Wikipedia

User:MarioGom/LoboReview

< User:MarioGom

This is a workspace to organize cleanup related to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/EChewning. It's also being used as an experiment on UPE review organization. If you want to participate, please, follow these instructions:

  1. Read the #Behaviour section to understand the kind of spam we are looking for.
  2. Go to the #Batches section and pick a batch (you can sign it to signal that you're working on it).
  3. Go through every linked diff (one diff may comprise multiple edits) and check whether they are ok or not. If they are ok, mark the line as {{ok}} not spam. If they are spam, clean up the latest version and mark the line with {{removed}}. If the text is not present in the latest version, note it. If you are not sure about it, or it requires a second opinion, mark it with {{notsure}}.
  4. We'll review second opinions at the #Edits needing 2O section.
  5. Articles requiring further attention should be listed at #Closely connected articles that need special attention.
  6. Leave your feedback about the process at #Feedback. Thank you!

You can also check a finished review at User:Blablubbs/Wolfram.

Behaviour

edit

We are looking at a sockfarm closely associated with Michael Patrick Mulroy and his think tank, Lobo Institute. The problematic edits usually do one or more of the following:

  • Spamming links (in external links or references) pointing to articles written by Mulroy or other Lobo Institute members like Eric Oehlerich. The links are rarely hosted at loboinstitute.org, but at other sites that publish them, including, but not limited to the Middle East Institute (mei.edu), abcnewsradioonline.com or defenseone.com. You can find the usual outlets and coauthors here: https://www.loboinstitute.org/publications/editorials-and-policy-papers/
  • Also watch for external links spam for their podcasts.
  • Whether refspam is used or not, the introduced text usually includes declarations made by Michael Patrick Mulroy or undue references to him.
  • Some edits promote people related to CIA paramilitary activities. Some of these edits may be due, but watch out for unsourced claims.
  • Add linkspam to dieliving.com.
  • There are also many edits related to Children in the military. Usually promoting My Star in the Sky documentary, the Grassroots Reconciliation Group, or other groups and publications.
  • Be careful with small edits: this sockfarm often edited articles only adding typos (apparently on purpose).
  • It should not be ruled out that some edits are meant to skew the point of view of an article towards a position defended by Lobo Institute, but most edits that were already reviewed are primarily about direct promotion of Mulroy, his associates or people and organizations connected to him.

Batches

edit

Batch 1

edit
Done. MarioGom (talk) 16:57, 23 March 2021 (UTC)

Batch 2

edit

Batch 3

edit
Done. MarioGom (talk) 12:57, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

Batch 4

edit

Batch 5

edit
Done. MarioGom (talk) 18:11, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

Batch 6

edit

Batch 7

edit

Batch 8

edit

Batch 9

edit

Batch 10

edit
Done. MarioGom (talk) 17:04, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

Batch 11

edit

Batch 12

edit

Batch 13

edit
Done. MarioGom (talk) 12:37, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

Batch 14

edit

Batch 15

edit

Batch 16

edit
Done. Giraffer (talk·contribs) 16:18, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

Batch 17

edit

Batch 18

edit

Batch 19

edit

Batch 20

edit

Batch 21

edit

Batch 22

edit

Batch 23

edit

Batch 24

edit

Batch 25

edit
Done. MarioGom (talk) 20:13, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

Batch 26

edit

Batch 27

edit
Done. MarioGom (talk) 20:23, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

Batch 28

edit
Done. MarioGom (talk) 20:30, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

Batch 29

edit

Batch 30

edit

Batch 31

edit

Batch 32

edit
Done. MarioGom (talk) 20:58, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

Batch 33

edit
Done. MarioGom (talk) 21:30, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

Batch 34

edit
Done. MarioGom (talk) 21:38, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

Batch 35

edit

Batch 36

edit

Batch 37

edit

Batch 38

edit

Batch 39

edit
Done. MarioGom (talk) 22:44, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

Batch 40

edit

Batch 41

edit

Batch 42

edit

Batch 43

edit

Batch 44

edit

Batch 45

edit

Batch 46

edit
Done. MarioGom (talk) 09:48, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

Batch 47

edit
Done. MarioGom (talk) 09:53, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

Batch 48

edit
Done. MarioGom (talk) 10:01, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

Batch 49

edit

Batch 50

edit
Done. MarioGom (talk) 10:19, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

Batch 51

edit

Batch 52

edit

Batch 53

edit
Done. MarioGom (talk) 10:32, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

Batch 54

edit
Done. MarioGom (talk) 10:37, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

Batch 55

edit

Batch 56

edit

Batch 57

edit
Done. MarioGom (talk) 13:24, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

Batch 58

edit
Done. MarioGom (talk) 13:33, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

Batch 59

edit

Batch 60

edit

Batch 61

edit
Done. MarioGom (talk) 13:58, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

Batch 62

edit
Done. MarioGom (talk) 16:28, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

Batch 63

edit
Done. MarioGom (talk) 16:33, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

Batch 64

edit

Batch 65

edit

Batch 66

edit

Batch 67

edit

Batch 68

edit
Done. MarioGom (talk) 22:11, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

Batch 69

edit

Batch 70

edit

Batch 71

edit

Batch 72

edit

Batch 73

edit

Batch 74

edit

Batch 75

edit

Batch 76

edit

Batch 77

edit

Batch 78

edit

Batch 79

edit

Batch 80

edit

Edits needing 2O

edit

Add below articles that require a second opinion.

Closely connected articles that need special attention

edit

Add below articles that require special attention.

Feedback

edit

Please, add your feedback about the review process itself here. Thank you!

  • @Xeno: I have read your edit summary: KB changed would be quite useful for at a glance checks. (diff). Thank you for the feedback. In this case, I have automatically excluded from this list some diffs that are irrelevant based on tags (some redirects, some already reverted). I considered to filter based on edit size, but I noticed a few bad edits with a very small diff size, so I left them in-place just in case. Also, the distribution of articles in batches is stratified, so every batch is supposed to contain some relevant and some irrelevant articles, avoiding extremely hard batches. I'm thinking a different strategy could be having different batch types. We would have some larger batches at the end made only of edits that are likely minor grammar or formatting changes, and these batches could be reviewed faster. What do you think? MarioGom (talk) 09:39, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
    It looks pretty good, and the batch I looked at did have one substantive edit (that needs review still). My thought was having the KB change would allow casual helpers to check big edits without having to go one-by-one. (Another exclusion factor might be edits that only added square brackets.) –xenotalk 11:22, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:MarioGom/LoboReview&oldid=1016614375"