can't tell you the specifics of what I can see in the CU, but I can tell you that JAMAMBTGE consistently uses a particular type of device, which is different from the one that the IP uses. I also know where JAMAMBTGE lives; the IP geolocates to a place a great distance away from there. I considered the possibility that JAMAMBTGE might be using a proxy to edit through that IP, but every proxy checking tool I know tells me it's a clean IP (it would also be fairly unusual for a proxy service to give you such a stable IP). So, either JAMAMBTGE has moved house and changed their editing device and their editing habits, or it's someone else who agrees with him on this one particular point. Hope that makes sense. Girth Summit _(blether) 20:02, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This is the kind of exhaustive answer I was hoping for, thank you. Based on the evidence you've marshalled here, I'll concede that my hunch was wrong. Zacwill (talk) 23:39, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome, and no worries about the hunch. Before I was an SPI clerk, I remember being sure that certain accounts were socks because of engagement on a particular article. I was sometimes perplexed when admins or CUs told me I was wrong. The training course for SPI clerks is fairly extensive - there are lots of different things to look at, and it's easy to get caught up on subject matter interests. It's a big world, there are lots of people who share views, even if they're odd views. In this case, it's the newly installed president of the US - there are going to be a lot of people looking at these pages, and some of them are going to agree with each other. If the IP is disruptive, report it via the usual channels. Cheers Girth Summit _(blether) 23:56, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Budisgood

You recently blocked a series of sockpuppets from Budisgood, conform this SPI. Now I have the idea that he is back with a new sockpuppet, making the same low quality edits in the same articles as Budisgood. (See here: Contributions. Am I right or wrong? The Banner talk 22:13, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You weren't wrong. Girth Summit _(blether) 10:25, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

And he keeps making more sockpuppets, only to return to the same group of articles and get hammered. The Banner talk 12:00, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Yorkshire Newsletter - February 2025

Delivered February 2025 by MediaWiki message delivery.
If you do not wish to receive the newsletter, please add an N to the column against your username on the Project Mainpage.

11:46, 1 February 2025 (UTC)

BenJovio

Are you certain about BenJovio at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Jellywings19? I ask because, whatever the technical indications may have been, until their very last edit not one of them came even close to Indonesia. Most of them were Africa-centric. Even re that last edit, Solomon Islands is some distance away. Largoplazo (talk) 13:30, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I'm certain - if there was a category higher than

Confirmed, I'd use it for the link between 777Veo and BenJovio. I didn't actually look at the editing very closely - a quick check on one of the socks from the archive confirmed the connection to 777Veo, and then when I ran a check on 777Veo the connection to BenJovio was obvious. Girth Summit _(blether) 13:38, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I'll bow in awe of the mystical arts of sockpuppet investigation. 🙂 Largoplazo (talk) 16:22, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

When they repeatedly log out of one account and into the other from the same device on the same IP within the same minute, it kind of makes it easy. It's not like it was just one IP - on numerous IPs across multiple ranges, they're swapping back and forth between accounts. I don't know why they bother - why not just do it all under one account and hope you don't get caught? I'll never understand some sockpuppeteers - wouldn't you have thought someone who'd been doing it for so long would have gotten better at it? Girth Summit _(blether) 16:27, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

In fact, I'll add to that thought: if they can operate the BenJovio account in such a way as to make you doubt that it's them, then they're clearly capable of evading detection if they want to. They could have just operated that account, without simultaneously operating a bleeding obvious sock, and most likely not been caught. They must know that we will always run CU on their socks, meaning that the messing about with operating two accounts simultaneously is never going to achieve anything. Why? WHY?? Girth Summit _(blether) 16:32, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Triumph Tour on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 03:31, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Opala300

I believe you have your reply: [1] TiggerJay (talk) 00:54, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tishreen07

Hello, I don't think this Editor will be any smarter. Again I caught this user editing while logged out. I did not add him to the investigation because he was editing from his IP account. Kajmer05 (talk) 09:29, 4 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I filed a new SPI file again. Kajmer05 (talk) 12:44, 4 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I caught this again, can you also check the diffs [2][3] I don't think this user has much chance anymore for August. Kajmer05 (talk) 14:40, 5 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Girth Summit Hello, I would never want to make a request, but this user is back again, they just attacked my talk page with IP address, now the IP is blocked, Yesterday I added a new user to the investigation regarding this, can you take a look? Kajmer05 (talk) 14:06, 8 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked. Feel free to request PP of any affected pages if they keep coming back - we can protect your talk page too if they try anything like that again. Girth Summit _(blether) 14:30, 8 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

UTRS appeal #100003

Courtesy notification. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 16:40, 4 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, DFO - I didn't respond to this note, that was rude of me, I just got caught up with other stuff and forgot. I think there's potentially some merit to the request, but it needs a proper poke around before acting upon it. They contacted me directly by email as well, I just haven't gotten around to looking into it (it was complicated last time...). I'll try to get onto it soon. Girth Summit _(blether) 20:57, 12 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – February 2025

News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2025).

Administrator changes

Euryalus

CheckUser changes

Oversighter changes

Technical news

Administrators can now nuke pages created by a user or IP address from the last 90 days, up from the initial 30 days. T380846
A 'Recreated' tag will now be added to pages that were created with the same title as a page which was previously deleted and it can be used as a filter in Special:RecentChanges and Special:NewPages. T56145

Arbitration

The arbitration case Palestine-Israel articles 5 has been closed.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:28, 5 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Dcasey98/Archive

Hi, did you change your mind about blocking Dan27032? See also WP:ANI#User:Dan27032 / disruptive editing and possible sock of User:McGurkus/User:Dcasey98.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:01, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

What I meant in the SPI was that I was going to block the McGurkus account, because of their connection to the Luffaloaf sock, but that Dan27032 looked unrelated. I've had another look to remind myself, and I'd stand by that finding - Dan27032 doesn't look to be in any way connected to McGurkus/Luffaloaf, or to any other account that I can detect. I don't have time right now to read through that ANI case - is there something specific you want me to look at? Girth Summit _(blether) 09:54, 7 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No thanks, I misinterpreted your comment at SPI.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:16, 7 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Debtled's back!

Looks like Izno nabbed them already. Girth Summit _(blether) 12:47, 8 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked LTA returned immediately

Heads up regarding your block of 118.70.42.4: they came back immediately as 2401:d800:f131:9305:9dc:518e:cc4d:a283. See this restoration of these edits. — MarkH₂₁^talk 01:26, 12 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. They are dotting about some wide ranges which I'd be reluctant to block because of the collateral - if you notice them again, page protection might be the way to go. Girth Summit _(blether) 09:46, 12 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

William Fraser (architect)

You'll recall this article made it to DYK a while ago. An editor with a gripe over my insistence that a rather large unsourced claim in the Brisbane article not be permitted decided Fraser's article needed decimating, including tagging it for deletion. I reported them to AI/V after the Brisbane edits, then after this recent spree, but they seem immune to receiving a block, maybe because they wiped their talk-page warnings. I debunked some of that editor's summaries in the Fraser article, so it's likely the rest of the edits were not in good faith either. What am I missing about their conduct being permitted? Seasider53 (talk) 18:41, 12 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

AIV is for obvious vandals - like, folk who add 'Justin is a wanker' to articles about French cheese, that sort of thing. If it's someone being disruptive to get back at you for a content dispute elsewhere, WP:ANI is the proper place. I'll take a look tomorrow if I get the chance and see what's what. Girth Summit _(blether) 20:33, 12 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No worries. I just realised they were canvassing (on my talk page) for other editors to weigh in on the deletion nom. ANI it is. Seasider53 (talk) 20:46, 12 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I actually had a few minutes to look at it, and I've asked them what they thought they were doing. Feel free to report at ANI anyway, but it's likely that no action will be taken until/unless they respond to my question. If you do report at ANI, be sure to inform the editor that you've done so. If they go back to that article without responding, let me know and/or update the ANI report. Cheers Girth Summit _(blether) 20:53, 12 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sock of Farooqi222

Hello again. Just wondered if the account Umer1973 needs to be blocked. You mentioned at the SPI case that the old accounts should be ignored, but Umer1973 is not stale. What do you think? --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 16:09, 14 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Drm310 - sorry for the slow response, I was away for the weekend. Good shout, confirmed and blocked. Girth Summit _(blether) 17:30, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Returning sockpuppet

Hi. You had previously helped with Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Vvrsjd, and I wondered whether you had time to re-investigate. I've added new evidence that, to my mind, strongly suggests that the culprit is back. Cheers, SunloungerFrog (talk) 09:56, 15 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Not right at this moment I'm afraid, but I'll try to get onto it soon if no-one else has. Girth Summit _(blether) 17:31, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much for your help with this. Cheers, SunloungerFrog (talk) 13:54, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your username just clicked. Kids I've taught love those books. I like to do voices for the characters - the frog is very French, the cat is posh and reserved, and the dog is sort of overenthusiastic and friendly. Girth Summit _(blether) 16:00, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Kes Gray, genius. I like trying to read the recap of all the rules on the penultimate spread in one breath. It's rare that I manage it! Cheers, SunloungerFrog (talk) 16:15, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Barkeep49:: it looks like we have another fan of children's literature in our midst. Girth Summit _(blether) 16:45, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oi, how fantastic to meet you @SunloungerFrog. If you end up doing any editing of children's books please don't hesitate to drop me a line. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 19:22, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Girth Summit, @Barkeep49 - thanks very much for the welcome and kind words. I do have one or two children's books that might be worth an article to fill a gap, so I will let you know. Cheers, SunloungerFrog (talk) 13:28, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Strange actions

I am utterly confused by the edits of User:Ömereditss (edits) who claims to have an old, discarded account User:LGT55 (edits). But LGT55 is an active account. And now Ömereditss invited me for a discussion on Discord, my alarm bells went off.

Do you have any advice how to deal with this? The Banner talk 15:39, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

1. I want everything to remain Private, that's why I asked for your Discord.

2. This was my old account, and LGT55 was the new account I created. However, I found the password for my Ömereditss account, I returned to this one. I will no longer use LGT55. Ömereditss (talk) 15:54, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I've got to say, Ömereditss, this looks highly suspect. You have just declared the use of three separate accounts. Two of those accounts were being used simultaneously at Battle of Porto Kagio - you can't say that you'd lost the passwords, you were swapping between them. At least two of your accounts have made edits at User talk:Lenovya, the talk page of an account blocked as a sockpuppet which seems to have a similar set of editing interests to yourself. You are leaving multiple people messages asking them to connect on Discord, which is frankly very strange behaviour - this is a collaborative project, there is generally no need to discuss content privately, it is better done onwiki so that others can contribute. Can you offer any explanation for all this? Girth Summit _(blether) 14:19, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

no this is my first wikipedia account I forgot the password for this account I came back when I found the password for my account you can see that my last edit was 2 years ago or you can block me Ömereditss (talk) 14:40, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

or block me, I don't want to deal with it. Ömereditss (talk) 14:41, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, block me. Ömereditss (talk) 14:42, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I want you to block me. Ömereditss (talk) 14:54, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

can u block me Ömereditss (talk) 15:23, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Additions to the SPI

Hey @Girth Summit! can you take a look at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/BasedHistorian PHD again please? 𐩣𐩫𐩧𐩨 Abo Yemen (𓃵) 16:23, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]