User talk:ST47

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Friday
05
June
2020
19:01 UTC
Archives
0x00
0|1|2|3|4|5|6|7
8|9|A|B|C|D|E|F
0x10
0|1|2|3|4


Expand Wikipedia[edit]

Hi... Sir

Can you expand Vani Bhojan Wikipedia's page. Please, career, reference this alone. Please.

User_talk:Rhmostafa unblock[edit]

The user has explicitly agreed to not post links to the website they were spamming; any objections to unblocking? A reblock would be easy enough if they "changed their mind." I might also add the condition that they not spam articles about Blinqnetworks. OhNoitsJamie Talk 16:32, 23 May 2020 (UTC)

@Ohnoitsjamie: Fine with me, subject to the usual conditions that they not insert spam links or contribute to articles in which they have a COI. ST47 (talk) 18:32, 23 May 2020 (UTC)

Xiang09 is back[edit]

Hey, I believe the banned serial sockmaster Xiang09 has returned again:

Xiang09 SPI convenience link.

As usual, they are heavily focused on transgender people in indigenous Filipino culture, as well as on creating various articles about Filipino mythology. Of course, I see no reason to trust any of this content.

As noted in the SPI, they use the same sources. Here, to take two quick examples, a now-blocked sock used Ancient Beliefs and Customs of the Tagalogs by Potet (a self-published book), and Cassell's Encyclopedia of Queer Myth, Symbol and Spirit. Here (in the same article) this newest account used the Potet source, and here they used the Cassell's source. I believe this is enough for a CU, but if not, please let me know. A bunch of sleepers may turn up again too. Crossroads -talk- 03:58, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

Okay, I would like to think you made this accusation in good faith. First of all, who's Xiang09? I'm not related to whoever that is. In fact, this is my first Wikipedia user, since this is the only time I'm not actually busy cause of the pandemic. Second, yes, I edited various articles, mostly NON-transgender articles. I've edited at around TWO LGBT articles and some myth articles. Is anything wrong with that? Just because some account edited those articles before, am I not allowed to anymore? Can't anyone edit those articles just because the data being added are about transgender people? Third, there are only a few sources about LGBT people and culture in the Philippines, which if you are a someone who's done research about it, you would know. Hence, all Filipino LGBT sources are important, and of course I'm going to use those sources with LGBT themes such as Ancient Beliefs and Customs of the Tagalogs, and Cassell's Encyclopedia of Queer Myth, Symbol and Spirit, especially since they are written by actual scholars. A popular website in the Philippines use Potet's book as source to their stories, which made it known to many, including me. Or are you saying that their work are irrelevant just because they include transgender Filipino topics, knowing that they are one of the only few sources with such topics. If I change the valid sources with transgender topics and replaced them with other sources with transgender topics, would that make it better? No, because, again, there are limited sources on those topics, so it won't change anything huge. Ggrandez17 -talk- 06:37, 24 May 2020 (UTC)
Mmmhmm. Isn't it a bit strange this user has decided to copy my signature format exactly? The only difference is that their userpage link is red because they didn't create one. Anyway, ST47, what is going to become of this? There's more evidence that this is a sock account, I just didn't give it all to save time. I went to you because you have experience with this sockmaster and I thought just running CU would be easiest. Please let me know if you need more evidence to run CU. Crossroads -talk- 14:39, 24 May 2020 (UTC)
 Confirmed, blocked. ST47 (talk) 15:34, 24 May 2020 (UTC)
Thanks so much!
On this note... why is there no way to keep this person (and other banned users and LTAs) from registering any more accounts? Couldn't, say, their IP and user agent combo(s) be blocked indefinitely? I feel if this was done generally, so that banned users were literally incapable of coming back, it would save a lot of time and effort. Crossroads -talk- 17:43, 24 May 2020 (UTC)
@Crossroads: We do try to place IP blocks when we think it will be productive. However, it's a tradeoff between blocking the target and risking collateral damage to innocent users. This user actually was affected by an IP block - I won't say which, of course - but see their unblock request about a week ago. Unfortunately, no one who looked at the unblock request made the connection, myself included, and they were able to use a different IP to continue editing over the past week. ST47 (talk) 17:51, 24 May 2020 (UTC)
Thanks. I wonder, though, if certain combinations of IP address and user agent data could be blocked. My ideal is that their personal devices would not be able to edit Wikipedia or register accounts; but even if we can't block a device as such, maybe an indef could still be issued for, say, 'IP X used by operating system Y'. I can't see there being any real risk of collateral damage if data is used in combination like this. I understand if this is not feasible for some reason, but if it is, I can't imagine why it is not commonly done. Having to play whack-a-mole with sockpuppets does damage to morale, and doubtless plays a part in why we have a problem with editor retention.
User:Stricnina stated to me on their talk page: I still remember that month and it made me actually give up because it was clear to me that I was dealing again with the same sockpuppet yet every time that I have to open an SPI I have to collect diffs again and again and I was already tired of collecting evidences at that point. I was actually entertaining the idea of just letting the person behind the sockpuppet to just do whatever they want. I was about to quit because it turned into a lonely and frustrating whack-a-mole game with the same sockpuppet master.
This is not the first time I have heard such sentiments. I too am very annoyed when I have to spend time stopping socks. How many good faith users have grown tired of dealing with socks and have left? I appreciate you handling this again, but I thought I'd ask in more detail why this idea isn't pursued. Crossroads -talk- 18:36, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

MauraMurrayMissing[edit]

Hello, I was reviewing the unblock request of User talk:MauraMurrayMissing and wondering if you had anything additional to add or any unaddressed concerns. Thanks 331dot (talk) 15:25, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

New sock of User:Pkschhonkar[edit]

The account User:Kumarjatji has already recreated two of Pkschhonkar's articles (one of them still is a massive copyvio) and the editor's talk page shws the same choppy way of responding. It is about as blatant as it can be. Best, GPL93 (talk) 13:35, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

Wht do u mean sir Kumarjatji (talk) 13:41, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

I don't know pkschhonkar Kumarjatji (talk) 13:42, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

Hello sir You are getting it wrong Kumarjatji (talk) 13:46, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

I just translated Hindi Wikipedia into English and Kumarjatji (talk) 13:48, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

You are getting it wrong[edit]

Hello sir You are getting it wrong I just translated Hindi Wikipedia into English and Kumarjatji (talk) 13:47, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

Articles for Creation: List of reviewers by subject notice[edit]

AFC-Logo.svg

Hi ST47, you are receiving this notice because you are listed as an active Articles for Creation reviewer.

Recently a list of reviewers by area of expertise was created. This notice is being sent out to alert you to the existence of that list, and to encourage you to add your name to it. If you or other reviewers come across articles in the queue where an acceptance/decline hinges on specialist knowledge, this list should serve to facilitate contact with a fellow reviewer.

To end on a positive note, the backlog has dropped below 1,500, so thanks for all of the hard work some of you have been putting into the AfC process!

Sent to all Articles for Creation reviewers as a one-time notice. To opt-out of all massmessage mailings, you may add Category:Wikipedians who opt out of message delivery to your user talk page. Regards, Sam-2727 (talk)

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:35, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

Email[edit]

Hi, this is just a reminder that I sent a reply your wiki mail. I sent it on May 17 in reply to your inquiry months ago. Thanks, and apologies for the delay. Whym (talk) 12:15, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

Update proxy block[edit]

Hi, could you update 122.53.86.50 (talk · contribs · WHOIS)'s block to a proxy block, per the IPs block log? Thank you. 2601:1C0:0:CCFF:5199:5E76:F128:94B2 (talk) 17:07, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

Also, 124.105.29.184 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) may still be a proxy as well... 2601:1C0:0:CCFF:5199:5E76:F128:94B2 (talk) 17:09, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

I blocked one of them. I'm not able to confirm that 122.53.86.50 is still a proxy, though. ST47 (talk) 17:57, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

The Signpost: 31 May 2020[edit]

Wondering[edit]

Not meaning to cast WP:ASPERSIONS at a newly registered editor, but don't you think this is rather odd? How would they have known about this blocked account? Also, considering they also just posted at the Teahouse about being tasked to write articles about their employer, makes me wonder if this is a new sock? --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 23:44, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – June 2020[edit]

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

ANEWSicon.png

Administrator changes

added CaptainEekCreffettCwmhiraeth
removed Anna FrodesiakBuckshot06RonhjonesSQL

CheckUser changes

removed SQL

Guideline and policy news

Arbitration

  • A motion was passed to enact a 500/30 restriction on articles related to the history of Jews and antisemitism in Poland during World War II (1933–45), including the Holocaust in Poland. Article talk pages where disruption occurs may also be managed with the stated restriction.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:27, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

Applying IP block exemption rights[edit]

I want to apply IP block exemption rights for my account because I'm going to use FreeBasics.com as a proxy website to edit Wikipedia because it is free to access Wikipedia on this website without using my data package. JeBonSer (talk | sign) 13:52, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

CheckUser request[edit]

Hello, could you please do a CheckUser between Pavan8809 and Generalsagar? These two users seems to be operated by the same person, evidenced by inserting the same website and format for references with SELFPUBLISH issues. 182.30.83.85 (talk) 07:27, 5 June 2020 (UTC)