User talk:Spicy/Archive 6

Archive 1

←

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

Archive 8

Invitation

Hello Spicy:

WikiProject Articles for creation is holding a two week long Backlog Drive!
The goal of this drive is to eliminate the backlog of unreviewed articles. The drive is running until 14 January 2023.

Barnstars will be given out as awards at the end of the drive.

There is a backlog of over 2500 articles, so start reviewing articles. We're looking forward to your help! ❯❯❯ Raydann^(Talk) 13:48, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

❯❯❯ Raydann^(Talk) 13:48, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Dzurdzuketi

• Spicy Hello, I hope all edits of puppeteers and vandals will be removed.--Товболатов (talk) 05:33, 8 January 2023 (UTC)

• @Товболатов: This post, your posts at the SPI, your posts to my Talk page, and your posts in other places re those editors whom you believe to be socks but were not blocked have become a disruptive crusade. If I see any more of this, you risk being blocked. Just stop.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:49, 8 January 2023 (UTC)

Adminship (again)

I read the comments you made last September: User talk:Spicy/Archive 5#Adminship. I disagree on several fronts. First, I do think it would be better to have more admin clerks. I haven't checked stats (and am too lazy and at the moment under the weather to do so), but I think most of the active clerks are non-admins. For example, I've made clerk requests, and sometimes it's CUs who respond after the request sits there for a while. Second, I'm pretty sure you were "experienced" enough at SPI back in September and, if not, I'm certain you are now. I find your clerking to be impressive, always have, and I think I've said so before, and I'm not prone to praising editors. Aside from SPI, I can't see why you wouldn't pass RfA based on your other activities. You've been here 3.5 years. You've racked up over 38K edits, some deleted. You have over 12K edits to article space. You've created articles, although there are always a few editors who insist on bringing articles to Good or Featured status or they won't (foolishly) support. Now it may be that the reason you're trying to find all these arguments against running is you simply don't want to be an admin, which I can perfectly understand. If that's the case, I apologize for pestering you.--Bbb23 (talk) 21:03, 8 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi Bbb23. Thanks for the kind words, and I hope you feel better soon. It's probably correct to say that I don't really want to be an admin, or rather that I don't want to go through RfA. From what I've seen, passing RfA seems to depend less on experience than on having an appealing personality and giving good answers to questions. I don't think I am a particularly likeable person and I hate writing about myself. I also haven't had as much time to contribute to Wikipedia recently as I have in the past, and I think it's unlikely that I would be very active as an admin. Please don't feel like you're pestering me, though. It's a compliment coming from someone whose work at SPI I respect. Spicy (talk) 02:56, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

Got it. I can certainly understand not wanting to through the RfA process. Mine was back in 2012, and even though things were supposedly easier back then, it wasn't fun. I had an attitude about sourcing that some thought was too aggressive. I'm not sure why you think you're not very likeable. In my experience, you tend to be a bit cool at SPI, but I think of that as being efficient, not unlikeable. Hating writing about yourself I can understand, but you would really be writing about you as a Wikipedian, not your RL self. Anyway, regardless of all my excellent arguments (smiling), I can see you don't want to put yourself through the process, at least not now. Maybe later.--Bbb23 (talk) 03:05, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

regarding suspected sock puppet of Kkm010

Hello @Spicy Sir i'm writing to you in regards to a very suspicious new account Rüdiger.Ingrid i'm quite confident that this user is a sock puppet of Kkmo10. Here is the evidence- Same as earlier blocked socks he shows interest in Indian politics [1] [2] [3] Similar to socks Mariam57 and Angelika789 makes the same edits to Economy of India [4] Similar to socks Mariam57, Angelika789, and other this user is obsessed with GDP number of Indian states like Maharastra, West Bengal, Gujarat here are some of the diffs [5] [6] [7] Sir i'm a relatively new to wikipedia thats why i'm approaching you with this case rather than editing the sock puppet investigation case page Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Kkm010/Archive i hope you look into this issue at your convenience. Thanks Vijaydanny (talk) 14:26, 11 January 2023 (UTC)

Hello user:Spicy Its bizarre editing of GDP figures and political party articles can be traced back to an earlier sock puppet. Similarly to User:Vijaydanny. I'm also new to Wikipedia, so I'm unfamiliar with many of the policies. You can check my edits to see where I have made changes as per the source. User: Vijaydanny is suddenly making outrageous claims and attempting to link me to another user simply because I edited an article about GDP figures and political parties. User:Vijaydanny is trying to remove poverty data from the "Economy of India," which I provided with reliable sources. You can check to see if I have made any mistakes. "Like Caesar's wife, you must be above suspicion." You can go ahead with the investigation if you have doubts in your mind. But please check my edits where I added information as per reliable sources, particularly the GDP figures and poverty data that User:Vijaydanny is trying to remove. Thanks--Rüdiger.Ingrid (talk) 16:05, 11 January 2023 (UTC)

There are instructions for filing an SPI here. My talk page isn't the appropriate place for this. Spicy (talk) 01:51, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

Spare a moment for Lung cancer

Hi there Spicy, long time no see! I've made the potentially ill-advised decision to update the old FA lung cancer, and I'll admit it's a doozie compared to the familiar backwaters of neglected tropical diseases. If I could bother you for a bit of time and effort, I'd very much appreciate if you could take a look through the first several sections – I've basically got a rough draft of the most clinical sections, up through Treatment – and let me know where you think more cleanup is merited. Also any opinions on images/tables (you can see the Diagnosis section is content-rich...) would be most welcome. It's taking me sufficiently long to get through updating the article, that I fear I'll forget the sources from the first part if I wait until the end to solicit feedback. Thanks in advance for whatever time you've got! And most importantly I hope you're staying well. Warm regards, Ajpolino (talk) 04:07, 18 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi Ajpolino, glad to see you around again. Unfortunately I've been busy lately and don't really have the time to work on large projects like this. I can take a look when I have time, but can't promise that I'll have anything helpful to add, sorry. Spicy (talk) 00:46, 19 January 2023 (UTC)

No worries, we all must spend our limited volunteer time as we see fit :) I'll be thankful for whatever time you can give. If you can't give any, don't sweat it. I'll see you around. I hope you're keeping well! Ajpolino (talk) 17:11, 19 January 2023 (UTC)

A goat for you!

Thank you for reviewing Are There Men on the Moon? so quickly! I greatly appreciate it!

WatkynBassett (talk) 20:33, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

Possible TruthTeller sock?

Hey Spicy! I noticed Kokomiku submitting a draft that had previously been the target of TruthTeller. Do you think this is another sock or should I wait until it's more obvious? I don't wanna start an SPI because if I'm wrong I don't wanna be seen as assuming bad faith. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 20:50, 3 February 2023 (UTC)

Hi Blaze Wolf. Your suspicion is reasonable, but I think this is actually a sock of a different master. See WP:Sockpuppet investigations/Condoritofan2012. Spicy (talk) 23:06, 3 February 2023 (UTC)

Alright sounds good. I saw that on the Condorito page but wasn't sure. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 23:20, 3 February 2023 (UTC)

Grounds for CU

Hrm... the WP:CHK policy states that sockpuppetry is a valid reason for requesting CU. I filed an SPI. What further reason would I need? - UtherSRG (talk) 18:25, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

Or reverse that - Why would someone make an SPI and not request CU? - UtherSRG (talk) 18:25, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

Hi UtherSRG. There are many reasons not to request CU - the most obvious situations are when a registered user is suspected of socking as an IP, as the privacy policy forbids using CU to publicly connect accounts and IPs, or when CU data for previous socks is unavailable because the retention period has expired. Beyond that, it's not really necessary to request CU unless you think it will tell you something you don't already know (i.e. you are not sure whether or not the account is a sock based on behaviour alone, or you have a credible reason to suspect that they may be operating other accounts). This partly has to do with conservation of resources - there are hundreds of admins who are capable of blocking a sock, but only a handful of CUs who are active at SPI. Furthermore, every check has a small but present risk of violating an innocent person's privacy, so (IMO) it's best to minimize checking when it's not strictly necessary. Let's say, for instance, a CU checks a suspected sock and finds that they are using an IP registered to a business. They run a check on that IP to see if there are other socks on it. The check brings up an established user who is obviously not a sock. Now the CU knows where that user works. While we trust functionaries to be able to handle such information appropriately, it's still best to try to minimize the exposure of editors' PII. The pages Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/SPI/Guide_to_filing_cases#Whether_or_not_to_request_CheckUser_in_a_case and User:Blablubbs/How to file a good SPI provide some more guidance on this. Spicy (talk) 18:44, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

I'll read those, but I'm about to go offline for a few hours. Besides my say-so, on what basis did you block on the SPI I filed? As an admin, I could have just blocked and marked them as a sock, but without CU I have no better info than just their behavior I witnessed. - UtherSRG (talk) 18:52, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

I didn't block the account (I'm not an admin, just a SPI clerk) - Jimfbleak did, apparently independently of the SPI, and I agree with his call. A new account showing up to recreate a spam article immediately after the master was blocked is very strong evidence of socking or WP:MEAT, such that CU is not required to make the connection. Actually, this brings to mind another reason why requesting CU is not always desirable. In spam/UPE situations, a client will often seek out a different person to publish the article after the initial attempt fails. In this case CU will provide no useful information and may even be counterproductive as the accounts will be technically unrelated. However, this is still meatpuppetry, and it's still blockable. Spicy (talk) 19:12, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

UtherSRG I block sock accounts on a pretty well daily basis, and hardly ever go to SPI or CU. If shortly after an article is deleted, a very similar version is created from a new account, that's enough for me. Obviously, I need to me an admin to do that, but it avoids the need for anyone else to check Jimfbleak - talk to me? 06:41, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

Sockpuppet Investigation

There are three sockpuppet investigation which are opened. 1: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Whybob19 2: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Hilola Jurakulova 3: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Panpanchik

The first investigation is by me in which I wrote "All first four accounts are created in interval of 2-3 hours at the same day and I think that they all are about same user because they all regularly create unsourced and one sentence articles about towns and villages in Uzbekistan.", second is by User:Bbb23 in which he wrote "Generally, this involves the creation of drafts/articles on Uzbekistani topics, mostly places and mosques. There are a slew of users who create the drafts, and then usually the master or Dilshod's project move the drafts to article space. The master and Dilshod's project also create pages on their own, and sometimes the other users also create pages directly into article space on their own. Occasionally, the master and Dilshod's project edit the same pages. With the exception of the master, all of the accounts were created at roughly the same time. I'm requesting a check to confirm and also to look for other accounts. I found most of the suspected socks from following the history of the pages in the masters and Dilshod's project's history, but I don't think I found all of them." and third is by User:Onel5969 in which he wrote "Okay, not sure exactly what this is, but these 6 editors, 4 of them created in the last day or two, went on a stub-spree today. Each of them created about 20+ articles on Uzbekistan subjects, using the exact same sourcing and framework. Not sure if its the same editor or not, but I thought perhaps it might be worth taking a look at. I'll provide a link to one article from each of them, but as I said, if you look at their contributions, each did quite a few. Here are the articles: To'xtaboyvachcha Mosque, Tillasheykh mosque, [Qambarboyvachcha uy Mosque]], Chor Xaros Mosque (although that one's a little bit different, but same subject matter from a recently created account, but it's their only creation today), Uzun Hovuz Mosque, and Tinchob Mosque." and the similarity of these all three investigation is that the suspected users of this investigation creates articles related to Uzbekistan which means that this all investigations is about one subject and should be merged.

I think that this all three investigations should be merged with Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Whybob19 since this investigation was made first. I request you for merging it. ​​​​​​​𝐋𝐨𝐫𝐝𝐕𝐨𝐥𝐝𝐞𝐦𝐨𝐫𝐭𝟕𝟐𝟖🧙‍♂️^{Let's Talk !} 12:09, 26 February 2023 (UTC)

Spicy, I'm not going to comment on any of this at the SPIs unless you wish me to. I have confidence in your ability to sort out this mess. I'll just briefly vent about the way this "edit-a-thon" was organized and managed. First, Artemev's brief response, indicated that this project is an effort to improve the Uzbekistani wiki, not en.wiki. Second, if they were going to experiment on en.wiki, they should have kept everything in draft space, and only experienced reviewers at AFC should have been able to move pages to article space. Third, given how many drafts they created, they should have announced the edit-a-thon so that reviewers (and other editors) would be prepared for the spike in draft creation. Fourth, each participant should have disclosed their participation on their userpage. Instead, they have created a mess that we have to address, and nothing will prevent this from happening again. I've seen it too often.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:15, 26 February 2023 (UTC)

You are absolutely right. They have to inform in their userpages and have to publish their drafts in Draftspace not in Mainspace. ​​​​​​​𝐋𝐨𝐫𝐝𝐕𝐨𝐥𝐝𝐞𝐦𝐨𝐫𝐭𝟕𝟐𝟖🧙‍♂️^{Let's Talk !} 15:21, 26 February 2023 (UTC)

Bbb23, I more or less agree with your thoughts on this and other editathons (#WPWP, the one that had newbies add references, etc..). It seems like many of these projects are organized by people who have minimal experience editing the English Wikipedia - if you go to the meta page for this editathon and look at the organizers, only one of them is extended confirmed, and they only became EC yesterday by moving a bunch of these drafts to mainspace. It's a recipe for failure, and unfair to the project that has to deal with mass addition of poor-quality content as well as to the editathon participants, who deserve better guidance than they get. If I were less honest I would say nothing and let them all get blocked as socks, which would probably be more effective at dealing with the disruption than trying to engage the organizers. Oh well. Spicy (talk) 19:42, 26 February 2023 (UTC)

Punishing the participants doesn't seem fair, and punishing the organizers would be an academic exercise. It would be best to have a set of enforceable rules for these things, and if the rules are not followed, then we can take administrative action. I wouldn't expect that anytime soon, if ever. I thought your merging and closure was good.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:22, 26 February 2023 (UTC)

RFA?

I know it's been suggested before, but I urge you to run at RFA. Giving you the tools would be beneficial even if all you did was block editors at SPI instead of requesting admin assistance. I'd nominate you if asked, but I suspect you have a surfeit of offers already. Best, Vanamonde (Talk) 15:32, 17 March 2023 (UTC)

We've been asking demanding begging for years now... Mz7 (talk) 17:29, 17 March 2023 (UTC)

I knew that was likely the case, but I figured another voice in the chorus couldn't hurt... Vanamonde (Talk) 17:43, 17 March 2023 (UTC)

Hi, Spicy, I strongly recommend you to become a sysop since there is a lot of lagging on SPI cases. If you are a sysop, a lot of case can be handled rapidly. Kind regards -Lemonaka‎ 23:23, 24 March 2023 (UTC)

The backlog at SPI isn't because no one is around to push the block button. Admin requests tend to be dealt with quickly. The issue is that many cases are complex or are reported in a confusing manner, which takes time for clerks and admins to sort out. Throwing more admins at it won't solve the problem. Spicy (talk) 13:36, 25 March 2023 (UTC)

Perhaps, but it's so much fun to throw admins around.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:55, 25 March 2023 (UTC)

It is until it's not. I threw my back out and had to apply for workman's comp. Spicy (talk) 17:01, 25 March 2023 (UTC)

I don't see how that's possible considering that you're not an admin. I hope your back is better now. How'd it happen? Too much heavy lifting at SPI?--Bbb23 (talk) 17:13, 25 March 2023 (UTC)

I thought that's what non-admin clerks were supposed to do. You pick up the admins and throw them at the socks, knocking them down like bowling pins. The problem is that some of the admins are too heavy. I think they should have weight limits, like jockeys. Spicy (talk) 17:27, 25 March 2023 (UTC)

You're not an admin? Hmm, could have fooled me. Drmies (talk) 17:14, 25 March 2023 (UTC)

It's the age-old RfA comment: "I thought they were an admin already". We should have de facto admins, you know like de facto community bans: if enough editors think someone is an admin, the crats must give them the bits. Oh, and if the editor doesn't like it, who cares? They can just not use the tools in protest. But at least we can throw them around.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:23, 25 March 2023 (UTC)

TBH, per previous interaction, I have enough faith in your judgement, kindness and responsibilities. It's just a tool, not a burden... Anyway, I still respect your choice. -Lemonaka‎ 23:32, 25 March 2023 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
		For noticing that AI article creator. Good catch! --Licks-rocks (talk) 09:42, 30 March 2023 (UTC)

Thanks :) Spicy (talk) 16:16, 30 March 2023 (UTC)

seconded - really glad you spotted these! Andrew Gray (talk) 17:45, 1 April 2023 (UTC)

Congratulations

It’s official I hear, time to update your edit notice. Zippybonzo | Talk (he|him) 10:30, 8 April 2023 (UTC)

Done :) Spicy (talk) 11:06, 8 April 2023 (UTC)

Congratulation ❤

Proud moment for us. @Spicy Many many congratulation for achieving what you deserve. NP83 (talk) 11:43, 8 April 2023 (UTC)

Uncongratulations

It's traditional to be all happy for newly minted admins, but I'm going to say instead should have happened 3 years ago. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 15:52, 9 April 2023 (UTC)

I just did it to stop all the nagging. But now people are nagging me about CUOS ): Spicy (talk) 16:42, 9 April 2023 (UTC)

Congratulations

Hey - I don't really consider this to be jumping the gun, given where the numbers are right now. The numbers don't lie: 200+ supports and no opposes, that is a monumental sign of how much faith the community has in you. The fact that you had the chutzpah to do a self-nom on 1 April, and come out smelling of summer roses - well played sir. Now, go block your own socks at SPI ;) Girth Summit _(blether) 21:32, 7 April 2023 (UTC)

Congrats from me too. I have closed your RFA as successful, one of the most successful of all time. Someone will doubtless bring the Tshirt at any moment, wear it with pride, you've earned it. If you ever get bored scrabbling down the back of the sofa for the right block message, some kind person put the code for a really nifty dropdown menu into my monobook. ϢereSpielChequers 10:38, 8 April 2023 (UTC)

Enjoy the extra buttons Cabayi (talk) 10:46, 8 April 2023 (UTC)

Thanks everyone. Well, it didn't actually end up being unopposed, but nothing can be perfect. There are so many new buttons... I've been pressing some of them. The admin version of SPIhelper is a little intimidating. Grateful to everyone for their support. Spicy (talk) 11:06, 8 April 2023 (UTC)

Congrats! Dreamy Jazz ^{talk to me | my contributions} 12:30, 8 April 2023 (UTC)

Congrats! :) And I second what GS said! firefly ( t · c ) 12:40, 8 April 2023 (UTC)

Congratulations @Spicy! Wear it proud. - 🔥𝑰𝒍𝒍𝒖𝒔𝒊𝒐𝒏 𝑭𝒍𝒂𝒎𝒆 (𝒕𝒂𝒍𝒌)🔥 13:11, 8 April 2023 (UTC)

Congratulations on the adminship! 192.76.8.84 (talk) 13:49, 8 April 2023 (UTC)

Thanks, Oxford. If I remember correctly, you once said that the only reason you'd consider creating an account is so that you could RfA. I'm just saying... I would support. Spicy (talk)

Definitely not the only reason! Tamzin suggested I should create an account a while back in a conversation, I said I'd consider it but I didn't end up making one at the time. I nearly made an account a few months ago just to turn off this godawful redesign - I find this new skin a pain to use for anything more complex than reading. To be honest I'm not sure if I'd ever run for adminship, I don't think I'd have any chance of passing. 192.76.8.84 (talk) 14:19, 8 April 2023 (UTC)

I didn't think I'd pass either, but I was wrong. Maybe you should wait a while after you create your account to RfA, though. ;) I switched back to the old skin immediately - I still find it jarring whenever I go to another project and see New Vector. I liked that Wikipedia looked like it was still stuck in 2006. It added character. Spicy (talk) 18:33, 8 April 2023 (UTC)

You can use Special:GlobalPreferences to change your default skin across all Wikimedia projects.

I don't actually mind the idea of making the site look more modern, my main complaint about the new skin is that they've sacrificed usability to make it look "minimalist" and "clean" and more like a mobile site. Everything more complex than searching and scrolling through an article is hidden behind poorly labelled, poorly sorted buttons and dropdowns. I can't see why everything needs to be hidden behind extra clicks or what organisation scheme they were going for (e.g. why are the links to other projects in the "tools" menu, but the notice about links to different languages in the hamburger menu? What is the point of putting the logged out "contributions" and "talk" links behind an ... dropdown, it was two small links and there's a ton of whitespace to the side of the search box!).

Anyway, I'm going to stop complaining about vector 2022 now, enjoy the new tools, try not to break anything! 192.76.8.84 (talk) 17:14, 9 April 2023 (UTC)

A (rather underinclusive) list of specialized extensions for using other skins is available at Wikipedia:Vector 2022#Without an account, and more general extensions like stylus and fastforward or of course tampermonkey and greasemonkey can accomplish the same thing. You could also write up your own applet without too much difficulty since appending useskin=Foo is all that's really needed example.

Arguably this is counter to the purpose of experiencing Wikipedia the same way most people do, but my preference for monobook is just too strong. If I recall right they're demoing some tools over the beta cluster to allow people to set preferences without accounts, but it'll probably be years before that sees the light of day, if ever. 74.73.224.126 (talk) 19:12, 8 April 2023 (UTC)

Thanks, I might give one of those options a try. 192.76.8.84 (talk) 17:15, 9 April 2023 (UTC)

• I'm so glad the begging worked! I would tell you to get to work... but looking at WP:SPI, it looks like I don't need to! Please don't hesitate to reach out to me if you ever have questions or need a second opinion on anything. Mz7 (talk) 22:11, 8 April 2023 (UTC)
  • Congratulations and best wishes. Donner60 (talk) 00:55, 9 April 2023 (UTC)

    Congratulations, Spicy! Hehe, your nomination on April Fool's... Tails Wx 12:22, 9 April 2023 (UTC)

  I was never in any doubt about this, but here to congratulate anyway. Let's hope your (comparatively) trouble-free ride will encourage others to run that gauntlet. (BTW you were literally seconds ahead of me here!) Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 20:06, 9 April 2023 (UTC)

Thank you!

Thank you for imposing the block on User:Cryptothecary356. He or she has been posting content on my talk page (User talk:Teblick#List of Articles About Actors), and I did not know what to do about it. Am I allowed to delete that section from my talk page? Eddie Blick (talk) 20:27, 9 April 2023 (UTC)

Hi Teblick, you're certainly allowed to delete their posts from your talk page. In general you're allowed to remove almost anything from your talk page - see WP:OWNTALK. Spicy (talk) 20:34, 9 April 2023 (UTC)

Thanks again! I will do so. I appreciate your help. Eddie Blick (talk) 20:36, 9 April 2023 (UTC)

Passing the baton

A baton for you!

As per tradition (since Tamzin began it for DanCherek's RfA), I am happy to pass this admin baton to you, as it was passed to me by ComplexRational in March. Congratulations becoming the English Wikipedia's newest administrator! There's going to be a lot of new buttons and options and things to read and to test out and many offers of congratulations and it's a lot to take in, but I and others are always more than happy to help both on-wiki and on Discord, so please reach out as often as you'd like. Remember when mopping that it's best to use overlapping figure eights. :) Aoidh (talk) 14:12, 8 April 2023 (UTC)

That's lovely. Hopefully I'll remember to carry on the tradition. Spicy (talk) 18:33, 8 April 2023 (UTC)

OK, so purely in the interests of historical accuracy (ahem), I draw your attention to this version of ToBeFree's talk page (see the section titled '(Slightly early) congratulations!', and this version of EvergreenFir's talk. The tradition briefly died out after that, and I'm delighted that Tamzin revived it. I just think that the true history of this time-honoured, ancient tradition needs to be understood by the whippersnappers. Cheers all Girth Summit _(blether) 22:03, 9 April 2023 (UTC)

Hey, this is still a thing? Thanks Tamzin, DanCherek, ComplexRational and Aoidh. Girth Summit, thanks for the ping and the note. And congratulations to Spicy of course. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 22:24, 9 April 2023 (UTC)

Congrats!

Congratulations on adminship (I’m a bit late though). Honestly your RfA is in my opinion a model RfA :) Vamsi20 (talk) 23:25, 9 April 2023 (UTC)

G.O.A.T

Congrats on becoming a bureaucrat/sysop/admin.

The Corvette ZR1 (talk) 16:32, 10 April 2023 (UTC)

Thanks

It was great to see a new admin name dealing with the Brogo13 SPI. New admins are rare enough that's it's always cheering to see them picking up some of the work. And congratulations on the RfA, of course. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 13:42, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Admin's Barnstar
	Congratulations on your judgement, kind and bravery. -Lemonaka‎ 01:10, 10 April 2023 (UTC)

Happy admin-ing, Spicy!! TheSandDoctor ^Talk 04:22, 12 April 2023 (UTC)

Quick note on JR Bareis

Thanks for your edits to JR Bareis.

I couldn't have figured that this was previously a redirect. Thanks! :) Aasim - Herrscher of Wikis ❄️ 18:40, 12 April 2023 (UTC)

IP range localizing to Vietnam that you partially blocked

Arising from a section at AN/I about bot-like archiving of talk pages, you blocked the range 2402:800:6000:0:0:0:0:0/38 from talk for disruptive editing and CIR. I've just reverted copyvio at NASCAR All-Star Race by 2402:800:61C5:311E:6D88:FE0E:B3D:16. I'd normally drop a template on the IP's talk page (with a plain English note), but that seems futile in the case of these newer IP addresses, and the AN/I section is closed. So could I ask you or any talk page watchers to keep an eye on the range in case there is more copyvio from it? Yngvadottir (talk) 23:39, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

Hi Yngvadottir. Thanks for letting me know about this - I've revdeleted the copyvio. It's a big range (hence why I only partially blocked it) and I'm fairly sure that the editor who added the copyvio is not the same as the editor who was disruptively editing talk page archives. (Based on the contributions of their IPv4 address, that editor's contributions to mainspace seemed to consist mostly of updating Rotten Tomatoes scores, which at least is a somewhat useful activity.) If you look at the contributions of any large IP range, you will probably see a lot of vandalism, spam, copyvio, etc., as well as some good edits. It can be hard to strike a balance between managing the disruption inherent in being "the free encyclopedia that anyone can edit" while still allowing well-intentioned IP users to make constructive contributions. I'm not hot on the idea of fully blocking the /38 at this time (although I note it has been blocked in the past), but I'll keep an eye out for copyvios and general disruption in the future. Spicy (talk) 00:06, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

Blocking user

I highly suggest to indefinitely block User:173.73.180.124, as they’ve been relentlessly harassing me, many other users and our edits, done numerous amounts of edit wars, and have also created various sock-puppet accounts here. Only 60 hours is nothing at all. Fdom5997 (talk) 20:59, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

Hi Fdom5997 - we don't indefinitely block IP addresses as they are often dynamically assigned and change from day to day. I'll keep an eye on the IP, though, and block them for a longer period of time if disruption resumes after the current block. Spicy (talk) 21:03, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

LTA on Lily Collins

On RPP/I I have come across user account Doeren, who made the requests to semi-protect the pages. I looked at the logs of the account and it appears it was created a few minutes ago just to request protection on the pages targeted by the LTA, so it seems a bit sus to me. I'm not really requesting for it to be blocked, rather noting it down here, there have been quite a number of LTA incidents I've come across in the past, where the abuser is apparently trying to gain recognition by purposefully vandalising pages with multiple IPs and accounts to get them protected on purpose. I guess there's nothing better to do than to protect the pages in these cases? Just tryna think of how to deny recognition to the max here. — AP 499D25 (talk) 03:39, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

Your suspicions are correct, and I've blocked the account - this is a very typical MO for that vandal. I didn't semi-protect the page myself, but I see that someone else has, which is probably reasonable. It's hard to understand what motivates some people. Spicy (talk) 04:35, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

After you closed Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Mza highered and warned each account ...

There have been two posts, one on each of the "students" by an IP editor, 71.250.211.160 (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · proxy check · block user · block log · cross-wiki contribs · CheckUser (log)).

At User talk:Mza highered they suggest they are awbwmtl - Hi i am awbwmtl. That's my username. I am new to creating content and apologize if I accidentally created a second account. Can you help me sort it out?.

At User talk:AwbwMtl they state the they are not mza highered - I am not mza highered. That's my colleague who started the content in her sandbox(? I think that's the right terminology) but then I did a lot of the editing. Is that alright?

I'm obviously finding a disconnect there. Would you mind taking a further look, please? 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 19:49, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

I've commented there. I'm still not convinced that this is something nefarious as opposed to unfamiliarity with how Wikipedia works. Spicy (talk) 20:18, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

I am also feeling charitable; also finding it somewhat surreal that the one is not the other but the other is the one. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 20:38, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

LTA

Hello, and thanks for the block, please see also contributions of User:Sofya Gerstle. Uncle Spock (talk) 11:34, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

Vandalisms

Hey, thanks for blocking User:Min-Seo O'Connor. It seems the same is happening with User:Sofya Gerstle, I've mentioned it here. Seems to be another autoreverter. - Therealscorp1an (talk) 11:38, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

Oh, I've just seen that you've done that too. Thanks. - Therealscorp1an (talk) 11:39, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

No problem. I'm going to bed now so if you see more of these just report them to AIV. Spicy (talk) 11:40, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

Yep, thanks. - Therealscorp1an (talk) 11:42, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for page protection/Increase

Just letting you know that that User:209.27.55.193 has an made an bogus page protection request for a second time [8] right after another admin (User:Bbb23) has removed the first request from User:209.27.55.193 has made. Untamed1910 (talk) 22:05, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

I'm not sure why you'd notify me about this, but it looks like another admin has already declined the request. Spicy (talk) 22:24, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

Just curious

Heya Spicy! I was snooping around WP:RfA for fun today and read over your self-nomination, contributions, etc. Congratulations on your adminship. I thought it was really great how you brought CBC to FA status (as well as worked heavily on other routinely-ordered blood tests and disease articles).

That said, I have to ask: what do you do in the medical field (assuming you are in it)? I'm hoping to be a medical student myself next year (God willing) and I'd love to contribute to WikiProject Medicine sometime in medical school or in the years thereafter. But I need to surmount this monstrosity first before doing so...

Anyways, sorry if I'm putting you on the spot or if you aren't comfortable answering, but I think that seeing medical personnel as editors on Wikipedia (much less admins!) is personally very uplifting to me. Thanks — That Coptic Guy^{ping me!} (talk) (contribs) 05:34, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Request to have a look at my ANI

Hello. I have chosen you randomly to ask an admin to have a look at this ANI I opened 3 days ago. Veverve (talk) 15:10, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

I'm not familiar with this dispute and don't think I have anything to add. Spicy (talk) 19:48, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Sorry

Wrong person....right person already blocked. Moxy- 00:57, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

New Page Patrol – May 2023 Backlog Drive

New Page Patrol | May 2023 Backlog Drive
On 1 May, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of redirects patrolled and for maintaining a streak throughout the drive. Article patrolling is not part of the drive. Sign up here! There is a possibility that the drive may not run if there are <20 registered participants. Participants will be notified if this is the case.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:12, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppet

Hello there, I noticed your were the admin involved in blocking User:Schroeded as a suspected sockpuppet of User:Brogo13. It appears as though, they have used another account (User:Bophubm) and seems to be doing very similar edits/changes to TFAs (current or upcoming) among other things. I would be happy to raise an investigation, but since it appears that this is a perrenial issue, thought I'd notify you, if there's a likely chance of intervening/blocking, or perhaps keep an eye on the user's edits/contributions. Cheers. Pseud 14 (talk) 15:39, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

Thanks, I've blocked the account. These are usually pretty obvious so I don't mind if you report them on my talk page, but if you're ever unsure, you can file a report at SPI and request CU. Spicy (talk) 15:43, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for your swift action, very much appreciated. Noted on the above. Cheers. Pseud 14 (talk) 15:46, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

Entuziazm is back...

Hi, and sorry to trouble you, but since you were the last to attend to the case I'm skipping the SPI to report this guy once more. He's back on the 199.119.233.226 IP, editing his usual pages (T-34, hetmanate, Kulik [the surname, since the Marshal is protected], etc.). I would appreciate it if you could block that IP and protect a few of the pages. Ostalgia (talk) 13:15, 25 April 2023 (UTC)

I've implemented some partial blocks and it looks like Yamla also did a short block of their range. Spicy (talk) 14:17, 25 April 2023 (UTC)

Yeah, Yamla also contacted me regarding their behaviour. It seems like he tried to get either you or Yamla to block me. Icing on the cake, I guess! Thank you for the help. Ostalgia (talk) 15:01, 25 April 2023 (UTC)

User:Vandman84

You may want to change the block to a sockpuppetry block because of the username. - 🔥𝑰𝒍𝒍𝒖𝒔𝒊𝒐𝒏 𝑭𝒍𝒂𝒎𝒆 (𝒕𝒂𝒍𝒌)🔥 23:22, 25 April 2023 (UTC)

See WP:DENY. Spicy (talk) 23:25, 25 April 2023 (UTC)

What does denying vandals recognition have to do with changing a block reason? - 🔥𝑰𝒍𝒍𝒖𝒔𝒊𝒐𝒏 𝑭𝒍𝒂𝒎𝒆 (𝒕𝒂𝒍𝒌)🔥 23:27, 25 April 2023 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) Not everything that is socking needs to be explicitly recognised as "socking", especially not when the socker in question seems to be focused in part on driving up their own sock count high score. Given that they quite clearly aren't HERE, I don't think there's anything to be gained from changing the block reason. --Blablubbs (talk) 14:07, 26 April 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Hanshingling

Hi. Could you please take a look at this? Something obviously went wrong when I attempted to file the SPI report. Don't want to screw something up by trying to fix it. Thanks. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 15:21, 26 April 2023 (UTC)

Fixed. You were just missing a bracket :) Spicy (talk) 15:24, 26 April 2023 (UTC)

Thank you. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 17:44, 26 April 2023 (UTC)

Mail!

Hello, Spicy. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

--bonadea contributions talk 13:53, 28 April 2023 (UTC)

Replied :) Spicy (talk) 15:25, 28 April 2023 (UTC)

Bonadea just giving you a friendly poke as it's been a few days without a response. No pressure if you're busy. Just wanted to make sure my email didn't end up in the spam bin. Spicy (talk) 22:46, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

On revdel and oversight

Thanks for your very helpful email message. TJRC (talk) 01:51, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

SPI

I'm using a new device which makes it pretty much impossible for me to make a comparison, but from what I've seen, I'm rather suspicious of Chocobiscuits. Could this be the third reincarnation of Tbf69? – ².O.^Boxing 09:38, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

Hmm, the overlap is pretty suspicious, and I see a few other behavioural similarities, but I don't think it's obvious enough to block without CU. I'd encourage you to file a SPI (unless one of the CUs who watch my talk page gets to it first)... Spicy (talk) 15:36, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

 Confirmed.-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 17:44, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

Thanks. I don't know why this is, but in my experience creating one's userpage with nothing but an image on it [9] is a surefire sign of a sock. Spicy (talk) 18:19, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

 Confirmed.-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 18:25, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

New Ankara 19 Mayıs Stadium

Hello. I created this redirect. However, later this article was created in the Turkish Wikipedia. So the direction of the new ankara stadium is wrong. A new item can be opened with this name. On the Turkish Wikipedia: https://tr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yeni_Ankara_19_May%C4%B1s_Stadyumu EfeD25 (talk) 18:29, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

@Spicy If you do not understand the subject, can you do what is necessary. This page should be linked here. https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q114098948 EfeD25 (talk) 18:36, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

EfeD25, pages can only be deleted through WP:CSD under certain circumstances and that is not one of them. You can nominate the redirect at WP:RFD, however. Spicy (talk)

A strange case?

Hi, Spicy, I believe that your great intelligence can solve this case. Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/AHTaxCrediter, editing behaviours support that some of these users were using sockpuppets, but technical evidence seemed to be unrelated. In such situation, which one is more critical? The technical one or behaviours? -Lemonaka‎ 09:45, 12 May 2023 (UTC)

Confirmed user

Hi Spicy. I'm not seeing where this confirmation came from, so I thought I'd just ask if you wanted to review it. Thanks. Also just a tip while I'm here ... when adding or removing rights, due to the nature of the log entry, it often helps to say what you're adding or removing. One day you'll appreciate what I mean :) -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 19:13, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

Zzuuzz thanks for catching that - I must have accidentally checked that box while assigning PCR. I didn't even know you could assign confirmed to an EC user. Sorry for the dumb mistake, and I'll try to be more clear with log summaries in the future. Spicy (talk) 19:22, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

@Zzuuzz + Spicy - you want User:Novem_Linguae/Scripts/UserRightsDiff.js which makes reviewing user rights logs so much nicer. :) firefly ( t · c ) 10:39, 12 May 2023 (UTC)

Query

Hello, Spicy,

Thought I'd give you a break from SPI questions. Thank you for deleting some User pages I recently tagged as CSD U5. This sometimes seems like a subjective criteria to me so I prefer to tag pages rather than deleting them myself, just so they get two sets of admin eyes looking them over. But I just ran across another case, User:Kling och Klang, I have questions about. 95% of their edits are to their User pages but there might be some content there that could be used for an article (although I admit that's a big stretch). They have been inactive for years and didn't edit very long so there is no opportunity to ask them what their intention was with all of these User subpages. There seems to be some cross-over from the other editor whose User pages I tagged and Kling och Klang's User pages. But if it looks like a clear cut case of CSD U5 to you (or to any talk page stalker), there are a lot of useless User pages that could stand to be cleared out. Thanks. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:21, 13 May 2023 (UTC)

Hi Liz. I noticed that account as well. I also noticed Jungledyret Hugo, whose userpage was edited by Wolwerock. I'm fairly sure that all of these accounts are the same person, and I contemplated deleting the other accounts' userpages as well as blocking all of them for NOTHERE and/or socking. I ultimately decided not to because the other accounts are inactive and all of the accounts have made at least some seemingly OK edits to mainspace. Also, the whole situation makes my head hurt. Given the history, I doubt that Kling och Klang's userpages were actually intended to be used for article improvement, but it's difficult to prove. I suspect many people would delete them if they were tagged as U5, though. Spicy (talk) 06:59, 13 May 2023 (UTC)

FYI

Hi, Spicy. You might recall clerking the most recent SPI for SKauane. The same person is back again as Xdtp. I'm not sure when I'll have a chance to write up another SPI filing, so I thought I'd just drop you a tip. Cheers, gnu57 21:05, 12 May 2023 (UTC)

Thanks, now blocked. Spicy (talk) 19:49, 13 May 2023 (UTC)

Refund

Hi there Spicy. Today, the page User: Illusion Flame/Mark Rober's Revengineers was deleted by you. Illusion Flame his since said on my talk that they are ok with other editors taking over the draft. Tails Wx and I have expressed interest. Could you please refund the page to Draft:Mark Rober's Revengineers? Thanks, Schminnte (talk • contribs) 23:53, 13 May 2023 (UTC)

Schminnte sure, and done. Spicy (talk) 23:55, 13 May 2023 (UTC)

Thanks. Schminnte (talk • contribs) 23:56, 13 May 2023 (UTC)

Extend Rollback

Hi Spicy, I would ask TheresNoTime, the granting admin, but they are quite inactive, and I noticed that you've been active at PERM. Could you please extend my rollback to indefinite? I am aware it runs out in September, but I'll forget to request it getting extended. Thanks, Zippybonzo | Talk (he|him) 17:03, 16 May 2023 (UTC)

You can file a request at PERM when it's closer to the end of your trial period. September is a long way away. Spicy (talk) 17:13, 16 May 2023 (UTC)

WikiProject Med Newsletter - Issue 21

Issue 21—June 2023

WikiProject Medicine Newsletter

Hello all. Another irregular edition of the newsletter; pardon the six-month gap. I was inspired to collect this after seeing how much activity there is in the GA space on the medicine front. Please review a GAN if you have time, and help to welcome more medicine editors into the fold:

Recognized content (since January 1!)

Trinidad Arroyo nom. Thebiguglyalien, reviewed by Mike Christie Mycobacterium nom. BluePenguin18, reviewed by Ealdgyth

Nominated for review

Hanhart syndrome nom. Etriusus, under review by Dancing Dollar Persistent stapedial artery nom. X750 Howard Florey nom. Hawkeye7 History of penicillin nom. Hawkeye7 Cataract surgery nom. Pbsouthwood COVID-19 pandemic nom. Ozzie10aaaa, under review by Shibbolethink Mohamed Hamad Satti nom. FuzzyMagma El Hadi Ahmed El Sheikh nom. FuzzyMagma Mansour Ali Haseeb nom. FuzzyMagma Sinus tarsi syndrome for peer review by Pear1020

WP:MED News

• Wikipedia:Good article reassessment is back in business, with a new process and new coordinators. If you see medicine-related GAs that may no longer meet the GA criteria, feel free to nominate them for attention/reassessment (please, not too many at once, lest we get overwhelmed). I'll incorporate them into the listings above.
• Major depressive disorder, Schizophrenia, and Dengue fever are featured articles that need updating. Feel free to chime in at the talk pages or WT:MED if you have the time/bandwidth to help update. They'll likely go to featured article review for more feedback in the near(ish) future (probably in the order listed).

Newsletter ideas, comments, and criticisms welcome here.

You are receiving this because you added your name to the WikiProject Medicine mailing list. If you no longer wish to receive the newsletter, please remove your name.

Ajpolino (talk) 04:10, 19 May 2023 (UTC)

What Do you think about this

Hi SanjeevModdi here I want know about the deletions proposal by this IP 152.58.124.156 an unregistered account might be by a blocked, banned user or sock puppet himself 🚫 ?.Gujjar,Iran, Gujjar Chah, Gujjar Ghar, And Taank Clan. SanjeevModdi (talk) 22:34, 24 May 2023 (UTC)

I'm curious too what you think, but more about SanjeevModdi than the IP. The IP was indeed disruptive, and I reverted all their edits, but I suspect that SM is a sock of Bensebgli. Not enough edits for me to block on my own behaviorally, though.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:32, 25 May 2023 (UTC)

After reviewing their editing histories, I'm confident that both SanjeevModdi and TonnyJ are socks of Bensebgli, and I've blocked them. There's another account that I'm suspicious of but that I don't have enough evidence to block, so if any checkusers are reading this and are bored, it may not be a bad idea to take a look. Spicy (talk) 03:35, 25 May 2023 (UTC)

Entuziazm

Hello, Spicy! This IP 199.119.232.216, which is a mobile account in Toronto appears to be Entuziazm, even right down to making insulting edit summaries on the T-34 article, see here [10] and [11] along with the claim that the T-34 was an "Ukrainian" tank. One might also note that when I reported Etuziam for sock puppetry earlier this month, this IP made this edit that I claimed that I was sock puppet for Entuziam, see here [12]. That is a rather curious claim given that I did not accuse that particular IP of being a sock puppet for Entuziam. It might be worthwhile to keep that IP from editing the articles that Entuziazm likes to edit. Thank you for your time and I hope all is well. --A.S. Brown (talk) 00:55, 21 May 2023 (UTC)

Hi A.S. Brown, and sorry for the delay in responding to your message. Yes, that's them, but it wouldn't be effective to block the IP at this point because it hasn't edited in several days and they've undoubtedly moved on to a new IP by now. There is some more editing from them on the wider range (and others), and I'm debating whether or not to block the ranges. They are quite busy and used by other editors. Spicy (talk) 16:40, 27 May 2023 (UTC)

Fnariful sockpuppetry

Hi,

I am not sure what additional documentation is normally done with obvious sockpuppets. This is regarding Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Fnariful/Archive. You had closed it as not being operated by the same person, but this admission indicates they operated both accounts. I have also blocked a new account, User:Mahaburrahmabd for obvious sockpuppetry as they created Draft:Md Ariful Islam. What is the usual action to take after making the block? Is an SPI case filed for reference, or are the user pages just tagged? Thanks. -- Whpq (talk) 21:40, 28 May 2023 (UTC)

Whpq, to be pedantic, the linked admission confirms that they operated another account but not necessarily that that account was Fnariful. If you compare the drafts created by Mahaburrahmabd and MdarifulIslamwriter to those by Fnariful, they appear to describe two different people. The subjects have the same name but different birth dates, birthplaces, education and occupations. I would interpret MdarifulIslamwriter's comment as referring to the account Mahaburrahmabd, rather than Fnariful. Anyway, to answer your question, you can tag the accounts if you want to, but it's not required. I generally don't file SPI reports 'for the record' unless it's a particularly complex or unusual case. Spicy (talk) 22:44, 28 May 2023 (UTC)

No, I wasn't going to do anything more, but I am not all that familiar with the ins and outs of dealing with sockpuppets so I wanted to check that nothing more needs to be done. Thanks for the info. -- Whpq (talk) 23:47, 28 May 2023 (UTC)

TPA

The user Ssbr iNet, whom you blocked as a spam user, has twice spammed their own talk page since you blocked them. Perhaps talk page access should be revoked? --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 14:20, 29 May 2023 (UTC)

Done. Spicy (talk) 14:36, 29 May 2023 (UTC)

NPR

Hi, I see you declined my NPR request. Please grant me this right for a one-month trial period. I promise not to disappoint you. I also thoroughly review AfCs and guarantee you that I will utilise NPR appropriately. Thank you! DreamRimmer (talk) 06:52, 29 May 2023 (UTC)

What's the rush? You have only been actively editing for about two months. Continuing to gain experience and demonstrate policy knowledge would be a better path to earning this right than making demands of others. Spicy (talk) 14:36, 29 May 2023 (UTC)

Thank you, sir. I'll request it back once I've had enough experience. DreamRimmer (talk) 16:46, 29 May 2023 (UTC)

Help

Hello there sorry to bother you could help me with user socket puppet investigation? DarkHorseMayhem (talk) 22:01, 30 May 2023 (UTC)

I fixed the formatting of your case. Someone will review it in due time. SPI is not always a fast process - following the advice at User:Blablubbs/How to file a good SPI can make things easier on the admins and clerks. Spicy (talk) 22:02, 30 May 2023 (UTC)

Hello!

Hello Spicy, I'm wondering what the minimum criteria for becoming a Pending Changes Reviewer are and when you would reccomend reattempting? Thanks, Knowledgegatherer23 (Say Hello) 00:27, 31 May 2023 (UTC)

Knowledgegatherer23, Wikipedia:Reviewing_pending_changes#Becoming_a_reviewer states "You have a reasonable editing history – as a guide, enough edits that a track record can be established." There are no firm rules for what that means but in practice I'd say that the requirements for becoming extended confirmed (500 edits and 30 days of editing) would be a sensible threshold. Spicy (talk) 00:32, 31 May 2023 (UTC)

Thanks, Have a great day! Knowledgegatherer23 (Say Hello) 01:07, 31 May 2023 (UTC)

second opinion

are these as promotional as they look to me? Thanks -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 18:57, 31 May 2023 (UTC)

Deepfriedokra yeah, seems like pretty standard U5/G11 material to me. Spicy (talk) 19:11, 31 May 2023 (UTC)

I mean the additions to existing articles. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 19:13, 31 May 2023 (UTC)

I think she needs advertizing only block? -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 19:14, 31 May 2023 (UTC)

But I hadn't seen the last Artspam . . . . . . . . .Thanks . . -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 19:16, 31 May 2023 (UTC)

Oh yes, those aren't good either. Personally I'd wait and see if she responds to the messages on her talk page, although in my experience, most of them never do. Spicy (talk) 19:17, 31 May 2023 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:National Collection of Type Cultures logo.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:National Collection of Type Cultures logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 04:11, 2 June 2023 (UTC)

About Rem Gatch

Hey Spicy. I'm talking about a Chinese sock of the same name in several years ago. S/he falsely added any Chinese music artists and record labels without references (as mentioned on Chinese LTA casepage, translate with Google Translate if you like). But recently IPs from Special:Contributions/2401:7400:c809::/39 IP range, which falsely added record labels in Chinese music artist articles Special:diff/1158623555, Special:diff/1158368619. Both geolocate to Singapore and are clearly the same editor. Regards. 183.171.121.239 (talk) 08:44, 5 June 2023 (UTC)