User talk:Drmies/Archive 148

Archive 145

Archive 146

Archive 147

Archive 148

The 31.218.86.208 guy probably evades his ban

He was blocked in the evening of yesterday. He was edit-warring regarding the infobox photo at Leon Trotsky prior to getting blocked and now I saw that some other IP address (84.32.71.105) with a single edit history made the exact same edit this morning (it's morning here) at - you guessed it - Leon Trotsky. Without writing anything in the edit summary. I suppose this one will continue with edit-warring and disruptive behavior. I wrote them to start a RfC in talk page before unilaterally changing the already-established photo. This is how it was done with Stalin's and Lenin's photos which were changed via a RfC few months ago. I wrote the same thing to 31.218.86.208 and they absolutely ignored this and I'm sure this IP will too, esp. if they're the same person, which I highly assume. GreatLeader1945 ^TALK 08:58, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

• Right now the only edit warrior is you. Drmies (talk) 14:23, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
• Wait--are you seriously informing me that "He was blocked in the evening of yesterday"? So, BEFORE you placed that warning there? And did you, ahem, happen to notice WHO blocked that editor? Drmies (talk) 14:29, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
  • @Drmies You do not have a single comment anywhere in our communication that makes any sense, I swear! And again, you keep ignoring everything I address. That's a totally unacceptable administrator behavior. GreatLeader1945 ^TALK 15:49, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
    • Hmm you probably missed "i got it, and there is no such thing as a permanent block for IPs" ("I got it" because I had littterally just blocked the editor). There is no such thing as a permanent block for IPs, except for in very rare circumstances, which you can read about in WP:IPBLENGTH--note where it says, in bold print, IP addresses should almost never be indefinitely blocked. You said "such an IP can't edit alone on Wikipedia if one doesn't make accounts as sockpuppets", which may be grammatically correct but semantically incoherent. As for the 84.32.71.105 IP--they geolocate to a very different place, and while that doesn't mean everything you'd still have to present a pretty good argument for why you think they're the same person, an argument you can make at WP:SPI--but an SPI case which asks for two IPs to be investigated is not likely to go anywhere. But what do I know! By all means, take it to a noticeboard--just make sure you provide popcorn. Drmies (talk) 16:26, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

On Luming Lu

Hi Drmies! I noticed your edits to the article on Luming Lu, and I understand that you made them in good faith. However, I am currently working on the article about Lu's sister, and I intentionally included the description in the infobox so that I can easily add the link later. If you take a closer look at the article, you'll see that I have already included an interlanguage link to the Chinese version of Jenny Lu. This indicates that: A, I am working on the red link, and B, it shows that the subject of the article is not non-notable. Therefore, I kindly request that you leave a message on the talk page first before making any changes to my edits next time. Thanks and cheers! Prince of Erebor（The Book of Mazarbul） 00:04, 8 March 2024 (UTC)

• Eh, User:Prince of Erebor, I did indeed make these edits in good faith, and you could have easily prevented all this by leaving an edit summary to explain what you were doing. In the meantime, it would have been nice if you had acknowledged that indeed we should not have non-notable people listed in infoboxes. As for ease of editing--well, you could have stuck in the links to begin with, so you'd have a red link, and said, in an edit summary, "this will turn blue in a minute". Anyway, thanks for writing her up. No, I do not believe that people should leave talk page notices for other editors if they're going to edit an article. Drmies (talk) 01:30, 8 March 2024 (UTC)
  • I have included the description in the article since its creation. So, A, it is not feasible for me to provide an explanation for every single word I have included in an article, and B, I did not anticipate anyone intervening as I promptly moved on to writing the next article to avoid an unnecessarily long hiatus. Anyway, I acknowledge that your edits were made in good faith, and I want to emphasize that I am not trying to start an argument. The purpose of leaving this message on your talk page is solely to clarify any misunderstandings that may have arisen. I appreciate your work on new page patrolling as well. Cheers!--Prince of Erebor（The Book of Mazarbul） 05:32, 8 March 2024 (UTC)

User talk:FAJTEAM

You may wish to revoke TPA. Cahk (talk) 08:33, 8 March 2024 (UTC)

• Yeah I saw that, thanks. Did you like my possums? Drmies (talk) 14:48, 8 March 2024 (UTC)

someone you may know

Any idea who is behind this [1]? Meters (talk) 08:43, 8 March 2024 (UTC)

Could it be Gotye? Geoff | ^{Who, me?} 14:45, 8 March 2024 (UTC)

Meh it's probably the Nephilim or the Tartarians. Eight months? What a strange choice. Drmies (talk) 14:49, 8 March 2024 (UTC)

Youth cred

Now that M. Star Mississippi has just outed xyrself as a Tik-Toker with a "timeline" on the Administrators' Noticeboard, I can give you a source that indicates that your search of M. Binksternet will be in vain, and some more Tik-Tok dance videos for the three of you to watch and mutually support your youth cred statuses.

Since the split, EMI have issued a number of compilations of Talk Talk stuff, but there's a limit to the number of times any material can be recycled without degradation. Their latest venture is a 28-track collection of virtually every mix ever released of every single they did for the label. Asides & Besides (1998) had […] gave it rarity value. London 1986 (1999) recorded at the Hammersmith Odeon, cxaptured the essence of the band's live performance and included most of their crowd-pleasers from the Colour Of Spring period plus "Such a Shame" and "It's My Life".

— Underwood, Robin (2003). "Talk Talk". In Buckley, Peter (ed.). The Rough Guide to Rock. Music Guides. Rough Guides. pp. 1050–1052. ISBN 9781858284576., p.1051

Talk Talk - Hammersmith Odeon - 08/05/1986 (As broadcast by the BBC) on YouTube

This BBC Radio 1 In Concert thing, Doktoro: Was this some sort of AM pirate radio station broadcast across international waters that you picked up on your transistor radio in Gallifrey? Neither Wikipedia nor this book have helped to explain this music-in-mono thing to me.

• Garner, Ken (1993). In Session Tonight: The Complete Radio 1 Recordings. BBC Books. ISBN 9780563364528.

I'm confused by other books saying that your pirate radio programmes were recorded in Paris not in Hammersmith like you said, Doktoro.

This was still in use for Radio 1's In Concert recordings in the 1970s, and for BBC radio comedy shows right up to the mid-1990s; today it's a gym club, and where the auditorium was is now an indoor swimming pool.

— Garner, Ken (2010). The Peel Sessions: A story of teenage dreams and one man's love of new music. Random House. ISBN 9781409074830., p.26

Perhaps you, M. BInternets, and M. Mississississippi can explain all of this geographic confusion and why you, Doktoro, are trying to get music-in-mono from what is clearly and verifiably a gym club, replete with Tik-Tok dancing people. If the three of you do not, I warn, someone might nominate Paris for deletion given that that article is visibly false. There are even pictures of the gym being repaired after The Blitz, on Google Maps.

Is this swimming pool like those canals in Amsterdam that the Tijme Loords have given you fake childhood memories of? Using the same name for the author is a bit of a giveaway. The Tijme Loords should have been more inventive. Although they have gone to some great effort with this back-story of you listening to music-in-mono off pirate radio, even going so far as to invent a whole fictitious country.

• Garner, Ken (2008). "Radio and popular music". In Blain, N.; Hutchison, D. (eds.). The Media in Scotland. Edinburgh University Press. pp. 166–180.

Uncle G (talk) 07:51, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

• Hmm a lot to ponder here. First of all, I'm not a fan of Dr. Who, and Doctorin' the Tardis--well, I like their later stuff. The Hammersmith location is from the cover of the album: OR, I know. I also got a CD with a show in the motherland, where he attempts some Dutch; perhaps he does something similar on the album, I can't remember, and it might give a clue. An OR kind of clue, of course. I trust you listened to this BBC show all the way through, and I assume you have the entire Talk Talk discography--after all, you are a civilized person. What a tight live act they were! Watching the drummer is fun (I assume you have the Montreux VHS/DVD): the man believes in what he's doing, though I kind of wish he believed in wearing a shirt. Wait--Scotland is fictitious now? Drmies (talk) 16:47, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
  • Of course Scotland is fictitious! Unless of course that Highland game depicted in Braveheart where they stood about 15 paces apart and threw rocks at each other's forehead until one of them was the last man standing was real. Geoff | ^{Who, me?} 17:24, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
    • It's worse than that; it's an excellent example of how one lie can become wildly out of hand as more and more is required to support it.

      In order to convince Doktoro that xe really did listen in mono (hard to believe, I know) to pirate AM radio stations, as the false memories that they have implanted say, the Tijme Loords concocted this D'Ye Ken person to be the author of these books on John Peel and the like that Doktoro can consult to check the veracity of the memories. Dokotoro can read D'Ye Ken's books and find that yes, there were indeed music-in-mono bands named Talk Talk, Duran Duran (a name that the Tijme Loords took from Barbarella (band)), and the like.

      Unfortunately, they concocted a fictional place named "Glasgow" for this person's university, and then decided that xe wouldn't use its own publishing house and invented another place named "Edinbrough" for that. In consequence of these mistakes they were required to make a significant expansion of the back-story to include the invention of an entire country for "Glasgow" and "Edinbrough" to be a part of. They populated it with a fanciful people who have funny hair and make music out of sheep's intestines, it seems.

      Alas, in yet another mistake they created a conlang for these fictional people, and even taught Doktoro to moan in it. This caused yet another back-story headache that required the creation of a whole Wikipedia in that language. At this point, this is getting to Truman Show levels of deception all to make sure that Doktoro didn't cotton on to the lie of the AM pirate radio music-in-mono broadcasts. Of course since it had been, that Wikipedia looked like it had been written in a conlang, the normal English of Known Space with a moaning accent.

      The Tijme Loords's quite clever explanation of that, as they finally learned not to exacerbate the problem by multiplying the falsehoods, was to say that yes it was written in a conlang by a citizen of Known Space, a cover story that you will find more on at Scots Wikipedia#Controversy.

      And all because Doktoro mi estas is not allowed to know who xe really is.

      Uncle G (talk) 05:05, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

• As an old, I uh think I might need some context here @Drmies @Uncle G. I do appreciate the humor though Star Mississippi 03:22, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
  • Doktoro has been trying for the youth cred again by writing about records so new that they haven't been reviewed yet. See Force of Nature (Talk Talk album), before it was redirected on the grounds of public safety. Xe has been trying to recruit M. BInternets to assist in finding better sources than Find-A-Grave at User talk:Binksternet. All of this whilst Paris does not explain how it is at wild variance with Google Streetview and BBC Radio 1 Live In Concert does not explain anything at all to the likes of me who try to support Doktoro's eternal quest for youth cred however we can. Uncle G (talk) 05:05, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
    • Radio Veronica is a terrible, terrible article in terms of referencing though I don't really doubt its content. I don't know if they were mono or stereo; I remember, vaguely, when they were pulled off the air (out of the sea?), though what I remember best is a song, "Veronica sorry"--ha, I only just learned that it was by Peter Koelewijn. I never knew the lyrics but I remember the catchy verse. Ah the romance of radio. I'll have to play my way through Category:Songs about radio one day. Does anyone still listen to The Blasters? Isn't "Border Radio" one of the best songs EVER? I love that verse. 50,000 Watts out of Mexico! Now I remember how I know that song: a live show, on VPRO radio, that I taped--yes, Uncle, on compact cassette. Drmies (talk) 15:20, 8 March 2024 (UTC)
    • Here they're playing in the old folks home, for me and my buddy Nils--this time with a juicy solo on a Les Paul. Drmies (talk) 15:21, 8 March 2024 (UTC)

Possible sock?

Hi there. I'm starting to think that Chusada25 is a sock of Husada28. Would you mind giving it a look? Anwegmann (talk) 04:09, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

• They're already blocked, right? The Wordsmith, do you see the need for a sock sweep? Drmies (talk) 14:25, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
  • I don't think there's any need for that, it was quacking into a megaphone since nearly all their accounts use the same naming conventions. I doubt running a CU would tell us anything that Special:ListUsers didn't when I checked that yesterday for new accounts.
    But on a related note with sockmasters using identical usernames, could you maybe take a second look at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Timelash? Not saying a CU needs to be run, just look at the filers of the cases. Timelash seems to love attention and getting blocked quickly; two of the three editors that have reported Timelash are IPs that seem like VPNs. Damned odd that an IP would catch them so quickly (twice) and report accurately, I wouldn't be shocked if Timelash was reporting itself. The Wordsmith^{Talk to me} 16:03, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
    • Hmm that would be super sad. But that goes over my head quickly--I see Spicy blocked the most recent range, and they're smarter than me. Drmies (talk) 15:04, 8 March 2024 (UTC)
    • Strange: I just saw that Ravensfire has also been getting IP assistance for an SPI. Drmies (talk) 15:35, 8 March 2024 (UTC)
      • It was odd - only edit from that IP and the CIDR range from a whois check had a few edits in Indian television, but nothing really in the Indian politics area. Still, 3 excellent diffs aren't something I'll turn down. Ravensfire (talk) 15:45, 8 March 2024 (UTC)
        • Ravensfire I just noticed you don't actually have a user page. Can I just post a picture of Nick Saban on your talk page? I mean, you gotta have one. Drmies (talk) 16:08, 8 March 2024 (UTC)

          Tempting ... but the drama from some of my out of state family ... Ravensfire (talk) 16:34, 8 March 2024 (UTC)

Category expert

Hey, who's a category expert (and also an admin)? I used to go to BrownHairedGirl for questions, but... --Bbb23 (talk) 17:59, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

• I remember the LadyofShalott used to play around with HotCat... Drmies (talk) 18:34, 9 March 2024 (UTC)
  • She doesn't edit much. I need someone who's currently active.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:35, 9 March 2024 (UTC)
    • Liz, maybe? Drmies (talk) 18:39, 9 March 2024 (UTC)
      • Now that's a thought, no one can accuse her of not being active. :-) So, Liz, if you received Drmies's ping and you have a moment, I outlined the issue at User talk:TSventon#Categories. Thanks, Drmies, and thanks in advance, Liz.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:46, 9 March 2024 (UTC)
        • You know I had to stick my nose in. This retaliatory report, in response to the report above it, and this exchange here where Acroterion was trying their best, is evidence enough of an uncollegial attitude. Then (after that) is an awful RfC on Talk:Foreign_Secretary (currently the next-to-last section), followed by another which shows the editor to be out of touch, besides having an amazing verbosity which also hinders their grammar. Have we eaten on the insane root that takes the reason prisoner? Drmies (talk) 18:59, 9 March 2024 (UTC)
          • Yeah, even if the current block is not justified, it's no big loss to the project to block such an editor. Thanks for the links.--Bbb23 (talk) 19:13, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

Hi... looks like y'all have it well in hand now, but let me know if I can be helpful. I'm around more than I was for a good while (albeit less than I have been at other times). LadyofShalott 13:38, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

Ervin Demo

Again, I didn't look deep enough into the sourcing but wanted to let you know about this as there is an obvious COI. CNMall41 (talk) 18:30, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

Sanity check

Hi, Doc (and any friendly TPSes)! I and a few others have been dealing with a...persistent editor on Talk:Leo Frank, and I just wanted to get a sanity check on the merits (or lack thereof) of the issue at hand. I don't know how much this is up your alley, but figured you'd at least be passingly familiar with the historical event; can you confirm or deny my impression that it is uncontroversial that the historical consensus is that Frank was wrongfully convicted? Thanks, Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 13:20, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

I don't much care about the merits. I've indeffed the user.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:43, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

"Now that's what I call, Ballin' the Jack!" ——Serial Number 54129 13:58, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

Serial, that sounds really obscene--in our English anyway. Drmies (talk) 17:00, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

Just an ole song, Drmies! :( ——Serial Number 54129 17:43, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

Wait. Obama sold his brother's soul to Satan? Well well, that explains a lot. Drmies (talk) 17:02, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

Bingo!

Very well said. That wording should be added to the PAG. -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 19:12, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

Bongo! S0091 (talk) 19:15, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

RM

Hey Drmies, how have you been? The RM on Bojana (river) has been open since February 23, but nobody has come to close or relist it. If time permits, can you see if there is anything wrong with how it was filed? Maybe it just happens that nobody has been interested in closing it, though I have never seen an RM stay open so long without being relisted. Ktrimi991 (talk) 01:38, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

• Well, it's not so easy. The count is 14-10 in favor of the move, and some of the opposes are clearly flawed; some seem to be deceptive, even. I think the discussion over Google hits goes nowhere (and someone showed their bad faith by talking about "a random Google search"), and the geographic arguments would carry the day for me, but articles on names are just not my forte--despite the now-ancient Tenedos case. So I'm a bit hesitant to close it, but I'll see if I can generate some interest. Drmies (talk) 14:39, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
  • OK, thanks. If you know someone who closes such RMs, I could ask them to take a look. Otherwise, if there is no issue with the filing procedure, it can wait until someone else takes a look. Cheers, Ktrimi991 (talk) 14:46, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
    • Oh, right, yes--I see nothing wrong with that. I posted on AN, maybe not completely appropriately, but I included a bribe. Drmies (talk) 14:49, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
      • Thanks! Much appreciated. On the quality of the comments, well, tbh, most of those who have !voted, either Oppose or Support, seem to have never read the naming guidelines. As may be expected in such topics, some "vote" just for the sake of "voting". Cheers, Ktrimi991 (talk) 14:57, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

Thoughts?

User DESERTSCHo0L20 just reverted an edit where I had reverted an IP sock of Hamish Ross. See this AN discussion. A quick look at this user's talk page history suggests a pattern of problematic editing. I am wondering if there might be a connection. Any thoughts? -Ad Orientem (talk) 03:37, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

• Ad Orientem, I wish I could help. I'm not that familiar with the technicalities of that troll or the troll itself, though I blocked a bunch of their socks, as I discovered later. I did have a look but for me it clarified nothing, and after comparing with what I saw on the SPI I cannot establish a connection. It is a weird edit, and the troll does have a habit of using accounts made up to almost a decade ago. They're operating from a range that's been blocked often enough but nothing in the log suggests a connection, and from what I saw the geolocation doesn't match up either--I assume the IP you pointed comes through VPN or something like that, but the troll operates from yet another continent, as far as I can tell. Oh, I do see now, in the CU log, that that range (which is pretty big) has been checked a time or two, or maybe two hundred, but not for that troll; Yamla and Oshwah checked it most recently, looking for other things. Maybe they have some insight? Sorry, Drmies (talk) 14:28, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

  Thanks for having a look. That edit, coupled with the account's history sent up red flags for me, but I want to be on firm ground before doing anything. -Ad Orientem (talk) 14:34, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

  No technical connection as far as I can see. Hamish socks stand out a mile away in the CU data. --Yamla (talk) 14:38, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

  Thank you Yamla; I appreciate your help and your expertise. Drmies (talk) 14:50, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

  Yamla, when I see user names like "From there up the hill" I get antsy. Drmies (talk) 15:08, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

  @Yamla Thanks for having a look. Looks like nothing actionable here. -Ad Orientem (talk) 15:40, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

Public administration

FYI, when you find an article on a academic field as bloated as that one with job titles and trivia about degree information, it is usually the work of Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/Hoaeter. MrOllie (talk) 21:31, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

• For real? I've blocked many of their socks. Thanks--and I appreciate your cleanup. I'm cleaning up a bit more. Drmies (talk) 21:36, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
  • At some point they branched out into academia. Strange, I know. MrOllie (talk) 21:38, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
    • I bet you they were an international student. Listen, MrOllie: earlier today, in the same PA article, I ran into this one again, who I blocked a while ago for all that BS on "notable academics", and I see now that the log says they were already a suspected Hoaeter sock. In the SPI I read that Schar School of Policy and Government is a new target of theirs--it's the George Mason connection, since the 129 IP kept pointing at Talk:George_Mason_University#Removal_of_Notable_faculty_and_alumni. Drmies (talk) 21:42, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
    • OK I'm sure you knew this all along already; I keep running into your edits. So they were being promotional in the George Mason article (that text on the "notable people" was indeed awful, and the overlinking is a dead giveaway), started this talk page...well whatever it was, and then went on a spree removing such sections from other articles, claiming it was the same thing. I didn't realize that at the time. Drmies (talk) 22:09, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

      I had missed the George Mason bit. I'm not terribly active in these areas, but I do take a look around when one of the IPs happens to show up on my watchlist. MrOllie (talk) 22:47, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

50.80.174.67

I am seriously worried about the edits of 50.80.174.67. To me, it seems large scale destruction with as excuse promotion and being unsourced. No response on the talk page. Request for giving sources instead of removal of large chunks of text unsuccessful. This is going out of hand. I can agree with some of it edits, but mentioning the name of a business is not the same as advertising. The Banner talk 09:07, 15 March 2024 (UTC)

• Hmm I don't know. I looked at a couple, only a couple, and agreed with them. Of course I looked at Heerhugowaard also (you know, I'm sure, that that's where my father came from), and I actually agree with the IP more than with you on that Yellow Book list of companies... Drmies (talk) 14:27, 15 March 2024 (UTC)

Thanks

Hey, thanks for catching the paid editing from Dan1992mou, I'm kinda slapping myself for missing that. I did some digging on the PR person's Linkedin page, and they're 100% the same person. Thanks again! Sincerely, Guessitsavis (she/they) (Talk) 18:06, 15 March 2024 (UTC)

• Well, Guessitsavis, I saw it because such paid accounts usually make a dozen useless edits and then post their draft. So I go through the edits, and it struck me that I saw the same name once or twice in those linked articles--and then in the draft. Don't blame yourself: you're working with good faith, and there was no reason for you to suspect anything. See also this section, User_talk:2601:19E:4180:6D50:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63#Louisa_Hawkins_Canby, and probably a few other sections on that IP's talk page. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 18:10, 15 March 2024 (UTC)

User:Dpugh500

Hi, I was wondering if something could be done with this user? He's recently removed content with legit sources from these pages[2] & [3]. His reasoning in the edit summaries being "Living people don't have DOB". Which makes absolutely no sense. I have since then reverted them. And he's been warned several times about adding and changing content without valid reasons[4].

I'd also like to mention that this very likely another account of this one[5]. Which has been blocked in 2022 for the same reasons. Kcj5062 (talk) 14:38, 17 March 2024 (UTC)

• No problem--thanks. Drmies (talk) 14:53, 17 March 2024 (UTC)
  • Thank you. One thing I forgot to mention is that I've come across this editor on several fandom wikis and he does the same stuff there. For some reason he wants actors(particularly voice actors) to be younger. At one point he was globally blocked. So he probably ended up irritating many admins. Kcj5062 (talk) 15:09, 17 March 2024 (UTC)
    • Some people really need to find another hobby, don't they. Drmies (talk) 21:18, 18 March 2024 (UTC)

We've got another...

User:Chilmihusada is a sock of several long-banned accounts, including Husada28, I suspect. Anwegmann (talk) 18:08, 19 March 2024 (UTC)

• Anwegmann, you're good at this. Drmies (talk) 18:31, 19 March 2024 (UTC)

  I do my best! Thanks for the help! Anwegmann (talk) 19:37, 19 March 2024 (UTC)

Thanks

I appreciate you stepping in re: Jack. He has also undone a good faith redirect twice. I am not going to restore it, as I am simply not here to fight him and will just let it go to avoid any drama. However, FYI anyway. Thank you very much, MC — MaxnaCarta  ( 💬 • 📝 ) 03:35, 20 March 2024 (UTC)

• Well he claims he's not edit warring. I'm not going to revert that either; I believe the community can take care of that. Drmies (talk) 16:56, 20 March 2024 (UTC)

103.25.249.243

103.25.249.243 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
May be a sockpuppet of 103.25.249.227, an IP that you blocked. First 3 numbers are the same and they edit the same pages in the same manner. //●→█2003 LN6█→●// 19:59, 21 March 2024 (UTC)

• Thanks. Not a sock or a meat--it's the same person. Drmies (talk) 20:27, 21 March 2024 (UTC)

Another possible sock...

I have a suspicion that User:Cavide96 is a sock of User:Naxsy and User:Andriyrussu. They have very similar editing habits, at times making identical edits that were previously reverted. Anwegmann (talk) 01:37, 21 March 2024 (UTC)

• Wizardman, is it time to rethink the whole Wikipedia:ANI 2.0 thing? ;) Drmies (talk) 03:01, 21 March 2024 (UTC)

There's a possibility that User talk:BunicaValea is also sock of all of the above. I don't know how I'm constantly stumbling on these, but they all edit in the exact same way. Anwegmann (talk) 18:45, 23 March 2024 (UTC)

DYK for Oakwood Cemetery (Montgomery, Alabama)

On 24 March 2024, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Oakwood Cemetery (Montgomery, Alabama), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Oakwood Cemetery contains the graves of Confederate soldiers and officers, English, Canadian, and French World War II pilots, and Hank Williams? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Oakwood Cemetery (Montgomery, Alabama). You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Oakwood Cemetery (Montgomery, Alabama)), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

—Ganesha811 (talk) 00:02, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

My problem

Drmies, my problem is that if I stop reverting and report, as I have done many times, then his version stays while I collect the evidence and the investigation is going on. Luckily I have found admins who now know him and are fast at investigating, but still it takes some time. And, once his sock is blocked, I can revert him... but then, in a second, his version will be back 'cause another sock of his will immediately appear. And if i do it all over, stop reverting and instead report, again his version stays while the process is ongoing. Effectively, many of his edits and versions stay, while my correction gets immediately reverted. For example...after some of the latest socks were blocked, I or other users corrected the Spain article, the genetic history of Italy article, the genetic history of the Iberian Peninsula article, the Romance languages article, the Battle of Lepanto article. But he just reverted with the new socks I mentioned at Talk:Trajan. And he will do it again when blocked. And so the current verion of these articles is his. I waste much more time than him at collecting evidence and reporting, while at the end of the day he acts not constrained by rules and is able to make much more edits than me with the many socks he creates. And (the irony!) I am the one who tries to be a good-faith user, while he is the permanently blocked one. But effectively he is the one not costrained. In this sense, sad for me to say it but it is the truh, he has been right to call me a fool who cannot stop him. Also, he checks every edit I do (so let me say "Hi" to Venezia/James who is reading this too) and often intervenes to change them later on. This is how I discovered some of his socks in previous years because I was like damn, so many of my edits are destroyed for no reason after a few hours or days. Then I discovered it was always him, chasing me. I let Venezia Friulano work for a lot of time on wikipedia eve I though i knew it was James Oredan. I was wrong because he did a lot of damage. Then he even said I WAS THE ONE chasing him (accusation in a mirror is his forte). So now I am basically on this anti-vandal crusade and now the most I do on wikipedia is to control this blocked user and I cannot do anything else. I do certain edits without logging in because I want to avoid edit wars by not revealing my identity, or I had to come at certain discussions and say "hey this is Barjimoa, but I forgot to log in". Not to to sound miserable, but to an extend I kinda am. The only consolatoon is that James/Venezia is also wasting his days, months and years like this, so we are both miserable. I don't know if there are some solutions for this? Barjimoa (talk)

• Well the question with each individual sock is, do you want to fill up the article history with reverts and reverts, or can it just sit for a day or two until the sock is blocked? What gives the sock greater pleasure? The reverts, no doubt. In general there's just very little we can do, though the article is now protected for a while. Drmies (talk) 20:57, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
• I found a few more. Drmies (talk) 21:18, 18 March 2024 (UTC
  • Drmies, also the following: Tyrefr, Flutoumb, Auxeron, FriedrichC82, Fleanot, Lucenselugo, and Unidosporasensio. I have also informed the admin Daniel Case who has lately blocked lots of these socks, so that you can work in two and it's less heavy.Barjimoa (talk) 07:25, 24 March 2024 (UTC)
    • I'm on it but please link the user/talk pages next time. Two of the names must have a typo, and the last one, I need to see a bit more evidence. Drmies (talk) 22:05, 24 March 2024 (UTC)
      • The last one was created to edit a number of pages (War of Jenkin's Ear, War of the Quadruple Alliance, Anglo-Spanish War, colonial empire) in which a number of IPs and blocked socks of James/Venezia were also active (such as User:Alburobizet) and pushed there some of his historic anti-English agenda that have been relentlessy dealt with and reverted by many other good-faith users. I have have dealt occasionally with this type of anti-English socks of James. Broadly speaking, what they typically do incude: inventing out of nowhere (or overstressing) Spanish victories against England; removing with little explanation (or downplaying) English victories against Spain; claiming the British empire was colonial/bad and smaller while the Spanish empire was non-colonial/good and bigger; changing figures accordingly (casualties or size of empire); personally attacking British users (in various ways: usually implying they are biased and racists; his typical accusation in a mirror etc etc); this is not the case but often times they have a British name and pretend to be British (already blocked: JamesOredan, SmithGraves), just like some of his anti-portuguese socks pretend to be Portuguese and some of his anti-Italian socks pretend to be Italian. And sorry you are right, it's User:Tyrefr and User:Floutomb.Barjimoa (talk) 04:59, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
      • Also, can you protect the Battle of Lepanto page given that he has been blocked and reverted but continues with other socks?Barjimoa (talk) 15:25, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

Just fyi

Just so you're aware of what's going on see here. Moxy🍁 00:45, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

• Does it ever stop? Drmies (talk) 00:58, 26 March 2024 (UTC)
  • I personally follow three shock puppets for years.... have not reported them because they've seem to have learned their lesson...as in they make positive contributions now. Sometimes it's better to just watch over them than it is to figure out who they are every new account. That said in this case and in other cases that I report it's usually because of behavioral or copyright issues. Moxy🍁 01:04, 26 March 2024 (UTC)
    • There's another one, reported earlier on this page, who just can't stop. Worse, there's a racist who pops up on a daily basis. The internet has been a great asset for racists and sexist. Drmies (talk) 01:08, 26 March 2024 (UTC)
      • Anonymity behind a PC has been great for voicing all points of view... be they logical or not. Freedom of speech is a great thing....but not so great for Wikipedia. Moxy🍁 01:20, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

Edit summaries?

Sorry, but what do you mean by be more explicit in edit summaries? Where did I go wrong. v/r - Seawolf35 ^T--C 15:08, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

• You reverted a bunch of their edits without explaining why. After checking, I can see why (unjustified warnings on IP talk pages), but we should still explain what we're doing. Thanks. BTW I indef-blocked the editor. If they come back in another guise, please let me know. Drmies (talk) 15:33, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

More involving Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Otuọcha

Morning. The IPs have been busy adding more suspected socks above. I already closed the first naming DanaMichal for insufficient evidence. Undaunted, they've now added Pfomma. In reviewing the first article they listed, Auddy Kelly, I thought that Otuọcha's edits ran contrary to Pfomma's, e.g., adding a notability tag to an article that Pfomma created, but then I got stuck on Pfomma's and another user's behavior, Jparrd, suspicious that those two are socks of each other. First, take a look at their userpages: besides comparing the similarities between the two current versions, also compare the current version of Pfomma's userpage with a previous version of Jparrd's. It's possible that Jparrd copied Pfomma's, but it is obviously the same as Pfomma's. Also, the article intersection is substantial. However, they appear to edit using different platforms and some of Jparrd's edits, I believe (I looked at them a while ago and forgot to keep the window up), are vandalism of Pfomma's creation. Before I take action at the SPI, though, I'd like to know if Jppard is a sock of Pfomma, assuming you're willing to run a check. Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:34, 22 March 2024 (UTC)

Drmies, it's fine if you're not willing to run a check...I'd just like to know one way or the other. Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 01:34, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

Shoot Bbb, did I miss a message? Sorry, I've been out of town. Drmies (talk) 01:35, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

Well that evidence was pretty overwhelming, esp. the user page and overlap, and I ran the check: confirmed and now blocked. Thanks Bbb, sorry for the delay. Drmies (talk) 01:40, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

I figured you might be away because you weren't here 24x7 as usual and that when you got back, you might have missed this one. I'm not used to your being away. Hope your trip was pleasure-related. I've taken the liberty of tagging the two accounts as confirmed. Thanks for your help.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:56, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

Pleasure? I forgot about that. This was a college visit with my oldest daughter. I feel like my life is falling apart and it's too late to repair. Drmies (talk) 16:09, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

You mean because your daughter is growing up and possibly leaving the nest...or something else? I worry about you sometimes.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:25, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

Need a friendly rollbacker

Hi, an editor Villkomoses has been converting fiction narratives from present to past tense.[6] They're probably new, they've done a lot of articles over the last few days, and are charging ahead quite fast. I'm not too fussed about this sort of thing, but noticed because they're introducing other grammatical errors and often leaving loads of present tense verbs in place, so the whole thing is a bit of a mess. I initially sent them a long message via talk-page asking them to be more careful, but I realise that the whole enterprise is fundamentally against MOS:PLOT. I've asked them to stop, but I think given the error-prone editing that it would probably be best to undo the whole lot. I'm asking you as a recently-active admin as I didn't want to humiliate a good-faith new editor with an ANI request. If there's somewhere more appropriate, please do let me know. Thanks! Elemimele (talk) 13:11, 31 March 2024 (UTC)

Reversions

Hello. Why are you deleting Presidential results for the cities of Boston and Somerville? The results shown are for the cities in said Presidential elections, they do not show the results for the state of Massachusetts. There is nothing wrong with showing the Presidential results for these cities. If there would be, we might as well delete the election results on every single US county page. ZackCarns (talk) 14:25, 31 March 2024 (UTC)

• Interesting that you post here, without simply pinging me from your talk page, where I already explained this. First, oh? Is that so? Because the link you gave isn't to anything specific--am I supposed to start searching in an archived portal? And search for what? Note also that the title in your citation template was "Massachusetts Election Statistics". Second, why should we include that data? Is there agreement on that in the Cities Wikiproject? Third, this is an FA. It wasn't in the last FA version, and I don't agree with its inclusion. If you want it in, you'll have to do a better job referencing it, and you'll have to find some consensus for it. Drmies (talk) 14:56, 31 March 2024 (UTC)
  • That source was already in there. Someone else referenced it, not myself. I can add the references if you want me to. Also, why not include the data? If we have a section about the politics of the city, we might as well include statistics from said city. ZackCarns (talk) 15:00, 31 March 2024 (UTC)
    • You used it, so the Pottery Barn Rule applies, I reckon. We can include all the statistics in the world from that city, but I see no reason why. Really, though, you should discuss this on the article talk page or on the Wikiproject page. Drmies (talk) 15:09, 31 March 2024 (UTC)
      • This seems to be a growing problem I wonder if we should have another talk like this one>>>>>Wikipedia talk:WikiProject United States/Archive 14#Federal election charts in State articles Moxy🍁 15:59, 31 March 2024 (UTC)
        • Thank you for that link and the comment, Moxy. It seems to be part of the continuous movement of making any article all-inclusive. ZackCarns, I hope you saw this comment and the discussion it linked to. For the record, I did not know about this, but it seemed reasonable to me that reasonable editors would have agreed already to keep that kind of material out. Drmies (talk) 17:20, 31 March 2024 (UTC)

          Alright. Understood. Truth be told, I've lost interest in the information anyway, as I've moved on to other Massachusetts-related elections stuff. ZackCarns (talk) 17:23, 31 March 2024 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – April 2024

News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2024).

Administrator changes

• Kbdank71
• Kosack
• NrDg
• TLSuda

Guideline and policy news

• An RfC is open to convert all current and future community discretionary sanctions to (community designated) contentious topics procedure.

Technical news

• The Toolforge Grid Engine services have been shut down after the final migration process from Grid Engine to Kubernetes. (T313405)

Arbitration

• An arbitration case has been opened to look into "the intersection of managing conflict of interest editing with the harassment (outing) policy".

Miscellaneous

• Editors are invited to sign up for The Core Contest, an initiative running from April 15 to May 31, which aims to improve vital and other core articles on Wikipedia.

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:47, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

Churchill

Re Racial views of Winston Churchill -- there is an entire section on Churchill and Jews--the material I deleted was not based on reliable secondary sources and does not fit in this section in the first place. It is based on one editor's reading a snippet from a primary source and his claim that Churchill " was promoting the antisemitic Jewish Bolshevism conspiracy theory. So I deleted it again. Rjensen

• OK, Rjensen, and I'm not going to argue against that, but that's very different from your initial edit summary. Anyway, thanks for the note. Drmies (talk) 14:36, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

Time to stop staring at socks, Doktoro!

• Berlagebrug (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
• Not Just Bikes. Amsterdam Closed This Bridge to Cars (but not bikes ofc). Event occurs at 2:52.
• Kruizinga, J. H. (1973). Amsterdam, stad der duizend bruggen (in Dutch). Strengholt. ISBN 9789060102855.

Your services have been called for. We need someone who can read Gallifreyan to get at the good sources. Do you know anyone? Uncle G (talk) 17:43, 31 March 2024 (UTC)

• I know someone who used to ride his bicycle across that bridge, every day, for years, to get to work. That person agrees that a park in the middle of that avenue, like in the old days, would make all of it much nicer. See the map at 5:10 or so? I love that color for the housing blocks, the graphics--that person has such a map in his foyer, from 1936, framed--four by four feet. I'll ask that person to get on it; he'll need to finish watching the video first, and have lunch, and a nap. BTW when you win that Powerball, that person would love to have a flat in that part of Zuid, the Rivierenbuurt. How gloriously beautiful that it; it fills my heart with joy and grief. Drmies (talk) 17:56, 31 March 2024 (UTC)
• Did you give a nod to User:T-Nod? Drmies (talk) 20:36, 31 March 2024 (UTC)
• Sorry Uncle--ran into a couple more socks, but progress is being made. Drmies (talk) 16:04, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

• I have not been there in decades. And even then, I was more familiar with the Nieuwe Amstelbrug in the Ceintuurbaan (my mother grew up in De Pijp). So I will not work on this article.The Banner talk 17:36, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

New legal article

I have finished enough of Consciousness of guilt (legal) to go public with it. Further development will be appreciated. -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 18:39, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

• Alright! I will have another look later, but so far I see a "thusly" in there, and I appreciate that. Good work! Drmies (talk) 18:51, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

Question for you

Is it normal that once a thread at WP:ANI is archived without action, for someone to remove it from archive and restore it? WCM_email 15:14, 3 April 2024 (UTC)

• Well it's not usual but it happens, yes. I would hope that it came with an explanation... Drmies (talk) 16:07, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
  • Yes, it appears someone wants me topic banned on anything to do with Tim Hunt. I spoke to you about my concerns there previously. A lot of accusations of misconduct, no actual evidence mind you. Fling enough mud about appears to be the tactic. WCM_email 16:22, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
    • Here in the US we fling spaghetti, apparently--it's crazy, I know. Drmies (talk) 16:28, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
    • OK, is it this section? I'm not going to get involved and read all that stuff--I read some of it earlier. User:JayBeeEll, you put that back--I assume (I hope) you gave an explanation in the thread (not just in the edit summary) of what you did and why you did it. Both of you, good luck with it. Drmies (talk) 16:32, 3 April 2024 (UTC)

      Hi Drmies, thanks for the ping; the number of different places in which WCM has carried this dispute is quite exhausting. I indeed left a note in the thread [7]. There is a concrete proposal on which 8 or 10 people have weighed in; in my opinion, it deserves closure (ideally in a way that will either (1) leave WCM feeling sufficiently satisfied that they do not continue to bring the same dispute to yet more pages, or (2) involve a topic-ban that forbids WCM from continuing the same dispute anywhere). I'm sorry that you're not willing to get involved (not that I blame you). JBL (talk) 17:23, 3 April 2024 (UTC)

      P.S. Aside from everything else, the whole "I'm going to put your name in a section-heading at ANI, but when it turns out most people see me as the problem, I'm going to begin leaving a series of whiny messages in lots of places about how sad it is that ANI is being weaponized" shtick is really not charming, even in a British accent. --JBL (talk) 17:45, 3 April 2024 (UTC)

Feel better hen? [8] A tip, if you stop wiki stalking my every move you'll not hear me laughing in British quite so loudly. WCM_email 22:08, 3 April 2024 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Draft:Mohammed Ali Tayem

Hello Drmies, and thanks for patrolling new pages! I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Draft:Mohammed Ali Tayem, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Not unambiguously promotional. You may wish to review the Criteria for Speedy Deletion before tagging further pages. Thank you. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 17:35, 3 April 2024 (UTC)

• Ivanvector, it's more promotional than most LinkedIn entries--and did you see the first "reference"? Drmies (talk) 19:07, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
  • I get what you're saying, and it definitely needs work, but the speedy criterion is for pages that serve no other purpose than to promote their subject; unambiguous advertising needing to be completely rewritten to serve as an article, not just that it has some promotional elements. The criterion goes on to say that a promotional draft on a notable topic (a member of Jordanian parliament is I think presumed notable) should be improved rather than deleted. It could be culled down to just what's notable and properly sourced about his political career; there wouldn't be much left but we have plenty of stubs on minor politicians.
  • On the other hand it's also created by a sockpuppet, I didn't notice at the time. G5? Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 19:30, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
    • Ivanvector, I think my "unambiguous advertising" line is drawn a bit differently from yours, haha. Moxy just tagged it as a resume--that's precisely the thing. Such articles, of which there are hundreds if not thousands, are created for pay and they're just advertisements that look like articles. It's the "looking like" that makes editors and admins not tag/delete them as spam, and I get that, I'm not quarreling. Yes, I got to the article because I was rolling up a sock farm, or a collection of sock farms; it's related to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Isaacrichard, and this one is a match with User:Olakunlepr--but there's so many. Drmies (talk) 00:39, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
      • Very interesting case..... whole bunch of these drafts are showing up in the normal watch list. Normally drafts don't show up in the generic watch list. Is there something they're doing differently to make them appear? Moxy🍁 00:44, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
        • Moxy I saw your edit summary, but I don't understand what you're talking about, sorry; I don't know what you mean with "watch list" here. Drmies (talk) 00:52, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
          • Sorry if I'm not clear they are popping up on the recent changes link on the side panel Moxy🍁 00:56, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
            • Right--shouldn't they be? That's where I find them--unless I'm sock hunting of course. Drmies (talk) 01:07, 4 April 2024 (UTC)

              Must be a setting I've changed recently.... never seen drafts there before. Moxy🍁 01:47, 4 April 2024 (UTC)

              I'd guess it's your settings. Drafts show in Special:RecentChanges unless you've set your filters to exclude them. You probably don't see them very often because it's a low-volume namespace, there aren't that many edits to show versus article or talk namespaces. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 12:48, 5 April 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Topic ban for Thmazing

As an anonymous editor, I felt attacked.— Usedtobecool ☎️ 01:54, 7 April 2024 (UTC)

• Thanks. Spellcheck did something, I saw it, but I didn't check it. Drmies (talk) 03:17, 7 April 2024 (UTC)

Jack Petocz

Drmies/admin page watchers, please semi-protect and maybe also do some sock checking? Thanks, Natureium (talk) 01:38, 7 April 2024 (UTC)

• NinjaRobotPirate, Yamla, I'd appreciate it if you had a look at the two accounts, the Lady and the Piano. You've looked there before, according to the log. Drmies (talk) 03:30, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
  • I don't believe I've checked these accounts before, but happy to provide a second opinion. I think the two specific accounts are  Unlikely, purely from a technical point of view. From a subjective view, I rather strongly suspect WP:MEAT. --Yamla (talk) 11:40, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
    • Thanks Yamla--I found you in the log, like I said, but I don't know what brought you there. Thanks for looking into it! Drmies (talk) 22:48, 7 April 2024 (UTC)

DYK for Cornelius N. Dorsette

On 8 April 2024, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Cornelius N. Dorsette, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that in 1890 Cornelius N. Dorsette, often referred to as the first African-American physician in Alabama, founded Hale Infirmary, a hospital for Black patients and staff in Montgomery? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Cornelius N. Dorsette. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Cornelius N. Dorsette), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

 — Amakuru (talk) 00:02, 8 April 2024 (UTC)

DYK for Hale Infirmary

On 8 April 2024, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Hale Infirmary, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that in 1890 Cornelius N. Dorsette, often referred to as the first African-American physician in Alabama, founded Hale Infirmary, a hospital for Black patients and staff in Montgomery? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Cornelius N. Dorsette. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Hale Infirmary), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

 — Amakuru (talk) 00:02, 8 April 2024 (UTC)

2607:fb91:900::/40

Hi, Drmies. Special:Contributions/2607:fb91:900::/40 has too much collateral to be hard blocked. Soft blocking with {{TMOblock}}, like the previous block, is more appropriate. — JJMC89 (T·C) 07:35, 3 April 2024 (UTC)

I can't see the CU evidence, but it does look like a truly astonishingly wide range to be hard blocked, especially without talk page access. I also know of one apparently (as far as I can see) constructive and innocent editor who appears to be caught by this block. JBW (talk) 13:49, 3 April 2024 (UTC)

• JBW, the CU evidence indicates an astonishing amount of socking/disruption (you should see the CU log), but you are welcome to adjust it. Having had it blocked for a few days may have saved us a bunch already. Drmies (talk) 14:24, 3 April 2024 (UTC)

Since you can see evidence that I can't, I certainly don't intend to quarrel with you. As I said, it looks like a wide range to be hard blocked, but I have had a good deal of experience over the years of blocks which look to me like one thing, but with fuller knowledge of the circumstances look like something else, so I don't intend to take any action without fuller knowledge; I merely raised my concerns with you to consider. JBW (talk) 15:42, 3 April 2024 (UTC)

JBW, I'm not quarreling, and I appreciate your note and your experience. If you say the block is too harsh, it's too harsh--yes there's stuff underneath, but it's not life and death; it's just gross and irritating and we can handle it. Please adjust the block as you see fit: I trust your judgment. Drmies (talk) 16:07, 3 April 2024 (UTC)

JBW, they came right back with a handful of accounts. Just saying. Drmies (talk) 22:35, 4 April 2024 (UTC)

Well, that just confirms what I said above,about not taking action without further knowledge. I've restored your version of the block, and I'll leave it to you, since you know more about it than I do. JBW (talk) 07:45, 5 April 2024 (UTC)

JBW, my "just saying" wasn't meant to be coy, like "gotcha"--sorry, maybe that was not the right choice of words. I really meant it quite literally. I'm a bit torn myself over this, and I hate feeling like I have to place hard blocks on long ranges. I can do with some guidance, and you and User:JJMC89 are offering it and I'm learning. I think you two have a lot more technical knowledge than I do, and whatever evidence comes from these glasses of mine shouldn't outweigh every other argument. Let's see if there's more complaints? And then reset the block they way you had it? Thanks, Drmies (talk) 13:36, 5 April 2024 (UTC)

I didn't think you were trying to be coy, or saying something like "gotcha", I thought you were just letting me know what the situation was. I have no idea whether I have more "technical knowledge" than you or not, but I find situations like this difficult. I believe I am more ready than most administrators to impose substantial blocks on IP ranges when it seems to me that there's unlikely to be much damage to innocent editors, but it becomes a more difficult judgement to make when significant collateral damage looks likely. I don't think there's any "right" answer: it's a question of making a personal judgement. JBW (talk) 16:26, 5 April 2024 (UTC)

I took a gander at this after being pointed here. As a rule of thumb, anything Tmobile aka 2607:fb90 or 2607:fb91 will always be too heavy to hard block. I see that the blocks on the /32s as a whole have expired or haven't been consistent. To prevent the disruptors from just going to another wiki and then coming back, and per our global stance on 2607:fb90/32, I have gone ahead and made 2607:fb91/32 a global block. I also reviewed the CU data, and there is not enough data to substantiate this as a hard block - falls very much below the threshold needed. I'm happy to provide details as to why in places where beans aren't as much of a concern. -- Amanda (she/her) 05:45, 9 April 2024 (UTC)

I saw that, Amanda--when I ran CU on the next sock. Drmies (talk) 12:25, 9 April 2024 (UTC)

I can't really parse the meaning behind that reply. If it's concern about a new sock already being created, then I'm happy to collab for ways we can shut that down, because new accounts aren't able to be created from that range now, which means something else is going on. Please feel free to reach out via email if that's a concern. -- Amanda (she/her) 12:44, 9 April 2024 (UTC)

I'm just a bit miffed that there's no stopping it. Drmies (talk) 14:23, 9 April 2024 (UTC)

Draft:John Paul (scientist)

You kindly restored an edited version of the Draft:John Paul (scientist) (removing copyright violations) I worked on it further, and the original editor User:Gcwcd then requested speedy deletion, (they had not actually edited that version of the draft) I should like to carry on working on it and move it to mainspace. Theroadislong (talk) 18:22, 9 April 2024 (UTC)

"not pursue this any further"

Do we give out boomerangs at XRV? The OP isn't coming off in a good light. (he understated) -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 01:54, 10 April 2024 (UTC)

• You know if you're coming by here, you might as well congratulate me on the grammar of that sentence! Drmies (talk) 02:09, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
• It was an immediate and straightforward NOT#3 close. I would have done it in the days before I noticed the close section says "uninvolved administrator". If that had been done when it should have been, if they then didn't drop it, they'd be in another venue where we didn't have to worry about whether a boomerang was appropriate. — Usedtobecool ☎️ 02:09, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
  • Well, the thing is that Bbb and I have exchanged recipes for chicken enchiladas via email, so I'm not uninvolved really. I mean, we're not really involved, it's not like we discussed steak or favorite books, but still. BTW, Bbb, Publix didn't have tomatillos, so I'll have to go shopping again tomorrow. Drmies (talk) 02:12, 10 April 2024 (UTC)

Courtesy ping regarding User:Saurav0804

Hi Drmies, I think the block should be indef here as I saw the sock notice in their userpage. I guess you might have missed it because of the existing block? Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 06:29, 10 April 2024 (UTC)

• Right--I think some default setting reset that time, but I later discovered the socking so I just not turned it into a CU block. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 13:03, 10 April 2024 (UTC)

Draft:Production of Ruby Gillman, Teenage Kraken

Hello, Drmies,

I'm not sure why you reverted the blanking of this draft by the page creator. We usually respect their wishes and see this as a signal that they would like the page deleted. Thanks for any additional information you can offer. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:35, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

• Because they had also pasted this into a sandbox and moved it into article space, and I deleted that--much easier than moving that back into draftspace, deleting the earlier one, merging the history. They did not want the page deleted. Drmies (talk) 00:43, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

User Imrubygillman

I think it's blindingly obvious this is a sock of Exteahans71. I've raised an SPI case. Barry Wom (talk) 14:20, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

• Yep, Barry Wom--which is why I saw reason enough to check, and was surprised to find nothing. I mean, I could look again and see if maybe they used the same phone or laptop from a different place, as much as I could see, but I think that that account is going to have a limited lifespan anyway. Drmies (talk) 14:54, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

Revert of Chicago P.D. season 11

Hi, I noticed you reverted this edit and left a Level 2 vandalism warning template on the IP editor's talk page. Would a {{subst:uw-spoiler}} or {{subst:uw-delete1}} template be more appropriate in this case? The edit summary does have quite some emotion to it, but let me know what you think. Thanks! CpX41 (talk) 01:15, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

• Hi--I didn't know we had a "spoiler" warning; that's a bit too granular for me, and I think it's the first time in a decade that I saw something like this. The language of the level-1 warning is inappropriate in most cases, and this person wasn't experimenting or needing help: they were purposely fucking around. Thanks! Drmies (talk) 12:14, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

  I agree that they are clearly WP:NOTHERE and likely it's a one-off case (especially since it's a IP editor) so either way, it's deal with. I just wanted to know your take on this since you are much more experienced that I am. Thanks, CpX41 (talk) 14:55, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

Draft:Jack Chambers (choreographer)

Hello, Drmies,

According to Draftify, we normally don't draftify articles that are more than 3-6 months old and this article was created in 2011. Do you think there are COI issues that have lasted that long? Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:31, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

• The only substantial edits are COI edits, in my opinion. What would you do? Drmies (talk) 20:49, 13 April 2024 (UTC)