→your opinion please...: new section |
|||
Line 110: | Line 110: | ||
Hi BH. When you get a minute could you take a look at [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Ad_Orientem#Comment_on_Harassment_issue this] and let me know if you think the IP is a sock of User:SchoolcraftT? I know we don't generally run CUs on IPs, just asking for an outside opinion here. I don't have enough personal experience to be able to make a judgement either way. Thanks. -[[User:Ad Orientem|Ad Orientem]] ([[User talk:Ad Orientem|talk]]) 13:50, 17 November 2017 (UTC) |
Hi BH. When you get a minute could you take a look at [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Ad_Orientem#Comment_on_Harassment_issue this] and let me know if you think the IP is a sock of User:SchoolcraftT? I know we don't generally run CUs on IPs, just asking for an outside opinion here. I don't have enough personal experience to be able to make a judgement either way. Thanks. -[[User:Ad Orientem|Ad Orientem]] ([[User talk:Ad Orientem|talk]]) 13:50, 17 November 2017 (UTC) |
||
:{{tpw}} They do share creative spelling ... victium, acoumpaning, sence (Schoolcraft) vs hasent, appriciated, historey (IP). Suggestive but probably not enough for DUCK by itself. ☆ [[User:Bri|Bri]] ([[User talk:Bri|talk]]) 16:41, 17 November 2017 (UTC) |
:{{tpw}} They do share creative spelling ... victium, acoumpaning, sence (Schoolcraft) vs hasent, appriciated, historey (IP). Suggestive but probably not enough for DUCK by itself. ☆ [[User:Bri|Bri]] ([[User talk:Bri|talk]]) 16:41, 17 November 2017 (UTC) |
||
== your opinion please... == |
|||
Since you blocked IP addresses mentioned in [[Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Renamed user 49274c4c204245204241434b]] |
|||
that individual has made use of two more IP address, each to leave a single complaint, on my talk page, that I have lapsed from [[WP:OUTING]], in my defence from their wikistalking: |
|||
[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Geo_Swan&diff=810861648&oldid=809962351] |
|||
[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Geo_Swan&diff=811262108&oldid=810871482]. |
|||
Do you think I should start another SPI? Do you have the authority to apply the same block duration to these two additional IPs? If so, is there any other information you think you would need before you go ahead, other than my confidence these two messages constitute the same kind of disruption as the individual at {{U|Renamed user 49274c4c204245204241434b}} had been devoted to? |
|||
Thanks! [[User:Geo Swan|Geo Swan]] ([[User talk:Geo Swan|talk]]) 20:21, 20 November 2017 (UTC) |
Revision as of 20:21, 20 November 2017
| Berean Hunter | Talk Page | Sandbox | Sandbox2 | | ![]() |
@ | This user can be reached by email. |
|
|||||||||||||||
This page has archives. Sections older than 7 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 10 sections are present. |
Will be emailing you about a sock matter
I will send you an email about this because, although I have identified the sock on Wikipedia in subtle ways, this is better discussed off Wikipedia due to the sock's cues I'm familiar with and due to "you can't accuse without evidence" drama. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 20:38, 6 November 2017 (UTC)
If you didn't get the notification that I emailed you, I just did. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 21:48, 6 November 2017 (UTC)
Update: As you can see on my talk page, I've asked others about this matter as well. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 16:30, 7 November 2017 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue CXXXIX, November 2017
|
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 13:29, 7 November 2017 (UTC)
I'm suspicious about some of the WP:SPAs commenting at this AfD. You already blocked two from CU, but I wonder if there are more? Or at the very least, I'm sure that some are WP:MEAT accounts. There are related discussions at COIN here and here. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 15:12, 9 November 2017 (UTC)
- Drm310, here is the SPI case to see that part of it. :) If you can help with it, you are quite welcome. We enjoy having more eyes on cases.
— Berean Hunter (talk) 15:27, 9 November 2017 (UTC)
- Drm310, here is the SPI case to see that part of it. :) If you can help with it, you are quite welcome. We enjoy having more eyes on cases.
Sockpuppetry
- 2A02:908:B36:A1C0:C7D:520F:6F02:C816 (talk · contribs · WHOIS)
The ip is sock of banned long-term abuser Tirgil34. The same location & ISP, same topics & edits. Please see the sockmaster's post on a non-Wikimedia site regarding Kortland: [1] and the edit by the ip-sock: [2]. Obvious WP:DUCK. 5.3.218.31 (talk) 17:50, 10 November 2017 (UTC)
- I am no longer working cases related to Tirgil or any other Turkish subject. Evidence need to be placed in SPI cases so others can look at it. I don't want to be tied down to that case and so I'm washing my hands of it.
— Berean Hunter (talk) 18:14, 10 November 2017 (UTC)- If i am remembering correctly, the ips become stale within 7 days, so filing a SPI case for ip socks does not seem a good idea. Thus, in order to get quick feedbacks, i prefered to report the sockpuppetry to CUs who are familiar with that case. But i can report it to an another admin, if you are busy. Thanks. 5.3.218.31 (talk) 18:58, 10 November 2017 (UTC)
Returning sock
Hullo there Berean Hunter, some time ago you blocked this sock of A Nobody. He's back again using the same IP. Could you please swat it? Thanks, Reyk YO! 23:02, 10 November 2017 (UTC)
Done
— Berean Hunter (talk) 01:35, 13 November 2017 (UTC)
RR Account
You must be tired of hearing from me. This is the new account of Regiis Rosis, previous account noted on my talk page. - Rosarum et Veritas (talk) 03:42, 11 November 2017 (UTC)
- Cheers.
— Berean Hunter (talk) 01:37, 13 November 2017 (UTC)
SPI/Oluwa2Chainz
I must say I have quit a few things against the just closed SPI against Oluwa2Chainz. 1) The SPI was started and concluded without the accused getting a note whatsoever that they're been suspected for sockpupettry. 2) There was no where that editing pattern of Kaizenify was on anyway similar to that of Olwa2Chainz. 3) Oluwa2Chainz is blocked on Commons for SPI and uploading copyrighted images the former he vehemently denied, I don't understand why he was blocked on this wiki also without giving him a chance. 4)With over 500 main-space articles, Oluwa2Chainz is not an editor that deserves the sweep under the carpet SPI.
What I do understand is that Nigeria has a very small amount of Dedicated editors and except you can prove without reasonable doubts that these editors are socks, then you should be cautious of what you block editors for. ʍaɦʋɛօtʍ (talk) 00:45, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
- 1) Oluwa2Chainz accused his own puppets and certainly knew about the case because he was pinged three days ago. He pointed to three stale accounts to relate them to prior to the case being filed. It didn't work.
- 2) Multiple intersections of Kaizenify on the same IPs with the other socks and Oluwa2Chainz is a really good cue. Kaizenify's user page stated that he was a photographer. Another one of the socks that I blocked was Imagekraft, whose user page also stated that they were a photographer. Sixteen minutes after an unblock request was declined for this editor as an anon IP (and I can't show you that but other CUs can see it), they logged into the Kaizenify account and filed this unblock request and then about a half an hour later, they filed one with Imagekraft. All that on the same day and same IP as Oluwa2Chainz. So then for another coincidence would be Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dayo Israel where I would describe Oluwa2Chainz as playing good hand "delete" and the other account, Kaizenify is the advocate account. That is exactly what happened in this AfD also. One of his own socks replies to his "delete" with references. These folks share the same IPs.
- 3) "Oluwa2Chainz is blocked on Commons for SPI and uploading copyrighted images the former he vehemently denied,..." and the two accounts above claimed to be a photographer...coincidence? "I don't understand why he was blocked on this wiki also without giving him a chance." That is a repeat of your number one question but his chance now comes after he has been blocked. He can defend himself...he'll be given an opportunity.
- 4) Shortly after finishing the case and blocking, I emailed the technical results to the checkusers' mailing list so that they would be able to see the information for themselves. My opening sentence was to tell them that I had blocked an established editor so I am not trying to have a "sweep under the carpet SPI."
— Berean Hunter (talk) 03:23, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
Preciooous three years!
![]() | |
Three years! |
---|
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:19, 17 November 2017 (UTC)
- Thank you very much, Gerda. :)
— Berean Hunter (talk) 12:06, 17 November 2017 (UTC)- Congratulations on an award well deserved. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 17:53, 17 November 2017 (UTC)
User:SchoolcraftT
Hi BH. When you get a minute could you take a look at this and let me know if you think the IP is a sock of User:SchoolcraftT? I know we don't generally run CUs on IPs, just asking for an outside opinion here. I don't have enough personal experience to be able to make a judgement either way. Thanks. -Ad Orientem (talk) 13:50, 17 November 2017 (UTC)
- (talk page watcher) They do share creative spelling ... victium, acoumpaning, sence (Schoolcraft) vs hasent, appriciated, historey (IP). Suggestive but probably not enough for DUCK by itself. ☆ Bri (talk) 16:41, 17 November 2017 (UTC)
your opinion please...
Since you blocked IP addresses mentioned in Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Renamed user 49274c4c204245204241434b that individual has made use of two more IP address, each to leave a single complaint, on my talk page, that I have lapsed from WP:OUTING, in my defence from their wikistalking: [3] [4].
Do you think I should start another SPI? Do you have the authority to apply the same block duration to these two additional IPs? If so, is there any other information you think you would need before you go ahead, other than my confidence these two messages constitute the same kind of disruption as the individual at Renamed user 49274c4c204245204241434b had been devoted to?