→Arpvr block?: new section |
m →Arpvr block?: just |
||
Line 154: | Line 154: | ||
Hi SS, could I please trouble you to add [[List of highest-grossing Indian films]] to your watchlist for a little bit? I'm seeing a flare-up of activity where a bunch of users keep changing the box office data of Kabali to 320 crore, when each of the references attribute this value to the producer's claim (i.e. they're using [[WP:PRIMARY|primary sources]] for controversial data.) The article is semi-protected, so many of these users are autoconfirmed, but some are suspiciously active after long periods of inactivity like [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Anish_gupta this guy] and [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/PPYT100 this guy]. I can't provide round-the-clock scrutiny, so any assistance you can provide would be appreciated. Thanks! [[User:Cyphoidbomb|Cyphoidbomb]] ([[User talk:Cyphoidbomb|talk]]) 21:58, 29 July 2016 (UTC) |
Hi SS, could I please trouble you to add [[List of highest-grossing Indian films]] to your watchlist for a little bit? I'm seeing a flare-up of activity where a bunch of users keep changing the box office data of Kabali to 320 crore, when each of the references attribute this value to the producer's claim (i.e. they're using [[WP:PRIMARY|primary sources]] for controversial data.) The article is semi-protected, so many of these users are autoconfirmed, but some are suspiciously active after long periods of inactivity like [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Anish_gupta this guy] and [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/PPYT100 this guy]. I can't provide round-the-clock scrutiny, so any assistance you can provide would be appreciated. Thanks! [[User:Cyphoidbomb|Cyphoidbomb]] ([[User talk:Cyphoidbomb|talk]]) 21:58, 29 July 2016 (UTC) |
||
== Arpvr block? == |
|||
We both know that {{u|Arpvr}} has been a problematic contributor. They're now repeatedly removing AfD templates - see [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Panyam_Vuppu_Vanaja_Bai&curid=50214767&action=history this, for example]. I think they've had enough rope. What do you think? - [[User:Sitush|Sitush]] ([[User talk:Sitush|talk]]) 15:44, 31 July 2016 (UTC) |
Revision as of 00:13, 1 August 2016
2009: Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2010: Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2011: Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2012: Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2013: Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2014: Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2015: Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2016: Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Other: 1 |
This page has archives. Sections older than 10 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III. |
Request for protection
I want to protect my user page. SpacemanSpiff can you protect my user page. Please if you can please protect my user page. Aayush Sangal (talk) 13:31, 29 July 2016 (UTC)
Dear SpacemanSpiff, you sent me a warning that I appear to be involved in an edit war. That was certainly not my intention. I merely observed what I believed was a dogmatic editor disregarding an editor consensus and reverted him. I'll stay off the page a few days until other editors now work on it. Please also keep an eye on it (and the talk page). Thanks and regards, George Custer's Sabre (talk) 07:06, 13 July 2016 (UTC)
- As I said in the above section, both of you are edit warring (in addition to another editor I warned earlier). If there's an impasse then please follow the dispute resolution processes like WP:3O and WP:DRN, not edit war on the content. —SpacemanSpiff 07:08, 13 July 2016 (UTC)
- Dear SpacemanSpiff, I reject you assertion of edit warring, but won't argue about it. All I'll highlight is that I did not violate the 3RR and I acted only to maintain what I believed in good faith was the consensus. As I noted above, I will step away from the page for a while. No problem. Thanks for your attentiveness. George Custer's Sabre (talk) 07:13, 13 July 2016 (UTC)
- But can you please elaborate where you reached the consensus and how? You didn't even replied to the discussion on the article's talk page[1] before reverting sourced material[2]. Bongaosl (talk) 07:31, 13 July 2016 (UTC)
- I meant the consensus that existed before you began editing and I reverted. It had been stable for quite a long time. I may of course be wrong, so I will stay off the page for a while. No hard feelings. Regards, George Custer's Sabre (talk) 07:39, 13 July 2016 (UTC)
- But can you please elaborate where you reached the consensus and how? You didn't even replied to the discussion on the article's talk page[1] before reverting sourced material[2]. Bongaosl (talk) 07:31, 13 July 2016 (UTC)
- Dear SpacemanSpiff, I reject you assertion of edit warring, but won't argue about it. All I'll highlight is that I did not violate the 3RR and I acted only to maintain what I believed in good faith was the consensus. As I noted above, I will step away from the page for a while. No problem. Thanks for your attentiveness. George Custer's Sabre (talk) 07:13, 13 July 2016 (UTC)
- Could you take a look at Zakir Naik, an article that if I had any brains I'd take off my watchlist, and the user you warned recently, Sharif uddin? BTW, the user's revert of my revert and their comment in the edit summary are not accurate. They moved one piece and removed another piece from the article. One of the more disruptive and non-neutral editors of that article has already been blocked for edit-warring (Bongaosl). I, unfortunately, can't act because I'm involved. Let me know what you think. If you believe I'm out of line, please tell me.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:21, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
- That's the reason I gave the warning to that user. I'm away in the mountains with only a 4" screen to type and read so can't do anything until Monday. Meantime I hope @NeilN and Bishonen: can step in. Same for your post below Sitush. Also ARBIPA warnings should go out for Zakir naik. 6 minutes to type. Cheers —SpacemanSpiff 15:50, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
- Applied 1RR to Naik. Maybe I'm missing something but as Israel is never mentioned in the article, I can't see how ARBPIA applies. --NeilN talk to me 16:19, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
-
- Brain fart. Yes, you're right. I believe using the BLP discretionary sanctions should achieve the same purpose. --NeilN talk to me 16:28, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
- If a page is troublesome enough to need a 1RR, why not also apply semiprotection? And I'm wondering if one of its recent editors, Only1MesutOzil (talk · contribs), should be blocked for WP:NOTHERE rather than go through all the levels of warnings with them. EdJohnston (talk) 16:48, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
- Most of the problem editors are autoconfirmed. As an aside, Bongaosl is now completely out of the picture. They're part of a very large sock farm and I've indeffed them.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:10, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
- Dear @Bbb23:, @NeilN: , @EdJohnston:, honestly there are massive BLP Policy violation on Zakir Naik article from both pro & against Naik editors by including defamatory, contentious contents from recent news blogs, news opinions and breaking news in the awake of recent controversy over Naik with Dhaka attack. While, verifiability does not guarantee inclusion defamatory contents are being added to the BLP article so it needs a neutral uninvolved expert editor's attention to make the page balanced, neutral and perfect as per Wikipedia guidelines. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.250.223.151 (talk • contribs)
- The article is already semied (thank &deity for that). IP, specific suggestions for changes would be welcomed on the article's talk page. --NeilN talk to me 18:46, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
- I curse the day that I set my eyes on that article and decide to semi it because of all the nonsense. BTW, what's the status on article 1RR restrictions, do individual editors have to be warned separately or is just an article/talk page notification sufficient? I've never enforced anything like this before and it seems that I'll be moving into AE stuff like this as it comes up more often now. cheers. —SpacemanSpiff 11:02, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
- I put up an article editnotice, a talk page header notice, and a talk page post about WP:1RR. Anyone who has been alerted to DS previously I consider alerted. Anyone I specifically name in my post I consider alerted. Anyone specifically warned by other editors about WP:1RR I consider alerted. I give first time offenders the chance to self-revert. Same goes for anyone reported for "chintzy" violations (and I'll mentally give the reporter the same look as your dog is giving me right now). --NeilN talk to me 00:14, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
- I curse the day that I set my eyes on that article and decide to semi it because of all the nonsense. BTW, what's the status on article 1RR restrictions, do individual editors have to be warned separately or is just an article/talk page notification sufficient? I've never enforced anything like this before and it seems that I'll be moving into AE stuff like this as it comes up more often now. cheers. —SpacemanSpiff 11:02, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
- The article is already semied (thank &deity for that). IP, specific suggestions for changes would be welcomed on the article's talk page. --NeilN talk to me 18:46, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
- Dear @Bbb23:, @NeilN: , @EdJohnston:, honestly there are massive BLP Policy violation on Zakir Naik article from both pro & against Naik editors by including defamatory, contentious contents from recent news blogs, news opinions and breaking news in the awake of recent controversy over Naik with Dhaka attack. While, verifiability does not guarantee inclusion defamatory contents are being added to the BLP article so it needs a neutral uninvolved expert editor's attention to make the page balanced, neutral and perfect as per Wikipedia guidelines. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.250.223.151 (talk • contribs)
- Most of the problem editors are autoconfirmed. As an aside, Bongaosl is now completely out of the picture. They're part of a very large sock farm and I've indeffed them.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:10, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
- If a page is troublesome enough to need a 1RR, why not also apply semiprotection? And I'm wondering if one of its recent editors, Only1MesutOzil (talk · contribs), should be blocked for WP:NOTHERE rather than go through all the levels of warnings with them. EdJohnston (talk) 16:48, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
- Brain fart. Yes, you're right. I believe using the BLP discretionary sanctions should achieve the same purpose. --NeilN talk to me 16:28, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
Possible sock of a blocked user
After the user Thecutehero (talk · contribs · count) got blocked on 21 May, you suspected that he might be active with some new account. Today I came across this account, which was created on 23 May. This new user is practically indistinguishable from Thecutehero.
He is creating same type of articles about the same type of topics as that of Thecutehero. Their writing style & way of citing/formatting are also indistinguishable, e.g. compare Thecutehero's this or this article with that of the new user's this article, which he created when his account was just one-day-old. Note that both users oddly wrote 'Area' as 'x acres' & 'Budget' as just 'INR' in the infobox. In fact, the remaining portions of their articles are also identical.
And, like Thecutehero, he is creating articles at a frantic pace, e.g. his account is just 50-odd days old & he has already created 96 articles! He is also struggling with copyvios akin to Thecutehero. - NitinMlk (talk) 15:38, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
- Looks like it but I think WP:SPI would be needed to make sure. I'm uncomfortable with WP:DUCK here because I'm not overly familiar with the original account yet and I'd prefer some technical verification before a block. Could you file it? cheers. —SpacemanSpiff 15:43, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
- I have no idea about the procedure of filing it. - NitinMlk (talk) 15:45, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
- You can use WP:Twinkle to file it, just click on the "arv" tab on User talk:Thecutehero and check sockpuppeteer, and add the other account(s) as sockpuppets. Then in the explanation you can give the sme info you've provided above. Just look at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Nouman khan sherani (archive) for an example. cheers. —SpacemanSpiff 15:50, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
- I have no idea about the procedure of filing it. - NitinMlk (talk) 15:45, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
- I am such a dimwit that I never used Twinkle till date! And, to be true, I haven't studied their behaviour in details. So, at this stage, it would be better if some experienced user files it - after studying both accounts properly. - NitinMlk (talk) 15:56, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
- @SpacemanSpiff: Wow! Just saw your relevant work here. Thanks! - NitinMlk (talk) 14:05, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
- Stumbled upon this conversation while undoing addition of unecyclopedic family photos to Wikipedia articles by multiple users/IPs. FYI: User:Vdhillon appears to be the original master. He was blocked in 2014 for copyright violations. Proof:
- Images uploaded by Vdhillon:
- Images uploaded by Lezela:
- utcursch | talk 23:42, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
- Of course it is Utcursch, why didn't I think of it? Especially since I wasted a lot of time cleaning up after that account! He's never gone away it seems. There's another intermediate sock that's been blocked. Pinging Bbb23 to see what kind of tagging can be done for this as SPI only covers the two most recent socks and any unblock requests won't have the full context without the right tags showing that this is a three year problem. —SpacemanSpiff 23:50, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
- I suppose what I would do is present evidence at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Thecutehero that there is an earlier master. There's nothing I as a CU can do, so you just need to convince a clerk (not that there are many around lately) that Vdhillon is the correct master. If you do, the userpages can be retagged appropriately. A much easier way is to add
{{sockpuppet|Vdhillon}}
to Thecutehero's userpage. It's not as good, but it'll at least make the connection.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:38, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
- I suppose what I would do is present evidence at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Thecutehero that there is an earlier master. There's nothing I as a CU can do, so you just need to convince a clerk (not that there are many around lately) that Vdhillon is the correct master. If you do, the userpages can be retagged appropriately. A much easier way is to add
- Of course it is Utcursch, why didn't I think of it? Especially since I wasted a lot of time cleaning up after that account! He's never gone away it seems. There's another intermediate sock that's been blocked. Pinging Bbb23 to see what kind of tagging can be done for this as SPI only covers the two most recent socks and any unblock requests won't have the full context without the right tags showing that this is a three year problem. —SpacemanSpiff 23:50, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
I want an answer..why is Bilcat removing page contents? Do you warn him? Indian Navy flag's are shown from teh British Indian Navy. If one has to look at History, the Indian history did not start with the British. So either have all the flags or have the flags of Indian Navy not British Indian. Now go and warn Bilcat. I want equality not just shit thrown around by British assholes.Itiltil (talk) 04:22, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
- Blocked for repeated personal attacks against other editors. —SpacemanSpiff 04:28, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
I finally beat you to a sock of Jhony jhony ha ji... INeverCry 05:12, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
- Haha, thanks. I'm sure The Masked Man of Mega Might must be thrilled to have a follower! —SpacemanSpiff 05:19, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
- You should've seen when I was an admin here and an admin and checkuser at Commons. Still can't beat the stewards with their lock button... INeverCry 05:34, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
Spam links
Hi, Can you please guide what kind of content i can add and what was the spam thing in that external link. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Madhukarwd (talk • contribs) 08:09, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
Sock sock
Why did you blocked Kichappan's IP sock 115.249.188.97 only for 72 hours. He had came with another sock, which I have opened an investigation. --Charles Turing (talk) 12:37, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
- A CU will get to it when they can, there's likely to be more socks and CU is needed for htat. cheers. —SpacemanSpiff 14:07, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
Ishq Hawa Mein
User:Gee Aap Kon is definitely a sock of User:Ishq Hawa Mein. Since Ponyo is offline and there's no investigation page, so don't know where to report this.- Managerarc™ talk 11:27, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
- No idea who that is, you'll have to start a new WP:SPI in the master's name or wait for Ponyo to return and wave her magic wand. —SpacemanSpiff 12:04, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
Laxmi Chand Tyagi
I think there is either a sock- or meat-farm operating here. The article to which I have redirected the bio is crap but the bio was even worse. - Sitush (talk) 10:19, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
- I think there's a sock farm around Milkman, some of the other accounts appear stale, but can you file an SPI? maybe a paid editing ring. —SpacemanSpiff 10:25, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
Nikam
Am extremely sorry for my behaviour and promise to be more professional.But i would like to know the reason, why is Sitush and many others editing the Nikam/Nikumbh page and giving less facts about that clan? Kondev (talk) 15:35, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
- The issue here is that you don't seem to understand our verifiability and reliable sources policies among other things, despite being alerted to them earlier. In addition, you (on this account) and as the currently blocked IP have been blanking content because you don't like it, you also reverted in content from another account that was warned about this behavior. All this is clearly disruptive. —SpacemanSpiff 16:00, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
New sock.
Blocked on Commons: SpaceSockSuperMan. Hasn't edited here yet, but he's registered. INeverCry 19:10, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
- Nouman Khan Sherani created SpacemanSpiff23 yesterday. And today Jhony does this one. These damn socks are ruining the whites in the laundry! —SpacemanSpiff 19:16, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
- He seems to have moved to new images after your protections. This one's ducky too, following that Chief minister obsession. cheers. —SpacemanSpiff 04:57, 28 July 2016 (UTC)
UTRS Account Request
I confirm that I have requested an account on the UTRS tool. —SpacemanSpiff
Done. Let me know if you have any questions with the interface or process! Cheers, --Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 22:13, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
Nadar (caste)
Any chance of you looking at the history of Nadar (caste)? I think some semi-protection might not go amiss. - Sitush (talk) 00:26, 27 July 2016 (UTC)
- If you look at the history deep enough (7-8 years back) you'll see that I've edited the article, so someone else will have to take a looksie and do the protection (or not). cheers. —SpacemanSpiff 02:41, 27 July 2016 (UTC)
- Looksied. --NeilN talk to me 02:49, 27 July 2016 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement TripWire
Please do not refuse to admin or edit in the Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement TripWire . It had been a very conflicting situation on south Asian pages. With a positive intent to help busy admin like you burdened by time & tasks. I have worked in detail on edit patterns of Tripwire and Kautilya3. Given three options two-way IBAN or Topic ban or Two-way Aspersion restriction. I find IBAN bit childish (sorry for the language). I would recommend Aspersion restriction (one moth) on TripWire for Baluchistan related articles. I agree with SheriffIsInTown after a detailed hard work on edit pattern of Kautilya3 and [4] [5] [6] mentioned by @TopGun: I would strongly recommend Indefinite Blanket topic ban on Kautilya3. This might be a reasonable solution to end Kautilya3 Vs Other party editors endless WAR. Other solutions might fail again and again. We need a good admin like you to help us on the subject. Thanks for your valuable time SIR.Xenoverse9 (talk) 10:24, 27 July 2016 (UTC)
- (talk page stalker) above user is blatant WP:DUCK sockpuppet. Please see this [7]. Spartacus! (talk) 10:46, 27 July 2016 (UTC)
Hi SS, could I please trouble you to add List of highest-grossing Indian films to your watchlist for a little bit? I'm seeing a flare-up of activity where a bunch of users keep changing the box office data of Kabali to 320 crore, when each of the references attribute this value to the producer's claim (i.e. they're using primary sources for controversial data.) The article is semi-protected, so many of these users are autoconfirmed, but some are suspiciously active after long periods of inactivity like this guy and this guy. I can't provide round-the-clock scrutiny, so any assistance you can provide would be appreciated. Thanks! Cyphoidbomb (talk) 21:58, 29 July 2016 (UTC)