User talk:PhilKnight/Archive106
Possible block evasion
I saw you blocked an user named Zj javier for addition of unsourced content, wanted to tell you that I saw another user called Zigmund Sanchez Javier, whose own user page says Hi I'm new but please don't ban me I'm sorry OK? Just don't ban me
, I don't know if WP:DUCK applies here -Gouleg🛋️ harass/hound 12:56, 3 August 2021 (UTC)
- Thanks. I blocked the account. PhilKnight (talk) 14:05, 3 August 2021 (UTC)
7seals spammer
Hello, I noticed that you rightly blocked Special:Contributions/2601:589:4801:5660:71b7:172a:249f:5009 although more edits were recently made by other addresses in the same /64 subnet (Special:Contributions/2601:589:4801:5660::/64), in case you would like to upgrade the block to the /64. Thanks, —PaleoNeonate – 18:30, 3 August 2021 (UTC)
- I've blocked the /64 subnet. PhilKnight (talk) 19:05, 3 August 2021 (UTC)
- Many thanks. When I have more time I'll try to see why these edits weren't automatically prevented or reverted, taking Wikipedia:WikiProject_Spam/LinkReports/7seals.blogspot.com in consideration, it seems to be a LTA issue and maybe worth a more specific blacklist entry... —PaleoNeonate – 19:26, 3 August 2021 (UTC)
- Update: 7seals.yuku.com and 7seals.blogspot.com proposed at the global blacklist, —PaleoNeonate – 04:24, 5 August 2021 (UTC)
Removing 5-day-old message from User talk:186.205.7.154
Hello.
Thanks for blocking this vandal. This is a long-term abuser who has been targeting a handful of racing drivers for well over a year now. See here. One of the vandal's things is to replace English text with Portuguese.
I'm all for removing ancient, irrelevant talk page notices, but your edit here removed messages clearly relevant to the current abuse problem, including removing a message about Portuguese that was only 5 days old.
Would you mind if I restore these? --DB1729 (talk) 16:31, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
- No problem, go ahead. Thanks for asking. PhilKnight (talk) 16:33, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
Done — All the best! --DB1729 (talk) 16:45, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
SPI lookover request
Hi, would you mind to look into Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Javito1993? Its sock is alive and kicking. Thanks. Flix11 (talk) 10:00, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
One more SPI lookover request
Could you have a look at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/PeaceWins? You recently blocked the socketpuppet User:Peace and Us. There might be another one: User:Peace Humanity. Phlsph7 (talk) 18:25, 13 August 2021 (UTC)
User talk:Raymarcbadz
The reference removals continue [1] among others. I had posted on the talk page of the user but they have reverted me twice. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 19:04, 14 August 2021 (UTC)
- Sportsfan 1234, did you put the references there on this [2] before? If you want to discuss this problem, I already set a section at WT:OLY. Thank you! Raymarcbadz (talk) 19:15, 14 August 2021 (UTC)
- You have posted an incorrect link. You continue to insist on reference removals and it is problematic. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 19:22, 14 August 2021 (UTC)
- And now another removal [3] Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 19:29, 14 August 2021 (UTC)
- Why do you accept the edits made by Sahlil0411 on Ukraine at the 2020 Summer Olympics? I am currently inspecting all NOC articles for further corrections. You are interfering with my problem involving reference removals and mass citation issues. Additionally, please refer to this link. Please read the discussion thoroughly before you react. Thank you. Raymarcbadz (talk) 19:15, 14 August 2021 (UTC)
- You are still not explaining why you are removing references. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 22:35, 14 August 2021 (UTC)
- Why? Citing references inside the table is indeed UNNECESSARY. Do you want to put references on the tables across all sections for the NOC article? Raymarcbadz (talk) 12:48, 15 August 2021 (UTC)
- When I unblocked you, you said you would stop deleting references. PhilKnight (talk) 12:08, 15 August 2021 (UTC)
- Why? Citing references inside the table is indeed UNNECESSARY. Do you want to put references on the tables across all sections for the NOC article? Raymarcbadz (talk) 12:48, 15 August 2021 (UTC)
- You are still not explaining why you are removing references. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 22:35, 14 August 2021 (UTC)
- Why do you accept the edits made by Sahlil0411 on Ukraine at the 2020 Summer Olympics? I am currently inspecting all NOC articles for further corrections. You are interfering with my problem involving reference removals and mass citation issues. Additionally, please refer to this link. Please read the discussion thoroughly before you react. Thank you. Raymarcbadz (talk) 19:15, 14 August 2021 (UTC)
- And now another removal [3] Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 19:29, 14 August 2021 (UTC)
- You have posted an incorrect link. You continue to insist on reference removals and it is problematic. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 19:22, 14 August 2021 (UTC)
- Sportsfan 1234, did you put the references there on this [2] before? If you want to discuss this problem, I already set a section at WT:OLY. Thank you! Raymarcbadz (talk) 19:15, 14 August 2021 (UTC)
- And the removal continues [4]. Is there away to stop this? Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 14:34, 15 August 2021 (UTC)
- I have issued a final warning. PhilKnight (talk) 13:09, 16 August 2021 (UTC)
- I have a question. Why did you want to have REFERENCES inside the table? Another reason. They are not properly cited.Raymarcbadz (talk) 13:33, 15 August 2021 (UTC)
- I suggest you take another look at WP:V. PhilKnight (talk) 19:01, 16 August 2021 (UTC)
- I have a question. Why did you want to have REFERENCES inside the table? Another reason. They are not properly cited.Raymarcbadz (talk) 13:33, 15 August 2021 (UTC)
- I have issued a final warning. PhilKnight (talk) 13:09, 16 August 2021 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – September 2021
News and updates for administrators from the past month (August 2021).
Administrator changes
Guideline and policy news
- Feedback is requested on the Universal Code of Conduct enforcement draft by the Universal Code of Conduct Phase 2 drafting committee.
- A RfC is open on whether to allow administrators to use extended confirmed protection on high-risk templates.
- A discussion is open to decide when, if ever, should discord logs be eligible for removal when posted onwiki (including whether to oversight them)
- A RfC on the next steps after the trial of pending changes on TFAs has resulted in a 30 day trial of automatic semi protection for TFAs.
Technical news
- The Score extension has been re-enabled on public wikis. It has been updated, but has been placed in safe mode to address unresolved security issues. Further information on the security issues can be found on the mediawiki page.
Arbitration
- A request for comment is in progress to provide an opportunity to amend the structure, rules, and procedures of the Arbitration Committee election and resolve any issues not covered by existing rules. Comments and new proposals are welcome.
Miscellaneous
- The 2021 RfA review is now open for comments.
Unseenimages
Apologies I just realised I listed this user at AIV and UAA - I don't normally do that. Thanks for blocking. 10mmsocket (talk) 18:03, 9 September 2021 (UTC)
- No problem. PhilKnight (talk) 18:05, 9 September 2021 (UTC)
Flix11
Hi, I wondered if HeteroID is a sock. In addition to this analysis (they overlap on almost all of the new account's 85 edits), the new account's first edits were to Indonesian articles. Seems suspicious enough to warrant a check. Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 21:27, 14 September 2021 (UTC)
- Sorry, no. I suggest you file a SPI. PhilKnight (talk) 07:18, 15 September 2021 (UTC)\
User you just blocked
Thank you for that, I was pulling my hair out wondering how else I could explain it to them. Thank You. LakesideMinersCome Talk To Me! 21:57, 16 September 2021 (UTC)
- No problem. PhilKnight (talk) 22:04, 16 September 2021 (UTC)
Thank you
Thank you for blocking 85.255.237.59 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log). I reported it to AIV yesterday, but was ignored. DuncanHill (talk) 11:39, 17 September 2021 (UTC)
- No problem. PhilKnight (talk) 11:41, 17 September 2021 (UTC)
Autoblock
Hi, Phil. There's a request for unblock at User talk:SidChat2048, for an autoblock resulting from a block you placed. I can't see any evidence that the two accounts are related, so perhaps lifting the autoblock would be OK. Can you have a look at it?JBW (talk) 20:24, 18 September 2021 (UTC)
- Hi JBW, thanks for letting me know. I have removed the autoblock. PhilKnight (talk) 04:07, 19 September 2021 (UTC)
Joan Mondale Article
As a fellow administrator who has previously blocked User talk:75.88.180.192 for making unsourced edits, I wanted to let you know that I recently reverted unsourced edits by this user to the Joan Mondale article and issued a warning regarding making unsourced edits, since a previous edit by this user relating to the same information was also recently reverted by User:Quisqualis and I wanted to get a second opinion if any further action should taken at this time.--TommyBoy (talk) 02:29, 24 September 2021 (UTC)
- Hi TommyBoy, thanks for letting me know. I don't think any further action is required. PhilKnight (talk) 18:05, 24 September 2021 (UTC)
- Thanks for the update, User:Quisqualis replied back to me that a report had been made at the AIV noticeboard shortly after I originally contacted you, but I will keep an eye on the Joan Mondale article on my Watchlist in order to make sure this does not become an ongoing issue.--TommyBoy (talk) 02:53, 25 September 2021 (UTC)
Possible sockpuppetry
Hi. I noticed that you declined an unblock request of Javito1993 because of compelling evidence in this SPI. The problem is that Javito1993 was able to create a new account less than 24 hours after Javito1993 was blocked. Flix11 was not able to do a proper report, but he was able to point to this editor interaction analysis. I and other editors have noticed other issues with Joplin201017 that appear to be very similar to the disruptive behavior of Javito1993. In fact, there are several discussions on the talk page of those users and here. Also, almost every time the two accounts respond to messages on their talk pages, they rarely indent their messages. I and other editors are sure that the two accounts are used by the same person. Could further action be taken? LSGH (talk) (contributions) 16:33, 1 October 2021 (UTC)
- Hi LSGH, based on your evidence I ran a checkuser and the result was
Confirmed. I have blocked Joplin201017 indefinitely. Thanks for letting me know. PhilKnight (talk) 17:45, 1 October 2021 (UTC)
- Could you kindly look at this account? Earlier today, I noticed that the new account edited some pages in the same topic area and went straight to the statistics. Similar to the blocked accounts, the username of the new account is composed of a name and a number, and all edits have tags that indicate that they are made using a mobile client. Another questionable behavior is shown here, where six edits in less than ten minutes to the same article is something that is too similar to ignore. LSGH (talk) (contributions) 08:41, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
- Hi, I ran another checkuser and blocked BEWD2000 (talk · contribs), CurtisYou (talk · contribs), and Zoey2003 (talk · contribs) as confirmed socks. PhilKnight (talk) 19:46, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
- Thanks. A different admin was able to determine that another account, MelaniePos, is also a sock. Is it possible that the sockmaster is using different IP ranges so that more accounts can be created? LSGH (talk) (contributions) 08:22, 17 October 2021 (UTC)
- Thanks for the info. I ran a checkuser and did not find any more accounts. Regarding your question, the rules governing checkusers mean I am not allowed to answer. PhilKnight (talk) 21:01, 17 October 2021 (UTC)
- Sorry for asking. I felt that I had to ask about it because the IP range 120.22.128.0/17 did the same thing yesterday. It was active in the same topic area earlier this year and plenty of edits were made from a mobile client. This is trickier because the IP range has several edits to pages in other topic areas, but most of those edits have the same tags and some have been reverted. Also, another account, 24Bnd, appears to be another sock. LSGH (talk) (contributions) 18:53, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
- No problem. Blocking the IP range would cause too much collateral damage. I have blocked 24Bnd as a
Likely sock. PhilKnight (talk) 22:41, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
- Yet another account, Xanderdany, is exhibiting the same behavior. I am reluctant to ask for page protection, but discretionary sanctions for the topic area may be helpful. LSGH (talk) (contributions) 05:03, 19 October 2021 (UTC)
- I have blocked Xanderdany as a Likely sock. Page protection could work, but it's a lot of articles. PhilKnight (talk) 16:01, 19 October 2021 (UTC)
- Another account, JrsMan1, is one more sock. It is quite easy to identify new socks because the same pages are being affected. Of course, we do not want to play whack-a-mole for too long, but page protection could be a good solution if blocking IP ranges and preventing account creation are not feasible. If at least one of these options is applicable, then it might be better. LSGH (talk) (contributions) 16:22, 20 October 2021 (UTC)
- JrsMan1 is Confirmed as is NickJons. PhilKnight (talk) 00:26, 21 October 2021 (UTC)
- Thanks for your help. Other editors may have already been aware of this sock farm and new SPI reports are being responded to quickly. LSGH (talk) (contributions) 15:56, 23 October 2021 (UTC)
- JrsMan1 is
- Another account, JrsMan1, is one more sock. It is quite easy to identify new socks because the same pages are being affected. Of course, we do not want to play whack-a-mole for too long, but page protection could be a good solution if blocking IP ranges and preventing account creation are not feasible. If at least one of these options is applicable, then it might be better. LSGH (talk) (contributions) 16:22, 20 October 2021 (UTC)
- I have blocked Xanderdany as a
- Yet another account, Xanderdany, is exhibiting the same behavior. I am reluctant to ask for page protection, but discretionary sanctions for the topic area may be helpful. LSGH (talk) (contributions) 05:03, 19 October 2021 (UTC)
- No problem. Blocking the IP range would cause too much collateral damage. I have blocked 24Bnd as a
- Sorry for asking. I felt that I had to ask about it because the IP range 120.22.128.0/17 did the same thing yesterday. It was active in the same topic area earlier this year and plenty of edits were made from a mobile client. This is trickier because the IP range has several edits to pages in other topic areas, but most of those edits have the same tags and some have been reverted. Also, another account, 24Bnd, appears to be another sock. LSGH (talk) (contributions) 18:53, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
- Thanks for the info. I ran a checkuser and did not find any more accounts. Regarding your question, the rules governing checkusers mean I am not allowed to answer. PhilKnight (talk) 21:01, 17 October 2021 (UTC)
- Thanks. A different admin was able to determine that another account, MelaniePos, is also a sock. Is it possible that the sockmaster is using different IP ranges so that more accounts can be created? LSGH (talk) (contributions) 08:22, 17 October 2021 (UTC)
- Hi, I ran another checkuser and blocked BEWD2000 (talk · contribs), CurtisYou (talk · contribs), and Zoey2003 (talk · contribs) as confirmed socks. PhilKnight (talk) 19:46, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
- Could you kindly look at this account? Earlier today, I noticed that the new account edited some pages in the same topic area and went straight to the statistics. Similar to the blocked accounts, the username of the new account is composed of a name and a number, and all edits have tags that indicate that they are made using a mobile client. Another questionable behavior is shown here, where six edits in less than ten minutes to the same article is something that is too similar to ignore. LSGH (talk) (contributions) 08:41, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – October 2021
News and updates for administrators from the past month (September 2021).
|
|
|
Guideline and policy news
- Following an RfC, extended confirmed protection may be used preemptively on certain high-risk templates.
- Following a discussion at the Village Pump, there is consensus to treat discord logs the same as IRC logs. This means that discord logs will be oversighted if posted onwiki.
Technical news
- DiscussionTools has superseded Enterprisey's reply-link script. Editors may switch using the "Discussion tools" checkbox under Preferences → Beta features.
Arbitration
- A motion has standardised the 500/30 (extended confirmed) restrictions placed by the Arbitration Committee. The standardised restriction is now listed in the Arbitration Committee's procedures.
- Following the closure of the Iranian politics case, standard discretionary sanctions are authorized for all edits about, and all pages related to, post-1978 Iranian politics, broadly construed.
- The Arbitration Committee encourages uninvolved administrators to use the discretionary sanctions procedure in topic areas where it is authorised to facilitate consensus in RfCs. This includes, but is not limited to, enforcing sectioned comments, word/diff limits and moratoriums on a particular topic from being brought in an RfC for up to a year.
Miscellaneous
- Editors have approved expanding the trial of Growth Features from 2% of new accounts to 25%, and the share of newcomers getting mentorship from 2% to 5%. Experienced editors are invited to add themselves to the mentor list.
- The community consultation phase of the 2021 CheckUser and Oversight appointments process is open for editors to provide comments and ask questions to candidates.
SPI query
Hello, PhilKnight,
We've had some questions recently about CSD G5 tagging so I just wanted to confirm what I think your results of Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Isuzu.tf were. User:Boulette897 was found to be a sockpuppet of User:Rayondelune but NOT of sockmaster User:Isuzu.tf, is that correct? If this is correct, then Boulette897's page creations would not be subject to CSD G5 but if they were a sockpuppet of Isuzu.tf, then they would be subject to CSD G5. If you visit my talk page you can find several discussions where we go around and around this technicality. Thanks for any clarification you can provide. Liz Read! Talk! 21:25, 12 October 2021 (UTC)
- Hi Liz, User:Boulette897 was found to be a sockpuppet of User:Rayondelune but NOT of sockmaster User:Isuzu.tf. So Boulette897's page creations would not be subject to CSD G5. Hope this helps. PhilKnight (talk) 11:09, 13 October 2021 (UTC)
Sportstir
Hello. You had blocked the sockpuppet named Sportstir. I believe he/she is back in the guise of Eastingweller. Sportstir and his/her predecessors have been reversing my edits for years. And now Eatingweller is doing the same thing. S/he pretends to be a newcomer but goes right to work on my edits. Like Sportstir and predecessors, Eatingweller does almost nothing else be undo my edits. Iss246 (talk) 18:34, 24 October 2021 (UTC)
- Already blocked. PhilKnight (talk) 20:54, 24 October 2021 (UTC)
About Gazakhordarsonik socks
Hello, I think these accounts are created by the same person, please check. (Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Gazakhordarsonik)
- User:Ridoanmacr2
- User:Vondobabarwiki
- User:Vondobabarwiki2
- User:Vondobabarwiki3
- User:Vondobabarwiki4
- User:Vondobabarwiki5
-- Afeef (talk) 08:28, 28 October 2021 (UTC)
- Hi Afeef, they are all confirmed socks of Gazakhordarsonik. Blocked and tagged. Thanks. PhilKnight (talk) 09:08, 28 October 2021 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – November 2021
News and updates for administrators from the past month (October 2021).
|
|
|
Guideline and policy news
- Phase 2 of the 2021 RfA review has commenced which will discuss potential solutions to address the 8 issues found in Phase 1. Proposed solutions that achieve consensus will be implemented and you may propose solutions till 07 November 2021.
Technical news
- Toolhub is a catalogue of tools which can be used on Wikimedia wikis. It is at https://toolhub.wikimedia.org/.
Arbitration
- GeneralNotability, Mz7 and Cyberpower678 have been appointed to the Electoral Commission for the 2021 Arbitration Committee Elections. Ivanvector and John M Wolfson are reserve commissioners.
- Eligible editors are invited to self-nominate themselves to stand in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections from 07 November 2021 until 16 November 2021.
Miscellaneous
- The 2021 CheckUser and Oversight appointments process has concluded with the appointment of five new CheckUsers and two new Oversighters.
im bored so here ya go
|
The Admin's Barnstar | |
| yes Lopbunny69 (talk) 14:43, 19 November 2021 (UTC) |
|
The Recent Changes Barnstar | |
| bored Lopbunny69 (talk) 14:43, 19 November 2021 (UTC) |
ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message
| | Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add |
IP vandal
Hello, PhilKnight. I saw that you had previously blocked 195.195.0.125 due to vandalism. Sadly, the IP continues its vandalism since it got unblocked, inserting jokes and random names into articles. Can you block them again? Applodion (talk) 13:44, 24 November 2021 (UTC)
- Hi Applodion, I've blocked them for 3 months. PhilKnight (talk) 15:59, 24 November 2021 (UTC)
- Thank you very much! Applodion (talk) 16:52, 24 November 2021 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
|
The Original Barnstar |
| Thank you so much Sumon Mahmud786 (talk) 16:57, 25 November 2021 (UTC) |
- Thanks. PhilKnight (talk) 17:08, 25 November 2021 (UTC)
IP 209.171.88.156
I reported 209.171.88.156 to WP:AIV here. 90 minutes later, a different IP removes the sentence regarding Disney and LGTBQ and leaves the rest. The two IPs geolocate to Ontario, the first to Toronto, the second to Richmond Hill. The city centers are about 15 miles from each other. Coincidence? Tag team? The second IP has not otherwise edited.
- 209.171.88.156 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
- 2607:fea8:3ae0:5ec5:3850:7676:ba50:8c34 (talk · contribs · (/64) · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
Cheers Adakiko (talk) 11:46, 1 December 2021 (UTC)
- Hi Adakiko, I have blocked the second IP. Thanks, PhilKnight (talk) 11:55, 1 December 2021 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – December 2021
News and updates for administrators from the past month (November 2021).
Administrator changes
Technical news
- Unregistered editors using the mobile website are now able to receive notices to indicate they have talk page messages. The notice looks similar to what is already present on desktop, and will be displayed on when viewing any page except mainspace and when editing any page. (T284642)
- The limit on the number of emails a user can send per day has been made global instead of per-wiki to help prevent abuse. (T293866)
Arbitration
- Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee Elections is open until 23:59, 06 December 2021 (UTC).
- The already authorized standard discretionary sanctions for all pages relating to the Horn of Africa (defined as including Ethiopia, Somalia, Eritrea, Djibouti, and adjoining areas if involved in related disputes), broadly construed, have been made permanent.
Words of gratitude
Thank you, sir for unblocking my account and welcoming me back. Sending the best regards. JCzopek35 (talk) 18:25, 5 December 2021 (UTC)
- No problem. PhilKnight (talk) 19:44, 5 December 2021 (UTC)