User talk:Bbb23/Archive 59

Archive 55

←

Archive 57

Archive 58

Archive 59

Archive 60

Archive 61

→

Archive 63

Requesting permanent block of User:Changaco from editing Liberapay

• User:Changaco has declared a COI: Special:Diff/1140103224 and said they are the founder of Liberapay: Special:Diff/1140103796
• Another editor, Bensin at Talk:Liberapay said Changaco should not edit directly, but rather propose changes at the Talk:Special:Diff/1140161442. I concurred.
• Responses have been argumentative when I warned about COI editing at User talk:Changaco: Special:Diff/1139493799. Warned about edit warring, similar response: Special:Diff/1140518092.
• Changaco continues editing the article to present the service in a desired way Special:Diff/1140491536, and apparently feels it is necessary to convince them to accept changes:Special:Diff/1140500776 And they have a right to control wording:Special:Diff/1140501496
• I can understand some frustration due to Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Liberapay, but
• Note: Similar belligerent interactions is not new in their 103 total edits: Special:Diff/499014880, and see 2012 Apprendre2.0 AFD discussion history: [1]

I'm trying the "skip the drama" WP:ANI route, and recognized your nickname. If COI board or other route fits better, please let me know. -- Yae4 (talk) 18:46, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

I have not violated the COI rules. Direct editing is strongly discouraged, but not forbidden. I have done my best to keep the Liberapay article as neutral as possible, and I seem to have succeeded, since no pro-Liberapay bias in my changes has been reported.

This request to block me from editing the Liberapay article is, from my point of view, groundless. Changaco (talk) 22:34, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

@Changaco: I don't think you should be editing the article directly, either, but, Yae4, I'm not going to get involved in this. You'll have to take this somewhere else.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:52, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Barnstar of Good Humor
	For lightening the mood at AN [2]. The WordsmithTalk to me 03:04, 21 February 2023 (UTC)

Baikonur Krai

Hi. Why did you remove {{Db-hoax}} from Baikonur Krai? This article is a hoax by user u:Carolina Mahadewi Malin, who was blocked in ruwiki. Dima st bk (talk) 05:13, 23 February 2023 (UTC)

RUSUKR RfPP

Hi. You declined my RfPP request for Battle of Sumy yesterday as "Not enough recent disruptive activity". However, the general sanctions regime instituted at WP:GS/RUSUKR stipulates that "Only extended-confirmed editors may make edits related to the topic area", broadly construed; thus two non-ECP editors editing a page which directly falls under this regime is a circumvention of it, especially considering the edits were live for 4 and 2 days, respectively. Curbon7 (talk) 21:58, 23 February 2023 (UTC)

I don't read those sanctions to mandate ECP ("If a page (other than a "Talk:" page) mostly or entirely relates to the topic area, broadly construed, this restriction is preferably enforced through extended confirmed protection, though this is not required." (added emphasis mine)). However, ToBeFree semi-protected the article last March. Perhaps he will be willing to increase the protection.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:52, 23 February 2023 (UTC)

Fair interpretation. Thanks for the response! Curbon7 (talk) 01:48, 24 February 2023 (UTC)

Hi Curbon7 and Bbb23, thank you for the ping! I have reverted further contributions from the same users and informed both about the restrictions. I think that providing information on their talk pages was the actual needed action, while reverts and protection are optional.

I think I might have increased the protection if I had seen the RfPP request, but I do well understand Bbb23's decision and find it at least equally reasonable. I'll probably have a look at the topic area later and might protect a page or two. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 12:00, 24 February 2023 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Admin's Barnstar
	For continuing to care deeply about sockpuppets, for always being diligent, and for giving me an opportunity to continue to learn. Yamla (talk) 22:28, 24 February 2023 (UTC)

One of the nicest barnstars I've received, thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:30, 24 February 2023 (UTC)

Need Clarity

Thank for noticing. I understand there was multiple edits made by multiple users. Though I know structure and flow is tempered, I'm unable to point finger on the same. Could you please oblige on some errors which you noticed BrightsForever (talk) 00:57, 26 February 2023 (UTC)

• tampered typo BrightsForever (talk) 00:57, 26 February 2023 (UTC)

Abusive username by user Haramiranjeet2

Hi. I am not sure whether this is the right place to report or not. But I take my freedom to notify you about Haramiranjeet2. The username is abusive as the Harami is an abusive word in India. I have notified the user to change the username in this diff but the user doesn't seem to do so. Pardon me if I landed in a wrong venue. Twinkle1990 (talk) 11:59, 25 February 2023 (UTC)

Report usernames that violate policy to WP:UAA. You should tell the admins, though, what harami means in Hindi (bastard?).--Bbb23 (talk) 14:43, 25 February 2023 (UTC)

Yes. In Hindi and in Urdu it means that. Twinkle1990 (talk) 02:05, 26 February 2023 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) I suspect that this user might be a sockpuppet, but I don't know the puppeteer. Haramiranjeet2 was created in January and tried to create Draft:Ranjeet Kumar. The draft's deletion history goes back to July 2020. Probably also of note is that Ranjeet Kumar has a deletion history going back to 2013, and there is currently a Draft:Ranjeet Kumar Shukla, which was created last week and may or may not be related. - ZLEA _T\^C 02:24, 26 February 2023 (UTC)

RE: Draft:Flylandexpress decline for speedy

I've tagged a few reviews I've done as db-g11 the last week and most have been deleted but I'm surprised this one wasn't. So I don't clutter your feed with errant tags, what prevents this as being a speedy in this case? I'm presuming it has to do with it not being sufficiently laudatory to be interpreted as fundamentally bad, but I'm fairly new to speedy tagging and really not certain. Apologies in advance for requiring this guidance. ~ Pbritti (talk) 18:39, 27 February 2023 (UTC)

I can't speak for other g11 pages, but this one wasn't even a little bit promotional. The language was quite neutral.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:42, 27 February 2023 (UTC)

I interpreted the phrasing created to support the local Farmers in Uganda as promotional in association with the primary-source valuation total; you're right that it was more than close enough to neutral. Thanks for pausing to offer that clarification. Please feel welcome to template me if I pass up a bad speedy again; I am not totally confident I have the standards down. ~ Pbritti (talk) 18:55, 27 February 2023 (UTC)

SPI

Regarding this:

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/WorldCreaterFighter&diff=prev&oldid=1142126482

Sorry for the inconvenience. I erroneously filed this case for WorldCreaterFighter. A couple of months ago, Vamlos was split from WorldCreaterFighter at SPI, as it is now believed they are 'different' enough to be considered two different people (they were previously considered the same). Vamlos is the "British" sockmaster, WCF is the "Austrian" one.

I would like for the WCF and DerekHistorian cases to be closed, and Vamlos to be treated as the proper one. I will also post more evidence later. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Vamlos Hunan201p (talk) 19:53, 28 February 2023 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – March 2023

News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2023).

Administrator changes

The Wordsmith

• Fuhghettaboutit
• Spinningspark (deceased)

CheckUser changes

Callanecc

Oversighter changes

Callanecc

Guideline and policy news

• Following a request for comment, F10 (useless non-media files) has been deprecated.
• Following a request for comment, the Portal CSD criteria (P1 (portal subject to CSD as an article) and P2 (underpopulated portal)) have been deprecated.
• A request for comment is open to discuss making the closing instructions for the requested moves process a guideline.

Technical news

• The results of the 2023 Community Wishlist Survey have been posted.

Arbitration

• Remedy 11 ("Request for Comment") of the Conduct in deletion-related editing case has been rescinded.
• The proposed decision for the Armenia-Azerbaijan 3 case is expected 7 March 2023.
• A case related to the Holocaust in Poland is expected to be opened soon.

Miscellaneous

• The 2023 appointees for the Ombuds commission are AGK, Ameisenigel, Bennylin, Daniuu, Emufarmers, Faendalimas, JJMC89, MdsShakil, Minorax and Renvoy as regular members and Zabe as advisory members.
• Following the 2023 Steward Elections, the following editors have been appointed as stewards: Mykola7, Superpes15, and Xaosflux.
• The Terms of Use update cycle has started, which includes a [p]roposal for better addressing undisclosed paid editing. Feedback is being accepted until 24 April 2023.

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:18, 1 March 2023 (UTC)

Return of duck sock

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/2A02:C7E:3011:FC00:A888:ABD9:2E6E:91E6 they also attacking other user's Shadow4dark (talk) 21:36, 1 March 2023 (UTC)

 Done. Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 21:43, 1 March 2023 (UTC)

Re: Sundeep Addy

What reference used establishes notability? Under WP:USCJN: "Nominees whose nomination has not yet come to a vote are not inherently notable." However he is not even a nominee, only a mentioned candidate. So where's the nobility to warrant an article? Reference 6 is the U.S. Senate website (not sure how that's relevant) and reference 9 is a LinkedIn page, which maybe used if it's authenticated, but not inherently a reliable source per WP:LINKEDIN. Snickers2686 (talk) 02:16, 28 February 2023 (UTC)

References are irrelevant to A7. Your analysis sounds like what you would do for WP:GNG, not for speedy deletion. The claim that he was chancellor at the University of Texas Law School alone is a claim of significance that defeats A7, but there are others. If you want to take it to AfD, do your due diligence and go ahead, but a7 won't work. I think this is the first time I've seen you at CSD - not your usual area.--Bbb23 (talk) 02:43, 28 February 2023 (UTC)

@Bbb23

Thank you. I have been creating multiple pages over the past month for people I feel could be nominated for a federal judgeship. I did my due diligence to make sure they all were notable & this is the only page that was challenged so I was surprised. But I appreciate your feedback to correct this issue. Thank you once again.

MIAJudges (talk) 01:28, 3 March 2023 (UTC)

Hello,

It seems another user has put a Notability tag back onto the page. The also moved two other pages into Draft Space for similar reasons. Feel free to chime in if you so chose to. I will tag the other two pages below as well.

Draft:Gilles Bissonnette - Wikipedia

Draft:Merritt McAlister - Wikipedia

MIAJudges (talk) 19:38, 3 March 2023 (UTC)

Deletion review for Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Simplicity Two Thousand

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Simplicity Two Thousand. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. QuietHere (talk) 14:15, 4 March 2023 (UTC)

Viaan Kapoor

You recently blocked Viaankapoor2012 and created Category:Suspected Wikipedia sockpuppets of Viaankapoor2012. I think the new account Viaankapoor1995 is the same individual. Can you please have a look? Thanks. Marbletan (talk) 13:38, 7 March 2023 (UTC)

Blocked and tagged, thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:02, 7 March 2023 (UTC)

Deletion of Nalie

why? Jaragustin (talk) 16:36, 8 March 2023 (UTC)

Because it was blatantly promotional per WP:G11.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:38, 8 March 2023 (UTC)

I totally disagree. I have enough references. How can i recover the copy and appeal? Jaragustin (talk) 16:40, 8 March 2023 (UTC)

how can you delete something that is in the sandbox??? I havent publish it nor submitted it. Jaragustin (talk) 16:41, 8 March 2023 (UTC)

Any page may be deleted per G11. To appeal, see WP:DRV.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:43, 8 March 2023 (UTC)

You are contradicting the guideline that specifically says that the sandbox was to practice writing an article. I have been chatting with some wikepedia admin who encourage me to revise it. It totally unfair to simply delete an article that is on sandbox. Brutal. Jaragustin (talk) 16:46, 8 March 2023 (UTC)

Do not post here again.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:47, 8 March 2023 (UTC)

Those DYK noms

of Numioa's, apologies for reviewing this opne. I suppose that's why you haven't, or can't, delete it? Feel free to do so; My comment/review adds nothing and their dumbass nominations should be burned to the ground. They were, after all, out-rightly lying, and if I'd seen their other, equally pointless noms, I would've ignored it. Cheers! SN54129 14:55, 5 March 2023 (UTC)

Absolutely right. I've deleted it now. I'm a bit worried, though, that there is something else that needs to be done to completely eliminate anything created by the user in th DYK area. I'm wholly unfamiliar with DYK, but it looks like there are the usual complicated interconnections that Wikipedia so dearly loves. If there's some dangling thingy out there, perhaps a bot will remove it. Anyway, long story short (too late, I know), if you know of something further that needs to be done because of my deletions and Talk page reverts, please feel free to take care of it.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:00, 5 March 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for that - I don't get involved in the backend of DYK myself, but enough people do that they-not me!  :) -will doubtless come knocking on your door if it caused issues. I don't think it will tho. To be honest, if it was just some troll, they probably wouldn't know how to transclude/ subst. or whatever else one has to do there! All the best, SN54129 00:27, 9 March 2023 (UTC)

181.199.44.240

Appears to be a sock you blocked yesterday, making minor edits to language articles/infoboxes. This guy. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 15:41, 9 March 2023 (UTC)

Another editor filed a report at SPI, and I blocked the IP there.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:32, 9 March 2023 (UTC)

Saaren

Hello,I had just written Saaren article, the article is in Farsi, and it has been submitted for comment. Please restore the article in my draft so that I can expand the article and post a comment for it.thanks 3567b (talk) 17:33, 9 March 2023 (UTC)

I can't restore a copyright violation.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:32, 9 March 2023 (UTC)

Sonu Kanwar

Can you recover Sonu Kanwar page in draft so i can improve it. You deleted this page. Wikione9 (talk) 17:06, 10 March 2023 (UTC)

There wasn't much to it, but I've moved it to draft.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:48, 10 March 2023 (UTC)

New mall-editing sock?

There is a new editor Forestbirkin818, who has been editing mall articles in a pattern that seems to match Complexhistorian and some other sockpuppets that you had reported about a year ago. This editor interaction report shows a huge overlap, but I wanted to see what you thought. Does this appear to be a new sockpuppet or do you think this is an innocent coincidence? Alansohn (talk) 23:40, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

Looks like a sock to me. Blocked and tagged. Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:00, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for taking care of this so quickly! Alansohn (talk) 00:51, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

Juan Branco sources

Hello bb23, you just reverted my 2 lasts edits on Juan Branco page saying that I needed to quote "relevant sources" but I already did in the discussion page. Maybe you didnt see it or maybe you don't find them relevant but I don't understand why ? There are clearly stating what is a known fact in France : relationship between politics (here : Emmanuel Macron) and some of the 9 billionaires owning 90% of the French press Username1789 (talk) 18:14, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

You need to cite sources in the article, but not just about Macron but also about a connection between Branco and Macron; otherwise it's WP:SYNTHESIS. And regardless, you need to gain a consensus to insert your material, and I can see from the discussion that you do not have one.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:32, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

Statesville, North Carolina

I believe the user who's been vandalizing "Statesville, North Carolina" (StatesvilleFan89) is a sockpuppet of Skivkanska (Skivkanska on commons), who might have two other active sock accounts (Kudgizstania and 2A02:2788:11E8:646:41D0:3C8F:FFDB:AA86) This user has repeatedly added fake flags on multiple pages across Wikipedia and Commons (Evidence: 1 2 3 4 5) This person is likely a troll and will continue to vandalize as this is the third time it's happened (it might be good to protect Statesville, North Carolina and Flags of cities of the United States due to this as well) Thanks and have a good day! DiscoA340 (talk) 20:25, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

If you're correct, why has StatesvilleFan89 not been blocked on Commons?--Bbb23 (talk) 21:18, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

The user just created his account, other than that, I don't know. DiscoA340 (talk) 21:51, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

FYI

Draft:Jay Nifaoui was re-created shortly after your previous deletion and final warning to the creator. Not sure if the content is any different this time but it's still a self-promotional page nonetheless. Uhai (talk) 22:24, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

I noticed when it was re-created, but the new version wasn't as promotional as the previous one, so I took no action.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:47, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

My mistake

Was just a misclick. Was already in the process of fixing it. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 23:49, 15 March 2023 (UTC)

I noticed. That's why I reverted my message to you.--Bbb23 (talk) 01:18, 16 March 2023 (UTC)

Holy smokes

Jason Bolden wins the prize for over-use of referencing for basic statements. Why use one ref when four or five will do? -- Ponyo^{bons mots} 22:25, 15 March 2023 (UTC)

Heh, there's something wrong with the creator of the article, and I'm trying to figure that out as I speak. If nothing else, they are WP:LOUTSOCKing with Special:contributions/2600:4040:538C:2300:0:0:0:0/64. Maybe UDP?--Bbb23 (talk) 22:29, 15 March 2023 (UTC)

At first blush it looks like UPE, but I can't see the monetary advantage of greatly expanding Mass and Cass (and its 200(!) references).-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 22:41, 15 March 2023 (UTC)

I dunno. I've seen so many flavors of UPE not much would surprise me. The thing I find most astonishing is why people are paid to write articles when they obviously can't write squat. Now where's the "monetary advantage" for the employer? This person's articles are at least decent. I also noticed that the user, like others I've seen, about two weeks after they started editing in January created a userpage with "retired" and WP:U1 on it. Somewhere I've seen an explanation for this bizarre phenomenon, but I didn't find the explanation at all convincing. Based on some conversations the user has had on their Talk page about their many creations, I've decided I don't have enough evidence to block for UPE. I did block the range, though; that's far too much logged out editing.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:54, 15 March 2023 (UTC)

Sounds good. I'm off to parent-teacher interviews so people can tell me what an awesome kid I have (not sarcasm, she's amazing).-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 23:07, 15 March 2023 (UTC)

Bbb23 cleaning up my mistakes and oversights again. It must be exhausting. Ponyo, you do the hard stuff - I just do a little proofreading and follow-up, which is much easier. How'd the PTA meeting go?--Bbb23 (talk) 23:32, 16 March 2023 (UTC)

The meetings were great. Always nice to hear people say lovely things about the ones you love.-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 15:32, 17 March 2023 (UTC)

Request/question

‎IP 205.173.168.3 (talk) has been making a lot of disruptive edits since his last block. Is this enough to constitute another one, and if so can you please do so?-- Grapefanatic (talk) 16:22, 17 March 2023 (UTC)

Not sure why you came to me, but obviously yes, blocked for one week for vandalism.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:26, 17 March 2023 (UTC)

Thank you, and you were one of the few people I could think of. -- Grapefanatic (talk) 16:31, 17 March 2023 (UTC)

I dunno, I would have gone to one of the two previous blocking admins, although, to be honest, I thought the second block should have been longer. The IP belongs to a school, so my guess is this will continue.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:47, 17 March 2023 (UTC)

Stephen D. Behrendt

Why do you keep reverting to the original article? I am married to Stephen D. Behrendt, he requested that I update the wikipedia article, and all the changes I made are externally referenced and can be checked. What is going on? Thank you for explaining. WeGardena (talk) 16:16, 16 March 2023 (UTC)

I've posted a WP:COI notice to your Talk page. You should not be editing your husband's article directly. If you have changes you wish made to the article, you must use the article Talk page with the template {{request edit}}.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:22, 16 March 2023 (UTC)

Thanks WeGardena (talk) 18:47, 17 March 2023 (UTC)

CSD Nominations

@Bbb23 If you look at the Username of the Creator, those are clearly Autobiography Drafts. Don't they normally fall under CSD G11? 1AmNobody24 (talk) 20:15, 17 March 2023 (UTC)

No, and please don't tag a page as G11 only because it's an autobiography.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:17, 17 March 2023 (UTC)

So those drafts are fine? 1AmNobody24 (talk) 20:21, 17 March 2023 (UTC)

No, those drafts are terrible, but they are not subject to speedy deletion.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:27, 17 March 2023 (UTC)

Got it. Won't happen again. Sorry for the trouble. 1AmNobody24 (talk) 20:29, 17 March 2023 (UTC)

Duck

Hi there's an obvious sock that has returned editing multiple articles [3] Magherbin (talk) 18:56, 8 March 2023 (UTC)

Got 'em, thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 19:01, 8 March 2023 (UTC)

Another duck [4] [5] Magherbin (talk) 19:09, 11 March 2023 (UTC)

New account [6]. Magherbin (talk) 01:51, 18 March 2023 (UTC)

undeletion request

Hi Bbb23. Per this discussion, would it be possible for you to readd any references and content that was not unambiguous promotion that was back onto User:Snoutlunar/sandbox, in order for the article to rebuilt to an acceptable standard? Thanks. --Ferien (talk) 19:53, 19 March 2023 (UTC)

Sorry, but the page was a blatant advertisement; I won't restore it. Nor will I take the trouble to cull out the slight amount of non-promotional material. Why do they want to write an article about the company? Perhaps they should do something else, like learn how to edit Wikipedia. It would be a more constructive use of their time and of more value to the project.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:22, 19 March 2023 (UTC)

Yeah, I wasn't asking you to restore the whole article. I was just asking you to readd the references in case they did want to rebuild the article to a constructive level, as they are a fairly new editor and I am their mentor. Doing so wouldn't be advertising and I think we both know that copying and pasting some references from a deleted article takes little to no effort or trouble. --Ferien (talk) 22:38, 19 March 2023 (UTC)

Three revert rule bold text

I see you undid my recent edit to Wikipedia:Edit warring, where you unbolded the text that I had made bold, as shown in this diff: The diff.

Here is my original edit for context: My edit

Your edit summary didn't explain why you undid the change; It just said "unnecessary".

I would like to put the bold text back. Having that phrase in bold makes it easier to see at first glance, especially for new users. By having that phrase in bold, new editors can learn wikipedia policy more quickly and more correctly. Born25121642 (talk) 13:04, 22 March 2023 (UTC)

I thought my edit summary was very clear: bolding the phrase is unnecessary. There's enough color and bold in that section. Adding more distracts from what's already's there.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:16, 22 March 2023 (UTC)

ok, understood. Born25121642 (talk) 21:37, 22 March 2023 (UTC)

Stephen Manas

My edit by Stephen Manas has been removed because I added copyrighted material without proof of permission from the copyright holder. Except that the authorization of the author I have it and I even sent the contract of the photo bought on the site Getty Images, in "permissions-fr@wikimedia.org". --Skarock (talk) 11:52, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

What's your relationship with Martin2707?--Bbb23 (talk) 13:55, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

None but I know it's the person on the page in question, he asked me to help him because he didn't understand how adding an image worked. Skarock (talk) 18:44, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

310Shopper / Margoiure

• 310Shopper (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
• Margoiure (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

I don't think I've encountered this LTA/sock before. Any idea what the master account is? – Muboshgu (talk) 17:36, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

For a long time now, there has been a user who vandalizes blocked user's Talk pages with the same kind of crap. They seem to come in spurts. Who the original master is I don't know. I may have asked someone at one point, but if I did, I'm afraid I don't remember the answer - if there was one. :-( If I were going to ask someone now, I'd probably ask zzuuzz. They tend to be one of the more knowledgeable CUs about this sort of thing.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:51, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

I don't believe there's one commonly accepted answer. Common names are AfD troll[7] and SPI troll.[8] These days of course it's the unblock troll. They've done other stuff too. As you'll see from the first link, another name is Kingshowman, and that's a commonly accepted token for SPI and stuff. I've also been known to use this name, though I'm not going to swear by it. Bbb23 might know even more than me given this information, if they can get their memory to work :) Pcgmsrich is another candidate name, there's others, and it just deteriorates from there into a speculative troll bog of unknown depths. I can see huge potential for a mixup when it comes to an original label, so I just don't bother, and haven't bothered pursuing it. Interesting fact, we can usually locate this user to within about 50 meters as they go about their day. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 18:48, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

I've tried injections of adrenaline directly into my brain, but no luck, although I did act pretty weirdly for a while. Kingshowman...now there's a voice from the past. Apt username, in my view, you could always count on drama and colorful usernames of his socks. But of course I have no idea whether this unblock troll is him. Who knows? Maybe it's a conspiracy of different LTAs...--Bbb23 (talk) 20:05, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

I honestly suspect we'll never know (unless I really waste a lot of time to look into it), and this one will forever just be known as '..troll'. I'd point out Wikipedia talk:Long-term abuse/Kingshowman and Special:DeletedContributions/Very_Truly_Yours, but they would say that. Sro23 thinks this might be BuickCenturyDriver and they're not often wrong. But anyway for most purposes if you need a name, Kingshowman will usually suffice. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 20:10, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

I agree with you about Sro23, but, IIRC (despite my memory), I don't think the technical data for BCD and Kingshowman are at all the same, and you must have data for the new crop of socks.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:16, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

Edit removed wrongly

hi there agreed with Philipnelson66 to put source and also that if I edited again he wouldn't take it down. Please restore the nickname on the Kerry F.C. (Ireland)‎ Wikipedia page. Pjgalway (talk) 13:31, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

@Pjgalway: For what it's worth, I didn't necessarily agree to you putting it back. I just said I would not revert the change. The source you cited is a blog which is not considered reliable. Philipnelson99 (talk) 13:39, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

there is a fan club blog. There are numerous social media mentions of it. A football club nickname doesn't need to be official. Often, like in this case - nicknames are given to a club by fans or the media, and they may vary over time and in different contexts. While some clubs may officially adopt a particular nickname, others may not. Ultimately, it is up to the fans and the wider community to decide what name or nickname they want to use for their team. please revert. Pjgalway (talk) 13:45, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Yes, I read the conversation between you and Philip on his Talk page. The material you've been adding must be supported by a reliable source, and neither the Twitter ref you mentioned or the blog you added is even close to being reliable. From what you say, you yourself don't think it's possible to find a reliable source to support that nickname, so I suggest you find something else to do at Wikipedia that is more constructive. If you persist, you may find yourself blocked.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:44, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

It's a small club, the blog is perhaps representative of the fact it is a new club. Pjgalway (talk) 13:46, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

That isn't up for debate. Blogs are user generated content, therefore they are considered unreliable. Philipnelson99 (talk) 13:47, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

Blog writers can become members of the national Union of journalists and so you are questioning the integrity of the journalistic profession though I note that this is Wikipedia policy. Either way I don't see the issue, it's the popular nickname among fans, so will appear soon. Seems the complainers in this situation are the "official ultras" who seem to dislike the wishes of real fans. Pjgalway (talk) 14:02, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

Duck Sock

Evening Bbb23, this sock has returned. [9] [10]. Magherbin (talk) 00:20, 30 March 2023 (UTC)

Sir Studios

Hi, a few days ago you blocked MuratKaranfil and Sir Studios for spamming about this business. Now a new user LegendarrowW has created Draft:Sir Studios again. I expect it's the same sockfarm. Could you look into this, or would you rather I take it to SPI? Thanks, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:41, 30 March 2023 (UTC)

Blocked and tagged, thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:27, 30 March 2023 (UTC)

Kerry FC nicknames

Kerry FC nicknames have been removed by you please put them back. They are the heart and soul of the club. Alanatnumber2 (talk) 17:42, 30 March 2023 (UTC)

What's your relationship with Pjgalway?--Bbb23 (talk) 17:46, 30 March 2023 (UTC)

Erasing my Edits

I am trying to understand why you erased my edits? You first used the excuse that it was a conflict of interest which is absolutely ridiculous! When I told you that I don't have any conflict of interest because don't know anyone from any of what I added. You then said my info was poorly sourced but after I told you that I'd provide sources you then changed it to I'm having an edit war which is not true either and now you won't respond. LN Pinedo (talk) 16:16, 25 March 2023 (UTC)

Edit wars are when you think you are correct, and when someone reverts your edit, you revert it back. Whether or not you are correct, you should not engage in them and continue on with your day instead of risking of being blocked. If you knew them personally, you should have said that. Insendieum (talk) 20:17, 30 March 2023 (UTC)

Even if you think it was not an edit war, it still was and you are trying to make an excuse and make it seem as the other person was in the wrong for what ended up, with your work being deleted. If you do want to make an edit, it should be well sourced or it will be reverted, and if it is deleted because you didn't make one, don't argue it and try to find one so you can make sure your information is verifiable enough. Insendieum (talk) 20:20, 30 March 2023 (UTC)

Sockpuppets/Block evasion at Sanctioned Suicide

Thank you for blocking a couple of sockpuppets at Sanctioned Suicide [11] [12], and protecting the page. Some other IPs/accounts have appeared which seem likely to be block evasion/sockpuppetry too, such as [13], [14], [15], and [16]. It may or may not be necessary to block them, but since this sockpuppetry/block evasion has been going on since mid-february, it seems likely to continue once the page is unprotected in a month. Could you consider protecting it for longer? Tristario (talk) 23:19, 30 March 2023 (UTC)

I blocked the IP, principally because of their block log and continued editing after the last block expired. However, I don't have enough evidence to make a connection between the named user and anyone else. As for the semi-protection, there's no reason at this point to extend the protection. If disruptive editing from non-autoconfirmed users resumes after the protection expires, you can request additional protection at that time.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:25, 31 March 2023 (UTC)

Okay, thank you. I'm not sure if the better place to take this is to WP:SPI, but this IP states here and here that they wrote almost the entire Sanctioned Suicide article, which means they're the same as the IPs who wrote much of the article (looking at the page statistics) who were blocked for block evading: [17] [18] [19]. Do you mind looking at that? Tristario (talk) 23:49, 1 April 2023 (UTC)

The IPs are from different countries.--Bbb23 (talk) 01:30, 2 April 2023 (UTC)

I don't really understand that, but as well as saying they wrote half the article, their behavior is also very similar to other similar IPs on the article (like this one) that have been blocked for block evasion, where they repeatedly edit their talk page comments. If I want this looked into should I open a sockpuppet investigation? Tristario (talk) 01:38, 2 April 2023 (UTC)

After doing some more digging, I've changed my mind and blocked the IP for 72h, although I think they were done as of yesterday (their last edit at the article Talk page). Another geolocator shows the IP located in the US, not Canada, and both IPs are owned by Verizon Business, whose geolocation reliability is erratic at best.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:03, 2 April 2023 (UTC)

Can't quite put my finger on..

I can't do an SPI because I can't figure out who the original is, but I suspect 79.70.70.215 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) is definitely a sock, and a troublesome one at that as evidenced, for example by his/her 3RR behaviour at York. Any ideas as you're an experienced puppet-killer? 10mmsocket (talk) 15:49, 2 April 2023 (UTC)

Have reported at WP:AIV in the meantime. 10mmsocket (talk) 16:02, 2 April 2023 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – April 2023

News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2023).

Administrator changes

Aoidh

KillerChihuahua

CheckUser changes

Ferret

Guideline and policy news

• A community RfC is open to discuss whether reports primarily involving gender-related disputes or controversies should be referred to the Arbitration enforcement noticeboard.

Technical news

• Some older web browsers will not be able to use JavaScript on Wikimedia wikis starting this week. This mainly affects users of Internet Explorer 11. (T178356)
• The rollback of Vector 2022 RfC has found no consensus to rollback to Vector legacy, but has found rough consensus to disable "limited width" mode by default.
• A link to the user's Special:CentralAuth page will now appear in the subtitle links shown on Special:Contributions. This was voted #17 in the Community Wishlist Survey 2023.

Arbitration

• The Armenia-Azerbaijan 3 case has been closed.
• A case about World War II and the history of Jews in Poland has been opened, with the first evidence phase closing 6 April 2023.

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:10, 4 April 2023 (UTC)

Sock or no sock?

Hi Bbb23. I'd like to draw your attention to this COIN discussion: WP:COIN#COI, may be removed? May someone remove it? One person has admitted to having two accounts: FabioMaggiAngelini and FabiusCesareAngelini.

The first account is active primarily on Italian Wikipedia. They have an admitted COI [20] (family member) with the subject they're editing about, the author it:Cesare Angelini.

The second account created a counterpart article here, Cesare Angelini (author). On their userpage, they disclose that they are the same person as the first account. That was confirmed by them when I questioned them at COIN. The first account made two edits to the English article, which the second account says was a mistake.

So - is one person allowed to use two accounts across two Wikipedias, if each is used exclusively for one language-version? I don't think I've come across this situation before.

There is also a third account (LitteralContributor) editing the article here, a WP:SPA who has remained silent. The person at COIN claims there is no connection... but they also claimed not to have a COI, and that wasn't true. I'm inclined to file at SPI and ask for a CU. What do you think? --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 18:18, 4 April 2023 (UTC)

All accounts are using identical edit summaries, as is the ip 2001:B07:AD4:666D:2E02:41D8:911E:2A8A Catfish Jim and the soapdish 18:41, 4 April 2023 (UTC)

I decided to proceed with a report: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/FabioMaggiAngelini --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 22:50, 5 April 2023 (UTC)

@Drm310: My apologies for not responding to this before, but I noticed it, intended to look at it later, and then...forgot. Opening an SPI is probably best.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:52, 5 April 2023 (UTC)

Copyvio revision delete

Hello Bbb23, could you please check this revision delete request? Regards! DreamRimmer (talk) 18:44, 8 April 2023 (UTC)

Not sure why you've come to me, but I suggest you ask an administrator who's more familiar with such tasks, although I believe the template may attract an admin. I always go to Diannaa myself, but I'm sure there are others.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:27, 8 April 2023 (UTC)

@DreamRimmer: It's up to the admin doing the revision deletion to check your work and verify that the requested action is appropriate. I see a couple of problems. One is that the curent version of the article still has an enormous overlap with the source webpage, and did have a similar amount of overlap even before the addition of the content you removed. Is it a Wikpedia mirror? A second problem is that the content you removed does not seem to be present in the purported source. — Diannaa (talk) 21:02, 8 April 2023 (UTC)

Seeming block evasion

Hi. This page is a favourite of a known and long term banned user. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Theories_about_Alexander_the_Great_in_the_Quran&action=history If you look at this edit by Gamma737 https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=1149112662&oldid=1147893182&title=Theories_about_Alexander_the_Great_in_the_Quran&diffmode=source you'll see that they effectively reinstate the edits you reverted here https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=1146405804&oldid=1146400010&title=Theories_about_Alexander_the_Great_in_the_Quran&diffmode=source Seems a sleeper account to me. ThanksNEDOCHAN (talk) 13:24, 10 April 2023 (UTC)

That's not enough for me to block. Please file a report at WP:SPI.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:29, 10 April 2023 (UTC)

ok thanks NEDOCHAN (talk) 13:46, 10 April 2023 (UTC)

Nabela Noor

@Bbb23:, Would you be able to draftify the page you deleted (Nabela Noor) into Draft:Nabela Noor so I can improve the page in draftspace with the sources? Thanks, Das osmnezz (talk) 20:23, 10 April 2023 (UTC)

Will you agree not to move the draft to article space on your own but instead use WP:AFC?--Bbb23 (talk) 20:24, 10 April 2023 (UTC)

@Bbb23:, I do agree, I will not to move the draft to article space on your own but instead use WP:AFC. Thanks, Das osmnezz (talk) 20:32, 10 April 2023 (UTC)

 Done. See Draft:Nabela Noor.--Bbb23 (talk) 21:00, 10 April 2023 (UTC)

Awaiting your response

I was awaiting your response and you reverted my inquiry? Before you say I was editing the archive, I would not have had to do so if I wasn't ignored – Batreeq ^{(Talk) (Contribs)} 03:43, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

• Batreeq, I think you were awaiting a response from Courcelles, maybe, but editing an arbitration enforcement log is not the right way to achieve that--you shouldn't be editing that page at all. Drmies (talk) 03:47, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
  • @Drmies: Shouldn't it be protected, then? – Batreeq ^{(Talk) (Contribs)} 03:53, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
    • No, why? It's a log, not a talk page. Drmies (talk) 14:16, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

Speedy Deletion Request Review/Help

Hi Bbb23, I was hoping to gain some better understanding of the speedy deletion tag on the page I created for Schellman. I'm new to Wiki and writing articles and thought this would be a good start. I would like to understand what edits I can make to help show that the topic I'm writing about is not advertising in nature. For background, I saw someone from this company speak at a conference in March. They spoke about Digital ID, which I'm very interested in. Trying to broaden my skills on wiki, I thought I would draft a page for Schellman (instead of the person I saw speak, since that seems harder to do) to gain experience before writing other pages. I would love any insights you have into the best way to approach writing pages. I reviewed the How to Create a Page, and I checked the Notability Guidelines page before drafting this page. I welcome your help, if possible. Thank you! CyberTrinity (talk) 14:42, 12 April 2023 (UTC)

You might talk to Jamiebuba, who reviewed the draft before tagging it for speedy deletion. Other venues have already been noted on your Talk page.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:01, 12 April 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for the quick reply, Bbb23. I'll reach out to Jamiebuba. CyberTrinity (talk) 16:03, 12 April 2023 (UTC)

Request review: sock block for User:IloveDPPH and User:Pharmacystudent000

Hi, I'm writing to discuss your sockpuppet block for the two accounts.

I can confirm that they are not socks of each other but just two people who use the same IP (as of records), through probably different UA.

At the same time, they are participants of a current University undergraduate course that have a dashboard set up for this purpose. As seen by the link:

https://outreachdashboard.wmflabs.org/courses/The_University_of_Hong_Kong/CAES9720_Academic_Communication_for_Pharmacy_Students_(2022-23)/students/overview

Please unblock the accounts if possible, thanks. I'm happy to provide more evidence to support the idea that these two accounts, though related to each other, are in no possibility engaging in any sort of sockpuppetry. Please let me know if there are any questions.

Regards, 1233 ( T / C） 06:20, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

What is your role in this?--Bbb23 (talk) 14:46, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

I originally collaborated with the university to help deliver their WikiEDU programmes (till 2021) in a paid support role (where I help out administrative tasks, deliver editing training and help amend the materials for the courses). The collaboration ended as we think the instructors are equipped with skills in dealing with most problems that won't require attention and my busy schedule in issues well known, such as OA2021. I still do local (in Hong Kong) educational/GLAM programmes now so they found me when there's this issue.

Hope that clarifies stuff. 1233 ( T / C） 19:24, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

quick Note: they = course instructors 1233 ( T / C） 16:42, 12 April 2023 (UTC)

User:Pharmacystudent000

I've taken the liberty of unblocking this user, who appears to be a bona fide student unintentionally giving the impression of a sock. Deb (talk) 07:34, 13 April 2023 (UTC)

Hi Bbb23. You probably already know, but formally FYI, currently at ANI. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 07:51, 13 April 2023 (UTC)

And I have unblocked IloveDPPH, this looks like a genuine misunderstanding with two newbies unwittingly behaving suspiciously. —  Salvio ^giuliano 08:41, 13 April 2023 (UTC)

Gamingmaster83 (proxy)

Some people don't understand your sarcastic, acerbic wit. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 07:24, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of User:Michael-Moates

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. A tag has been placed on User:Michael-Moates requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section U5 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to consist of writings, information, discussions, or activities not closely related to Wikipedia's goals. Please note that Wikipedia is not a free web hosting service. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such pages may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Valereee (talk) 14:41, 10 April 2023 (UTC)

Why did this end up here? Did I do something stupid? Valereee (talk) 14:48, 10 April 2023 (UTC)

No, I created the page years ago when I tagged it for sock puppetry. Silly automation.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:49, 10 April 2023 (UTC)

Ah! Valereee (talk) 14:50, 10 April 2023 (UTC)

hahahahaha...I'm thinking I should've unchecked some box...sorry, never actually CSD'd a user page before Valereee (talk) 15:00, 10 April 2023 (UTC)

Probably wouldn't have this time if the user hadn't been kind of obstreperous. Valereee (talk) 15:01, 10 April 2023 (UTC)

Yeah, I noticed on his Talk page.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:03, 10 April 2023 (UTC)

This is clear harassment by Valereee. My page has information about myself as to the many topics I write about here. This does not meet the U5 criteria. Michael-Moates (talk) 19:08, 12 April 2023 (UTC)

I wanted to reach out and see if you wanted to restore this before I ask for a 3rd party admin to review. Wikipedia dictates that I try to resolve with you first. Since you had previously been involved in another issue with me, I think it is fair to request review by an uninvolved administrator. Michael-Moates (talk) 19:17, 12 April 2023 (UTC)

As an uninvolved third-party administrator, I examined the deleted item and agree: it was a shameless self-advertisement, and formatted to resemble a (badly-constructed) Wikipedia article. I would have deleted it immediately, for the same reason it was deleted. --Orange Mike | Talk 21:14, 12 April 2023 (UTC)

Now that he can no longer advertise himself here, he's retired. One can only hope that he remains so.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:07, 12 April 2023 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) I know this user has been obstreperous, but some of the above comments could be perceived as WP:GRAVEDANCING — BillHPike (talk, contribs) 02:37, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

The user requested restoration, saying if they didn't get it they'd ask for review by an uninvolved admin. 2 hours later, an uninvolved admin provided review. Less than one hour after that, Bbb informed this discussion the OP had retired. I don't see how any of that is gravedancing. Are you referring to the single statement 'one can only hope he remains so'? Valereee (talk) 10:18, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

Page revert

Hi. I just wanted to ask why my edit on Wake Up & It's Over was reverted. Simply curious about the reason why, as no reasons were listed! -- CallMeWhatULike 11:53, 14 April 2023 (EST)

I misunderstood what you did and have now restored your edit. That said, unless you plan to develop the article quickly, it really should be in draft space.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:01, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

User talk:Gamingmaster83

Sorry, I got confused by this interaction from you a lot. I didn't realise it's sarcasm (or was it?). Next time I run into a confusing statement like that again, I'll ask for confirmation/clarification before acting. —  AP 499D25  (talk) 07:28, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

It was sarcasm. I thought it was obvious, but apparently not.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:03, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

Oh, okay. I forgot you were one of the more funny admins around on here.

One of my favourite admins on here, is Materialscientist. I've noticed he has a "zero tolerance" approach towards vandals. There have been more than a handful of occasions where, after reverting a vandal's edits, just as I was about to put a warning on their talk page, they had already been handed out a block notice to them by Materialscientist. Never fails to give me a chuckle every time. —  AP 499D25  (talk) 09:13, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

Zpro1408

Zpro1408 (talk · contribs) has had two appeals closed as stale, and the appeals seem sincere enough. Do you object to unblocking? ~Anachronist (talk) 00:57, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

By the way, I had always considered you a 'go to' guy for checkuser-related things (not that I ever acted on that) but I noticed just now you're no longer a checkuser. What happened? ~Anachronist (talk) 01:00, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

The user hasn't complied with Z1720's request from February. Specifics would be helpful in evaluating whether the user can be an asset to the project.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:43, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

Question about something I've seen on ANI

When looking at ANI I see a lot of text that looks greenish teal, what does that mean? -- Grapefanatic (talk) 16:48, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

You'd have to provide an example.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:54, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#Back-Door_Deletion at the comment made by Huggums537 from 3:44, 1 April 2023. -- Grapefanatic (talk) 17:03, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

Just some turquoise text, I guess. Where's a link for it? WP:TQ doesn't work! Tails Wx 17:14, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

"If one person unilaterally added it to mainspace, one person should be able to unilaterally remove it if it doesn't meet our inclusion criteria. If the two disagree about whether it meets the criteria, then we have a discussion." I don't know how to link to a specific quote but that is what the green text says. -- Grapefanatic (talk) 17:21, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

I mean, it could be a quote to the editor's statement, or it could be from a Wikipedia essay! The "turquoise text" shows up as you enter this:

{{tq|Example}}

This would show up as:

Example.

Hope this helps! Tails Wx 17:36, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

Yep, that would be it. Thanks. -- Grapefanatic (talk) 17:37, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

help

hey man can u actually help me with this leaugue of nations article? what should i improve? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Montbur (talk • contribs) 14:27, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

I don't think you are competent enough to edit Wikipedia.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:44, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

there was nothing wrong with my revision except the lack of citation, whyd u go through and start reverting stuff rather than helping, thats not very nice Montbur (talk) 14:52, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

Regarding Talk:Kennedy Obohwemu

hi Bbb23! I feel like you may've been a bit bitey when handling that situation, imo you probably could have told them to use {{Request edit}} (which they seem to be unaware of until now) instead of saying their edits are not good (but why exactly is it not good?) and scaring them off with a block. anyway, happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 14:47, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

You think the material Gi43 wants to add is "good"?? Their misuse of adminhelp was disruptive, and I warned them about it.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:06, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

I'd rather leave analysis of the content to those who work on the edit requests so they can give better feedback than me (I personally think it's not yet good for mainspace, but I only provided my thoughts to give them an overall direction to head to), but I'm just saying that instead of saying that what they're doing is wrong and they should stop lest they get blocked, it's best to explain why it is wrong (because {{adminhelp}} is for help requiring administrators only) and ideally what they can do instead (use {{request edit}} instead).

not every newcomer knows all 10000 policies and templates and intricacies we use after all, so it's best to assume they don't know and guide them first, and only after they have repeatedly ignored your (or everyone's) warnings despite explaining what to do, then you can tell them that competence is required (since you've tried all you can and they're unlikely to change at that point). just my few thoughts. 💜  melecie  talk - 23:18, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

i feel ive experienced the same, this guy seems aggressive and unpleasent and peverts almost everything ive ever added recently, he doesnt want anyone to try and improve or give advice! Montbur (talk) 17:37, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

72.86.42.248

Seems like the user have become active again despite previously being blocked by you for block evasion. What is the proper procedure in cases like this? Should we do anything? --Trade (talk) 22:35, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

I blocked the IP; thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:45, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

thanks

I was Mistaken, and I don't Like other Users telling me I am wrong ..Sorry Jena (talk) 16:22, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

Sock

Hello Bbb23, can you take a look at edits at Gafat people & Fasilides, appears to be a duck. Magherbin (talk) 19:22, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

Certainly does. Thanks for the heads-up.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:23, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

Possible connection between sock and banned user

Was doing a cursory look through the edit history of socks relevant to Littleboyblue2000 and saw that multiple socks of Krajoyn overlapped with the new set. Besides the topical similarity–primarily Dominican Republic articles, almost exclusively Caribbean–the cross-wiki abuse seems to be a theme between both sets. Please let me know if you want me to look into it or if I'm seeing patterns where there are none. ~ Pbritti (talk) 18:02, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

I don't remember that sock farm being especially interested in the Caribbean, but it's been a long time. Favonian, as I recall, was the expert in that case.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:27, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

@Pbritti: Krajoyn definitely has a Dominican "angle", with the Parsley massacre being a favorite obsession. However, the primary bee in his bonnet is fiddling with casualty figures, using "eclectic" referencing, and my cursory reading of the wee boy's contributions didn't show much of that. Furthermore, the IP range mentioned on the user talk page, 2600:4040:aad3:c900::/64, is American while K was mostly editing from Sweden and the Dominican Republic. Favonian (talk) 21:03, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

Google Fiber

I issued him a final warning since he consistently used the filthiest and most defamatory slurs in Hindi on that article, which revisions should also be deleted, and that user was WP:NOTHERE totally. DreamRimmer (talk) 16:30, 24 April 2023 (UTC)

My problem was that a user should not get two warnings for the same edit. They problably deserved more than a first-level warning, but then you'd want to remove the first-level warning and replace it with a higher-level one. It's all moot because I blocked them after they did it again. I'll take care of the rev/deletions, though, now.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:35, 24 April 2023 (UTC)

Please delete this revision too, and thank you for always keeping Wikipedia protected. DreamRimmer (talk) 16:48, 24 April 2023 (UTC)

(smiling ruefully) Thanks for catching that.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:53, 24 April 2023 (UTC)

Speedy delete re Draft:Modified Newtonian Dynamics (2022)

I realise that the fringe/hoax may not fit the "obvious" in G3 and I will admit I'm not familiar with the standard with which this is applied. However, I still believe that the article should not exist even as a draft.

First off, on this sentence in the lede alone the entire article is in solid WP:FRINGE territory:

is a theory of gravity that dispenses with General Relativity and Dark Matter.

You may note that the actual Modified Newtonian dynamics is clear that it does NOT supersede GR [21][22], as dark matter is a phenomenon that can be detected by Newtonian means, and MOND only dispenses with the notion of dark matter, and even then only in specific circumstances [23].

Secondly, the article creator has made no attempt to even put a cursory source to justify the far-reaching claims of the lede. All sources in the article are either links to youtube videos, popular science pages, or irrelevant Feynman citations that seem intimidating but are just an incredibly roundabout way of saying "mirrors reflect light", and all pertain to an irrelevant section copied straight from a section the article creator has [24]inserted repeatedly to the Redshift article. In conclusion, the article in question, if it were an actual article and not a draft, even if its citations were massively improved (which it can't, because they don't exist), would be AfD'd and snow deleted very, very quickly.

I realise this might not fit the criteria for speedy deletion, but surely something can/should be done about a blatant fringe article even in draft space. Fermiboson (talk) 17:28, 24 April 2023 (UTC)

Pinging article creator @The oracle 2015 because it's probably courtesy to notify them as well. Fermiboson (talk) 17:31, 24 April 2023 (UTC)

Assistance for Disruptive Edits

Hello Bbb23, I'm requesting assistance regarding editor Veverve which I've noticed you have previously blocked. As you probably know, this user has a long history of WP:3RR, WP:DISRUPT, and WP:VANDALIZE and has been blocked multiple times by several admins ([25], [26], [27], [28] and [29]). He has gutted two articles that I've been working on for weeks that are related to each other (Maria Valtorta, and Poem of the Man-God).

His underlying contention is that some of my sources are unreliable. I disagree, but asked him to go to the article talk page where we can discuss, and reverted his changes which gutted both articles, removing perhaps 40%+ of both articles and a large number of citations. He reverted my changes, and I reverted his again (2nd reversion). Again I asked him to discuss on the talk page and not to revert again. He contacted one of the admins Diannaa, asking her to check for any copyright infringement. She found one and made the page history inaccessible to me. I'm happy to correct any copyright infringement by rephrasing in my own words the offending material, but I am unable to access the ungutted versions of both articles since Diannaa removed my access to those versions.

I don't understand why Diannaa removed my access to these versions of the article before letting me know about the copyright violation, where I could correct it. I've asked her if she can restore access so I can correct the copyright infringement. She seems unresponsive. The disruptive editor then finally reverted my reversion, and that's where both articles currently stand – gutted, with me unable to access the ungutted versions. I've placed warnings on Veverve's talk page asking him to stop.

Would it be possible to:

1. Access my most recent reversions of both articles so I can undo the substantial gutting of these articles, and correct the copyright policy violation?

2. Block/ban Veverve for his serial disruptive edits and vandalism? Arkenstrone (talk) 16:24, 24 April 2023 (UTC)

This has nothing to do with me, and Diannaa has not been unresponsive. It looks more to me like you have a problem understanding what she's telling you.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:28, 24 April 2023 (UTC)

Agreed, it has nothing to do with you, I just wanted to see if you were able to assist given your previous interactions with this editor. But it appears not, and I respect that. Also, I didn't mean Diannaa was unresponsive in general, but unresponsive to my request to restore access to the inaccessible content so I could correct any issues. Arkenstrone (talk) 21:20, 24 April 2023 (UTC)

Protection of Teahouse

Hey! I understand your reasoning for protecting the Teahouse, however I don't think 1 day is appropriate for the Teahouse given its specifically users who probably wouldn't be autoconfirmed yet. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 17:02, 25 April 2023 (UTC)

How long do you think would be appropriate?--Bbb23 (talk) 17:32, 25 April 2023 (UTC)

Examining the protection log, it appears for all the protections that were less than 24 hours, 3 hours of protection seemed to be the most common (although I could just be bad at math involving times). Given the severity of the vandalism, I think 5 hours (or maybe 5 hours and an arbitrary amount of minutes to make it harder to resume vandalism when protection expires) might be best. Interestingly this is the first time the Teahouse has needed to be protected since 2018. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 17:44, 25 April 2023 (UTC)

I changed it to 6 hours, although I suspect the crap will resume once the protection expires. The asshole seems to have an inexhaustible number of Indian IPs at their disposal. It'd be nice to have a protection that affects only IPs.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:49, 25 April 2023 (UTC)

I was thinking the same thing. Similar to an anon-only block of an IP. Actually... I'm curious if it would technically be possible to have such a protection since it would be useful for pages such as this in which IPs tend to be a bigger problem than non-autoconfirmed users. I'm fine with a 6 hour protection, about half of what I was originally thinking (12 hours). ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 17:52, 25 April 2023 (UTC)

I did place a range block earlier that caused them to move to a new block of IPs. They're also willing to hop to other pages to disrupt. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 17:53, 25 April 2023 (UTC)

I wish that we better understood the mentality and motivations of such troubled individuals. Cullen328 (talk) 19:14, 25 April 2023 (UTC)

I'm not sure how much that would help, but I suspect many editors of this type are not "troubled" but angry at not being allowed to be disruptive. I know enough people I actually care about IRL who are troubled to give a flying hoot about these kinds of people whom I don't know or want to know. Someone once told me I should be more sympathetic because these are people, too. I understand the point and of course it's a fact, but it's not something I'm overly fussed about.--Bbb23 (talk) 21:15, 25 April 2023 (UTC)

I remember a (somewhat) sane LTA posted something saying that they are addicted to it. While they may be an LTA, it is interesting to think about the fact that these people keep doing it not because they refuse to stop, but because they're addicted to it. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 19:19, 25 April 2023 (UTC)

Block evasion

Hey Bbb23. You recently blocked LieutenantShen (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) for sock puppetry. I've reverted a number of their edits, and I just received 43 notifications that my reverts were undone by Feng30 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). That account started editing a few hours after the Shen block. Looking at history of the article Jianwen (era), it seems to me that both accounts are related to Dmhw (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). But I daresay you're more across this than I am. Let me know if you want me to file something at SPI; a link to the master's account/case would be handy if that's the case. Thanks. — Manticore 13:12, 26 April 2023 (UTC)

I haven't looked at it yet, but see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Ylogm.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:16, 26 April 2023 (UTC)

Checkuser on IPs

You wrote Please do not request a CU when you report IPs, which is not at all surprising. So what should I do instead? How are probable IP sockpuppets handled? (I doubt that I'm the first to have asked this question so feel free to point me at the canned answer.) 𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 16:32, 26 April 2023 (UTC)

You should not request a CU, just report the IP and it will be decided behaviorally.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:34, 26 April 2023 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of User:Eightbillion/Grigori Grabovoi (talk helper) page

Hi Bbb23, why is my user space page "G11: Unambiguous advertising or promotion"? It is the same as the main namespace version, except that the events are put in chronological order, plus a table added to be able to see which part is not in order and an assumed respect level is indicated. Eightbillion (talk) 19:05, 26 April 2023 (UTC)

As per Wikipedia:User pages: "User pages are pages for organizing the work users do on Wikipedia, as well as speaking to other users. User pages are mainly for interpersonal discussion, notices, testing and drafts (see: Sandboxes), and, if desired, limited autobiographical and personal content. Pages in the User and User talk namespaces are considered to be user pages." I created the page to help the discussion with other wikipedians as I have notified them here: [30] Why my user space page "G11"? --Eightbillion (talk) 09:57, 27 April 2023 (UTC)

I've restored the page.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:20, 27 April 2023 (UTC)

The page is a blatant POV fork of an existing article, and can serve no useful purpose. The table consists of two parts - a timeline full of ridiculous promotional spin ('Resurrecting people', 'Creating new science', 'News about earthquake prediction device' etc, etc, etc), and a 'respect' column which is unambiguous WP:OR, based on nothing but Eightbillion's personal opinion. And while the remaining body of the text is largely copied from the existing article, new content has been added to further promote Grabovoi, citing sources already rejected in talk page discussions, along with section headers which purport to assert in Wikipedia's voice that Grabovoi is a 'Respected scientist, inventor, clairvoyant, healer', and 'the Second Coming of Jesus Christ'. If the intent was actually to aid discussion, rather than masquerade as an article, it wouldn't need an infobox. It wouldn't need copy-pasted content. It isn't an aid to anything, except promotion by a single-purpose account that claims to have no links to Grabovioi but nevertheless spends a great deal of time creating reams of fake-article text in user space - this is the third example of such user-page misuse. AndyTheGrump (talk) 13:39, 27 April 2023 (UTC)

Why don't you take it to MfD?--Bbb23 (talk) 13:47, 27 April 2023 (UTC)

Given that the two previous fake-article pages had been speedily deleted, it seemed unnecessary. And still does, but if I have to, I will. And then, the next time I see such abuse of user space from this blatantly-promotional single-purpose shill account, raise the matter at WP:ANI instead, where maybe the root problem will get dealt with. AndyTheGrump (talk) 14:00, 27 April 2023 (UTC)

@AndyTheGrump: I'm not sure I was aware of the previous deletions. I'm a little tired at the moment and my brain's a bit fuzzy. Fastily deleted the previous ones as U5 (better than G11 I think), and if Fastily - or any other administrator - wants to redelete the page, I have no problem with it.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:38, 27 April 2023 (UTC)

I see Orangemike has now deleted the page again. Thanks. AndyTheGrump (talk) 14:46, 27 April 2023 (UTC)

I removed the questioned parts. Is it acceptable now? Eightbillion (talk) 14:02, 27 April 2023 (UTC)

No, you have not 'removed the questioned parts'. For a start, your bullshit 'respect' column is still in the table, alongside the 'Resurrecting people' etc nonsense. But in any case, there is no useful purpose whatsoever served by creating article forks. That isn't how Wikipedia works. It doesn't aid discussion. But then, you clearly aren't interested in discussion anyway - just engaging in relentless, repetitive promotion of your resurrection-for-payment messiah.

Incidentally, I note on your talk page that you claim to have no personal connection with Grabovoi. Can I then ask exactly where you have been getting this highly-detailed 'timeline' from? Is it WP:OR, or sourced to Grabovoi himself? AndyTheGrump (talk) 14:13, 27 April 2023 (UTC)

I kept the respect column because I would like to discuss this with the wikipedians. And for that reason the order of events are important, so the page is here to read the events in order. This is not aimed to be an article fork, just a helper page for the discussion. I do not want to promote Grabovoi, I just would like to show the full picture of his life. I also find it necessary to include the bad news and criticism of him. The "Resurrecting of people..." is the title of his book and I added it to support the next paragraphs which describe his teaching.

I do not have personal connection with him but I know his teaching and found to be useful, also I found his life events are better than the current wikipedia article shows, so I decided to help to fix it. Yes, I spend time on it because I think it could be important for many people. I collected myself the timeline data from the news and web sources. His lifetime events are well covered on the Internet after his announcement. Eightbillion (talk) 14:29, 27 April 2023 (UTC)

You have already been told, repeatedly, that Wikipedia does not base content on contributors own opinions, whether regarding 'respect' or anything else. There is nothing to discuss. Nothing at all. Zilch. Nada. If you want to waste your time promoting your messiah-for-profit, you will have to find somewhere else to do it. Wikipedia does not consider the umpteenth candidate for the Second Coming of Christ as 'important'. Nobody does, except Grabovoi, his idiot followers, and a few hack journalists looking for clickbait headlines (or quite possibly, bribes). AndyTheGrump (talk) 14:40, 27 April 2023 (UTC)

John Macnish

Hello Bbb23. Just curious of your rationale behind the decline. Cheers, Tim O'Doherty (talk) 00:14, 30 April 2023 (UTC)

Pretty obvious; I didn't agree with you that it was that promotional. The rest of what you say is immaterial. It's been tagged before, you know, so you really should take it to AfD if you think it's not notable.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:17, 30 April 2023 (UTC)

Bbb23, it was written by Circlevision, who is obviously an associate of the company, or at least has a conflict of interest. In creating the article, there would have been an ulterior motive. Again, the refs don't check out. I'm not going to spend too much time on this stubby article, but there you go: that's my case. Tim O'Doherty (talk) 00:20, 30 April 2023 (UTC)

Well, after over 8 years of no edits (!!), Cullen328 just hard-blocked Circlevision for promotional username, so perhaps Cullen would be willing to speedy delete it.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:49, 30 April 2023 (UTC)

In my opinion, there is no statute of limitations on "promotional username, promotional edits" blocks. Maybe somebody will haul me to ANI for expressing my opinion. As for John Macnish, I have not assessed his notability. If anyone wants to either improve that article or take it to AfD, I will welcome either of those options. Cullen328 (talk) 03:10, 30 April 2023 (UTC)

I won't haul you to ANI (smiling), but I'm not sure what the block accomplishes. I just deleted the user's userpage as a G11, which I thought was more "harmful" to Wikipedia than leaving the user unblocked. My biggest beefs are (1) admins who do soft blocks with promotional usernames and promotional edits and (2) the fact that U5 is not applicable if the user has made some undefined number of edits (that's why I used G11 even though I think U5 in these cases "should" be the right way to go).--Bbb23 (talk) 13:19, 30 April 2023 (UTC)

Note

I was patrolling new files on Commons and I saw File:APPEAL.pdf, which appears to be an attempt to appeal a block of yours. I'm not sure how you would like to handle this, but I figured I would make you aware of the file. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 02:16, 1 May 2023 (UTC)

I must say I've never seen anyone do anything like that before. Other than an unusual form of venting, I can't see what the user thought they would accomplish by it, but regardless of what they thought would happen, they are now indeffed on Commons and the file deleted. Thanks for letting me know. As Hugh Grant said in Notting Hill in a very different context, "It's been nice...surreal, but nice."--Bbb23 (talk) 13:09, 1 May 2023 (UTC)

Inappropriate article tagging

Hello, Bbb23. A year ago, you issued a warning to the user Kevo327 for inappropriately tagging articles related to Azerbaijan for speedy deletion. Liz and TheBirdsShedTears left similar comments in the same thread (Thread). Unfortunately, despite being warned by three users, Kevo327 continues this behavior. They have now moved on to tagging articles for PROD, but the false reasons and inappropriate tagging remain. Today, they proposed to delete Isa bek Hajinski House, despite the article being created five years ago and having four cited sources. A simple Google search yielded two more reliable sources for the article, which I added. This should have been done by Kevo327 before nominating the article for deletion. Kevo327 also did the same for The Oil Gush in Balakhany article months ago, and I had to do the research for them again. What course of action do you suggest? — Golden ^{call me maybe?} 18:41, 1 May 2023 (UTC)

I should add that they also inappropriately tagged an article for speedy deletion on March 22, 2023, which you removed. — Golden ^{call me maybe?} 18:43, 1 May 2023 (UTC)

I suggest WP:ANI if you think you have enough recent evidence of using deletion processes politically.--Bbb23 (talk) 19:48, 1 May 2023 (UTC)

Rationale for blocking Gaura79

Bbb23, you have blocked @Gaura79 over suspected sockpuppetry via @Nihalojha without running a CU on them, merely on an allegation by a dissenting user. Could you please clarify the rationale for your decision? Regards, Cinosaur (talk) 07:48, 28 April 2023 (UTC)

Gaura79 is evading his block by using another sock-puppet called Ilya Mauter [31]. I strongly believe this user is doing paid editing on the Russian Wikipedia (this is unrelated to his socking here), but the WMF should probably be informed about it. Psychologist Guy (talk) 22:44, 29 April 2023 (UTC)

I've blocked IM. That was kind a stupid thing for them to do. As for the WMF, I have no reason to report anyone to the WMF. If you feel it's needed, that's up to you.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:58, 29 April 2023 (UTC)

As Gaura79 already explained, Ilya Mauter was his legit and declared alternative account used primarily for editing Russian Wikipedia, under which he authored over 3k articles there. It was not used to mislead by sockpuppetry or block evasion here. He also gave a detailed response to the allegations and filed for a sockpuppetry retrial based on checkuser evidence. Could his sensible request be granted, please? Regards, Cinosaur (talk) 18:48, 2 May 2023 (UTC)

Cinosaur, most of the articles he has created on the Russian Wiki are unsourced lists, redirects and disambiguation pages. He did not declare the Ilya Mauter account when he created it, nor link to his other accounts. On the Russian Wiki he had never linked to Gaura79. I do not think it would qualify as a legit declared account on the English Wiki because it was not declared. If he wanted to use multiple accounts here, he should have declared it much earlier on. On WikiCommons he was using another account Gaura. I have raised question about that account on Commons. I do not know why this guy needed so many accounts. On Commons he was uploading Hare Krishna photographs then putting them onto the Russian Wiki on his account Ilya Mauter.

Sometimes privacy issues might be why users create different accounts so we can assume good faith there but this guy uses his name on the Russian Wiki and signs his photographs with his name on another account on Commons so he did not want privacy. So I do not know why he needed all these undeclared accounts. It does not look legit to me. I find it likely that the same user is also using IP addresses but as Bbb23 said they only have one or two edits so are not disruptive. I do not believe the admin has made any mistakes here. There are too many accounts. I think it is time to move on from this issue so I won't be talking about it again. Psychologist Guy (talk) 23:12, 2 May 2023 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – May 2023

News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2023).

Administrator changes

Spicy

• Ale jrb
• Dbachmann
• DGG (deceased)
• Jimbo Wales

CheckUser changes

Jimbo Wales

Oversighter changes

Jimbo Wales

Guideline and policy news

• A request for comment about removing administrative privileges in specified situations is open for feedback.

Technical news

• Progress has started on the Page Triage improvement project. This is to address the concerns raised by the community in their 2022 WMF letter that requested improvements be made to the tool.

Arbitration

• The proposed decision in the World War II and the history of Jews in Poland case is expected 11 May 2023.

Miscellaneous

• The Wikimedia Foundation annual plan 2023-2024 draft is open for comment and input through May 19. The final plan will be published in July 2023.

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:22, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

WarFooting Sub Antarctic H20

Would you mind looking at their contribs. I just deleted one book review and WP:G11 tagged another. Like I said on their talk, I write book reviews too, but I don't post them here. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 15:44, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

My lord. Userpage deleted and user indeffed.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:52, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

User talk:Yeen3002

Stated withdrawal of unblock request but did not use the unblock ticket. Sufficient to unblock? (Asking for a friend.) -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 23:23, 2 May 2023 (UTC)

I'm logging off in a sec, but I think you mean "Stated withdrawal of legal threat", but I don't know what you mean by "Asking for a friend".--Bbb23 (talk) 01:51, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

Anyway, if you feel that is adequate to withdraw the legal threat so we can unblock. . . . . . -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 01:55, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

Did the ticket have something more interesting to say than the hollow remarks on their talk page? Drmies (talk) 02:00, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

I think I mean t "template." Aphasia. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 02:08, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

@Drmies: No, all that delightful charm on the talk page. I only asked because someone tried to help them out with the unblock template. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 02:10, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

• I agree with Drmies. The withdrawal is at best "hollow", and the user had to be dragged into it. Their first comment after the block was "This is ridiculous, I didn't do anything wrong". Then when Jayron32 laid out the obvious (I would have let the user stew), the user's next response was that it was a "first offense". Then when Cullen repeated tht that the user had to withdraw their legal threat, and you (Dfo) pushed, the user finally withdrew the threat. Even after that, they are apparently incapable of putting it in an unblock request, or maybe just unwilling to cooperate; collaboration doesn't seem their strong point.
  Before the legal threat, which seemed to come out of nowhere, it wasn't even provoked in my view, the user had a grand total of 6 edits to political articles of the same stripe. Although none was vandalism, they were incompetent or unconstructive, and either were reverted or had to be "fixed". For example, in one they added nowiki tags around a fake ref (unconstructive), and in another they wikilinked two things one right after the other both pointing to the same article (incompetent). These edits stretch back in very short bursts to June 2022. I really don't like unblocking users who were blocked for legal threats who are disruptive in the first instance. I also don't like imposing a topic ban on users whose sole edits in the last year have been to that topic. But we often do things around here that make no sense to me, and I suspect that many administrators would unblock the user.
  Bottom line: you (Dfo) can do whatever you wish. If you wish to unblock them, fine. If you wish to unblock only if they agree to a topic ban, fine. If you wish to reblock them as NOTHERE (my preference), fine. If you wish to force them into more discussion before deciding, e.g., about their personal attacks, which you mentioned, fine. If you wish to bow out, at least until they formally request an unblock (second preference), that's fine, too. Sorry for the length of this mini rant. It's the middle of the night, and I should be in bed sleeping but am having trouble.--Bbb23 (talk) 11:01, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

  Thanks. I'll unblock him and CTOP alert him. Then we can race to see who reblocks him first for WP:CIR. Best -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 12:34, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

  If their previous history is any indication, it may be months, if ever, before he's blocked for anything.--Bbb23 (talk) 12:44, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

  Oh, I have great confidence in this user. And I'll be watching. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 12:46, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

  @Deepfriedokra: As I've said before, sometimes your comments just go right over my head. Why did you add that FWIW section to the user's Talk page, and why did you call the link "My mom's dead, OK? She's dead"?--Bbb23 (talk) 15:30, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

  JUst my rather emotional response on reading his crack about our mom's basements. He shouldn't be talking about people's moms like that. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 15:34, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

  Just goes to show you how tired I am. I re-read the legal threat after your post, and I totally missed the mother's basement thing.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:39, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

  I skipped over that part to at first. The legal threat grabs the attention rather forcibly -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 15:41, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

  PS. I think we are all tired. And I miss DGG. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 15:45, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

  I didn't know David had died. Sad.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:18, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

You removed my report for 'wrong venue'

Hi, in the description, I mentioned that the user was edit warring, I wanted to know as well if it was a sockpuppet, I still need the warring addressed, regards. Hogyncymru (talk) 21:57, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

I removed your post to WP:AN3 again. If you insist on filing a report at AN3, you must follow the instructions at the top of the page.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:42, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

Abandoned draft

Hello there sorry for bother i was wondering could you delete this draft:Draft:Ahmed Mujtaba it was not edited 5 months already DarkHorseMayhem (talk) 16:42, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

WP:G13 requires six months.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:23, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

ANI notice

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Arkenstrone: baseless accusations regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.

I was recenltly asked by admin Ad Orientem to notice those mentioned even if I consider them not to have been involved. This is why this notification is so late. Veverve (talk) 00:43, 5 May 2023 (UTC)

Juan Branco Early Life

Hello @Bbb23, thanks for your edits helping me to correct the machine translation and following Wikipedia guidelines. Actually it's my bad for the early life info : the section in French is "origins and private life" but I hadn't changed the name yet in english. I will put it back with the correct section name if it's ok for you ? Imagritte (talk) 15:00, 5 May 2023 (UTC)

Oh and another thing, I see you just left "Branco" in the text but aren't you afraid that it might be confused with his father which is also in the article ? That's why I added "Juan" before each occurence Imagritte (talk) 15:56, 5 May 2023 (UTC)

You'd have to give me an example; we only use Branco's first name when there could be confusion in that part of the article.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:02, 5 May 2023 (UTC)

Oh okay, then it seems fine Imagritte (talk) 10:40, 6 May 2023 (UTC)

Question

Hey, @Bbb23. Apologies for the inconvenience. I had been away for some days and was not aware of the 3-day rule. I saw you undid my new post on the Administrators noticeboard, and I am curious on how to pursue this case further. A new post on the noticeboard seems out of the question judging by the revert. Ola Tønningsberg (talk) 16:27, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

First, your complaint should never been posted to WP:AN but to WP:ANI. Second, the problem is that your original post to AN a few days ago was responded to by WikiEditor1234567123, and yet a simple repost of your initial complaint does nothing to reference that. I suppose you could post your complaint at ANI, explain how your same post was auto-archived at AN, and provide a diff of WikiEditor1234567123's response from the AN archive. I have no comment on the merits of your complaint, other than, at a glance, it's not easy to follow.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:37, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up. I'll do a repost at ANI and leave a revision to the replies of Wikieditor. I noticed you have been involved with these sockpuppets, which are highly relevant to my case. Would you have the opportunity to take a look at it? Judging by a case you were involved with yesterday at AN, I think there is sufficient evidence. Ola Tønningsberg (talk) 16:46, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

Confusion over "Nuon Molin"

Hi Bbb23. I nom'd Nuon Molin for deletion as A7. It looks like you removed the CSD tag, but the logs show that you deleted it a minute later. And now the page exists (still, or again). I am quite confused over if you intended to delete it, or remove my speedy nom. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 14:55, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

The problem arose because the user moved the article to their sandbox, along with the A7. I removed the tag because it was now a sandbox and couldn't be deleted per any of the A criteria. However, I deleted the article per your A7 tag. Now the user has recreated it. I've blocked the user for promotion, and I suggest you retag the article as A7. I'm not sure whether I will delete it or allow another administrator to look at it this time.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:07, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

Well, while I was writing the above, Fram moved the article to draft space, which, albeit understandable, is in a way unfortunate because it cannot be deleted easily, and will probably languish for 6 months.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:10, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

Does it help if I move it back? I hadn't noticed the earlier history when I moved it, I noticed it was an autobio but the subject being Cambodian made it impossible to do a good check for sources (else I would have tagged it for A7 probably). Fram (talk) 15:17, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

It somehow seems manipulative to move it back.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:22, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

Then letting it expire in draftspace is probably the easiest. Fram (talk) 15:30, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

Thanks Fram for lending a hand. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 15:45, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

Actions with Germany-Azerbaijani

Hi there @Bbb23,

Just to let you know, I reported that user in the heading for vandalism, as their contributions show they were trying to prove some point (eg: some Azerbaijani soldier allegedly killing 45 Armenians). I hope this saves you the trouble of having to do it yourself! Losipov (talk) 16:25, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

I don't think G-A will be blocked based on a report at WP:AIV. Not the right board in my view.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:31, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

That was my report, actually. I don't like reporting users, but it seems that they were just trying to prove a point throughout different articles. They also said they were new? If that's the case then I kinda feel bad. Maybe give more warnings before resorting to AIV? I'm not sure. But yeah I think you're right; that board is constantly changing with reports but no action is being taken on mine right now. Losipov (talk) 17:04, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

Just to clarify: that account is probably not all vandalism, but a lot of edits were reverted. So not "vandalism-only" per se, but definitely has non-constructive edits. Losipov (talk) 17:06, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

Sorry for the spamming of your talkpage, but that account did get blocked. they approved the report. Losipov (talk) 17:09, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

You're not "spamming", and I noticed the block.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:09, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

User talk:Charlesvet88

User is requesting a WP:SO unblock. I brought the matter up at AN, but no one had much to say (it was archived without a response). Prior to me extending the user WP:ROPE to them, I thought I would see if you had any additional information to add, as the blocking admin. Thanks for anything you can add, one way or the other. --Jayron32 13:54, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

@Jayron32: I haven't been following this much. Quick question: has a CheckUser checked to make sure that at least in the last 90 days, the user has not used any other accounts or IPs?--Bbb23 (talk) 23:17, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

As far as I know, nothing has been done at all. I was responding to very old unblock requests and trying to clear them. No one has said or done anything in response to this post until you, just now. --Jayron32 10:58, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

Request for elaboration

User talk:JustTheFacts33. They pinged me to ask your input. I have no background on the matter. Just passing the message along. --Jayron32 13:03, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

I was aware of their questions. I have just left a lengthy response on their Talk page, which is far more than they deserve.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:28, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

At what point

is this IP WP:NOTHERE? This is the IP you blocked a few weeks ago that just continues to argue and argue. Since I’m the target, I’m seeking another admin’s input/judgement. Thanks! Zsinj^Talk 15:59, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

NP, I've blocked the range for one month this time.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:06, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

Cheers! Zsinj^Talk 00:02, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

I'd just like to note that I did finish building my shed, and no, the IP didn't help. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 16:06, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

Now that they can't edit Wikipedia for a month, maybe they'll have time to help you, if not with your completed shed (congratulations), perhaps with other tasks on your to-do list. I'm sure they'd be delighted if you ask them nicely.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:10, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

Of course, their location may present a minor problem, but maybe they like to travel.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:12, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

That's excellent, because this is a very busy time for us farmer types. I have to process rabbits this weekend or next, move more compost, plant, got some digging too do before building a fieldstone retaining wall with fireplace. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 16:13, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

"process rabbits"? I'm not sure what that means, but it doesn't sound good for the rabbits.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:16, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

"Processing" is a euphemistic term for turning a meat animal into...well, meat. :) Valereee (talk) 16:21, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

Yeah, I could have said slaughter, butcher, or dispatch. Process is the "in polite company" term. I also tan the hides, so it's not just meat! ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 16:26, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

That sounds like a lot of work but also a nice change of pace for those of us who only have distant family with the knowledge of processing animals. I’d help! 😂 Zsinj^Talk 00:02, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

I normally end up doing a few lessons a year for people who want to learn a bit about animal processing and butchering. Get in touch with how the sausage is made, literally. Almost no one wants to do the actual dispatching, but most people get comfortable with skinning and cleaning fairly quick.

I think I'm going to take pictures of the process this time and upload them to Commons. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 01:18, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

An article could totally be created at Home butchering. There are dozens of books. Currently Meat processing redirects to Meat-packing industry. Valereee (talk) 10:32, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

That's not a bad idea. Unfortunately right now I'm too tied up with home butchering for Home butchering, but autumn and winter will come again, and I should be able to scrape up time to spend writing. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 15:35, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

Hmmm, I'll be enjoying my vegan tofu pad thai tonight. Which reminds me that I owe you a recipe, Bbb23.-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 16:38, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

Love me some tofu. Like literally my mouth is watering thinking about the little Thai place nearby that makes the best tofu green curry... Valereee (talk) 17:08, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

Gerdau Graphene

Can you please explain your rationale for removing Gerdau Graphene? The contributions that the company has made to the graphene industry are both significant and noteworthy, evidenced by the independent editorial coverage about it. Can you also please send the page data? AaronEndre — Preceding undated comment added 12:51, 12 May 2023 (UTC)

@Bbb23 can you please restore the page so that I can copy the page data and use the article creation and review process? AaronEndre (talk) 13:35, 12 May 2023 (UTC)

Okay, I've moved it to Draft:Gerdau Graphene with the understanding that you will not move it to article space on your own but go through WP:AFC. I suggest you first work on making it more neutral in tone; otherwise, you may find it tagged as WP:G11 again.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:44, 12 May 2023 (UTC)

Ok, thank you. Still learning! AaronEndre (talk) 14:22, 12 May 2023 (UTC)

Reverted content

Hello @Bbb23, you said that infos I added on 6th arrondissement were WP:OR but they come from the introduction of the WP Page 6th arrondissement so they seem to me like common knowledge about this arrondissement. Also, if the sentence about minimum income was poorly formulated, why didn't you just reformulate it instead of erasing it ? Or just indicate with a template that it needed reformulation ? Thanks, Imagritte (talk) 16:46, 12 May 2023 (UTC)

I can propose this formulation if it's better : "In 2018 and 2019, he defended yellow vest protesters pro bono, and therefore lived only with the French guaranteed minimum income.[5][6]" Imagritte (talk) 16:55, 12 May 2023 (UTC)

Please post comments about content disputes on the article Talk page. Also, there is no reason to ping me on my own Talk page.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:14, 12 May 2023 (UTC)

Ok sorry Imagritte (talk) 17:23, 12 May 2023 (UTC)

Observation

Hey, hope you're well? I just came by to make an observation, FWIW. Lately I've been spending most of my time at AfC or NPP, where I often see dross that I feel I need to request speedy on. Usually the requests get actioned, but sometimes they're declined, which is fine by me of course and as I would expect. The thing I've noticed, though, is that of the maybe dozen or so admins who most commonly deal with my requests, you probably decline them more often than anyone else (at least that's what it seems like, I don't exactly keep a log!). This isn't a criticism or complaint, BTW, just an observation; I get that often these things aren't clear-cut, and three different admins might take a look at the same case and come up with three different calls, and probably all be equally correct. Anyway, I wanted to pop by and say 'hi', and hope that my speedy requests aren't getting too irksome... and if they are, then do let me know. Enjoy the rest of your Sunday. :) Best, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 15:14, 14 May 2023 (UTC)

Ironically, I delete speedy-tagged pages a lot more than I decline them. I suppose that might cause you to wonder if I think your tags are worse than other taggers, but the truth is I haven't given it any thought at all. Anyway, I'd spend about 10 seconds worrying about it and then shrug your shoulders and move on. :-) --Bbb23 (talk) 16:07, 14 May 2023 (UTC)

Okay, I'll just put it down to... you're on some sort of personal crusade against me. :) Which is cool. Carry on. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 16:15, 14 May 2023 (UTC)

No, not against you, just against all Finns. Here you grow up speaking one of the most difficult languages in the world and yet can speak other languages, including English, with total ease. It's grossly unfair, and you should be severely punished.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:25, 14 May 2023 (UTC)

Oh okay. Fair. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 16:35, 14 May 2023 (UTC)

Making you aware

Hello Bbb23,

I just wanted to let you know that on the WP:ANI in the thread “Link to personal blog of notorious pedophile Tom O'Carroll” a user is asking for your Desysop for a non-existent reason. I suspect likely block evasion, but I just thought I’d let you know. - 🔥𝑰𝒍𝒍𝒖𝒔𝒊𝒐𝒏 𝑭𝒍𝒂𝒎𝒆 (𝒕𝒂𝒍𝒌)🔥 00:24, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

Yeah, I reverted the IP, and they've been blocked by another admin.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:32, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

This is a perennial troll, we just block them on sight. Acroterion (talk) 00:34, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

Great! Thanks for the quick action. - 🔥𝑰𝒍𝒍𝒖𝒔𝒊𝒐𝒏 𝑭𝒍𝒂𝒎𝒆 (𝒕𝒂𝒍𝒌)🔥 00:35, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

MrPinkingShears

Hi,

I disagree with indefinitely blocking MrPinkingShears. His comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Minor-attracted person (2nd nomination) crossed a line but nobody really warned him of our policies before dropping an indefinite block. I suggest trimming the block. I will also note that he has made some good comments about content. He just needs to understand we argue over content not other editors' intentions. I think a 24-hour block would serve that purpose just as well --A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 03:59, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

Speedy deletion contested: V2Ray

Hello Bbb23. I am just letting you know that I contested the speedy deletion of V2Ray, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: A7 does not apply to software. Thank you. BangJan1999 16:38, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

I'm aware of the limitation, but I thought the product was web-based. I just looked at their website, and, honestly, I'm not sure whether it is or not. Or perhaps it can run on web but also can run offline. Oh, well, there's something very wrong with the creator of the article (and other similar articles), but that's irrelevant to the tagging issue.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:12, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

Notice of Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Questions for Bbb23. Thank you. Suffusion of Yellow (talk) 19:35, 16 May 2023 (UTC)

Strangely enough...

I've been meaning for a couple of days to drop you a note thanking you for your diving into various policing activities, including looking into and taking actions against socks. Personally, I find your admin judgment to be quite good, and your actions to be almost invariably justified. You do an awful lot to make this a better place, and I appreciate it -- and I'm more than willing to say that anywhere and anytime if you desire it. Best, Beyond My Ken (talk) 01:42, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

Dispute at Theanine

Please have a look at the tendentious activity of user Reflecktor at Theanine, Talk:Theanine, and Dispute resolution to advise if this complaint should be posted at ANI.

The user:

• insists on primary sources to support 5 presumed, unconfirmed physiological effects of theanine remaining as a sentence (ref 38) here.
• edit wars and accuses others of WP:DE if the statement and sources are challenged or removed
• does not collaborate on the talk page to discuss deficiencies of the primary sources or to rewrite/delete the sentence
• argues against use of the most recent systematic review on possible effects of theanine, and ignores providing an acceptable statement from the review
• frustrates and stalls the DR process by contributing no constructive solution while maintaining that primary sources are sufficient to meet WP:MEDRS.

Ok to respond here. Thanks for your assessment. Zefr (talk) 15:09, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

I skimmed the dispute resolution discussion, enough to know that I'm not interested in looking any more deeply than that. With that disclaimer in mind, this content dispute doesn't look like it's suitable for ANI. You may have to find another method of dispute resolution than WP:DRN, which is ongoing; Robert McClenon, who has been moderating the discussion with his usual skill, is in a much better position to advise you than I.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:19, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

User:Zefr - If this dispute does go to WP:ANI, no matter who files it there, one likely result would be for both editors to be topic-banned. Complaining to an administrator while mediation is in progress is a form of forum shopping. I am about to stop the back-and-forth and go back to asking direct questions. Robert McClenon (talk) 20:11, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

If I fail the moderated discussion, the dispute will probably go to WP:ANI, but I have just told you what result I would expect. Robert McClenon (talk) 20:11, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

Robert McClenon - you misinterpreted my outline to Bbb23 above. I was not forum-shopping or subverting the DR discussion about content and sources in the theanine article, but rather was testing an ANI about the tendentious, obstructive behavior of the other editor who has not provided even one constructive, collaborative solution to the disputed content. Approaching an admin is on ANI under "Before posting a complaint about a user... want to skip the drama?" - I have employed all of these to engage the disruptive editor.

You have been patient and moderate in your role, but everything has been stated clearly and extensively throughout the DR in criticism of the disputed sentence and sources. I have run out of things to say and will await the RSN outcome.

Apologies to Bbb23 for airing this out on your talk page. Zefr (talk) 00:04, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

No, User:Zefr, I didn't misinterpret the outline. You were going through the recommended steps before filing at WP:ANI, so you were considering filing at WP:ANI. Maybe I should clarify further that it is not possible to have an article content dispute or sourcing dispute at DRN and a conduct dispute at ANI. Maybe that isn't clear enough, but DRN will not open or continue a discussion about an article when there is another dispute resolution process pending about the article, even if they are two subtopics, or if one is content and one is conduct, or one is X and the other is Z. I didn't misunderstand. But maybe clarification is needed. Robert McClenon (talk) 01:50, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

Sources and edits

Greetings. I'm not sure why you wholesale removed entire sections with the excuse of "no source" when especially the section of "Textual history" was VERY sourced and referenced. The whole thing regarding "original autographs" and the three main "manuscript traditions" etc, were copiously sourced and verified. I'm still developing, though, the section on New Testament apocryphal books. But apparently, frankly speaking, you didn't carefully check, but rudely and disrespectfully (for some reason) undid BIG WORK that I've been doing, against Wikipedia policy and drift, of "I DON'T LIKE" and "NO OWN". Why exactly? These sections (especially the first section of "Textual history") are important and relevant. You're aware, I'm sure, that WP policy is EDIT AND IMPROVE additions, not totally delete them. So please discuss. Regards. Vibigraphical (talk) 18:07, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

Zenomonoz

This user, whom you blocked five years ago for running a sock farm, has requested unblock, and seems from their talk page to have picked up some significant support. The checkusers involved have also found no evidence of recent socking. Do you have anything to say? Daniel Case (talk) 06:06, 20 May 2023 (UTC)

Based on the (rather long) unblock request and other editors' comments, I have no objection to unblocking the user. Thanks for asking.--Bbb23 (talk) 12:56, 20 May 2023 (UTC)

Notice of noticeboard discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.Katakana546 (talk) 13:53, 22 May 2023 (UTC)

Band is back

Blessthefall has released a new picture together and announced new music. Quit changing it back. Anaglob (talk) 16:44, 22 May 2023 (UTC)

Astrosniks

Why did you revert all my changes to the Astrosniks page? I'm building a full history and everything i put on the page is 100% accurate. AstrosniksCollector (talk) 16:57, 23 May 2023 (UTC)

"Falsely deleted"

I find User:deepfriedokra/del and User:deepfriedokra/g11 useful in answering most of the questions/accusations creators of deletable content might have. Feel free to use as desired. YMMV. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 17:03, 23 May 2023 (UTC)

Thanks, but that doesn't look like my style, which tends to be short and (hopefully) to the point.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:40, 24 May 2023 (UTC)

?

Huh? Dinoz1 (chat?) 17:08, 25 May 2023 (UTC)

First, your comment at ANI was plain wrong. The IP didn't just remove stuff; they added stuff. Second, your warning, which was equally misguided, came after I revoked TPA.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:10, 25 May 2023 (UTC)

I said the messages that the IP sent were personal attacks, the IP did remove quite a bit of their talk page and replaced it with the messages. Second, that was accidental, I didn't see the update to the block until after you reverted my edit. Apologies for the edits. Cheers, Dinoz1 (chat?) 17:15, 25 May 2023 (UTC)

They weren't normal personal attacks. They were comments so gross that I had to rev/delete the last ones.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:22, 25 May 2023 (UTC)

Absolutely disgusting. Thanks for correcting my mistakes and deleting the last ones, apologies for the warning . Have a good day! Dinoz1 (chat?) 17:25, 25 May 2023 (UTC)

CSD of User:Shakil Ahmed Raffy/sandbox

I CSD’d the sandbox because the editor is trying to alter existing edits with his own details, plus the draft has been deleted twice already. Please check edits of editor. Equine-man (talk) 18:14, 26 May 2023 (UTC)

I didn't think it qualified as a G11, but I ended up deleting it per U5.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:18, 26 May 2023 (UTC)

Yeah I saw. For some reason twinkle wasnt showing me U5. Oh well, thanks for sorting. Equine-man (talk) 18:24, 26 May 2023 (UTC)

Centner Academy

May i know the reason for reverting my changes? Tomtom271 (talk) 22:32, 26 May 2023 (UTC)

Whitewashing. You have very few edits here, and almost all of them have been disruptive, usually non-neutral - and reverted. If you keep it up, you're headed for a block.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:36, 27 May 2023 (UTC)

Unblock request of Enrico.cambiaso

I'm reviewing an unblock request for this editor, who was blocked for sockpuppetry and self-promotion. They have acknowledged the socking and agreed to cease editing about themself or inserting references to their own work, so would you see a problem with a "last chance" unblock for them, under a one-account restriction and no editing about themself or citing their own work? Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 22:35, 27 May 2023 (UTC)

@Seraphimblade: Has a CheckUser verified that the user hasn't socked in the last 90 days?--Bbb23 (talk) 12:46, 28 May 2023 (UTC)

I verified that User:Enrico.cambiaso hasn't socked in the last ninety days. EdJohnston (talk) 13:32, 28 May 2023 (UTC)

Thanks, Ed, then I have no objection to the user being unblocked.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:36, 28 May 2023 (UTC)

Precious anniversary

Precious

Two years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:01, 28 May 2023 (UTC)

Umm, what happened on this day two years ago? As long as you're foolish enough to come to my Talk page, what do you think of the article Lisette Oropesa? Have you heard her sing?--Bbb23 (talk) 22:27, 28 May 2023 (UTC)

Dubai articles

Hiya - thank you for acting on the Jad Krimeed issue (edit warring/socking). With a number of articles, the changes go deeper than the last edit - for instance, you reverted the sock at Al Awir but in fact, the last stable version of the page before our friend started tinkering was this one. Would you have any objection if I took it back to the last stable version? Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 04:47, 30 May 2023 (UTC)

No objection at all. I'm not sure why I reverted the IP, to be honest. I know I reverted the IP's addition of images to articles created by the named user, but I didn't go through articles, like this one, that were edited by the IP or the named user much. My guess is somewhere else I noticed these hand-drawn maps uploaded by the named user, which are generally objectionable, and did it for that reason.--Bbb23 (talk) 12:37, 30 May 2023 (UTC)

Request for review

Hello and good day,

Can I request you to please review a draft page which is created by someone. The draft is well resourced and the subject is notable but unfortunately an admin has an issues. Can you please give your insights.

thanking you, I remain Robertglan (talk) 14:23, 30 May 2023 (UTC)

I have no clue what you're talking about.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:12, 30 May 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for reply.

Recently the page name (Draft:Sybrid Private Limited) is created. And, it is in draft. Can you please review it and let me know if any changes are required.

Thank you Bbb23 Robertglan (talk) 15:25, 30 May 2023 (UTC)

Why me? You have had two reviewers on that draft, both of whom have given you feedback: Carpimaps and Theroadislong. Sounds to me like you're editor-shopping to find someone who'll agree with you. BTW, neither of those editors is an administrator, not that it's relevant to anything.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:32, 30 May 2023 (UTC)

Yes I know but both reviewers are not replying. You are the one protected this page from being deleted. Now it is perfectly written. I just need your review.

Thank you for your reply Robertglan (talk) 15:37, 30 May 2023 (UTC)

You have to be patient. I did not "protect" the page from deletion. I declined a WP:G11.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:43, 30 May 2023 (UTC)

Alright.

Thank you for reply Robertglan (talk) 15:54, 30 May 2023 (UTC)

Sorry, I was busy. OutsourceAccelerator seems to be written by the company itself. Even if it isn't, it doesn't seem to a reliable source. I am not sure though so can you tell me why it is reliable? Carpimaps ^{talk to me!} 23:26, 30 May 2023 (UTC)

Your block of ParkerJST

Access to their talk page should be revoked, too.   –Skywatcher68 (talk) 19:18, 31 May 2023 (UTC)

Umm, I revoked it hours ago.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:06, 31 May 2023 (UTC)

Lies, damned lies...

Many years ago I saw a user page which consisted almost entirely of lies, such as a user box making an utterly false claim as to how long the editor had been editing. I deleted it as a hoax, I think, or maybe I just removed the user box. The editor kicked up a huge fuss about what I had done, and told more lies in order to justify having my action overturned. I don't remember all the details, as it was a long time ago, but essentially what happened was that consensus somewhere, probably ANI, was that editors are allowed to post such false claims to their user pages. Sigh... 😒 JBW (talk) 20:29, 1 June 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for your thoughts.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:12, 2 June 2023 (UTC)

If there was a rule against hoaxes in user pages, some might be objecting to my claim to be one Gardevoir in a trenchcoat. LilianaUwU ^{(talk / contribs)} 23:29, 1 June 2023 (UTC)

I should think after the Essjay controversy the community would be less accommodating. Binksternet (talk) 23:42, 1 June 2023 (UTC)

@Binksternet: Although, as I have said, the incident I referred to was a long time ago and I don't remember the details, it was long after the Essjay affair, which took place in 2007. At that time I had barely started editing Wikipedia, and I didn't become an administrator until 2010. JBW (talk) 20:25, 2 June 2023 (UTC)

TPA revoke needed.

It looks like Somaliland vote is continuing to spam on their talk page. TornadoLGS (talk) 20:35, 2 June 2023 (UTC)

 Done--Bbb23 (talk) 20:37, 2 June 2023 (UTC)

Regarding UN India Yuwaah Advocates

Hi, I have seen that you've recently deleted my created page without replying to my contested message. I strongly oppose this decision. It's my strongest believe that this page can be moved to draft for rewriting or can be redirected to United Nations but must not be deleted. I request you to reverse your decision. Pokai (talk) 19:26, 3 June 2023 (UTC)

The problem is whether it is an article or a draft, it is too promotional, which is why I deleted it per WP:G11.--Bbb23 (talk) 21:04, 3 June 2023 (UTC)

Why did you delete my sandbox for no apparent reason?

???very confused because you deleted my sandbox for no reason. i didn't have any intent to publish anything on my sandbox so there was no use of you deleting it... is there a way you could restore it because frankly you did it for no reason. Slaybestieana (talk) 19:44, 3 June 2023 (UTC)

If you do not intend to publish any of it, what's its purpose?--Bbb23 (talk) 21:06, 3 June 2023 (UTC)

to experiment which i am allowed to do. Slaybestieana (talk) 00:28, 4 June 2023 (UTC)

No comment on what you're "allowed to do", but I've restored it.--Bbb23 (talk) 01:16, 4 June 2023 (UTC)

thx gorg Slaybestieana (talk) 03:07, 4 June 2023 (UTC)

Kashmir Age

Dear Bbb23, How are you doing? I hope you're well and happy. Please restrict the creation of Kashmir Age, which is constantly created as advertising. Many thanks! DreamRimmer (talk) 19:53, 4 June 2023 (UTC)

I don't think it's the kind of article that should be salted, at least not yet. I'm more troubled by the user who keeps recreating it. That said, you're welcome to request creation protection at WP:RFPP.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:15, 4 June 2023 (UTC)

Can I please get my deleted contents back

Hi,

I moved a page for the sake of changing title, the source page contents and the page itself has been deleted, the new page where I wanted to move is not created. So, basically all my work is gone. Can you please create the new page that I requested in the move and also preserve the log history?

many thanks,

UsmanGolra (talk) 22:10, 4 June 2023 (UTC)

Sorry, the page was tagged as WP:G11. I will not restore a page that is so blatantly promotional.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:13, 4 June 2023 (UTC)

The page is neither a spam nor it is blatantly promotional. That is a biography, similar to other biography pages of people on wikipedia. UsmanGolra (talk) 22:20, 4 June 2023 (UTC)

Can I suggest you a look at the page again? It is definitely not a spam. UsmanGolra (talk) 22:51, 4 June 2023 (UTC)

{{tps}} Assuming we're talking about Draft:Mohammed Shahzaman Syyed, I concur that its content appears irredeemable as far as WP is concerned. DMacks (talk) 23:00, 4 June 2023 (UTC)

What do you reckon now? Would the page/contents be deleted again if I add contents (that I tried moving from the last page) to this page or would you reconsider looking at the contents - as they are not spam. UsmanGolra (talk) 23:10, 4 June 2023 (UTC)

New articles by inexperienced editors should be started as drafts. That way you will get detailed feedback about what is wrong with the article. And once it gets approved as conforming to Wikipedia policy, it will be moved into place. Skyerise (talk) 23:35, 4 June 2023 (UTC)

It was a draft.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:20, 5 June 2023 (UTC)

It was a draft. I totally do not understand the policy of deleting it as a spam, when it is simply a biography of someone who does not exist on Wikipedia, or even elsewhere. I was working hard on it to make sure the WP policies and rules are meet ; e.g. adding references, making sure the article is not my personal advertisement etc.

I want you to please reconsider looking at the contents of the draft and revert the deletion.

thanks UsmanGolra (talk) 07:42, 5 June 2023 (UTC)

@Bbb23@DMacks@Skyerise I appreciate if you look into my above comment please. UsmanGolra (talk) 11:46, 5 June 2023 (UTC)

"its content appears irredeemable as far as WP is concerned". It would need a complete rewrite from scratch. See WP:YFA, WP:TONE, etc. DMacks (talk) 11:58, 5 June 2023 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – June 2023

News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2023).

Administrator changes

Ingenuity

• Ddstretch
• Prodego
• Resolute

CheckUser changes

Courcelles

Guideline and policy news

• Following an RfC, editors indefinitely site-banned by community consensus will now have all rights, including sysop, removed.
• As a part of the Wikimedia Foundation's IP Masking project, a new policy has been created that governs the access to temporary account IP addresses. An associated FAQ has been created and individual communities can increase the requirements to view temporary account IP addresses.

Technical news

• Bot operators and tool maintainers should schedule time in the coming months to test and update their tools for the effects of IP masking. IP masking will not be deployed to any content wiki until at least October 2023 and is unlikely to be deployed to the English Wikipedia until some time in 2024.

Arbitration

• The arbitration case World War II and the history of Jews in Poland has been closed. The topic area of Polish history during World War II (1933-1945) and the history of Jews in Poland is subject to a "reliable source consensus-required" contentious topic restriction.

Miscellaneous

• Following a community referendum, the arbitration policy has been modified to remove the ability for users to appeal remedies to Jimbo Wales.

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:32, 5 June 2023 (UTC)

Palak Jain (Actress)

I see there is an article on a Palak Jain it seems better to redirect there than Yeh Pyaar Nahi Toh Kya Hai. The Palak Jain in Yeh Pyaar Nahi Toh Kya Hai looks like a different person. CambridgeBayWeather (solidly non-human), Uqaqtuq (talk), Huliva 14:36, 7 June 2023 (UTC)

Yes, sorry about that, I was trying to undo edits by a sock, and I should have paid closer attention to the result. Thanks for fixing it.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:54, 7 June 2023 (UTC)

Follow-up on User Block

Hi Bbb23, I wanted to follow-up on a recent block [32] you made on a user for edit warring, which expired today.

The user has returned to the page right off his block, making the same edits [33] during the edit war for which he was blocked for. The user has claimed that there is consensus for the edits, despite replying to another IP user's substantive objections just a few edits prior [34]. I note that the edits were not discussed in the same conversation, but the issues/concerns are essentially the same between the two conversations [35][36].

I further note the borderline uncivil tone which the user used in his reply, with reference to my previous notes [37] on this users WP:BATTLEGROUND approach to editing.

I understand that some frustration is acceptable given that there was previously sock-puppetry involved. However, I really do find this user's WP:BATTLEGROUND attitude to be of concern, and would appreciate it if you could take a closer look at this. Please let me know what you think. Carter00000 (talk) 15:22, 7 June 2023 (UTC)

Hi user:Bbb23, I note that the substantive disagreement to any change to the material was a sockpuppet. And my research on their history has given me some reasons why they might have been disagreeing when the majority of others in talk agreed with the changes. I note that User:Carter00000 has not even attempted to participate in talk despite raising this here and I find this rather odd. AlanS^talk 15:44, 7 June 2023 (UTC)

"despite replying to another IP user's substantive objections just a few edits prior" I was replying to a person who was misreprencing a debate by claiming everyone in talk was claiming that BRS had been "convicted" and that they were doing this because of "politic". That wasn't in regards to substantive objections. Anyone who reads it will see. AlanS^talk 16:03, 7 June 2023 (UTC)

@Carter00000: TBH, I really don't want to take a closer look. If you think AlanS's conduct is sanctionable, take it to WP:ANI.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:26, 7 June 2023 (UTC)

Noted on your position and will seek further community input if needed. Carter00000 (talk) 00:54, 8 June 2023 (UTC)

Reversion of edit on Gates Cambridge Scholarship

I see where my edits expanding the table of notable people associated with this award have been reverted in their entirety. I compiled those additions by finding alumni with existing eponymous pages. Could you please help me understand why you felt it was best reverted? FlamingMoth (talk) 23:46, 5 June 2023 (UTC)

I intended to make some additional updates to this page due to some out-of-date information, but I wanted to sort out the reversion of these previous changes first. Please let me know if this discussion is better suited for the article's talk page. FlamingMoth (talk) 10:20, 8 June 2023 (UTC)

Speedy deletion Nomination

The page I created is just draft and has not been published, but why I received Speedy deletion nomination when the page actually has not been published yet? What does that mean? Plus I contested speedy deletion, so are they going to get back to me? Saleh Al-Batati (talk) 14:39, 8 June 2023 (UTC)

86.30.133.163 at Libreboot and Open-source firmware

86.30.133.163 is back at Libreboot and Open-source firmware. I see a lot of r and yellow on the list, and would undo, except 3RR and all that. Thanks. -- Yae4 (talk) 11:05, 8 June 2023 (UTC)

I blocked the IP for one month for block evasion of Special:contributions/92.40.218.255, which ToBeFree blocked on June 1 for two weeks. I blocked the 86. IP for longer because the've been editing longer. Although it's probable that both IPs are owned by the same person as Special:contributions/86.29.243.86, the IP I blocked for two weeks (mimicking TBF's block duration) on June 3, the behavior of the 86.30 seemed closer to that of 92, e.g., the edits on Open-source firmware, which were identical. If the IP-hopping continues, we may have to semi-protect one or both articles, depending on the amount of activity.

As for your reverts, if you think IPs are evading blocks (you should at least verify that they edit from the same country), it's always a good idea to include in your edit summary that suspicion because of WP:3RRNO, but your concern about 3RR is understandable, and I'm certainly not recommending edit-warring.--Bbb23 (talk) 12:30, 8 June 2023 (UTC)

Thank you. -- Yae4 (talk) 16:13, 8 June 2023 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

		The Admin's Barnstar
		For taking care of my request. Thank you for your swift action. JeffSpaceman (talk) 00:49, 3 June 2023 (UTC)

Do you think you could convince Ponyo to raise my salary? She really doesn't pay me enough to do these things for her. Thanks for the barnstar.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:58, 3 June 2023 (UTC)

I'm not a complete hard ass. Effective immediately your salary is doubled!-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 19:39, 5 June 2023 (UTC)

@Ponyo: I got your check (or cheque) in the mail today. Now I don't know much about Canadian banks, but down here banks don't honor (or honour) checks where the amount just says "Double". I think cash would be better, don't you? Canadian or American dollars, I'm not picky. Well, I am picky, but not about this. Let's see, my salary was $25K, so double that would be $82K.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:49, 6 June 2023 (UTC)

Oh. Things are so much more complicated on your side of the border! Perhaps I can pay you in double doubles?-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 15:39, 7 June 2023 (UTC)

You know me well enough to know that I can't be bought off with fast food.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:23, 7 June 2023 (UTC)

Ha! It's real money now!-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 23:33, 8 June 2023 (UTC)

HBC points?-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 18:25, 7 June 2023 (UTC)

You really have to expand your horizons beyond your own borders. I'll take Canadian cash, but Canadian points, jamais.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:51, 9 June 2023 (UTC)

{Just an observation - just another example of this talk page being a pleasant read : ) - jc37 01:40, 9 June 2023 (UTC)

Kumuthaseo and repeated editing of a page by Aditya Vikram Singh(harsh)

Hello, I believe this User:Aditya Vikram Singh(harsh) is a sockpuppet of User:Kumuthaseo and he is constantly editing the page Benvanshi and even my own draft article and sandbox! — Preceding unsigned comment added by DrDuke101 (talk • contribs) 18:58, 8 June 2023 (UTC)

I'm not sure why you think so except for the username, but the user is very disruptive, and I've blocked them.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:39, 8 June 2023 (UTC)

Thanks DrDuke101 (talk) 02:12, 9 June 2023 (UTC)

Open-source firmware IP editor

I noticed your block on 86.30.133.163 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) and they seem to have been blocked again today on 92.40.219.187 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) for edits made to Libreboot. Given their what seems to be prolific editing and edit warring on topics like Open-source firmware and Libreboot from multiple IPs, is this something worth going to SPI about? They claim to have a "real account" (see diff 1159349472) and given their frequency with these kinds of edits I don't entirely doubt it. Dawnbails (talk) 20:01, 9 June 2023 (UTC)

If your objective is to find out whether they have a named account through their IPs, filing at SPI would be a waste of time. The only way that could be established is through running a check against the IPs, which would be a violation of privacy.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:05, 9 June 2023 (UTC)

User:Stargxrrrl/New York City Gay Rights Bill of 1986

I have undeleted the draft and unblocked the user. This may be a flawed article draft, but I don't see any connection to WP:NOTWEBHOST, let me know if I'm missing something. The draft is part of a university New York City history project. Pharos (talk) 18:14, 13 June 2023 (UTC)

It is customary - indeed almost required - to consult with a blocking administrator before unblocking, not give them a heads-up after the fact. No need to respond.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:16, 13 June 2023 (UTC)

My apologies

If I overstepped on that socker's talk page. They've made their own choice clear tho, and it's no one else's fault but their own. BilCat (talk) 00:26, 14 June 2023 (UTC)

Not a big deal; it's just generally better not to give them the attention they want.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:28, 14 June 2023 (UTC)

Understood. BilCat (talk) 00:37, 14 June 2023 (UTC)

FYI

Re: User talk:Bbb23exposed3 - I just blocked this one; relevant discussion at User:Koavf. --Orange Mike | Talk 15:43, 14 June 2023 (UTC)

And 6 minutes later globally locked. I really don't think Koavf should be discussing this sort of thing on Wikipedia. If they want to edit Wikipediocracy, that's up to them, but it shouldn't spill over here. Thanks for the heads-up.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:54, 14 June 2023 (UTC)

86.98.24.99

Hola. You indeffed user:Jad Krimeed for disruption and socking. I have a funny feeling about 86.98.24.99, which has started to creep in the same style of edits to Dubai pages, more disruption and reversion all round... Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 05:13, 15 June 2023 (UTC)

Not to worry, Materialscientist got 'im... Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 06:03, 15 June 2023 (UTC)

User Libreleah at Talk:Libreboot

Bbb23, Sorry to bother again. User Libreleah at Talk:Libreboot looks like a another sock evading block. If it should go to SPI, please let me know. -- Yae4 (talk) 15:26, 15 June 2023 (UTC)

Sorry, but I'm not monitoring this anymore. Please link accounts. Who do you think is a sock of whom?--Bbb23 (talk) 15:31, 15 June 2023 (UTC)

Almost certainly the 92.40.x IPs that were recently blocked. Possibly SPA user Crocfarts based on edits. I wouldn't be surprised if article attackers "Anuraag Chopade" and Lakersfan89 were also connected, although the content of the attacks were different. -- Yae4 (talk) 15:51, 15 June 2023 (UTC)

Too confusing for me. Take it to SPI if you wish.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:19, 15 June 2023 (UTC)

How to remove comments with valid reason

Hi @Bbb23 would please help me out with the article Draft:Ankit Kumar Pandey to represents a reliable article and also remove the rejection and comments. The haul (talk) 21:04, 15 June 2023 (UTC)

Sorry, not something I do.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:53, 15 June 2023 (UTC)

User:Gugrak

Hi Bbb23, Sorry if I inappropriately RV User:Gugrak page. I thought as he is a blocked sock it shouldn't be possible for them to blank their talk. I've noticed them exploiting a unified login to vandalise mine and anothers usertalk page in Wikimedia and I thought they were using that to edit in Wikipedia. AlanS^talk 14:37, 12 June 2023 (UTC)

See WP:BLANKING.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:38, 12 June 2023 (UTC)

Seems like there's another IP [38] which could be related. Based in the UAE and editing only relating to BRS. Carter00000 (talk) 08:24, 17 June 2023 (UTC)

Unblock request by Barr Theo

This editor is requesting a standard offer unblock. They seem aware of what went wrong, have agreed to a one-account restriction, and Yamla confirmed that checkuser does not show any recent socking. Any objection to a last-chance unblock? Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 07:38, 18 June 2023 (UTC)

Short answer is no objection. Longer answer is something that always irritates me about the 6-month period: when does it start? From the date of the block? Or from the date of the last edit by the user on their Talk page? I've seen administrators use both. It only becomes relevant when, as here, the user requested an unblock exactly 6 months from the block but whose last edit before the latest unblock request was that of the first unblock request, January 12. I reread WP:SO a moment ago, and, unless I missed something, it doesn't say. Me, if I were forced to "vote", I'd say 6 months from the block for a couple of reasons. First, it doesn't seem fair to impose the "longer" period when the essay doesn't say. Second, it would discourage discussion of the block because it would change the clock. I know that sometimes such discussions are unconstructive on the part of the user, but we shouldn't assume in advance that they will be for the purpose of the "rule". Out of curiosity, what's your view? Sorry to muse out loud, but this does seem to come up fairly often, no doubt because I block so many socks. Anyway, back to the case at hand, I have no objection to you unblocking the user.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:17, 18 June 2023 (UTC)

Thanks. And yes, I would most certainly agree with you that when we're going to specify a particular time frame like that, we should be clearer as to exactly when the clock starts. If I had it to do myself, I would say that the six months is from the later of the time of the block, or the last time the editor was evading it by socking, but that discussing the block on their talk page or appealing to UTRS while blocked is not block evasion and does not reset the clock. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 16:16, 18 June 2023 (UTC)

My entry

Hi there. This user, 154.47.118.103, which was recently blocked by you, has decided to put a speedy deletion template on my brand new entry. I do not understand why, could you please help me with that and to remove the template? The entry is factual, "academically dry" and referenced. Needless to say, it is not commercial/promotive by any means. Txs in advance. קוונטום דוץ (talk) 21:05, 18 June 2023 (UTC)

I removed the tag before blocking the IP.--Bbb23 (talk) 21:07, 18 June 2023 (UTC)

Thank you very much for the fast action. קוונטום דוץ (talk) 21:10, 18 June 2023 (UTC)

Soccket puppet

Hi think user Nathacha Akontara is socket puppet Christbueze of he created:Draft:Charles Ndukauba same articles that latter created also ,this draft is first edit of Nathacha. Can you check? DarkHorseMayhem (talk) 23:02, 20 June 2023 (UTC)

I think so too. Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:05, 21 June 2023 (UTC)

Another one

Hello. I encountered Упгаз and their contributions (posting non-encyclopedic material on their talk page). I came to request a block from you because you previously blocked another account that was doing the same thing. Thank you. Zoe Trent Fan🎤💍 15:41, 19 June 2023 (UTC)

I've blocked them as obvious. I don't suppose you remember the username of the account I blocked before? --Bbb23 (talk) 15:51, 19 June 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for the block. I still remember the username of the account you blocked before (User:ਗੈਪ ਹੈ). Additionally, I have been seeing accounts with non-English usernames rambling about unencyclopedic content on their user talk pages for quite some time, like that account. I haven't done anything about them until I encountered that account. Zoe Trent Fan🎤💍 16:44, 19 June 2023 (UTC)

I may not be able to tie all the ones you've seen together, but at least those two are now tagged as connected to each other. Thanks for your help.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:47, 19 June 2023 (UTC)

Here's the contributions of another one I found today: Special:Contributions/ጋዝሉፔ. I'll also see if I can track down the older ones I saw. Zoe Trent Fan🎤💍 15:32, 20 June 2023 (UTC)

I blocked and tagged the new one. You don't have to search for older ones, unless it sheds some light, either locally or globally, on who the master is.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:39, 20 June 2023 (UTC)

• Hey, Zoe Trent Fan, I stumbled across the SPI related to this master and thought you might like to know: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/あすぺるがあすぺしゃりすと.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:41, 22 June 2023 (UTC)

Sockpuppet

Please see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Amanheheh337, and investigate. Thanks ✠ ZenDragoX✠ (contact) 13:04, 23 June 2023 (UTC)

Does this need a rev/del?

Special:Diff/1161726230 I've reverted but wasn't sure if it needs deleting? Thanks, Knitsey (talk) 17:41, 24 June 2023 (UTC)

Yes, I think so per WP:BLP. Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:44, 24 June 2023 (UTC)

Duck sock

same edit summarise obvious duck. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Timoy3456 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/BerkArikan

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/159.146.74.140 Shadow4dark (talk) 19:12, 24 June 2023 (UTC)

 Done. Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 19:25, 24 June 2023 (UTC)

Userpage clearing

Hi. Sorry to disturb, I just randomly pick an administrator from the users list.

I kinda remember administrator has the ability to clear userpage and its edit history. Could you help me clear out mine?

Thank you. −Edward (^t⋇_c) 20:40, 24 June 2023 (UTC)

The talk page as well. Thanks. −Edward (^t⋇_c) 20:43, 24 June 2023 (UTC)

I can delete your userpage (that's what I assume you mean), but your Talk page cannot be deleted. If you want your userpage deleted, you don't have to ask an admin to do it. You can put the WP:U1 tag at the top of the page, and someone will come along and delete it. In this instance, because I'm not sure that's what you want, I'll wait to hear from you, or you can initiate it yourself as explained. BTW, your signature does not comply with WP:SIG because it does not show your username (Edward isn't enough). You should fix it.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:57, 24 June 2023 (UTC)

Query

What did you mean when you said "do not change the status of the case without explaining what you're doing in the report and why". I do not quite understand. The original status was CUrequest before the cases were merged. Where and how should I explain what I am doing? What report? When you are saying something, make it clear.

(BangaloreNorth (talk) 14:17, 25 June 2023 (UTC))

Personal attack and false accusations

A user named BangaloreNorth is attacking me personally by saying I have lost shame and self respect. They are also falsely accusing me of being a sockpuppet, when the investigation has not even concluded. Please take action against them. Here is the link of the discussion where they attacked me just now: Wiki discussion. Cinephile4ever 10:28, 23 June 2023 (UTC)

If you believe that BangaloreNorth has violated WP:NPA, then you should bring them to WP:ANI.--Bbb23 (talk) 12:37, 23 June 2023 (UTC)

I reported in the page you asked me to 4 days before, here's the link: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#Personal_attack

Other users too have acknowledged that user's personal attack on me. When will any administrator take action? Cinephile4ever 04:34, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

Help

Good evening! I need your help as an administrator. Recently, an article I wrote was deleted because there were not enough independent sources. It was called "Stips (Israeli website)", see here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Stips_(Israeli_website). I worked on it really hard and I would like to request to restore it to the draft namespace. I promise not to move it to the namespace as an article until I find more suitable sources and all the problems regarding the notability and sourcing will be resolved. Thanks! אוהד בר-און (talk) 19:24, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

Band 'O Gypsys speedy deletion

I don't think this met the criteria for A7, since there was a claim of significance being "one of the longest running bands in the world" or some such thing. I also found a Google Books source ("History of Contemporary Music of South Africa - Part 1 - Page 7") that states "They play heavy Hendrix - ZZ Top influenced music and have been around for years . Originally , they were known as the Sasons . They live on a farm , outside Johannesburg and are living proof to the maxim - " you never get old with rock ..." [39] There also appears to be a significant fan base, I found this YouTube video [40][41][42] [43][44] that calls them the "Godfathers of South African Rock", and the fan base uses superlatives like "legendary", and there's a biography about 19 seconds in. I think it should have gone to a full AFD, potentially after a move to Band O' Gypsys. It's annoying that they ripped off a Jimmy Hendrix song as the name of the band, which is what makes searching for them difficult so I'll excuse the evident lack of WP:BEFORE, and it's possible that the misplaced apostrophe in the article title was a clumsy attempt at disambiguation. The user who added the speedy deletion tag has stated that the article will "end up in red after a week". That may well be the case, but it should still go to a full AfD, there's no way that an editor with six months of experience (or any other) should be making such calls on their own without a clear basis in policy. Park3r (talk) 02:49, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

I don't see a problem with this as someone disconnected from the request. There has to be more than passing mentions about the band. I ran a search through Google and other resources and I believe there is still not enough resources to establish that this is a notable band in South Africa. I tried searching through South African resources as well and the only resource that gave any coverage was Amuzine. I did see an audio interview in a rock station's playlist, but the interview was not linked. I think that could help establish things further. Other helpful resources if they could be found are newspaper articles in microfiche or newspaper archives, considering they started sometime in the 1960s. The video interviews are not enough to establish support as they are biased towards the band. Album sales numbers could help support the statements, but I could not locate them easily. Requesting that it be put in the draft space and then working on finding more resources might be the better option. Inomyabcs (talk) 09:00, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

At the risk of getting into a slippery slope argument, your comment should be a delete vote in a proper AFD, or we may as well discard the process and allow individual nominators to take down articles. The criteria for speedy deletes are limited, and this nomination seems to have not met them. Park3r (talk) 09:14, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

I'm not going to speak for Bbb23, but between the administrator review and the original proposal (assuming good faith). Two eyes looked at it and said there isn't enough there. The burden for speedy delete is would it be reasonable that other editors would view it the same way:

However, editors may propose the deletion of a page if they believe that it would be an uncontroversial candidate for deletion.

I have just shown that I believe the same through giving you my due diligence. If it had gone to AfD, I would have done the same. In all probability, we would end up at the same result and you got your answer much quicker. Which is also a point in speedy deletion, "Speedy deletion is intended to reduce the time spent on deletion discussions for pages or media with no practical chance of surviving discussion." Not trying to make it a slippery slope, but just showing that in your specific case, there needs to be more and I'm not the only one that shares that view. Inomyabcs (talk) 09:39, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

You used criterion A7, when the article had a WP:CCOS, which is a misapplication of that criterion. Furthermore, you're conflating WP:PROD with WP:SPEEDY. Your quote "However, editors may propose the deletion of a page if they believe that it would be an uncontroversial candidate for deletion" links to WP:PROD, not WP:SPEEDY. Park3r (talk) 09:46, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

We can go around in circles all day. I'll just leave it to Bbb23 to respond, if they desire. Inomyabcs (talk) 09:54, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

• The speedy deletion is partly due to the fact that I didn't notice that it was already at AfD. I think it qualifies for A7 because the one line "Formed in 1962 that claims to be one of the longest-running bands in the world.", which is not even a real sentence but appears to say that the band claims that distinction, not that it is in fact the longest-running band in the world, is not a credible claim of significance. The only other material in the article is the discography, which consists of two albums (I'm guessing albums because of the way they're formatted but have no idea really), one from 1995 and the other from 2004. What happened to all the years from 1962 to 1995 and from 2004 to the present? Finally, the article has zero sources, not even a website for the band, and everyone and their mother can get a website for a band, even if the members (no list of the members in the article) never get any further than their garage. Anyway, Park3r, you seem to be the most upset over the deletion, so I'll leave it to you. Three options and you choose: (1) I'll restore the article and reverse the AfD so it can continue; (2) I'll restore the article as a draft for you and anyone else to work on; or (3) I'll do nothing. Let me know.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:53, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

  I’d ask you to reverse the deletion and allow the AfD to continue. Thanks. Park3r (talk) 15:35, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

   Done.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:48, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

Removal of post

Earlier today, an editor posted here making a seemingly good-faith, reasonable request that you consider restoring a page you had deleted. The editor forgot to sign the post with four tildes. You undid the post from your page without responding, with the edit-summary admonition "posts to my talk page must be signed." While of course talkpage posts should be signed, reversion is not an appropriate way for an administrator to deal with what was obviously an inadvertent typing mistake. Please restore the editor's query and address it on its merits. Thank you, Newyorkbrad (talk) 15:28, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

I revert all unsigned posts because they will not be archived unless I fix them, and I don't see why that burden should be mine (this happens regularly). The user is welcome to repost properly, or if you wish to, you're welcome to restore the post and sign it for the user so it will eventually archive. Frankly, I wish Sinebot would sign such posts, and I don't understand why that happens sometimes and not others.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:43, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

Regardless of our dispute about my conduct, I've done what the user asked, created Draft:Tobi Lou, and let them know on their Talk page.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:01, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

Thanks. That's a good question why Sinebot didn't take care of this. Do you know who is maintaining it these days? If so I'd be glad to follow up with them. Regards, Newyorkbrad (talk) 16:05, 30 June 2023 (UTC) Addendum: I see the mention of Slakr on the bot's page, so I'll follow up there. Regards, Newyorkbrad (talk) 16:29, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

Tobi Lou undeletion request

In August 2021, you deleted the page for Tobi Lou on A7 grounds. Since then, the musician has had an album on the Billboard charts, so he now reaches the notability criteria. Is it possible to restore the page? I am planning on creating the page, but would prefer to build off the existing page, if possible. Rmalla2000 (talk) 19:59, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

Umm, I've already taken care of this for you and posted to that effect on your Talk page.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:01, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

References

Administrators' newsletter – July 2023

News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2023).

Administrator changes

Novem Linguae

• Deckiller
• Electionworld
• MBisanz
• Penwhale
• Raul654
• Roadrunner
• Viridae
• Yannismarou

Bureaucrat changes

MBisanz

Guideline and policy news

• Contributions to the English Wikipedia are now released under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License (CC BY-SA 4.0) license instead of CC BY-SA 3.0. Contributions are still also released under the GFDL license.

Technical news

• Discussion is open regarding a proposed global policy regarding third-party resources. Third-party resources are computer resources that reside outside of Wikimedia production websites.

Arbitration

• Two arbitration cases are currently open. Proposed decisions are expected 5 July 2023 for the Scottywong case and 9 July 2023 for the AlisonW case.

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:57, 1 July 2023 (UTC)

Undeletion request for SOAPjr

In 2008, I took a few programming courses at a community college, and was amused to learn there was a web development program called SOAP. I made a few edits to that article and to SOAPjr, probably just fixing typos and rewording a few sentences. It should be clear I had no conflict of interest in those edits. My programming career didnt really work out and I've forgotten all about most things related to computer programming. It just popped into my head recently though to check up on the article, and to my surprise, I found that you deleted it in 2022 without an AFD, saying it was blatantly promotional. Wasn't this article live for fourteen years? And as I remember it, it was quite long and detailed, too.

My recent edits may suggest I no longer take this project seriously, but this is a serious undeletion request. I think the page should be restored, and if it really is that bad, put through an AFD. If you'd rather put it in my userspace so I can work on it as a draft, I'd be willing to do that as well, though as above, I have little knowledge of programming, so this would be a rather unusual "draft" as I'd be mostly taking things away from the article rather than adding them.

I hope to hear from you soon. Thanks, —Soap— 12:46, 2 July 2023 (UTC)

Restored to Draft:SOAPjr.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:03, 2 July 2023 (UTC)

Okay thank you. Before I posted here, I checked to make sure SOAPjr itself hadn't been abandoned, and it definitely still exists, but now that I see the article history, it seems like it really didn't take off and doesnt even have a domain name anymore. However, we have plenty of articles about historical projects, so I'm not going to give up. I will touch up the writing style, add whatever I can find, and then submit it through the AFC process. I admit I've been so focused on Wiktionary lately that I'm going to have to read up on our policies again to see what is and what is not an acceptable secondary source. And I work slowly. But, again, I appreciate your prompt reply and I will do what I can to improve this draft to present it neutrally as an article should be. —Soap— 13:19, 2 July 2023 (UTC)

Silently deleting an edit war request

Good afternoon. May I know why you deleted my request without any response? The user has resumed an edit war for which we were both previously banned for violating the three undo rule, now blatantly ignoring the discussion and pointing out the context of the situation. Solaire the knight (talk) 13:36, 6 July 2023 (UTC)

If you want to file a report at WP:AN3, follow the instructions at the top of the page. Free-form reports are not permitted.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:38, 6 July 2023 (UTC)

But this was a direct violation of sanctions following a request previously posted on this page. And even so, why didn't you even try to ask me if I would file this as a three-cancellation violation before deleting the request?Solaire the knight (talk) 13:50, 6 July 2023 (UTC)

Military law enforcement

I undid your revert. My removals were not unexplained. I explained it on the talk section of the template.

Military police are NOT federal law enforcement per United States Code. They derive their powers from the UCMJ, and have no power in the civilian world unless they are on DOD property - in which case UCMJ applies. UpstateCops (talk) 14:05, 6 July 2023 (UTC)