Jump to content

User talk:Bbb23/Archive 54

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 50←Archive 52Archive 53Archive 54Archive 55Archive 56→Archive 60

Tbone49 is back

Hi Bbb23. Good to see you on back on Wikipedia. I don't know if you remember them, but music editor Tbone49 is back using BrutallySour. If you have a moment to check out Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Tbone49, I'd appreciate it as the filing I made on their sockpuppeting in February was open until April before it was closed with no action. Thanks. Ss112 04:35, 9 July 2021 (UTC)

Hi, Ss112, I took a look at the report you filed, but I'm not sure what you want from me. Unlike the previous two reports, the suspected sock is a registered user and you've requested a CU, so I assume the report will not languish as long.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:09, 9 July 2021 (UTC)
Apologies, I thought you were still a CU. However, CU has now been declined because Tbone49's account is too stale, so the case is awaiting a behavioural investigation. If you have the time to check it out now that that's been done, I'd appreciate it. Ss112 14:44, 11 July 2021 (UTC)

Draft:Lecturio

Hello Bbb23, I was a little confused but I think there was an edit conflict between you and User:Jimfbleak on the above linked draft. It looks like Jim deleted it at the same time you declined the G12 so only your most recent edit is visible and it looks like you submitted the draft. If the draft is to remain would one of you please restore all the previous edits so we can see the history and we have the ability to review previous versions and you don't get spammed with the approval or declines. McMatter (talk)/(contrib) 14:45, 12 July 2021 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&page=Draft%3ALecturio courtesy link McMatter (talk)/(contrib) 14:46, 12 July 2021 (UTC)
@Mcmatter: Heh, it was a G11, not G12, but the rest of it's right. I've deleted it now per G11, although I don't think it qualifies, mainly for the reason you mentioned. Thanks for bringing the mess to my attention. :p --Bbb23 (talk) 14:52, 12 July 2021 (UTC)
@Mcmatter:, thanks, I was quite unaware of all this... Jimfbleak - talk to me? 15:30, 12 July 2021 (UTC)

DT intro

Howdy. Would you be interested in closing an RFC at Donald Trump, concerning the intro? I've put requests at the Closure page, but no takers. GoodDay (talk) 17:46, 13 July 2021 (UTC)

@GoodDay: Hehe, you must think I'm a masochist.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:49, 13 July 2021 (UTC)

ban lifting

Hi, I never said I wanted my ban lifted. I only wanted some clarify as this automobile ban thing was extremely weird. I feel like I'm not a worthy editor sometimes. Sorry again, but I only did that because I thought that the ban lifting was done against my will. I know this from experience, a user had a similar incident, but the automobile project had enough of my. behaviour and I wanted to keep a distance. This is just worthless as all I want was the ban to be clarified not lifted. If I want the ban lifted, I would start all over again from now till Feb-Mar 2022 then put the ban appeal forward --EurovisionNim (talk to me)(see my edits) 13:48, 14 July 2021 (UTC)

Sigh. I understand, but you can't remove an entire subthread for that reason. You should have just said that in the discussion. All you've accomplished by removing the material is make yourself look disruptive/immature/incompetent.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:57, 14 July 2021 (UTC)
I don't really want to edit for a while. I'm a useless editor. Everyone keeps reverting me and yes I do agree I am WP:CIR. I am immature and I can't really help it.--EurovisionNim (talk to me)(see my edits) 14:54, 14 July 2021 (UTC)
I'm sorry. I was trying to be honest, but I did not intend to hurt your feelings. When I say "incompetent", that is referring to your ability to edit Wikipedia, not a comment on your abilities in real life. And your well-being in real life is always far more important than Wikipedia. Whatever happens, take care.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:59, 14 July 2021 (UTC)

Amhara Man 06

You blocked the editor last week, and the moment he noticed he can edit again, he surprised us all with this edit, which restores his last edit, for which, presumably, he was blocked. LandLing 12:56, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

Unexplained revert

Hi Bbb, could you explain why you reverted this edit? It is factual (I watched the game), so I'm assuming there's an issue with the source, but I have knowno knowledge of its status as an RS. Thanks. BilCat (talk) 02:42, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

@BilCat: Hopefully by now you've figured out what was wrong with the user's edit. First, there was an emoticon in the ref. Second, the URL in the ref returns a 404. Third, although you can't see his deleted contributions, he has some significant editing issues. I'm glad you fixed the article to include the material.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:32, 18 July 2021 (UTC)
Ok, thanks. BilCat (talk) 17:20, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

Keanu's girlfriend

Back in Nov 2019 you sheriffed at the biography of Alexandra Grant, blocking some socks. The case has revived at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Clearwater48; I think we could use your insight again. Binksternet (talk) 17:34, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

Sheriffed? I feel like a hobbit. I've requested a merge at the SPI.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:00, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

full discussion?

Hey, Bbb23! Why doesn't Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Edit_warring#User:Berig_reported_by_User:Dan_Koehl_(Result:_No_violation) show what Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Edit_warring#User:Berig_reported_by_User:Dan_Koehl_(Result:_Declined) shows? —valereee (talk) 19:06, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

@Valereee: I'm not sure precisely what you mean. In the first I said there was no violation because, uh, there wasn't. In the second I recommended that the user take the matter to WP:ANI because, if it belonged anywhere, that's where it belonged. The user was obsessed with Berig's conduct, and if he wants to complain about it, it should be on a board that handles such complaints and would be open to a broader discussion. ANEW is not such a place.--Bbb23 (talk) 19:46, 18 July 2021 (UTC)
Sorry, I shouldn't have shorthanded it. In the first, the whole discussion isn't there. The second is the whole discussion, which (apparently?) didn't get archived? Apologies for whatever technical misunderstandings, I'm not good at that stuff. I was just wondering where the rest of the discussion got deleted. —valereee (talk) 20:13, 18 July 2021 (UTC)
I'm not sure why you think that in the first the "whole discussion" is not there. After I declined the first, Dan created a new discussion (the second), and then you and others jumped in. As far as I can tell, nothing was deleted or archived.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:20, 18 July 2021 (UTC)
I'm so sorry, I'm sure I am just being an idiot. But in the first link, which (I think?) is what was archived, the discussion is truncated? —valereee (talk) 20:32, 18 July 2021 (UTC)
How could it have been archived? It's still there now. I see nothing to indicate it was "truncated". I'm afraid at this point you'd have to show me a diff where someone removed some piece of it. I'm sure you're not an idiot. :-) It sounds to me like you're just frustrated.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:50, 18 July 2021 (UTC)
Not so much frustrated, just puzzled. Oh, sorry, now I see what you're talking about! Lol...I thought I was going crazy. So there were two discussions that started identically. Good grief. That person is (or was) an admin on another wiki. —valereee (talk) 10:20, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Sockpuppet query

Hello, Bbb23,

I am thinking that User:Ttttt321 could be a sockpuppet of User:Syed Shial12 based on account creation date and their edits on List of Sufis. I'd report this at SPI but I couldn't find a linked SPI case report so I'm coming directly to you. Thanks! Liz Read! Talk! 00:25, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Hi Liz, mostly they look the same, but there are some technical differences, mainly all the previous socks used the same device, but the new user does not. Plus there's the all caps and a much more fleshed-out article by the new user. I think it warrants a check, though, so I recommend filing an SPI. There is no case, so just file a report using Syed Shial as the master, and request a CU. Thanks for the heads up.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:39, 20 July 2021 (UTC)
Okay, thanks for checking.Liz Read! Talk! 02:02, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Happy Adminship Anniversary!

Happy Adminship Anniversary!

Have a very happy adminship anniversary on your special day!

Best wishes, CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 10:15, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Happy Adminship Day!

Wishing Bbb23 a very happy adminship anniversary on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! History DMZ (HQ) † (wire) 18:44, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Eric Joyce

Re: Eric Joyce page edits

Thanks for your intervention. It's all a learning experience for me. I'll leave that page alone, except to put a short comment there once I've made this one here. The IP editor was clearly highly abusive, but I am not sure if that's a breach of Wiki rules; it's the lesser point anyway. I'm entirely confident of my legal ground and am certainly not intentionally whitewashing. Internet-only offences (those not involving third parties) are not sexual offences in the UK (or any other jurisdiction?); the sex offender's status was already flagged in the article. Child sex offences involve actual children in the offence and are laid out here (paras 9-15a). This is very far from a trivial distinction. A previous admin had inserted 'Child pornography offence', which seemed the best formulation to me but has now been replaced by the IP. A final point, which might have been discussed at Wikipedia somewhere and if so I'll come across it at some point, is that while Wikipedia does not accept the principles of the UK's Rehabilitation of Offenders Act principles, articles like the Eric Joyce page look like they are explicitly designed to exploit that fact. I take your editorial comments in good spirit, though, and will apply them to my edits elsewhere. SteveCree2 (talk) 17:12, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

Sock/meatpuppet

Hey, just after you blocked Ansar908716281 for edit-warring on the Mu'awiya I page,[1] this sleeper became active[2]. The account is reinstating Ansar908716281's edits. - LouisAragon (talk) 18:00, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

Handled at the SPI.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:31, 22 July 2021 (UTC)
"It ain't over 'til it's over." Informer0987 (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki). Favonian (talk) 20:07, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

Gwangju Global Motors

I've noticed that you deleted the Gwangju Global Motors article under WP:G5 criterion. G5 applies to "created by banned or blocked users in violation of their ban or block, and that have no substantial edits by others." This article has been reworked from ground up by myself, which means the CSD essentially deleted my contributions. Therefore, I would like to request an undeletion of the article. Andra Febrian (talk) 02:52, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

 Done --Bbb23 (talk) 12:12, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

Lazybugger13 and Lazybugger13A

Hello, Bbb23, you blocked a user, Lazybugger13, for abusing multiple accounts back in March 2018. And I stumbled upon another account with a similar name and their editing goals as stated on the talk pages are the same. I think Lazybugger13A is the same person and he has been editing up until last year in October. Sending this out just in case this one went under the radar which it most likely did it seems. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 19:57, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

It looks like the sock created another account three days after I blocked the group. I don't watch pages like the ones he edits, so I didn't notice. I don't see any point in blocking the user given that he stopped editing so long ago, but if you see activity on the account, please let me know. Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:05, 25 July 2021 (UTC)
I think you should block the account permanently regardless whether or not he's going to be active. His talk page and user page are in fact an exact copy after I looked at the history of both pages. A block on 13A is warranted since he's been violating his ban for the past three years. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 00:33, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
I'd say trust the judgment of a long-time checkuser. Liz Read! Talk! 02:31, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

Sock?

Are these 2 the same sock (adding identical image, you blocked the 1st one): [3] & [4]? Or should I go to SPI? Rgrds. --Bison X (talk) 00:43, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

You can go to SPI if you like, but I don't think it's the same person.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:51, 27 July 2021 (UTC)
OK, thanks for taking a look. Rgrds. --Bison X (talk) 01:14, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

I Need The Code Behind Deleted Article To Preserve Initial Work Effort

I wish to retrieve the deleted material for future improvement of : James White (Graphic Designer)

I've never had to do this before, because no one has ever deleted any of my articles so fast before. How is this done? ♠Ace Frahm♠talk 12:03, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

I often move deleted articles to draft space when the authors request it, but, in this case, the article was tagged with WP:A7 and WP:G11, and I deleted it per both criteria. Therefore, a draft would be subject to immediate G11 deletion, so moving it makes no sense. There are administrators, though, who will e-mail you the contents of the article. Perhaps one of those administrators who watch my Talk page will do that for you; I don't e-mail users.
I would be remiss if I didn't say that the article was of very low quality. Except for the subject's website, it had zero sources, and it was written very poorly. In my view, having looked at other creations of yours, your abilities as a content creator are subpar.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:02, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Mohammed106 (again)

Hello, Bbb23. You told me here to notify you if banned user Mohammed106 (talk · contribs) (or their IPs) return with their disruptive editing. Well sure enough, they are back, now as Lazer106 (talk · contribs), with an additional IP – 41.254.64.153 (talk · contribs · WHOIS). On top of that, they resumed disruptive editing on List of heads of state of Libya almost immediately after that article was unprotected on July 26. —Sundostund (talk) 07:17, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

I blocked the named account. The IP hasn't edited in a few days. Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:40, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Checked

Hi Bbb23. You recently blocked User:Mia34985 as a sock of User:Vanessa566 per a report at WP:AN3. Now I ran a check, and found that Vanessa566 and User:Augustina67 are  Confirmed to User:Mia34985. All these have an interest in Danganropa. User:Cassandra872 is stale. What is the simplest way to record the new information? Open an SPI, or just apply some tags? Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 23:42, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

@EdJohnston: I'm afraid I took the simple way out, meaning it was obvious that those two accounts were socks of each other. I figured they were likely related to Cassandra, but Cassandra was tagged as a confirmed master but also tagged as a suspected puppet of User:TotalTruthTeller24 by Izno. Cassandra has no SPI, but TTT24 does (Cassandra is not in the archives of the TTT24 case), and I know none of the history. Also, Cassandra was never CU-blocked, so I don't know what CheckUser is familiar with any of this. Yamla, though, is the one who blocked her, and they were a CheckUser at the time of the block - maybe they can help. So, long story short (too late), I don't know what's best to do, but it would be nice to have it sorted if possible.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:17, 30 July 2021 (UTC)
The Cassandra family has quite a bit of overlap on topics with the blocked users, see Category:Wikipedia sockpuppets of Cassandra872, some of which were editing recently (but probably not sufficiently recently for CU data to remain). Special:Contributions/Jalloween is the newest from April. I'd be a confirmed on behavior there for Cassandra to these new 3.
A CU clerk would know better, but I think it'd be reasonable to add a new investigation for TTT noting Cassandra directly as well as these most recent socks. The last TTT sock Special:Contributions/Yardy12 was editing on the same topics as the last (unconfirmed) Cassandra sock, and NRP seems to have come to a similar conclusion given the block log for Jalloween. I came to my belief on the point after discussion on Discord with ferret. Izno (talk) 12:27, 30 July 2021 (UTC)
(Whether you should always "open an SPI or just apply some tags" is always a question for me. :D) Izno (talk) 12:07, 30 July 2021 (UTC)
For me, too. I expect, for those of us with checkuser, if we've already confirmed a sock the safest answer is to note it in an SPI. This is often just a waste of time, though. The confirmed information is useful to know if a user has hit WP:3X and is useful to know if they've been socking recently. It's a bit more work to determine if someone's been socking recently if you don't record it in an SPI, but not much more work. If someone's requesting an unblock and they were blocked as a suspected sock already, checkuser evidence may confirm this but noting this in an SPI doesn't really add much value. Just reblocking the account is less work (for checkusers and for clerks) and provides basically the same value. So, that's how I think about it. I'm not trying to claim this objectively correct advice, though. In particular, I'd be interested to know opinions of clerks. --Yamla (talk) 18:25, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

do you really want to welcome an indefinitely blocked user, even a "qualified" welcome?

Yes. I like to educate them. Probably it goes over their heads so fast it creates a sonic boom and produces tornadoes in its wake turbulence. However, if it recaptures one spammer and turns them into a productive editor, it is certainly worth doing. --Deepfriedokra (talk) 15:44, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

Oh ye of good faith. :-) The dissonance is stark, but I've reinstated your edit - after all, why should my view prevail? Take care.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:48, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

Stadion Wiener Neustadt ≠ Wiener Neustadt Arena

Stadion Wiener Neustadt (demolished in 23 April 2020 [5]) ≠ fr:Wiener Neustadt Arena → [6], [7]. Thank you. Arturo63 (talk) 22:19, 31 July 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) 14:17, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

3PO

I really would like to AGF, but looking at these contribs...

What do you think? - jc37 16:49, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

@Jc37: I think her conduct is very odd for a brand new user, but if you're asking whether I think she's a sock of the creator of these categories, I'm not convinced. She edits only from a mobile device, whereas the other user does not, and the other user uses the visual editor, whereas she does not. In and of itself, that is not definitive, but in my view it means you'd need technical corroboration before taking any action.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:02, 1 August 2021 (UTC)
Thank you very much. I'm hesitant to start an SPI, because on the other hand, if it's not a sock/meat puppet, I'd like to avoid BITE as well. Kind of a catch-22 inherent in the system. I'm a proponent of innocent til proven guilty, for all, here, but things like this can potentially be so disruptive to CON, I wish we had a better system for RFC/XFD discussions.
At this point, unless you have any suggestions, I guess I'll just stay in wait-and-see mode.
Thank you very much for your insight. - jc37 17:07, 1 August 2021 (UTC)
I was wondering about this exact same thing. My spidey-sense says something ain't right, but ya know, AGF etc etc. Whoever closes the debate (which won't be me now because I've commented) will presumably just disregard this sockpuppet. Antandrus (talk) 17:17, 1 August 2021 (UTC)
Well, I'm not as AGF as you folk, so my recommendation would be to file a report at SPI and request a CU. After all, Verdi's Requiem is at stake.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:21, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Admin's Barnstar
For your tireless efforts at attending to subject areas requiring admin action. Thanks B23, we remain grateful. Celestina007 (talk) 19:53, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

I absolutely second this sentiment : ) - jc37 02:06, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

Thanks to both of you.--Bbb23 (talk) 12:43, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

The File mover and Rollback

Hi , I have question , Can I get those permissions, Regards . Hamaredha (talk) 18:37, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

Not sure why you're asking me. You need to ask in the appropriate sections of WP:PERM.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:02, 4 August 2021 (UTC)
OK, thank you Hamaredha (talk) 20:32, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

User:Master Atul Kushwaha

Master Atul Kushwaha (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) - you just blocked this guy and he is definitely behaving badly - edit warring and ignoring messages to use properly referenced sources - but he is (sort of) responding on his talk page. Might I suggest that you change the ban from permanent to a cooling off period c/w a stroppy warning that the next ban will be permanent if his behaviour doesn't change? Your call though, you're the admin. 10mmsocket (talk) 13:44, 6 August 2021 (UTC)

In addition to being disruptive, the user is clearly incompetent. Certainly at this point in time (he's probably a kid) he's not able to edit Wikipedia constructively.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:50, 6 August 2021 (UTC)
Good point. Good riddance! 10mmsocket (talk) 14:12, 6 August 2021 (UTC)

Deleted Article

Hello. There was an article Mahmoud Shoolizadeh that was recently deleted after being nominated for deletion. I'd like to ask for your help in seeing if there is a way to reinstate the Article, for several reasons. The article has been on Wikipedia for 14 years, since 2007 (the early years of wikipedia!) and had been grown, edited, and discussed many times even as the rules of wikipedia have evolved over time. Its worth mentioning that this article is regarding an international award winning film director originally from Iran who had since been forced to emigrate to the united states, complicating certain source finding attempts. Several reasons were given for nominating the article for deletion so allow me to give a rationale for why they do not apply to this specific circumstance.
1. "It appears that the page was created by his son": Yes, the page was Originally created by myself - his son. This was 14 years ago, and the page had been updated and evolved and changed by thousands of contributors since then. Back then there were few people in Iran with knowledge of wikipedia and the internet, so I had contributed what I could.
2. The article had hundreds of references to English language news papers, outlets, and festivals, where he had won several awards internationally, from festivals in Italy, Poland, US, UK, Germany, and several other countries to name a few. A simple review of the references would have made it clear that he meets GNG standards.
3. Given that the article had been present for such a long time, some source pages are no longer available/active. This is a simple consequence of the ever changing internet.
4. The article was deleted in about one month. More time was needed to generate appropriate discussion. Again, this is an Iranian film maker, and the government there absolutely bans any dissemination of information regarding journalists or film makers that have emigrated, hence limited available current data. Especially a film director forced to emigrate to the US. I challenge anyone to find any original information about any Iranian film director that was expelled from Iran, who was active since the 1980s.
5. There were only 2 votes, and both were for a weak delete. Further discussion can change the outcome. Had there been more time, I would have contributed myself, and informed other persons knowledgeable in this area to contribute their opinions also. Side note: I'm a physician in the US, and currently unfortunately working with a surge in covid, with no personal time available to be spent on wikipedia. I need your help. Thank you. Pouya sh (talk) 16:56, 8 August 2021 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but I don't see how I can help you. As you are the subject's son, you have an obvious conflict of interest and shouldn't have created the article in the first place. Such conflicts must be declared. Second, the discussion time of one month is much longer than most deletion discussions, which are usually decided in about 7 days; this one took longer to get a consensus so it remained open. Finally, your statement that you would have "informed other persons knowledgeable in this area to contribute their opinions" (as well as yours) to the discussion had you had the opportunity is a violation of WP:CANVASSING. Wikipedia simply doesn't work the way you think it does.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:39, 8 August 2021 (UTC)
Thank you for your prompt response, I appreciate it. I'm not sure why an old wikipedia article should be deleted solely based on an my personal family history. The person who nominated the article for deletion knew the relationship because I've been fully transparent and have declared this multiple times to the best way I can here on wikipedia in all discussions involved. Regarding "canvassing", my intention is to reinstate the discussion so that the opinion of the community can be heard, of all sides. By all means have all appropriate people give their opinion, even if different than mine. But to delete the article based on two "weak delete" opinions? If I've done something against the rules then serve the punishment to me, but why delete such article. Is there anything I can do? Pouya sh (talk) 23:12, 8 August 2021 (UTC)
The article was deleted because there was a consensus to do so, not because the subject is your father. I repeat: there's nothing I can do.--Bbb23 (talk) 12:56, 9 August 2021 (UTC)

Note

... - jc37 17:34, 9 August 2021 (UTC)

@Jc37: Yes, I noticed (user is on my watchlist), but thanks for the heads-up. There's something very wrong with that user, but other than the personal attack against me, which doesn't bother me much, I have no basis for blocking her.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:38, 9 August 2021 (UTC)
Happy to help, and understood.
"...Idk what exactly i participated, but i know now I'm right, whatever it was..." - This comment, when matched to your question and their current edit history, makes me think you're right about an SPI being needed. - jc37 17:51, 9 August 2021 (UTC)

Another look

After an extensive talk on #wikipedia-en-help with user:Worldsendart, I believe that I've cleared up several issues, including what not to do when writing about topics in which one has a personal interest. They've explained the "Matilda" thing to me as best they could, and I don't think that'll be an issue any more. Mind taking a second look? DS (talk) 03:13, 7 August 2021 (UTC)

I've taken a second and a third and a fourth look, and I'm uncertain as to what's best to do. The key problem for me is whether the user is being honest. It's hard to believe that she has no connection with Care of Africa or the people who run it, but she says otherwise. I told her she had to put a COI tag on her userpage, and, instead, she put something disingenuous about her interest in charities. On the plus side, the material she is now proposing to be somehow integrated into the article is far better than anything she's proposed before. She's eliminated the copyright violations, and the material itself is more factual and encyclopedic and, as far as I can tell, not WP:UNDUE. I wonder if there's a way to get another administrator's views without making a big deal out of it, i.e., going to the noticeboards. What are your thoughts?--Bbb23 (talk) 11:47, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
She told me that she had (past tense) connection with C4A, but as a volunteer rather than as an employee, and that she still believes in their mission. I explained that this still counts as COI, which I believe she has accepted.
Further, I'm confident that she has never had access to the account which is currently "Matilda", as that account is - after several namechanges and at least one usurpation - a former admin.
I'm loath to unblock her without getting your okay, though. DS (talk) 17:28, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
@MER-C: If you're willing, could you give us your opinion on what to do? You're more experienced than I with "advertising" and editors whose main objective appears to be to promote a particular article. I'm on the fence. Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:09, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
To be clear, I asked if that was her only intention, and she said no, she wanted to do stuff about Australian cultural figures in general. DS (talk) 05:27, 8 August 2021 (UTC)
If you unblock (not saying that you should), then it should be on the condition that she does not edit on any topic on which she has a COI. MER-C 09:18, 8 August 2021 (UTC)

Would it bother you if I did the unblock? DS (talk) 02:15, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

DS, the short answer is go ahead and thank you for your courtesy throughout. I am going to bow out of the task of assisting the user in editing the article. I do recommend that you define clearly the scope of the user's conflict and that it be spelled out on their userpage. Also, unless you intend to mentor the user, they should start using article Talk pages to propose changes, not their own Talk page. I hope things work out.--Bbb23 (talk) 12:52, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

Gae Aulenti & Piazza Gae Aulenti Pages

Hello. I see that Mariagrazia.ds (talk · contribs) had her edits removed from the Gae Aulenti page and the Piazza Gae Aulenti page was deleted. Could you explain why? I am relatively new to the site. The user is English as second language and that might account for the 'weird edits'. They are also a student trying to work on a project and are definitely not trying to advertise for this architect or piazza. What can they do to fix it? Thanks! Archandfeminisminstructor (talk)

I'm trying to understand who you are and what you're doing on Wikipedia. According to your userpage, you are an instructor for Wikipedia:Wiki_Ed/Universität_Kassel/Architecture_and_Feminism_(Summer) (a page that does not exist), but Wiki Ed only sponsors courses for the US and Canada, not Europe. I assume Maria is one of your students, but she did not identify as such, and her editing here was clearly disruptive, even if it was not intentionally so. Perhaps you can explain more fully what's going on and who at Wikipedia is sanctioning your activities here. Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:32, 9 August 2021 (UTC)
Hi, I've encouraged Mariagrazia.ds (talk · contribs) to advocate for herself as I realize that it is not my place to try and do so. That said, here is our course page. As you say, Wiki education doesn't support European courses, so I ran it as a Program/ Event and was in contact with User:Sage Ross (WMF). This all probably doesn't even concern you, so I apologize if I am wasting your time. Archandfeminisminstructor (talk)
The link to your course page doesn't work. No need to apologize.--Bbb23 (talk) 12:53, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

Mohammed106 (again)

As expected (at least on my part), banned user Mohammed106 (talk · contribs) is editing again, this time with another IP – 41.254.70.106 (talk · contribs · WHOIS). —Sundostund (talk) 23:33, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

Blocked and all edits reverted.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:37, 3 August 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for your prompt reaction. Just a question: Should IPs like this one, clearly used for block evasion, be also tagged in order to add them to Category:Wikipedia sockpuppets of Mohammed106? —Sundostund (talk) 23:42, 3 August 2021 (UTC)
I don't normally tag IPs, and generally it should be admins or SPI clerks who tag.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:44, 3 August 2021 (UTC)
Right, then only (future) sock accounts should be tagged, as is already done with Lazer106 (talk · contribs). —Sundostund (talk) 23:47, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

And, the user is active again, this time as 41.254.70.217 (talk · contribs · WHOIS). —Sundostund (talk) 15:26, 8 August 2021 (UTC)

I've blocked Special:Contributions/41.254.70.0/24 for one month and reverted the single IP's edits.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:42, 8 August 2021 (UTC)

And we have a probable renewal of their activity, this time as Hamody15 (talk · contribs) and 41.254.64.27 (talk · contribs · WHOIS). —Sundostund (talk) 18:45, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

Named account blocked and tagged. Having trouble blocking the IP (again). Waiting on an answer to my post at WP:VPT.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:37, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

My sandbox

Hello. This is user Metsfan22. I believe you deleted an article I was working on in my sandbox that was related to driving safety and self-driving cars. The violation was web hosting. Is there any way I can get access to the text I was working on so I can continue working on it off of Wikipedia? Metsfan22 (talk) 21:19, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

Perhaps an admin who watches my Talk page will e-mail you the contents of your sandbox. I'm afraid I don't.--Bbb23 (talk) 11:28, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

Page protection request

Hi Bbb23, could you please take another look at File:Hermione Granger poster.jpg? You responded to the RfPP request with "User blocked", which is true, but the vandal in question has been socking. You'll see a series of similar vandalistic edits starting July 27 with this edit and continuing through to today. Their pattern is to target all manner of Hermione-related pages (hell if I know why!). I worry that a user block, without page protection, will barely disrupt this vandal's pattern. Thanks, Firefangledfeathers (talk) 03:58, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

There's been nothing since yesterday. If it resumes, you can ask me or go back to RFPP.--Bbb23 (talk) 11:30, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

Redirect

The page "Japanese waltzing mice" was speedily deleted. It was a redirect meant for a new page Japanese house mouse. It could have been a problem with visual editor that automatically added "db-nocontent|help=off" tag while creating a redirect. Chhandama (talk) 05:11, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

No, it was tagged by a user. I've restored it for you, and fixed it. You created it incorrectly.--Bbb23 (talk) 11:35, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

Sockpuppets

Hello. I'm referring to this incident - Kevinkevin03062003 (talk · contribs) is one more sockpuppet and has been blocked in deWP. Here in enWP there's also 77.11.67.214 (talk · contribs). I'm not sure about how to report this in enWP properly, so maybe you could take the necessary steps...? --Roger (talk) 09:29, 1 August 2021 (UTC) ... @Blablubbs:, fyi --Roger (talk) 12:15, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

I've blocked and tagged the named account. I tried to block the IP for 72 hours, but I'm getting a message that the IP is already blocked, even though it is not, at least not directly - not sure what is going on with that.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:07, 1 August 2021 (UTC)
...Georg0406 (talk · contribs) as well. --Roger (talk) 21:52, 6 August 2021 (UTC)
@RoBri: Blocked and tagged. You might let someone know at de.wiki if you haven't already done so. Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:44, 6 August 2021 (UTC)
https://meta.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:CentralAuth/Georg0406, thanks, --Roger (talk) 10:56, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
You're a good fellow. Thanks! --Bbb23 (talk) 10:59, 7 August 2021 (UTC)

Hiya again, Kevinlansmannlansi (talk · contribs) is another one... Roger (talk) 18:12, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

Blocked and tagged.--Bbb23 (talk) 19:36, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

SPI

I don’t understand why you closed this SPI here - it may be my misunderstanding of SPI procedure. The IP is only on a 1 week block - do I have to re-open the SPI when they come off it? There doesn’t seem to be a conclusion whether there has been socking. DeCausa (talk) 06:41, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

My close was fairly typical of a report where the master is already blocked and the only allegation is IP socking. The duration of the IP block is at the discretion of the blocking admin; we often don't block IPs for a long time. If you think the block should have been longer, you can always discuss the matter with Doug Weller, but if the IP resumes their disruption after their block expires, they will likely be blocked for longer, regardless of whether you file an SPI. Finally, it is not uncommon for there not to be an explicit determination of socking before closing an SPI.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:15, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
@DeCausa: I wasn't aware of the SPI or the history when I blocked. I'd say that WP:DUCK applies here and that the IP's edits can be reverted. As Bbb23 says, the close was standard. Please contact me - email is fine - when, as I presume they will, they start editing again, and I'll do a longer block. Doug Weller talk 15:07, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
@Doug Weller: and Bbb23. Thanks both. Understood. DeCausa (talk) 20:11, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

Clarification

I saw this and decided to ask, is there any particular article per se that appears dubious? Celestina007 (talk) 10:44, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

@Celestina007: Dubious isn't the word I'd use. The articles all appeared interrelated and designed to promote at least one common entity. In the future, please don't use mobile diffs anywhere near me. :-) --Bbb23 (talk) 21:33, 13 August 2021 (UTC)
I’m not sure what this: “:-)” is but I presume it’s a smiley, Im uncertain what that is but in retrospect I think the tone here was quite unfair to me. I was merely trying to be of help. However It’s okay, I wouldn’t be using a mobile diff with you or around you ever again. Have a great weekend Bbb23. Celestina007 (talk) 15:53, 14 August 2021 (UTC)
I don't like mobile diffs, so in the future, if possible, I wanted you to use normal diffs when you're communicating with me. The smiley was intended to take any sting out of my comment. I know you were trying to help and never thought otherwise.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:07, 14 August 2021 (UTC)
Unfortunately my device didn’t interpret it as a smiley, if it had i probably wouldn’t have felt as hurt as I was yesterday. I’m sorry for the misunderstanding, moving forward I wouldn’t use mobile diffs around you. Thanks for the clarification it has given me closure. Celestina007 (talk) 23:17, 14 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi

Hi. I just saw this. I hope you are not going again triple—B—two—three. Hope to see you around. —usernamekiran (talk) 19:23, 15 August 2021 (UTC)

Welcome back

Seems like I missed your unretirement, welcome back! --qedk (t 愛 c) 14:15, 16 August 2021 (UTC)

Same editor?

Hello! Not sure if you're able to tell if User talk:78.148.25.46 is the same editor as here? Looks like a possibility, given Template_talk:RuPaul's_Drag_Race#Template_edit_suggestion and similarities to this past discussion. ---Another Believer (Talk) 18:54, 16 August 2021 (UTC)

Sockpuppet on my talk page

Hi Bbb23, I'll have to look up the details, but since you deleted the page mentioned there, you may be interested in the latest edits to my talk page. :) ~ ToBeFree (talk) 06:50, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

@ToBeFree (mobile): I just came on-wiki, somewhat bleary-eyed because it's way too early where I live, and have been trying to catch up with what's been happening with this sock and their IPs. El C has blocked both IPs who edited your Talk page, thus relieving me of the task. I've taken the liberty of removing the posts from your Talk page. Thanks for the heads up.--Bbb23 (talk) 11:11, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

Apology

Hello there, Bbb23. I am informing you that I am owing you an apology for not abiding by the rules. Sorry for speedy tagging and I will not do it again and will let the other editors handle it. Thank you. ScrapheapNinjaShuriken77 12:40, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

Personal attack?

Hi there. I was wondering if it would be okay for you to remove the personal attack against me at Talk:RJ Nieto the same way you did at Talk:Mocha Uson. I don't think it's appropraite for me to remove it myself. Regards, -Object404 (talk) 11:04, 16 August 2021 (UTC)

@Object404: Sorry for the belated response. I've removed the material. I was hesitant because of all the recent turmoil regarding the user, but that's been, uh, resolved, so I saw no reason to leave the offensive material in place.--Bbb23 (talk) 11:52, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
Thank you! -Object404 (talk) 12:43, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

Draft:CPN-UML (Socialist)

Hi. Would it be possible to undelete Draft:CPN-UML (Socialist)? I was unaware of the identity of the draft creator, but I had done a number of edits on the draft and it's a legit subject ready for mainspace. I have no problem with the block against the creator, per se. --Soman (talk) 20:49, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

I wouldn't say it's ready for mainspace, but I've restored it for you.--Bbb23 (talk) 21:39, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
Many thanks. I did a few further edits. --Soman (talk) 21:54, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

An editor that you range-blocked is incurring on block evasion

Greetings Bbb23, I write to let you know that an editor you range-blocked one day ago [9][10][11] is currently incurring on block evasion and edit-warring again [12]

Comparison of edits between one of the blocked accounts [13] and the edit IP account editing today [14]

This is likely a recurrent editor, as throwaway accounts that try to make edits in the line of the ones this article (and other articles that deal with related topics) has been target of in the last days is a rather common thing, it happens every three months or so. Thanks in advance. Pob3qu3 (talk) 00:41, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

Getafe CF in European football

Hello, I created an article about Getafe CF in European football, but you deleted it even though I opened a discussion about it, why was the article deleted? It is common for club records in Europe to need an article, so why such arbitrariness? --Mishary94 (talk) 01:55, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

It's been deleted twice per WP:A10. Don't create it again.--Bbb23 (talk) 02:17, 19 August 2021 (UTC)
I will add and expand the information further so that it is reason enough to create an article, so I hope not to delete the article --Mishary94 (talk) 03:35, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi

Hi , this user User talk:SuperSonic54 has been making one sided edits of caste articles and is not willing to listen to the other editors. Based on their editing, it doesn't seem to be that they are a new editor. It is possible that they edited in the past with a different name. Can you please look into this. Thanks Sharkslayer87 (talk) 03:16, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

I have no special expertise in this area.--Bbb23 (talk) 11:25, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

AIV

Hello. Just out of curiosity – do you agree with these ( [15] [16] ) blocks made by Materialscientist? These accounts were classified by him as vandalism-only and therefore blocked indefinitely. However, on AIV you responded to my reports with "User has been incorrectly or insufficiently warned." Are you going to discuss the rationale of these blocks with Materialscientist? Best, Tymon.r Do you have any questions? 13:32, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

Some admins are more quick to block vandals than others. Although I don't necessarily go strictly by the book in terms of number of vandalistic edits and number of warnings, in these two instances, I felt there hadn't been enough of either to block. I don't think it's productive, though, to debate the pros and cons of Materialscientist's judgment in particular cases vs. mine.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:38, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

Deleted Articles

Hi, why are you wanting to delete my articles? I'm just a translator, I like to contribute by translating articles, you've already deleted 2 of mine, please check, sorry if i did something you didn't like :( --Adriana wiltzman (talk) 17:23, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

Mohammed106 (again)

Apparently, banned user Mohammed106 (talk · contribs) is editing again, this time with another IP – 41.254.64.125 (talk · contribs · WHOIS). —Sundostund (talk) 16:29, 16 August 2021 (UTC)

And, this could be yet another block-evasion IP – 41.254.64.58 (talk · contribs · WHOIS). —Sundostund (talk) 18:46, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

Slow-moving revert war

Hi, I’m wondering what to do about this editor, basically a single-purpose account dedicated to removing a (justified, in my view) tag on Davor Džalto, an article where other sockpuppets have recently edited, e.g. 1 and 2. Many thanks. — Biruitorul Talk 14:36, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

I've blocked the user for 24h. NYaction was soft-blocked, so even if the new user is NYaction, it's not considered socking. Regardless of that, if you look at the user's edits to Lyal S. Sunga , the only other article they've edited, you'll see an emerging pattern of promotion of Džalto, which of course tallies with the removal of the advertising tag from Džalto's article.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:58, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

Draft:Pop It (toy)

I'm not technically "advertising". I am just making an article about Pop-Its and what are they and what they benefit. You can't just delete my draft straight away. I spent months on it and you try delete it. There's nothing wrong with it.

Doctorine Dark (talk) 17:37, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

Ranboo copied draft articles

Hey. I was just wondering, there are 2 drafts talking about the YouTuber Ranboo. Here are their links: Draft:Ranboo and Draft:Ranboo (Youtuber, Streamer). Can you do something about that? It would be greatly appreciated if you do. :)

Kind regards, Doctorine Dark (talk) 17:52, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

Hello

I have been noticing that you have been reverting my "unnecessary" edits. I do not see the point as to why you are doing such thing, but I seem to be disturbed to see you doing so whatsoever. Please assume good faith for I am too tired and depressed for Wikipedia.

Kind regards, Doctorine Dark (talk) 15:56, 21 August 2021 (UTC)

I have undone your edits because they are poorly done. If you are "tired and depressed", then stop editing, but you can't use your mental state as a justification for making unconstructive edits. As an aside, nationality is not used in infoboxes unless it differs from the subject's country of origin. Don't add it back, especially with an internal comment saying not to revert something that shouldn't even be there.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:05, 21 August 2021 (UTC)
It took me a while to find that nationality guideline: WP:INFONAT.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:17, 21 August 2021 (UTC)

Blocks, reverts, protections...

If it's of any interest to you, this edit edit-conflicted me, as I was trying to revert my own edit, having seen your block. I also strongly suspected sockpuppetry myself, and had considered blocking.

When I started this edit I noticed that this page has been indefinitely semi-protected since sixteen months ago. I haven't seen the history which led to that, but is it time to try lifting the block? I have myself protected user talk pages, including several times my own, but I always prefer not to keep them protected longer than necessary. JBW (talk) 16:21, 21 August 2021 (UTC)

Do I have to? It's such a pleasure not to have the disruption.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:24, 21 August 2021 (UTC)
No, of course you don't. Probably once in a while it will stop a legitimate edit, and much less often it will stop a great flood of trolling, so it's a question of which you give higher priority to. I am uncomfortable with the thought that I may be shutting out legitimate new editors from making legitimate queries, but you may feel differently. Something I have found, but would never have predicted, is that if I semi-protect my talk page, but provide a link to an alternative, unprotected, talk page for anon and unconfirmed editors, it completely stops the trolling. Obviously there's nothing to prevent the troll from attacking the alternative talk page, but in practice they never do. (And I do mean "never": I have done this quite a number of times over the years, and it always works.) I can only assume that the kind of person whose idea of fun is posting crap on a talk page doesn't get any pleasure from it if they think it won't be seen by lots of people. JBW (talk) 18:14, 21 August 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for sharing your experience. It's interesting, and I think your inferences make a great deal of sense.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:36, 21 August 2021 (UTC)

Thanks and a duck

Thanks for this, you're doing a Herculean labour (on maybe a Sisyphean task) in anti-sockpuppetry areas. I heard a distinct quack here and wonder if blocking and/or page protection is needed. — Bilorv (talk) 21:18, 21 August 2021 (UTC)

Recent SPI

Hi I see you closed the SPI case yesterday stating it was only one edit 2 weeks ago [17]but the ip is active today and its a norway IP reverting same content, can you now take action? [18]. Magherbin (talk) 05:23, 22 August 2021 (UTC)

The report I closed (now archived) at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Ragnimo listed Special:contributions/2A02:2121:309:3C85:4533:8AA0:1FA4:EC54, which still hasn't edited since August 7. The IP you note above is Special:contributions/89.8.71.131, which made one edit yesterday. There's nothing I can do. My close was procedural. I didn't determine whether the IP was evading a block, just that blocking the IP would do no good, and, frankly, even if I were willing to assume block evasion, blocking single-edit roving IPs is a waste of time. Sorry.--Bbb23 (talk) 11:59, 22 August 2021 (UTC)

Caste Warrior

Hi Bbb23, this user User talk:SuperSonic54 has been making contentious edits that are revolving around a particular "caste". They were warned previously by several editors but they blanked most of the warnings. They removed content here by calling it not constructive. They removed content here claiming that content has no source but a closer examination reveals that is not the case. They made this edit claiming they were making a spelling correction but they actually removed sourced content. I reverted their edit but they once again made the same edit yesterday once again claiming that they were making a spelling correction but in reality there once again removed sourced content. Most of their edits are revolving around Reddy caste. Can you please look into their behavior. Thanks Sharkslayer87 (talk) 08:55, 22 August 2021 (UTC)

Please stop asking me about this issue. See my last reply.--Bbb23 (talk) 12:01, 22 August 2021 (UTC)
I didn't ask you to perform a sockpuppet chceck and I certainly didn't mean to nag you. I brought their behavior to your notice as you are an admin. I will take this to a different platform then. Thanks Sharkslayer87 (talk) 12:16, 22 August 2021 (UTC)

Curious

Hi! I noticed that you've been watching out for the socks. Thank you! I thought it would be efficient to report this here, if you have the time.

Kmishra1024 (talk · contribs) looks like a new sock of Curious boy km (block log · checkuser confirmedsuspected). Editing much of the same articles, doing similar things. Username tracks; "km" in earlier names would appear to be K. Mishra. And arguing WP:BLP in their third edit which is unlikely for a newbie, but would make perfect sense for someone who's been tracking my edits in the Nepal politics area, such as here where I reverted them with the same rationale.

By the way, an instance of them abusing WP:SOCK before they were blocked is at Talk:People's Socialist Party, Nepal#Article Split/New article titled 2021 split in the People's Socialist Party, Nepal to be formed from a section. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 03:30, 22 August 2021 (UTC)

@Usedtobecool: This is damned weird. Have you seen what Kmishra1024 posted on their userpage? I'm looking into it.--Bbb23 (talk) 12:11, 22 August 2021 (UTC)
I am quite sure both those accounts are unrelated. This one is almost definitely Curious, and those other accounts are both more competent and less troublesome. They both edit in (mostly) different areas, both different from Curious' obsession area. I would say they are trying to muddy the waters, probably trying to get you and/or I in trouble. Those userspace edits came after I posted here, right after in fact. It was my fault; I did not realise at the time that userlinks templates generate pings. Usedtobecool ☎️ 15:44, 22 August 2021 (UTC)
Not to worry and not your "fault" at all. I've decided that the userpage statement was an attempt to distract, which worked briefly, but I've now blocked the account as a sock.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:48, 22 August 2021 (UTC)

Recent SPI : Politialguru

As you were the admin who kindly dealt with the SPI for this user, I would like to draw your attention to his/her other mischief and wonder if you might have any input or be able to take action - Wikipedia:Administrator's_noticeboard/Incidents#Followup_to_Politialguru‎_SPI. Thanks. 10mmsocket (talk) 20:45, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

A. Fielding

Could you reconsider your speedy delete here? this is a relatively well-known and prolific writer whose books are still in print, which is surely enough of a credible claim of significance to make an A7 inappropriate? there are sources available, although admittedly not given in the article. Ingratis (talk) 00:51, 24 August 2021 (UTC)

@Ingratis: I'm willing to restore it and remove it to draft space so it can be fleshed out. Let me know.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:53, 24 August 2021 (UTC)
That would be fine - thanks! I'm not sure yet how good the sourcing is anyway, but there is some, so worth a second chance. Ingratis (talk) 00:59, 24 August 2021 (UTC)
Here it is: Draft:A. Fielding.--Bbb23 (talk) 02:07, 24 August 2021 (UTC)
Thanks very much. Ingratis (talk) 02:23, 24 August 2021 (UTC)

Working Group on Syria, Propaganda and Media

Hi Bbb23

I raised an issue of edit warring on the Working Group on Syria, Propaganda and Media article here but it was archived without a resolution. The user has taken a censorial approach to this article and articles about the group's members. Your guidance would be incredibly helpful.

Many thanks, Atiru (talk) 12:57, 25 August 2021 (UTC)

You're going to have to work this out on the article Talk page.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:08, 25 August 2021 (UTC)

What would be a good source for an online person?

Subject says it all, I worked for a while on the article “Griffpatch”, and would like to know what should be included, thanks!Yoblyblob (talk) 01:19, 26 August 2021 (UTC)

Re: Speedy Deletion of Knulp (musician), linking in from Herman Hesse's novel Knulp (1915).

Hi Bbb23

The reasons behind the deletion of the link from Knulp the book to Knulp the musician has been noted. How do I contest this, in a most sincere and respectful sense, if this is possible.

Regards D User: Soren Loved RegineSoren Loved Regine (talk) 03:16, 26 August 2021 (UTC)

Mugsalot

HI , this user change every reverts for me , why ? I do not know and he refuse any discuss , I speak with him but he do not answer me , I do not know where is problem if we put location in place , can you see this articles Zembîlfiroş and Batel , please help me , I see his reverts are vandalism work , I wait your answer , thank you Hamaredha (talk) 21:22, 26 August 2021 (UTC)

@Hamaredha: It appears that your edits are unconstructive. And Mugsalot has not "refused" to talk to you at all. Finally, Mugsalot's edits are not vandalism, and for you to label them as such constitutes a personal attack. Be careful, or you risk being blocked.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:06, 26 August 2021 (UTC)
Thank you for explained, this user don't answer me in talk page Deraluk and Batel, I hope if you can help me. Best Regards, Hamaredha (talk) 05:38, 27 August 2021 (UTC)
You are right (Mugsalot's edits are not vandalism) , I apologize for use this words , thank you for explained to me but this user don't answer me in talk page Deraluk and Batel, Regards Hamaredha (talk) 05:56, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

You're fast!

You finished what I wanted to do before I could even complete the train of thought! Good to see you active again! —SpacemanSpiff 13:41, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

It's nice to see you too. I feel sorry for UTRS, though.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:43, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

Article for William Appling

Dear Bbb23,

We have made substantial edits to the article for William Appling and would like to have you evaluate it. We understand about the promotional/advertising problems and other reference issues with the original draft, and we believe these have been corrected. May we go ahead and post the new draft? We have every intention of making this an excellent Wikipedia article and of adhering to all the requirements.

Many thanks, CharlesVictorDudley (talk) 19:29, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

Iranian actors

Hi! Since you just CSD tagged, any chance you'd like to endorse the CU request at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Aliasghar_ghorbandokht ( I think you're a clerk?) to make these G5s when the backlog is cleared? Will be a much more efficient way of getting them deleted, otherwise they'll just recreate. Thanks either way Star Mississippi 16:07, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

@Star Mississippi: I'll think about whether to block the user based on behavior, but I'm not a clerk.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:09, 29 August 2021 (UTC)
OOps, don't know who I had you mixed up with. TomStar has blocked for the blatant disruption so we have two weeks for the backlog to settle, so don't worry about it. Thanks though! Star Mississippi 17:28, 29 August 2021 (UTC)
Your confusion is completely understandable given my history. However, as you can see, I've indeffed the user. In addition to all of the helpful evidence you and others presented, I did my own independent investigation, and the similarities were abundant.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:33, 29 August 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for handling. Have a great day. Star Mississippi 17:49, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

Thank you.

There was also a different variation of the username you blocked (USER19339393993‎) which I that I reported at ANI, that attacked 2021–22 Tottenham Hotspur F.C. season, I don't know if a socket puppet check needs to be done. If there are more of that out there. Cheers. Govvy (talk) 18:19, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

Request

Hello Bbb23! As the blocking admin of the suspected master, would you please have a look at this SPI? The user in question is disruptive, so some form of action at least is needed. Thanks! ☿ Apaugasma (talk ☉) 11:10, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi Bbb23!, I have one question? , Hamaredha (talk) 15:46, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

User:Novrogod2

Is this guy a sock or something? I noticed some odd behaviour just now from my watchlist and when looking at the guys contrib. Something felt fishy... Govvy (talk) 16:55, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

Sockpuppet

Hollybs8 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is clearly a sockpuppet of Hollybh (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) whom you blocked earlier for other sockpuppetry. Just so you know. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 22:53, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Hello!

Hello bb23 Syed89 (talk) 16:21, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

Article restore

Sir, article i created Ume Samuel Ikeogu was deleted long time ago, please can it be restored so that i will work on it to improve it or should i start new article on it Samnaija (talk) 00:37, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

No, I won't restore it, and no, I don't think you should start a new article.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:53, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
Thank you for blocking jason perla, now i won't have to deal with that disruptive editor anymore now that you blocked him! peace is restored in the Wikiverse thanks to you! SomeWhatLife (talk) 01:22, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

Protection request

Thanks for the RV. Can you protect my talk page from IPs again? Thanks. Flix11 (talk) 04:29, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

@Flix11: It looks like the individual has stopped, and you don't have a history before of IP disruption. Why don't we wait? I have your Talk page on my watchlist, and if it happens again, I will semi-protect the page.--Bbb23 (talk) 12:11, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
It was on June 2020. Flix11 (talk) 12:12, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
I have been vandalized by another IP from Palembang. Flix11 (talk) 09:01, 2 September 2021 (UTC)
And again today. Flix11 (talk) 04:34, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

Curious (2)

There's a new sock, ECN001 (of Curious boy km I mean), There was another but it only made a few edits and I've forgot the details. Even with the new account allowed to edit for so many days, they continue to edit with IPs. So, letting them do their little things until they start causing trouble, which I briefly considered, does not seem palatable. But they seem to be able to change IP at will. And I don't know how drastic we can be in handling one abuser. Can we block all ranges of the ISP, maybe leaving account creation enabled? I don't think they can easily switch ISPs; they could switch to mobile data, but at least it would be costlier for them. Or do we block IPs as they appear (I could list them day to day as they appear)? Nepali Congress and Bimalendra Nidhi are two articles that they target for their advocacy. Could we semi those for 3-12 months, and see where they move on to next? I need guidance. Usedtobecool ☎️ 13:23, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

I've blocked and tagged ECN001; if you remember the other named account, regardless of how many edits they made, please let me know. I believe the ISP used is Vianet Communications Pvt. I have no idea how big they are, but I've never heard of blocking all ranges of an ISP, especially not because of one user. There are problematic ISPs where often wide ranges are blocked, but that's not usually done preemptively. Proxies, of course, are a different matter. If, OTOH, you can let me know if individual IPs that are in the same range, I can look at blocking those ranges. I've done so before with this user. As for semi-protection, the same rules apply to pages this user edits as any page. There has to be enough recent disruption to justify protection.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:48, 29 August 2021 (UTC)
Sensible. Will do. Thank you! Usedtobecool ☎️ 14:48, 29 August 2021 (UTC)
  • I've blocked that one and one other. I've G5'd the draft. There were others, but they haven't edited in a few days, and the user uses so many different ranges, it's hard to keep up. They've always used mobile networks. Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:06, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

I've been trying to create this page, but in spite of a "hangon" template on the main page I never got much of a chance and the talk page was apparently deleted as belonging to a deleted page, but the article page hadn't been deleted yet because of the hangon template, unless it was deleted so fast that my post crossed with the deletion

Am I accidentally breaking some kind of procedure or is there something going on here?

From what I can tell I seem to be cross-posting mid-air collision style with an active attempt to delete the page. I'm not aware of a deletion discussion involving this page.

Shentino (talk) 20:13, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

Wolf's Search was deleted. It was the second time you created the article, and this time was hardly an improvement on the first. If you believe there should be an article on the book, do it in draft form. Creating it in article space is disruptive.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:17, 3 September 2021 (UTC)
thanks I was actually unaware of the drafting process. I've actually done "bold skeletons" before, like "The Profit (TV series)" and I was amazed at how quickly the wikipedia community developed the article. Btw, why was it deleted the first time and was it ever deleted before my first creation of the article? Shentino (talk) 20:19, 3 September 2021 (UTC)
It was deleted the first time per WP:A3. Unless you created it under a different name, those were the only two times it was deleted. By the way, for drafting, see WP:AFC.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:22, 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) 20:44, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

A problematic editor has returned

Greetings Bbb23, I write to inform you that unfortunately the disruptive editor and block evader I told you about last week [19] is back, repeating the same behavior, just in a different article[20][21] (notice that once again is using multiple IPs). As I mentioned last week, this person is likely a sockpuppeter that has already had socks blocked (very likely the editor Php2000/Huasteca whose case is here[22]), in fact there may be another sock in that article right now: The editor Lonerism20. As said editor supports the edits of the IP accounts [23] and actually tried to reduce the number of White Mexicans personally some months ago [24], and must also be noted that both editors always lower them to the same number, that of 13 million (compare [25] with [26] for example). Thanks in advance. Pob3qu3 (talk) 02:23, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

I don't think there is anything I can do here. The two IPs you mention above are in different ranges. Assuming that Lonerism20 is related to those IPs, I doubt that they are related Php2000. As I glance at the somewhat complex history of Php2000, it looks like he edited from Spain, not Colombia.--Bbb23 (talk) 12:12, 2 September 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for your reply. Things have calmed down recently, but I think one must remain vigilant in case a conflict resurfaces as we are dealing with a recurrent disruptive editor. Additionally, I’ve remembered a previous conflict that involded the editor Huasteca [27] on which his edits [28] were conveniently assisted by IP accounts[29][30] that hailed from Indonesia of all places. Nowadays there’s many easy ways to obtain dynamic VPNs and given the proficiency of this sockpuppeter I think said scenario is a plausible possibility. Pob3qu3 (talk) 21:31, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

re

Can you consider yanking talk page access for BuccaBug. He is using it as a WP:POLEMIC. Thank you NW1223(Howl at me|My hunts) 00:12, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

 Done.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:49, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

Consultation

Hi, Bbb23. i am nelson --NelsonLee20042020 (talk) 07:07, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

i want to ask you, can i re insert my image of the victim into the page Anthony Ler, which i created? because i thought of providing identification of the victim, since some standalone biographical pages of murderers like jeffrey dahmer have their victims' photos uploaded --NelsonLee20042020 (talk) 07:07, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

if cannot, please remove it and give me a reason here --NelsonLee20042020 (talk) 07:10, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

What the hell?

Why did you delete my draft on Hopper? It was not "Unambiguous advertising" by any stretch and I was in the middle of improving it. FailedMusician (talk) 00:38, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

Who is paying you to write this and the other travel-related drafts you are quickly creating?--Bbb23 (talk) 00:54, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

Charli_250 et al

Hello, I'm referring to User_talk:Bbb23/Archive_54#Sockpuppets. Right now he's active as 89.12.2.174 (talk · contribs). I'm listing his banned and blocked accounts an various IPs in de WP: de:Benutzer:RoBri/Charli, maybe this is helpful. --Roger (talk) 11:12, 26 August 2021 (UTC) ...IP was blocked by Schniggendiller (talk · contribs), thx --Roger (talk) 18:38, 26 August 2021 (UTC)

... 77.183.98.114 (talk · contribs), was blocked globally this morning, now again in deWP --Roger (talk) 21:34, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

Special:Contributions/0306kev is another sockpuppet, fits even in the naming-pattern. --Roger (talk) 13:04, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

@RoBri: I'm embarrassed. I noticed 0306kev yesterday, I don't remember how as I don't pay attention to sports articles, and the obvious connection just sailed right over my head. Good thing someone's paying attention. Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:15, 1 September 2021 (UTC)
Just popped in, 0306kev00 (talk · contribs) jumping into my view :-) --Roger (talk) 15:54, 5 September 2021 (UTC)
Blocked and tagged. I noticed he had one edit at de.wiki but hasn't been blocked. Perhaps you could do the global lock request?--Bbb23 (talk) 16:15, 5 September 2021 (UTC)
I'll give a hint to Schniggendiller (talk · contribs) --Roger (talk) 16:26, 5 September 2021 (UTC) ...in deWP, done. --Roger (talk) 16:35, 5 September 2021 (UTC)
Thanks (to both of you). This thread is becoming a permanent mini SPI.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:37, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

Daljit Singh

Hi. Why was Daljit Singh deleted? That was a perfectly legit disamb page. --Soman (talk) 21:33, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

The page was hijacked, and I failed to notice the history. I've restored it back to the disambig page. My apologies.--Bbb23 (talk) 21:37, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

Quizplus Draft

Hi Bbb23, why did you delete my draft? I was in the middle of improving it. I was allowed to have six months period to improve it. Please put it back --RidAndia (talk) 02:25, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

I deleted it per WP:G11, and wherever did you get the notion that you are "allowed" any period at all "to improve it"?--Bbb23 (talk) 12:27, 5 September 2021 (UTC)
I read the rule and I understand the reason. However, I received a notification after a I submitted the draft from --User:Usedtobecool indicating that the draft is not accepted and that I have 6 months to improve it. I think I have the right to improve my first draft and to submit it one more time.--RidAndia (talk) 11:33, 6 September 2021 (UTC)
My guess is the six months comes from the fact that if a draft has been unedited for six months, it is subject to deletion per WP:G13. However, the six-month period is not a "right" for any editor's draft to be immune from deletion. Drafts are often speedy-deleted very quickly after creation. It depends on the draft.--Bbb23 (talk) 12:20, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

User talk:AbbasWafadar

Can you tell me who's sockpuppet? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:09, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

Generally, socks are tagged on their userpages; AW is no exception.--Bbb23 (talk) 12:13, 6 September 2021 (UTC)
There it is! Thanks. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:42, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

@NYT first said

Hi, while I don't object to your deletion of that page, I wanted to call your attention to the fact that the author had provided a (fairly generous) list of additional sources on the talk page. I had not had the opportunity to evaluate the reliability of the sources provided, but I had pinged the author and asked them to add some additional reliable sources and then I would remove the tag. If the Twitter account in question has really been discussed in as many sources as the author appears to be have provided, I would have been willing to send the article through AfD (if needed) instead of requesting speedy deletion. Taking Out The Trash (talk) 20:01, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

I moved it to draft space. Regardless of anything else, it needs work. BTW, I don't trust the creator.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:12, 6 September 2021 (UTC)
My suspicions were correct. The user and all their page creations are now gone.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:28, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

Edward Tasji

What happened to my first contention where I listed the reasons? Why did it magically disappear w/o a response? While revising my draft and uploading it as an article the previous article was deleted by other admins. What is going on? Do the wiki admins gloat in their glorified station from being editors? Edward Tashji is known in the Armenian & Turkish academic communities. He has books published, with one of them referenced for being a primary source. He was the public relations director for Turkish American relations, his life has a web presence, and a wiki page in German. Why do you feel the need to nitpick this account? Is it because the articles I post or edit upset you personally?. Can you direct me on where to complain about admin abuse. Medyawatch (talk) 16:41, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

User:Rgalo10

Another sock on my talkpage, 75.99.44.106 (talk · contribs · WHOIS). Cards84664 21:04, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

Well, that certainly wasn't very pleasant, was it? Blocked and edits rev/del'd.--Bbb23 (talk) 21:19, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

Recently unblocked user edit-warring again

Hi Bbb23, hope you're well. The user Medyawatch that was blocked by you recently is back in Misak Torlakian page and is edit-warring again [31]. After I wrote an extended message in the talk page of the article [32] and explained the problems with their edits, I asked them to see talk per WP:BRD [33]. Yet they edit-war and re-revert in the same fasihion as previously without even replying in talk [34]. ZaniGiovanni (talk) 22:51, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

The user started casting aspersions [35]. ZaniGiovanni (talk) 23:06, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

Mohammed106 (again)

Apparently, banned user Mohammed106 (talk · contribs) is editing again, this time with some new IPs – 156.38.50.12 (talk · contribs · WHOIS), 156.38.52.203 (talk · contribs · WHOIS), 156.38.50.208 (talk · contribs · WHOIS), 41.254.64.42 (talk · contribs · WHOIS), and 156.38.52.12 (talk · contribs · WHOIS). I guess there may be some more, which I didn't notice so far. —Sundostund (talk) 06:02, 9 September 2021 (UTC)

It's a bit of overkill considering the age of the edits, but I've blocked Special:contributions/156.38.48.0/21 for one month. You might want to check the edits in that range. I reverted one, but there are others that probably need to be reverted. The 41. IP's one edit was last month.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:22, 9 September 2021 (UTC)
I appreciate the range block you applied here, I think its more than justifiable... I reverted some of their edits in the range, the ones that were the most obvious block evasions. There might be some that I overlooked tho... As for the 41. IP, I reported it as well just in order to be as detailed as possible. Anyway, I suppose there are some additional IPs, used on short-term basis, which I overlooked as well. —Sundostund (talk) 13:35, 9 September 2021 (UTC)

Block evasion

Hello. User:JRachid is now here. -- Tobby72 (talk) 08:21, 11 September 2021 (UTC)

Right, blocked and tagged.--Bbb23 (talk) 11:36, 11 September 2021 (UTC)

Just saying

Absolutely pointless. The single reply made my comment redundant and removal did nothing to hamper the discussion. But, sure lol – 2.O.Boxing 16:31, 12 September 2021 (UTC)

Request

Hello.Sorry for putting my message in a wrong place.Could you possibly show me the right place for this subject?Thanks in advance--Namaka (talk) 18:19, 12 September 2021 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
They sure don't pay you enough :)

Thanks for all that you do. Sro23 (talk) 00:58, 13 September 2021 (UTC)

It's always a pleasure to get a barnstar from an old friend, Sro23.--Bbb23 (talk) 01:55, 13 September 2021 (UTC)

Reappearance?

Hi Bbb, FYI, on 17 August you blocked 92.53.23.253, they, using several IP addresses in that range, had been repeatedly adding false information to Nissan, Jaguar Land Rover and other car related articles. 31.11.104.176 has popped up today making very similar edits. -- DeFacto (talk). 21:04, 13 September 2021 (UTC)

 Done --Bbb23 (talk) 21:09, 13 September 2021 (UTC)

Chicken Florentine

We discussed Chicken Florentine on my talk page about a week ago, and I was surprised by the lack of an article. Well, you inspired me to write Florentine (culinary term). Let me know what you think. Thanks. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 20:09, 12 September 2021 (UTC)

Well-written and interesting, which is what I expect from you. :-) --Bbb23 (talk) 21:53, 12 September 2021 (UTC)
Just reading that made me hungry, Cullen328. Liz Read! Talk! 00:32, 14 September 2021 (UTC)
Thanks, Liz. Now I have to cook some chicken Florentine, take some photos for Commons, and then eat it with my wife. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 01:07, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

Chemmalai Maha Vidyalayam

Hey Bbb23,

Thanks for clearing this up. I sometimes wonder if some editors disregard me because I have a female name. Oh well, just a head's up, JohnDVandevert left a crazy message for me on my talk page so one might be coming your way. Stay well, Liz Read! Talk! 00:30, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

@Liz: I will seek higher authority in legislative manners What on earth does that mean? He's lucky, though, because I was going to block him for 24h for the personal attack, but Acroterion warned him, so I didn't.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:41, 14 September 2021 (UTC)
Perhaps I was feeling slightly more benign, but not by much - that was egregious, and I've got no objection to an insta-block, since I considered it too. It's also bizarre - is somebody giving terrible advice on IRC? Acroterion (talk) 00:45, 14 September 2021 (UTC)
That is a clear legal threat. Together with the clear declaration to refuse to AGF, a longer block is warranted. A strong battleground mentality. -- Valjean (talk) 01:34, 14 September 2021 (UTC)
He is in distress over losing his draft so I have some second thoughts about my gentle mocking. But I'll leave it up. It's too bad he has told so many admins (at least 3 by my count) to not have contact with him. Liz Read! Talk! 03:16, 14 September 2021 (UTC)
He lost the version of his draft that had been deleted per G11, but got another version restored that had been created by two of his previous accounts. Nonetheless, he went on an attacking rampage, and I blocked him for one week.--Bbb23 (talk) 03:49, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

Your recent block on one of the evasions of 92.53.0.0/18

Hello, Bbb23.

I've just noticed this IP address edit with the same targeted pages as the aforementioned IP range...this new IP range is this one, I think. Would this be considered as block evasion, and if so, would you mind imposing a block on that IP range? Thanks.

Tfess up?or down? 02:00, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

Blocked. Thanks for letting me know.--Bbb23 (talk) 02:08, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

Colors Telugu

I would like to know the reason for the deletion of the page colors telugu. I attached reliable sources to confirm its existence. So, kindly stop deleting my page. Icecreamland (talk) 14:21, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Admin's Barnstar
You were sorely missed. Good to see you "active" and editing. Wishing you the best. Unbroken Chain (talk) 12:25, 16 September 2021 (UTC)
Thanks, Unbroken Chain.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:18, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

Explanation of joke on PerpetuityGrat's userpage

Hey Bbb23! So I see that you had an issue with PerpetuityGrat's userpage joke and (after some issues on Teahouse) they've explained the joke and the reasoning they reverted your edit. The reasoning for their joke is that they don't like "articles i've created/heavily contributed to" lists so they created their joke list as a joke and satire. When you removed it and they reverted it, they thought that you were simply just showing authority as an admin and were looking for a policy that explains your removal. You never really gave them one and, after I removed it (twice, the second time providing them with the policy that applies, being WP:HUMOR) they understood the reasoning for the removal and have decided to keep the joke off of their page. I figured that you would like to know this. Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry | Discord: Blaze Wolf#0001 (talk) 20:53, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

Sockpuppet investigations of Monegasque100

See Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/ClassicYoghurt, if you are interested. wikinights talk 22:07, 17 September 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:47, 17 September 2021 (UTC)

User:Spokane Ball yt

Can you nuke their articles? They all seem to be PRODded, AfDed, or CSDed, and a few have been redirectified. ― Qwerfjkltalk 15:28, 18 September 2021 (UTC)

Why did you revert my edits

I edited a page which I think improved it considerably and my edit was undone for being unsourced.

I quickly checked the page and realised a number of other entries were also unsourced, so I deleted them. Wikipedia’s policy is quite clear about unreferenced material.

Can you justify your actions? If not revert my last edit. A64784574 (talk)

Obvious socks are obvious – and blocked. Favonian (talk) 19:19, 18 September 2021 (UTC)

Possible sockpuppet

Hello, Bbb23,

I stumbled upon editor Favaroon who, having registered a week ago with only 53 edits, has been focusing on tagging pages CSD G5 (all of the taggings have been reverted). I've noticed that sometimes sockpuppets are drawn to policing other sockpuppets so that's why I'm posting here. They say they are a Disney and Nickelodeon fan if that rings any bells. If I'm off-base, my apologies. But new editors tagging pages for deletion is a red flag for me. Liz Read! Talk! 02:17, 19 September 2021 (UTC)

I was incorrect, looking at their deleted contributions, their CSD G5 tagging is more extensive that I initially realized. Liz Read! Talk! 02:20, 19 September 2021 (UTC)

Request for assistance

Hello again. I am writing to ask if you could be so kind as to take a look at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/DBD. I would not normally mean to bother you with such a case, but I am concerned that if it is left too long (there seems to be a substantial backlog), the checkuser data could become stale. If I am not mistaken, such data is only retained for 90 days...and the last edit on one of the relevant accounts was on 4 July. I apologise for making such an impudent request, but I would be most obliged for your assistance. Thank you, RGloucester — ☎ 16:11, 19 September 2021 (UTC)

As you note, there is a heavy backlog at SPI, including CU requests. Assuming the alleged sock doesn't edit anymore, the data still won't be stale for about two more weeks. I'm not sure a CheckUser will review it "out of turn", particularly as it hasn't been endorsed by a clerk, but there's nothing I can do.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:24, 19 September 2021 (UTC)
That's fine. Thank you for your reply. I will keep an eye on things, but in the meantime, I hope someone will take a look before the end of the of the remaining fortnight. RGloucester — ☎ 18:37, 19 September 2021 (UTC)

User:Renewal6

This user you blocked was suspected of being a sockpuppet at discussion https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#Renewal6_and_Bkatcher_being_disruptive_and_uncivi. Would it be possible to investigate if they are? Dronebogus (talk) 19:21, 19 September 2021 (UTC)

A sock puppet of whom?--Bbb23 (talk) 19:49, 19 September 2021 (UTC)
I do not know, that’s part of what I was wondering. I think the user who was suspicious just thought they seemed like a sockpuppet of someone because of their behavior (vandalism-only account with very narrow editing range getting suspiciously deep into policy-heavy matters shortly after being created). Dronebogus (talk) 20:01, 19 September 2021 (UTC)
Nothing I can do about that.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:05, 19 September 2021 (UTC)

Maria Mukuka

Hi there!

I noticed my tag for speedy deletion was deleted for the article above. Is an off broadway ensemble cast member (only one show) of significance enough for a wikipedia page? Most sources lead back to the actors website, with minimal outside sources. Would love to hear from you! House1090 (talk) 22:59, 20 September 2021 (UTC)

I think there's enough there to get past an A7, which is a much lower standard than WP:GNG.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:02, 20 September 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for this! If I may, none of the sources address their work though. There is no mention of the actor, only of the other ones. They only come up in the ensemble cast list, which makes me think that they were added to article to avoid deletion since there would not be further investigation. Also, the views for the pages are extremely low. Thanks for the reply, look forward to hearing from you again! House1090 (talk) 23:08, 20 September 2021 (UTC)
Then take it to AfD.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:11, 20 September 2021 (UTC)
Looking for a link to there, it's been a while since I have been on. House1090 (talk) 23:13, 20 September 2021 (UTC)
WP:AFD.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:14, 20 September 2021 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Admin's Barnstar
Supporting wikiusers by answering questions and giving guidance. House1090 (talk) 23:16, 20 September 2021 (UTC)

Luca Stricagnoli

Hi Bbb23 I was in the middle of editing my page and you deleted it, I have been working on this a long time and was following guidance from another mod on how to fix it and get it approved.The last mod told me to find more citation and that does make it a little one sided but he rejected the unbiased original one for lack of context , can you reinstate it please and i would appreciate your adviceMickmonaghan343 (talk) 14:05, 16 September 2021 (UTC) .

My advice is to do something else on Wikipedia besides promote Stricagnoli. The only thing you've been doing for the last three years is work on that draft, and all you've achieved is an advertisement.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:32, 16 September 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for the reply, i was hoping to learn from doing one page and going from there, having it deleted without being able to defend it like last time, i based the headings on other candyrat guitarists that had pages approved, i dont see how its any advertisment as it was only a draft and its not visable on google. can you please put it back so i can take out what you deem to be advertising? if you check the one rejected last month it was straight to the point but got rejected even after the last person who deleted it said it should be fine to be considered. thanks Mickmonaghan343 (talk) 16:10, 16 September 2021 (UTC)
@Bbb23:Hi again hope you are well i am asking is it possible to "userfy" it, that is restore it and put it in your User space, like my Sandbox where i can work on improving it. Thanks Mickmonaghan343 (talk) 11:47, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

Bias on MCS page

Bbb23, I am concerned with the partisan depiction of Multiple Chemical Sensitivity in Wikipedia. MCS is a highly controversial illness, with researchers hotly divided. However, the views of only one side of the debate appear to control the narrative on Wikipedia's page. For example, when one searches Toxicant Induced Loss of Tolerance (TILT) in Wikipedia, you are automatically redirected to the MCS page. However, there is no mention of TILT anywhere on the MCS page. I discussed this on the talk page and everyone who participated in the discussion agreed that TILT should be added beside IEI. This was immediately undone by another user who had not participated in the discussion. This is just one example, overall the entire MCS page is full of unreferenced and improperly referenced opinion statements, some of which are completely false (eg, "unrecognized").

So I was hoping to initiate a dialogue with you. What is going on here? I thought Wikipedia was supposed to present a neutral point of view.Silliestchris (talk) 17:09, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

I really don't know what you want from me. I have no interest in a dialogue with you about Wikipedia or the article or the content dispute. My job is to prevent disruption by enforcing Wikipedia's policies. You are having trouble editing here because you have an agenda. I've already blocked you once for your disruption on the article. If I were you, I'd forget the article. If that's your only interest on Wikipedia, then I'd forget Wikipedia.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:37, 21 September 2021 (UTC)
I do have an agenda, it's to bring both sides of the debate to the article. Currently, only one side of the debate is being presented, and any attempts to bring the other side of the debate to the table, which has extensive references, is being aggressively muted.
Can you please comment on my observation in regard to TILT? Silliestchris (talk) 19:01, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

Report sockpuppet

I have a feeling that User:Nic.cartagena12 and a new user User:Nic Of Reading are just one person. Can you check their userpages and look for their similarities. Thank you. clipred (talk) 15:10, 18 September 2021 (UTC)

 Done --Bbb23 (talk) 15:26, 18 September 2021 (UTC)
I believe they have returned as User:Wiki Scientist. Their edits moving the Mikey Williams (basketball, born 2004) article match those by User:Nic Of Reading. Many thanks. CalDoesIt (talk) 15:48, 21 September 2021 (UTC)
My Comment. I notice that an admin already blocked Wiki Scientists because of sockpuppet, i am opposed to it. First, I looked at the users contributions of both users, and I think they were not editing the same article. Second, if you notice that the both user created their account in the same date, but Wiki Scientists has already made 200 plus edits in just 11 days compared to Nic of Reading that has 70 plus edits only. Please check properly the both user. It is impossible that they were using two accounts in just one device. Sorry, I can't explain it properly because i can't speak English very well. But i think Wiki Scientists is not using multiple accounts. Thank you. clipred (talk) 03:18, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

Sock puppet question

With regard to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Diane Molly Handerson is "Please move case to Liliana Verdiana Levy" because that's the primary user and all sock puppet cases root from the first account? (new to this and just trying to understand how it all fits together) Sciencefish (talk) 13:26, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

Yes, in the sense that the "first account" is the one that's created first. I wouldn't all it the "primary user", though, as there's only one user with multiple accounts. Does that answer your question?--Bbb23 (talk) 13:30, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

A Barnstar for you!

The Anti-Flame Barnstar
You always stay civil. Not many editors can say that, but you can! Pyramids09 (talk) 17:22, 23 September 2021 (UTC)
Civil, probably so, but "nice" comes harder to me. Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 19:14, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

Charli 250

Hey, i saw you were involed per here and here where the blocked user has come back. He is indeed back and everyday with another IP, sometimes undoing edits just to make them themselves afterwards or adding a result while other matches are still on from the same time. They edit in 2021–22 Frauen-Bundesliga and 2021–22 Handball-Bundesliga and other german league(s). Any way we can deal with it as they have a different IP everyday? Also pretty uncivil here. I don't want to go into an edit war and risk myself getting in trouble. Kante4 (talk) 13:01, 12 September 2021 (UTC)

...currently Sportfan032021 (talk · contribs) --Roger (talk) 13:45, 12 September 2021 (UTC) ...global block by Schniggendiller, cheers --Roger (talk) 13:50, 12 September 2021 (UTC)
There's only so much I can do when they jump IPs. I blocked the IP who edited today: 77.191.14.186. I also blocked Iliassport032021 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), whom I noticed while looking at the pages noted above. RoBri, please do your usual good deed and request a global lock for the named account. Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:47, 12 September 2021 (UTC)
Yeah i saw the quick block you did, thanks for that. I also asked RoBri if i can help somehow when i notice someone fishy (most pages that get edited are on my watchlist) or should i post here? Don't want to disturb you with my post(s). I guess we have to hope that the editor gets bored... Kante4 (talk) 15:56, 12 September 2021 (UTC)
I don't notice unless someone tells me because I have none of the pages this sock edits on my watchlist. I'm afraid sports articles are not my thing. :-) --Bbb23 (talk) 16:00, 12 September 2021 (UTC)

77.183.19.118 (talk · contribs) looks like another IP from the user. Erased the standings just to make the same edit himself here. Other edited articles look like the ones the user does edit also (normally). Kante4 (talk) 18:35, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

Now blocked, thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:40, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
Thanks to you. I think i will (have to) post more often here in the next days/weeks... -.- Kante4 (talk) 18:48, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
Back with 77.183.23.72 (talk · contribs · WHOIS). Kante4 (talk) 19:04, 17 September 2021 (UTC)
Another one 89.14.33.38 (talk · contribs) here, same articles as always and "behaviour", updating games before all from the same time are over. Reverting edits, just to make them themself again Template:2021–22 3. Liga table. Kante4 (talk) 14:00, 18 September 2021 (UTC)
+ 89.14.12.91 (talk · contribs) --Roger (talk) 15:36, 20 September 2021 (UTC)
New one is 77.13.66.132 (talk · contribs). Kante4 (talk) 13:35, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

Sandbox

Hey I'm wondering why you deleted my sandbox page? The Tips of Apmh (talk) 18:58, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

Having a copy of the Donald Trump article is not an appropriate use of your sandbox.--Bbb23 (talk) 21:27, 25 September 2021 (UTC)
@Bbb23: I didn't know I couldn't copy and paste other articles into my sandbox. I was using that article in my sandbox to test dummy citations. I also had many useful links in my sandbox history, which are now deleted. The Tips of Apmh (talk) 05:23, 26 September 2021 (UTC)
Now you know.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:14, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

Possible sockpuppet of User:Gotam502

Please have a look at Special:Contributions/BSM53 -MPGuy2824 (talk) 10:19, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

Blocked and tagged. Thanks very much.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:40, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

Another reappearance?

Similar to this one we now have 185.100.245.76 and 185.100.245.168. -- DeFacto (talk). 14:20, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

Special:contributions/185.100.245.0/24 blocked for six weeks.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:27, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

About Bhumana Kiran Kumar 275

Hi, Bbb123 How are you? Bhumana Kiran Kumar 275 is only Promotion account. He Used Own Userpage and Usertalk Page for Promotion. He joined Wikipedia last 9 days. He Written Own autobiography in Tamil on your userpage.I Can't Understand this. I Requested to you Please Blocked for 3 Month or Indefinitely Because He is Only promotion Account.I've taging for speedy deletion under CSD G11. Best Regards. Jiggyziz 🇮🇳Any Help🇮🇳? Contact Me. 06:33, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

Handled by Athaenara.--Bbb23 (talk) 11:25, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

Sockpuppetry and ThomasFan707

Hi Bbb23,

I noticed that you blocked ThomasFan707 for being a sockpuppet. I was wondering if you could share the name of the account(s) of the puppetmaster because the user may have also made nonconstructive contributions to Wikimedia Commons.

Thanks,  Mysterymanblue  10:37, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

I don't know for sure who the master is, but apparently some other accounts are Special:contributions/SpiderMan B1A and Special:contributions/BFDIFan707.--Bbb23 (talk) 11:30, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

Creating a Draft of previously deleted page

Hello @Bbb23: , I was about to create a draft for Benafsha Soonawalla but saw that it was previously deleted two years back . Recently I am working on project for creating pages of serials and actors . I thought it would be better to ask you if I should move further for its draft creation Rockpeterson (talk) 06:52, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

All I tell you is that article was created and recreated so many times (by sock puppets) that it was salted in 2018.--Bbb23 (talk) 11:34, 27 September 2021 (UTC)
Ok Thanks for the info Rockpeterson (talk) 13:18, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

Eduardo Behrentz

Hello brother, what can I do to create this article? It has references, and what is written is well founded. The person in question is the current Vice Chancellor of the Universidad de los Andes, he has repeated his execution time in 2020 due to his work in the first period (2016-2018) and is a well-known columnist for the newspaper El Tiempo, the most important of Colombia. What else do I need to reference or add to show that the subject in question is indeed relevant? Thanks. --ChuchoVCJMuzik (talk) 19:06, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

If you like, I will move it to draft so you don't have to redo all your work. Because notability is borderline, I don't think it's a good idea to move it back to article space on your own; rather, use the WP:AFC process so you get feedback from other editors as to whether it satisfies notability guidelines. Also, I deleted it per WP:G11 as well, so when you work on it, tone down the promotional rhetoric as much as possible. Let me know.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:17, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

Why You Deleted My Article

Bbb123, why you tagging speey deletion of Dr. Nagendra and Durgadas (novel) .both are notable topic, You are a foreign citizen, do you know, delete the article about these two topics, I am not sorry, I only regret that main could not become a good and reliable user, if possible, forgive me today After that, I will not create or edit articles on the English Wikipedia, the sister project of the Wikimedia Foundation.Best Regards Jiggyziz 🇮🇳Any Help🇮🇳? Contact Me. 13:16, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

Jiggyziz, Looking at these as I saw them on the CAT:CSD, I judge they are not particularly promotional. The article on the book is a straightforward descriptive article, though the plot is too long.. The article on the person, which I've movedto his name, Nagendra, uses adjectives of praise, but they seem to be sourced and are not excessive. In each case, I also think there are enough elements of notability I should note that I too have sometimes made similar errors. This is why it's best practice for one admin not to simply delete an article except in the most obvious of cases, but just tag it and let another admin confirm: we check each other. DGG ( talk ) 23:08, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

Worth an SPI?

Hey Bbb23. If you want to open an SPI for X2821yl (talk · contribs) I would have some results to post there. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 17:48, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

@EdJohnston: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/X2821yl. I'll bill you later for my services.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:48, 27 September 2021 (UTC)
Thanks! EdJohnston (talk) 23:12, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

Please block this user

User talk:2001:FD8:2118:4986:9525:C888:597E:C94, that user is making a vandalisms at the article Andrew E. and Salbakuta, can you block that user. clipred (talk) 06:31, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

Hi:

I noticed you deleted that SPI that Indonesia 2006 has filed. I thought it was strange how a brand new editor would file an SPI in less than 24 hours after they have created an account. DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 13:45, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

Indeed.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:49, 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) 17:03, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

Ficzere21 at Bongo drum

Hi Bbb,

I saw that you blocked Ficzere21 (talk · contribs) due to edit warring at the Bongo drum article. It appears that they were evading their block by using IPs, readding the same content, see 2600:1017:B12F:1FD0:0:45:91A1:1301 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) and 72.231.224.127 (talk · contribs · WHOIS). Could you temp block those IPs and extend the account's block for block evasion? Thanks!

(PS. Is there a better venue to ask this than just the blocking admin's talk page?) Thanks, eviolite (talk) 15:23, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

@Eviolite: I have increased the block to indefinite for the named account and blocked each of the IPs for 31h for block evasion. I'm not sure the IP blocks were needed, but... You can always file a report at WP:SPI for the block evasion, but the truth is it would probably take some time for it to be addressed, so contacting me is probably better. However, if I'm not around, your only options are SPI or hoping another administrator is willing to review the situation. I'd appreciate it if you'd look at the article and make sure it's okay; it looks to me like some of the socks' changes were not backed out. Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:09, 30 September 2021 (UTC)
Thank you. I wasn't sure if I should post to SPI as I know CUs are not allowed to confirm users to IPs, and there wasn't another account here. I've restored an older version of the lede and it seems fine now, couldn't find anything with Who Wrote That. Thanks! eviolite (talk) 16:31, 30 September 2021 (UTC)
If you file at SPI, you can't request a CU if, as in this instance, it would connect an IP to a named user, but you can still file a report at SPI without requesting a CU. Accounts are blocked all the time based only on behavior.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:06, 30 September 2021 (UTC)
Since we are talking about SPIs here, I was wondering if anyone of you would like to check if user Ficzere21 is a sockpuppet of someone? He was too aggressive to be "just a newbie". Check the copyvio violators. That's what he was doing.--MollyPollyRolly (talk) 19:58, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

Charli

Hey, sorry to be back but 77.11.162.146 (talk · contribs) is the new account it seems. At the european table tennis champions (see here) he just reverted an edit just to make the same one himself a few minutes later (just like he made at other articles with old accounts). Also same other article he edits (Regionalliga). Kante4 (talk) 14:30, 2 October 2021 (UTC)

Re: Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring

Hello,

Not entirely familiar with the rules of the noticeboard, but after my reversion, the issue at hand was seemingly resolved. Not sure about the tone of the edit summaries (WP:NPA maybe?) but otherwise I don't see much point in carrying on with my original complaint. Let me know what I should do. Thanks! Benjamin112 ☎ 23:00, 2 October 2021 (UTC)

Just add a comment at the bottom of the report that it has been resolved.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:02, 2 October 2021 (UTC)

Quick question

Hello! I'm seeing that Smita Patil filmography has been recreated recently while patrolling new pages. I see that you deleted the page in August under WP:G5. I'm not an admin, so I can't see the old version of the page that was deleted. I was wondering if you'd be willing to check if the content was notably similar to the version that was deleted, so as to see if this might be another one of those circumstances where a deleted page gets revived by copy-paste. — Mikehawk10 (talk) 04:48, 3 October 2021 (UTC)

Not the same. The sock's version was crude.--Bbb23 (talk) 06:45, 3 October 2021 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Qazi Yasir

Hello Bbb23. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Qazi Yasir, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: To be quite honest, I do question why you tagged this article for speedy deletion. Admittedly, theferences - such as they are - ain't good, but would appear to be good enough to avoid outright speedy deletion re . Thank you. Shirt58 (talk) 11:27, 4 October 2021 (UTC)

@Shirt58: Well, in my defense, I didn't tag it as A7 but G11. Still, when I'm the reviewing admin of a speedy tag for an article that's been around a long time, I too am more relucatant to delete except in very obvious cases. In retrospect, although there are parts that are overly promotional (the whole article smacks of making him a martyr), overall not enough for a g11, especially for a subject who is probably sufficiently notable to withstand deletion. Sorry for making extra work for you.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:18, 4 October 2021 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thanks for this. I was in the middle of trying to write a semi-lengthy AN/I report to explain that something needed to be done about the self-promo, so you've saved me a lot of time! DanCherek (talk) 16:44, 4 October 2021 (UTC)

about kreeda bharati page

Kreeda Bharati is a nationwide sports organization, in which physical and mental sports training is imparted to every citizen of the country, especially youth. All sources on this page confirm this and send it to Wikipedia mainspace... thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wiki97828 (talk • contribs) 03:49, 5 October 2021 (UTC)

Sockpuppet

Just reporting these possible sock puppets, these blocked user User:Wiki Silent and user User:Flex On Me have voted in these discussion Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ion Perez. They have the same reasoning, look at these, [36] and [37]. —Clipred (talk) 02:09, 6 October 2021 (UTC)

I agree; now blocked and tagged. Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 02:25, 6 October 2021 (UTC)
👌 —Clipred (talk) 02:26, 6 October 2021 (UTC)
Hi there! User:Flex On Me created another account: User:Flex on You. Please block, thanks. — Ctrlwiki (talk) 05:06, 7 October 2021 (UTC)
The sockpuppet is also being discussed at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Nic.cartagena12. SeanJ 2007 (talk) 05:12, 7 October 2021 (UTC)

Deletion of Will Witt

Hello Bbb23. It says that you deleted my article for (A7: Article about a real person, which does not credibly indicate the importance or significance of the subject). Before it was deleted, I added sources to it. I was wondering if you could tell me why it was deleted? Did I break any other rules? Am I as a user suspended from creating articles? Can it be undone now that I added sources? Ricey244 (talk) 17:40, 7 October 2021 (UTC) Thanks, Ricey244

Hi Bbb23, could the page be restored to draftspace so that Ricey244 could work on it there? Ricey244 inquired on my talk page too. Thanks. Tol (talk | contribs) @ 18:02, 7 October 2021 (UTC)
@Ricey244: I don't think you violated any policy, and you're definitely not "suspended from creating articles" — don't worry about it! Tol (talk | contribs) @ 18:04, 7 October 2021 (UTC)
See Draft:Will Witt.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:33, 7 October 2021 (UTC)
Thanks Tol and Bbb23! Ricey244 (talk) 22:02, 7 October 2021 (UTC)

User:Satrar

Would you mind taking a look at Satrar? They've been POV pushing and are making disruptive edits at Separatist movements of Pakistan,CAC/PAC JF-17 Thunder, and Para (Special Forces), and they are now making personal attacks when I tried to discuss it with them. They clearly are not here to build an encyclopedia. - ZLEA T\C 14:36, 8 October 2021 (UTC)

As far as I can tell, a lot of this is old.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:45, 8 October 2021 (UTC)
That's because it went through WP:AN/I without response and another admin before I came to you. - ZLEA T\C 15:51, 8 October 2021 (UTC)
Regardless of the reason, it's still old. I don't see the point of taking action unless they resume their misbehavior.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:55, 8 October 2021 (UTC)

Deletion of Cupid Chan

Hi. My page has been deleted (Speedy Deletion) and I was wondering if I made any genuine mistake because I followed every step according to Wikipedia guidelines. Can you please accept my request of undeletion of this page?. He is a well-known person in his industry. The more I searched about him, the more I found that as a speaker he has been invited to more than 30 renowned events in different parts of the world. He is also chairperson of Linux Foundation that is a nonprofit consortium dedicated to building sustainable ecosystems. He is also a professor at the University of Maryland. The content of the article was backed by several notable independent references and sources like yahoo, business insider. So I believe that he is notable enough to have a Wikipedia page and I request you to undelete the page so that I can improve it more. If you think that it was written in a promotional way then I can also make more edits and rearrange the content to make it according to Wikipedia rules. I'll be thankful for your help. Regards Billyatthewheels (talk) 00:21, 8 October 2021 (UTC)

@Billyatthewheels: Who is Pittsbilly?--Bbb23 (talk) 15:42, 8 October 2021 (UTC)

@Bbb23: Hi I don't know pittsbilly Billyatthewheels (talk) 15:47, 8 October 2021 (UTC)

@Bbb23:: Hi I don't know this guy named Pittsbilly. Billyatthewheels (talk) 15:50, 8 October 2021 (UTC)

You don't need to leave duplicate messages, and you don't need to ping me on my Talk page. I am willing to put the article into draft space with the condition that you cannot move it to article space on your own. Instead, you must use WP:AFC so it will not be moved to article space until it is appropriate. If that condition is acceptable to you, let me know.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:54, 8 October 2021 (UTC)

Hi sure. Sorry for the duplicate message. It wasn't intentional. Yes please I'll be thankful if you move it to draft space so that I can make the required changes to it and will submit it for review in AFC. Thanks Billyatthewheels (talk) 18:48, 8 October 2021 (UTC)

Okay, see Draft:Cupid Chan.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:27, 8 October 2021 (UTC)

Possible Dusrapehelu sock

Hi. Do you think AurSunao (talk · contribs) would be a sock of Dusrapehelu? You blocked the last sock 3 days ago Pyaarkarona (talk · contribs). While the both the usernames, AurSunao (And listen) and Pyaarkarona (Do love) (from the userpage) are similar, the AurSunao account is interested in RMs, like Uttarpradeshi (talk · contribs). I'm not sure which one is the sock master, if there is one. Any opinions? Thanks — DaxServer (talk to me) 16:04, 9 October 2021 (UTC)

Actually, speaking of the last edit by Pyaarkarona [38], Uttarpradeshi expressed interest in making RM closures but said wasn't aware how back then User talk:Uttarpradeshi#Closing a move discussion. I think these two socks belong together. Back then when I reported Uttarpradeshi as Sanjay Kumar Tiwari20's sock, Doug Weller found the links b/w Uttarpradeshi and other socks, but couldn't confirm to Sanjay. Perhaps Uttarpradeshi and the confirmed socks are linked to Dusrapehelu and not Sanjay? — DaxServer (talk to me) 16:14, 9 October 2021 (UTC)

Block a IP

Hello! @Bbb23: Sorry for bother you, I warned 185.30.88.95 according to what you said in my talk page, but they are doing the same thing again and again... Can you check and block this ip to prevent vandalized at Binədərəsi. Thanks ~ Limited Idea4me (talk) 17:23, 10 October 2021 (UTC)

You don't need to ping me on my Talk page. I've blocked the IP.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:28, 10 October 2021 (UTC)

Gerda's October corner

October songs

Today: DYK #1700, and I uploaded more images, mostly blue and green, for hope. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:03, 8 October 2021 (UTC)

Gerda, I do like pretty pictures, especially of nature, thanks! --Bbb23 (talk) 15:48, 8 October 2021 (UTC)
You are welcome, and there are four more now (if you click on songs), - around here, it's mostly black&white, and standing upright as Psalm 15 says - I made a last statement in the AN thread where I feel I don't speak the language. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:12, 10 October 2021 (UTC)

SuperGuy1119

I read his unblock request and I think he might not have been intending to do something wrong ... at the very least maybe someone should have asked him what he was doing. I'm leaning toward unblock, unless I'm missing something. Daniel Case (talk) 04:58, 12 October 2021 (UTC)

"2022 World Sambo Championships" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect 2022 World Sambo Championships. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 October 12#2022 World Sambo Championships until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Deancarmeli (talk) 07:25, 12 October 2021 (UTC)

Touching bases

Hey Bbb23, I wanted to touch bases with you just for a second about the 24 hour block you gave to dawnleelynn. I wanted to first let you know that in our past encounters, I have generally respected you as an admin (heck, I even gave you my pony prize once) and I am hoping that your attitude just reflected a tough day. I realize her block has expired, and hopefully this will soon blow over, but I am a little concerned about how quick you were to slap a block on someone with a clean record who just had a temper flare in a minor wiki-kerfuffle over a piped link and a comma. This sort of dustup has happened to us all, and it really was just a warnable offense unless 3RR is a rigid line that has to always result in a block for everyone—which it isn’t. I know this user well, and a warning from you as an an admin asking her to cool her jets would’ve been more than sufficient. Sometimes even experienced people do wander into new “wiki–neighborhoods” and discover they’ve encountered a walled garden with fierce gatekeepers. (My comments elsewhere outline my position on that issue) When you’re not ready for it, it can knock you for a loop. I think I’m a little bit frustrated as I noted a situation earlier the same day (I chose not to get involved) where an anon IP was more than 3RR reverting something in a far more aggressive manner —indicative of a sock— yet someone uninvolved just sent them a gentle welcome message and politely asked them to stop. My point (I do have a point) is merely that I was concerned at your assumption of ill will on the part of a very sincere and dedicated editor. We all make mistakes. My unsolicited advice is even when you do have to apply consequences, maybe avoid attributing motive to people, as we don’t know what’s going on inside anyone’s head. Montanabw(talk) 18:46, 12 October 2021 (UTC)

Concurring with Montana and adding from my comment from the discussion on dawnleelynn's talk page."I would wish in a more perfect Wikipedia that the admin here might review the action and if possible remove the block from the editor's record telling me that there are those on Wikipedia who understand that this is both an encyclopedia and a collaborative community where good editors are not thick on the ground and in this case an editor who got a little carried away for a first time is warned and so valued for the work she has done here for years with out trespassing on our policies." Littleolive oil (talk) 18:55, 12 October 2021 (UTC)

G6 CSD

Regarding Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Mexican media image vandal:


1. You (or whoever CSDed it) should have warned me on my talk page before CSDing out of literal nowhere. I'm pretty sure that's literal policy that one has to do that when they speedy nominate a page (and even if it isn't, I still feel like it's common sense anyways).


2. "Nonexistent user"? Seriously? I was basing it on an actual LTA casepage as this person doesn't have a username AFAIK. I didn't want to go to ANI or AIV as it wasn't urgent vandalism in particular, but I still needed to report it. What else am I supposed to do, let a vandal keep vandalizing? I think not. wizzito | say hello! 21:35, 12 October 2021 (UTC)

We don't create SPIs where the master doesn't exist. Just because someone labeled some range(s) of IPs as xxxxxx doesn't mean an SPI should be created. If you don't want the IPs to keep vandalizing, then you should seek range blocks at WP:ANI. AIV would not work because too much analysis would be needed for a range block. And please stop being so antagonistic. It makes me less inclined to help you.--Bbb23 (talk) 21:46, 12 October 2021 (UTC)
Sorry, I'm not normally this up front with people. Also just not feeling too good lately because of a lack of sleep. Also, "we don't create SPIs where the master doesn't exist"? I'm pretty sure I've seen a few, most notably Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/The UPN Vandal ("The UPN Vandal" was registered for this case as a placeholder account, so still technically no master). wizzito | say hello! 21:55, 12 October 2021 (UTC)
I know what it's like not to sleep. Unfortunately, I have chronic insomnia. The history of The UPN Vandal case is weird and not altogether clear to me. That said, someone created the account to then block IPs. Whose idea it was and the reasoning is unknown to me. In your case, I don't think it would fly. However, you can see if a checkuser or admin SPI clerk is interested in helping you with this, but I wouldn't create it without "permission" from one or the other.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:06, 12 October 2021 (UTC)

add closer's username...

Sigh. Yeah, I always expect the close script will add my sig automagically, like so many other similar scripts do. -- RoySmith (talk) 23:30, 12 October 2021 (UTC)

I understand and sympathize. Scripts are so useful but sometimes so annoying.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:31, 12 October 2021 (UTC)

3RRN

I was quite surprised by this edit. What, among the collapsed material, did you feel was of any relevance to the 3RRN filing? Newimpartial (talk) 02:01, 13 October 2021 (UTC)

It doesn't matter whether it's relevant (although I found it interesting myself). No participant of a report should hat part of the discussion. Indeed, no one but an admin should do it.--Bbb23 (talk) 02:13, 13 October 2021 (UTC)
If that is a rule or norm of the noticeboad pages, I certainly wasn't aware of it until now. Is it documented anywhere? Newimpartial (talk) 02:22, 13 October 2021 (UTC)
I'd call it common sense. However, if you insist on a label, "norm" is good enough. BTW, if you should ever hide material again, it's best to sign so others know without checking the history who made the decision.--Bbb23 (talk) 11:03, 13 October 2021 (UTC)

Deletion of Hugging Face

Why would you delete the page while rhe speedy deletion was being contested?

It's an open source company. When I created the page I made sure to add citations and there was one more deletion challenged but still you deleted the page. Isn't it unfair? Abdul rajaT 22:03, 13 October 2021 (UTC)

Return of the Penis

This user popped up on my radar a few weeks ago, and I quickly recognized them as likely Penii (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki), whom you blocked in June. This was based on the silly username, the "not a first account" behavior, but most of all... all the penis. Their 11th edit was to Penispump (of particular interest to Penii), followed quickly by the creation of Peens, then edits to Penes, Pene, and Cock. Plus an interaction with Liz, with whom Penii had interacted pre-block.

Decided to wait and see what happened, and today noticed the three WoW-related edits at the top of their contribs, which was the last bit of confirmation I needed—recalling the first Penii edit linked above, and their userpage before you deleted it.

Thoughts? Happy to send this to SPI if you'd like, but I doubt CU will find much, so I'd just be bringing it there and immediately self-{{awad}}'ing it. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she/they) 00:43, 14 October 2021 (UTC)

@Tamzin: See Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Account10000.--Bbb23 (talk) 01:00, 14 October 2021 (UTC)
Yep. Great minds (and/or talkpage stalkers) think alike. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she/they) 01:02, 14 October 2021 (UTC)

October 2021

Hi, I just want to ask you if can you block Novela1221 because it is a sockpuppet of ASIANPOPCHANNEL? Also until now, the sockpuppets investigation is still opened for a checkuser to check it but until now there was no action. SeanJ 2007 (talk) 01:33, 14 October 2021 (UTC)

Unfortunately, there is a continuous backlog of CU-requested reports, but at least this one is now in the endorsed queue, which tends to get a faster response. I'd rather give it a little longer (Novela1221 hasn't edited since early yesterday) and let a checkuser review it.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:17, 14 October 2021 (UTC)

UTRS 49441

BoardOfEd is requesting unblock on UTRS appeal #49441. Appreciate any feedback before deciding to restore TPA. --Deepfriedokra (talk) 04:01, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

@Deepfriedokra: I have no objection to restoring TPA, but I would have to be convinced by the user's public statements about his behavior before I would give him another chance. The pre-block and post-block behavior was so extreme...--Bbb23 (talk) 13:23, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

Possible Uttarpradeshi socks

Hi again. Based on the former activity at Talk:Jointness and integration in the Indian military, I think SimonBiden (talk · contribs) is a sock of Uttarpradeshi (talk · contribs). PMGSMP (talk · contribs) and SimonBiden seem to be same, based on the contributions and the user pages. But given that SimonBiden and PMGSMP are interested in a broader Indian topics rather than just Uttar Pradesh topics, I think they might be more of a socks of Dusrapehelu. Could you take a look into these? Thanks! — DaxServer (talk to me) 17:11, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

This is very confusing. I'm inclined to believe that both users are socks, but the question is who is the master. There are two ongoing SPIs: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Sanjay Kumar Tiwari20, which supposedly Uttarpradeshi is a part of, and Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Dusrapehelu, which you filed naming these two users. I'm inclined to let these play out rather than take action on my own. Some advice for you: first, your signature should have links to your userpage and your talk page, and, second, you should be providing more evidence when you file SPIs in the nature of diffs, as well as linking users when you mention them if they are not linked elsewhere in the report. It would make it much easier for other editors when they are reviewing your reports/comments.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:33, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for the advice. I'd improve reporting hereby as you suggested. — DaxServer (talk) 13:51, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
Great! --Bbb23 (talk) 13:53, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

Userpage vandalism

I saw that your userpage seems to have a steady vandalism rate of one vandal per month. You might consider protecting your userpage to prevent any more unwanted edits. - ZLEA T\C 21:35, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

Actually not a very high rate, but the page is already semi-protected, which is good enough.--Bbb23 (talk) 21:46, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

User:Satrar again

Satrar has resumed their attacks. - ZLEA T\C 20:23, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

I don't know what's wrong with ZLEA, they are again and again showing up on my talk page and accusing me of uncivilized behavior. Despite of my repeated efforts to avoid them, they are not ready to let it go and resort to personal attacks. Satrar (talk) 12:34, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
Need I say more? - ZLEA T\C 12:41, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
@Satrar: ZLEA is not accusing you of "uncivilized behavior" but uncivil behavior. Your comment at the AfD was unnecessary and worse than uncivil, and I don't blame ZLEA for being bothered by it. You should not be making such comments about any other editor.--Bbb23 (talk) 12:54, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
Okay sure. I will be careful in future. Satrar (talk) 00:48, 17 October 2021 (UTC)
I have a feeling they didn’t get the message. - ZLEA T\C 21:20, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
@ZLEA: Regardless of the manner in which they expressed themself, you should honor their request not to post to their Talk page.--Bbb23 (talk) 21:45, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

Pat Mesiti

Hey, Bbb23,

An editor just tagged this page as an attack page but I noticed that earlier today you did some copyediting on it so clearly you didn't view it as an attack page earlier today. What's your opinion of it? Liz Read! Talk! 01:01, 17 October 2021 (UTC)

It hadn't been tagged when I edited it, but I thought about it. My interest at that point was more in the creator than the article itself. At bottom, it shouldn't exist because the subject isn't notable. Anyway, it's been deleted.--Bbb23 (talk) 02:13, 17 October 2021 (UTC)

A request

Hello, Sir/Madam @Bbb23 Can you give me Rollback rights for short time period? I know I'm new user this tool is not for me, but I always tried to protect Wikipedia from vandalism. I read WP:ROLLBACK properly (Rollback works very fast, I want to be a Rollbacker), then if I'll done any mistake, you will take this right away from me. Sir/Madam, you told me to inform the creator/contributor after I made any changes in the article. I always follow your instructions and informed every single users & ips after I changed anything (whether it's vandalized or normal). I think that's enough to make me believe. Thanks ~ Limited Idea4me (talk) 08:00, 17 October 2021 (UTC)

I'm male, but you don't have to call me sir. I know it's cultural, but... As for your request, I don't think you're ready for the rollback privilege.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:37, 17 October 2021 (UTC)

Hello, @Bbb23 Can you check at Band of Pride?, all of this unsourced meterial and copy-vio from http://s.web.umkc.edu/steint/tubaeuph/Friends/Young.html I removed it once time only copy-paste part, but again did the same thing by IP ~ Limited Idea4me (talk) 01:28, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) @Limited Idea4me I've gone ahead and restored the version free of copyright violations, and left a warning for the IP. SQLQuery Me! 01:51, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

Draft:Dinesh Pratap Singh (BJP)

Hello Bbb23. Just to let you know, 9 minutes after you deleted Draft:Dinesh Pratap Singh (BJP), it was recreated my the same user with what looks like the first sentence of the deleted draft. I don't think it's quite as promotional as the previous iteration, but I'm also fairly sure that this user is never going to get this draft published (and it's probably going to be expanded into similar promotion again). Tol (talk | contribs) @ 17:32, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

A new problem

Hello, again, Bbb23,

So far, I've blocked four sockpuppets in the past 15 minutes and they just keep creating new accounts even though account creation is blocked. What the heck can one do? Liz Read! Talk! 03:09, 17 October 2021 (UTC)

Did you ever find out who the LTA is?--Bbb23 (talk) 13:28, 17 October 2021 (UTC)
Well, I don't have a good memory of sockmasters, their puppets or their habits of editing but it looks like ST47 opened up a SPI case at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/James8333 for which I'm very grateful. There are about 20 sockpuppets listed and I only dealt with 6 or 7 of them but Saturday night was crazy, I'd block one and 2 minutes later they'd create another account and vandalize and over and over again. They were very obvious but it was like Whack-a-Mole and I didn't know how to stop them from creating more and more accounts.
I was wondering if CUers had an ability of issuing a hard block on the IP address(es) used because, honestly, I haven't found that checking to block account creation has ever stopped a persistent sockpuppet from just creating a new account after the old one gets blocked. Liz Read! Talk! 01:32, 19 October 2021 (UTC)
@Liz: We do have the ability, but to obey the privacy policy, that is normally done using the {{checkuser block}} template and without specifically mentioning which sockpuppeteer the IP range block is intended to target. However, I will say that if you do happen to notice any additional activity of this sort, please report it to that SPI case so that we can see if anything further needs to be done. ST47 (talk) 01:48, 19 October 2021 (UTC)
Thank you, ST47. I was literally at a loss of what to do and, of course, who is editing Wikipedia late on a Saturday night when one is looking for help? Luckily, I had an editor helping report the new sockpuppets when they appeared but all I could do at the time is hope they tired themselves out. Now that there is a SPI case, I can report new ones there. Thanks again. Liz Read! Talk! 02:19, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

Checkuser

Hi, Beeb, thanks for this. I suppose they're not one and the same, since TTC's English prose is much better. But apart from that, there are many indications, surely. Meatpuppetry isn't allowed either, so I've asked a CU. Bishonen | tålk 10:23, 17 October 2021 (UTC).

Nothing wrong with asking a checkuser, but you can infer meat puppetry on your own. In this instance, though, if you believe they are separate people, I can see how one could be disruptive and the other not, so it's not a classic meat puppetry case. That's why I brought it to your attention.
On an unrelated subject, why did you make the block of DeaconShotFire so short? In my view, he should be blocked indefinitely, but at least more than the last block of one week.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:33, 17 October 2021 (UTC)
The next block should certainly be indefinite. Bishonen | tålk 20:00, 17 October 2021 (UTC).
And done. Bishonen | tålk 19:48, 19 October 2021 (UTC).
Bishonen, I didn't think it would take him long to shoot himself in the foot, but it was quicker than I expected. His response to your explanation of the block ("I definitely won't be making another account, as that would be against Wikipedia policy. Enjoy your fake power, degenerate.") doesn't make sense on many levels. Why should he bring up the idea of socking? Since when does he care about policy? The use of the phrase "fake power", which he's used before, is silly. Your "power" is very real; it's your use of it he objects to. Perhaps it's some sort of play on the phrase "fake news"? Finally, if he attacks you or anyone else again ("degenerate"), I will revoke TPA.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:37, 19 October 2021 (UTC)
In case anyone else wondered, "fake power" does not appear to tie him back to any past sockmaster. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she/they) 22:50, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

Page restore

Could you restore the Mikey Williams (basketball, born 1991) page? I think that it would be better to continue and improve the article (prior to its deletion) instead of creating a new article from scratch. He has played in a number of countries already and is getting more coverage in the country now, especially as he is a league leader in stats. Probably restoring in a draft page is better to not attribute the creation of the article to the blocked sock. Thanks! Engr. Smitty Werben 09:05, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

@GiantSnowman: Do you think Williams is notable?--Bbb23 (talk) 10:56, 15 October 2021 (UTC)
As far as I can see, he does not meet WP:NBASKETBALL as he has only played in the Philippine Basketball Association, which is not listed there as a 'notable' league. I also cannot see any significant coverage to meet WP:GNG, only routine match reports. I suggest the article is restored and draftified so @Engr. Smitty: can update and improve and then we can re-assess. GiantSnowman 11:36, 15 October 2021 (UTC)
@Bbb23: Any updated on my request? Engr. Smitty Werben 08:33, 20 October 2021 (UTC)
(you don't need to ping me on my Talk page) I am reluctant to restore a page created by a sock generally, but even more so because GiantSnowman doesn't think the subject is notable. @GS, if you wish to restore it to draft space, that's up to you.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:33, 20 October 2021 (UTC)
I'm more than happy to leave it if you are. GiantSnowman 07:56, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Balloon World Cup

Hi Bbb23,

I have recently accepted the "Balloon World Cup" at AfC, which was previously deleted by you(3-4 days ago). The article does meet notability guidelines, I am unsure whether the current creator of this draft is the same blocked/suspended user, kindly look into this.

Thank you!

QuantumRealm (meow • pawtrack) 03:59, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

@QuantumRealm: I am addressing this at WP:SPI. Thanks for the heads up.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:08, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Charli

Sorry to be back but he is 77.183.77.54 (talk · contribs) here now. Kante4 (talk) 16:38, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

And also Op03444 (talk · contribs) here i think, edits the same article minutes after i messaged him. Kante4 (talk) 16:48, 20 October 2021 (UTC)
Both blocked. Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:20, 20 October 2021 (UTC)
Many thanks that you are so quick and i can come here and you help. Kante4 (talk) 17:22, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Looks to be 89.14.137.67 (talk · contribs) now. Reverting other edits just to make them a minute later themselves (FIS and UCI WC's today), common usage by Charli. Kante4 (talk) 16:49, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

That was fast, looks like a new record. ;) Kante4 (talk) 16:51, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

Possible sockpuppet

Reporting possible sockpuppet, this IP user 143.44.164.124 has similarities to this IP user 119.93.40.241, for example, this IP user 143.44.164.124 added a content in an article, but it was removed, then another IP user 119.93.40.241 added the content again. And when you read the summary, they have the same reasoning, see [39] and [40]. Another proof is that both of them reported me in ANI. Can you please check. Ctrlwiki (talk) 07:43, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

The two IPs are not hiding the fact that they are the same person. The problem is whether either is doing anything blockable. I guess what concerns me the most is the 119. IP was CU-blocked in May for three months for editing logged out. Do you have any idea what named editor NinjaRobotPirate had in mind? We can't ask the checkuser because it would be a privacy violation for him to disclose that.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:21, 23 October 2021 (UTC)
And on that note, 2409:4073:414:F541:68D6:41B5:8EB3:3AF9 just made some edits to one of your talk page archives so I imagine they are related to someone you have blocked. Liz Read! Talk! 20:05, 23 October 2021 (UTC)
Someone blocked yes, but I didn't block them; I deleted one of their articles per WP:G5. It's our dear friend 0"cleopatra"0.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:29, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

Possible block evasion by Fotznbrädl

Andreasgayk (talk · contribs)

The editor, Andreasgayk, is doing the same edits as Fotznbrädl on the page, Stutenkerl. Here is what Fotznbrädl did. [41] And here is what Andreasgayk did. [42] What do you think of issuing a block on Andreasgayk, Bbb23? Hayleez (talk) 23:15, 24 October 2021 (UTC)

 Done.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:18, 24 October 2021 (UTC)

Underwood Page

Hi @Bbb23:, I was building my first article on this company called Underwood Ammo, and I noticed that you reverted or undid the article from the main space the first time, I then tried to address some of your concerns so that it would certainly not qualify as unambiguous advertising or promotion, and I am still working on my neutral wiki tone of voice etc as a fairly new editor. Each time I go back to work more on the article (which already had three secondary sources though and was written from a WP:NPOV, you've reverted my work. I did not see any explanation on SPECIFICS other than a broad "G11" citation regarding that you felt it was advertising or something. Anyway, I was just going to try and follow the protocol next for adding a company logo that is fair use, but then it was gone again. Can you please let me finish that up and leave that up in the main space, it might not be perfect, but I felt it was sufficient to no longer be in the sandbox. Thanks! Th78blue (They/Them/Theirs • talk) 15:32, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

You're wrong. The article was tagged for deletion. Rather than delete it, I moved it to draft space. You bypassed WP:AFC and moved it back to article space without any improvements with the pretext that you were going to work on it. The proper place to work on an article is in draft space (not your sandbox, either), then when you think it's ready to be in article space, you submit the draft to more experienced users. You have no one but yourself to blame for what happened. That said, I am willing to restore the article in draft space, but only with the understanding that you will go through the AFC process.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:38, 25 October 2021 (UTC)
Hi again, @Bbb23:, I seem to have offended you or something, and for that I apologize in advance. I am a fairly new editor, and have found wikipedia to be a fairly hostile environment to learners. That said, you seem to be willing to help by the latter part of your response above, and for that I am grateful. One comment though, I did in fact make several changes after moving my article to the "main space" (If I am using the right terminology even!). So I am not quite sure why you say, "without any improvements"... I did make changes, though perhaps they were insufficient to your liking? Regardless, I accept your proposal to, "...restore the article in draft space, but only with the understanding that you will go through the AFC experienced users..." If that is the process, then I will not follow it. I am not looking to be an exception or circumvent established norms... Thank you! Th78blue (They/Them/Theirs • talk) 19:07, 25 October 2021 (UTC)
(You don't need to ping me on my Talk page.)  Done.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:00, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

Continued block evasion by Fotznbrädl

Ichielnutzer56 (talk · contribs)

The editor, Ichielnutzer56, is doing the same edits as Fotznbrädl and Andreasgayk on the page, Stutenkerl. Here is what Fotznbrädl did. [43] And here is what Ichielnutzer56 did. [44] What do you think, Bbb23? Hayleez (talk) 20:18, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

Persistent. Because there are now three, I tagged them. Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:23, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Original Barnstar
why did you delete MerrishLegend (talk) 04:32, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

Probable sock

You've just blocked User:JaiHind108 as a sock and now we have a new user User:Rockymumbai99 making the same edits. Oculi (talk) 20:51, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

Sockpuppet investigation

I created a sockpuppet investigation of User:Jobbyhahns and saw that you deleted it and you said it was misfiled. Where I should have I reported it? And, how do I get the text from the page back, as I took a significant amount of time putting it together? -Citrivescence (talk) 01:22, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

There was no point to filing it, so you don't need the text back. The misfiled comment was because you reversed the sock and the master. If that had been the only problem, I would have requested that it be moved, but all the IPs were blocked, locally, often globally. Nothing needed to be done.--Bbb23 (talk) 01:57, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
I am requesting the text back. One of the IP addressses has not been blocked 97.85.150.223 and is actively harassing me. Not just that, I filed the report so there is a record of what has taken place and to try to determine if the accounts belong to a single user, not just to block them. -Citrivescence (talk) 02:25, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
That IP is blocked and has been for months.--Bbb23 (talk) 02:52, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

Re A7 on Luke Sela

Hi Bbb23 -- I declined this; I don't think A7 applies (there seem to me to be clear claims in the article) and a quick Google search suggests Sela might well be notable as a long-term editor of the principal daily newspaper of a country (albeit a small one). If you decide to take it to AfD, could you notify me, please, as I don't check in here all that often. Regards, Espresso Addict (talk) 05:29, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

@Espresso Addict: I don't often tag old articles for deletion. Thank you for improving the quality of the article.--Bbb23 (talk) 11:58, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

Explain your action

You have not authorized deleted my article about the participant, the fact is that there was no personal data there, and secondly, Wikipedia is a free encyclopedia that anyone, even a minor, can edit, so I consider deleting and performing actions on my page, illegal. I just warned you. ViktorChik VTR (talk) 07:25, 28 October 2021 (UTC)

Do you really want to argue this point? —A little blue Bori v^_^v Jéské Couriano 07:29, 28 October 2021 (UTC)


Sockpuppetry?

Dinobba (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

TrueImperial (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Imperialreal (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Hi Bbb23, seeing as you were the one who blocked TrueImperial barely a month ago, I thought it would be appropriate to come here. Like any other user I like to maintain WP:GOOD FAITH, but this seems very sus; a new user named Dinobba writes 'Edit' or 'Edit.' in his edit summaries very often, plus he edits in Timurid/Mughal-related articles just like the recent socks, particularly TrueImperial. The way they edit article seems similar, mainly to do with infoboxes, and the fact that they change the religion section to Islam (Sunni Muslim) / Islam Sunni Muslim makes it seem even more sus [45] [46]. And not to mention the fact that almost all their edits get reverted. Thoughts? Would this be enough proof of sockpuppetry? --HistoryofIran (talk) 11:47, 28 October 2021 (UTC)

Please Mr.Iran Don't mistaken blaming i am Bangladeshi of afghan origin from living Bangladesh i do not have any abuse in here the TrueImperial socpuppetry it’s better to block me a world then Wikipedia i currently using for 4 months as i love history and Timurid/Mughals were my subject and also nessesarily i m giving reference 😇 but love wikipedia now my-self wikipedian i follow basic rules as well as possible and do not connected with Everywhere if i have mistakes please forgive me and revert as your wish sir.


😔 Dinobba (talk) 12:10, 28 October 2021 (UTC)

Not to mention his English is on the same level as the previous socks, and he uses smileys just like them as well. --HistoryofIran (talk) 12:18, 28 October 2021 (UTC)

Draft Page Deletion - Contest Deletion

The request for speedy deletion of Elevate Oral Care Draft site was inappropriate and untimely. The page was in draft form so the historical foundation could be posted, a link created and pushed out to the dental community for editing. In less than 12 hours the draft was deleted an did not permit any of these actions from taking place. My relationship with Elevate Oral Care is publicly disclosed as instructed by Wikipedia in my profile. Additionally, my posting of the background information is appropriate in that we are a privately held company and there are no Securities Exchange Commissions listings or other references to provide such information. Only a principal of the organization would have the knowledge to post such information. No where on the page was listed any promotional information, citations were to third party publications and professional dental organizations (most non commercial). One link was provided to Elevate Oral Care website and equal links were provided to other mentioned competing companies. Please re-post the article. Spardue13 (talk) 12:21, 28 October 2021 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Spardue13 (talk • contribs) 11:00, 28 October 2021 (UTC)

Possible sock

Teampips is a new account that started to edit today. Within 15 minutes it made 15 edits, including ones that need some good knowledge of the rules such as using Twinkle and nominating an AfD. Their 15th edit was reverting a sock of JohnGotten and then stopped editing, as if the goal of the account was making some edits here or there before making that specific revert. On that article lately socks of Orchomen and JohnGotten have reverted each other. I do not have the time to open an SPI, and you probably might be interested in taking a look. Ktrimi991 (talk) 12:55, 28 October 2021 (UTC)

Persistent sockpuppetry on Stutenkerl and Request for Longer Protection

2003:e6:573e:e193:b421:7016:5845:2b2f (talk · contribs)

Now, after LuK3 protected the page, Stutenkerl, this new IP address did the same edits as Fotznbrädl, Andreasgayk, and Ichielnutzer56. [47]. I think that this IP address should be blocked for block evasion and this page should be protected for a longer time period. Hayleez (talk) 18:29, 28 October 2021 (UTC)

HaudenosauneeC other account

I saw you commented on user:HaudenosauneeC's talk page about them probably having a previous account. I'm very certain their other account is user:Albertaont, which isn't blocked and hasn't edited since a week before the HaudenosauneeC account started editing. The pages they edit are similar and the edit summaries are very similar. Both accounts even made the exact same edit on Mexico–United States relations : 1, 2. Nettless (talk) 22:59, 28 October 2021 (UTC)

It’s about a page you recently deleted

Hello Bbb23 👋🏻 Hope you are doing well. It's about Najmun Nahar's Wikipedia page that you deleted in September. I didn’t really understand the reason for its removal. Najmun is a Bangladeshi traveler and globetrotter who has already visited 150 countries around the world. The sources are so numerous, which enabled me to write this wikipedia article. Several media in many countries and in many languages ​​have written about her for more than a decade.

Thank you and please review it. In other cases, I may want this restored because I would like to continue improving this page. Thank you so much and have a blessing Friday.CPGLCONGO (talk) 10:07, 29 October 2021 (UTC)

The article was an advertisement and deleted as such.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:00, 29 October 2021 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Bbb23/Archive_54&oldid=1146372173"