User talk:DoRD/Archive 13

Request

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

I just need to say that a user named Ram The Editor was blocked by you by the checkuserblock-account template but you misunderstood it. That user was actually for good contributions so that user should be unblocked. Please unblock Ram The Editor. Thank you. 122.162.27.1 (talk) 12:46, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

That one, out of six accounts on the same IP address, was for good contributions? No, with the dozens of vandal accounts you've created, I don't think so. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 19:42, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

No, even though others were for vandal accounts, Ram The Editor was for good contributions; Some good users get caught in same ip address and Ram The Editor was one of it, please trust Ram The Editor that he will do nothing wrong and he is for good contributions, Therefore please unblock Ram The Editor. Thank you. 122.161.239.88 (talk) 13:04, 23 September 2017 (UTC)

Hi, we all agree that Ram The Editor does good contributions. One user said "No, even though others were for vandal accounts, Ram The Editor was for good contributions; Some good users get caught in same ip address and Ram The Editor was one of it, please trust Ram The Editor that he will do nothing wrong and he is for good contributions, Therefore please unblock Ram The Editor. Thank you. " That user was right. Ram The Editor was for good editing. Please unblock Ram The Editor. Thank you. 122.162.76.14 (talk) 03:01, 29 September 2017 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

FYI

See WP:Sockpuppet investigations/The abominable Wiki troll. Maybe you want to close that? There is an ongoing struggle between socks of TAWT and (probably) socks of Mangoeater1000. More info is in my submission to the sock report. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 17:30, 29 September 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up, EdJohnston. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 18:56, 29 September 2017 (UTC)

Blocked user request

Good morning DoRD, over at OTRS we've received another unblock request from AnExpiredPotato (talk · contribs), again asking that his indef block be modified. Fwiw,  JGHowes  ^talk 16:09, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

Considering their contribs and edit filter hits, I recommend leaving the block just as it is. Cheers ​—DoRD (talk)​ 18:21, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

About Personal info

I apologize. I did not know it was personal info as it only seemed like forum usernames to me. I just copied and pasted the link [1] found on the AFD. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 144.138.75.78 (talk) 16:27, 7 October 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, and thanks for the information - it has been removed from the AfD as well. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 16:44, 7 October 2017 (UTC)

Invitation to discuss the soon to built, Interaction Timeline

Hi Checkusers and Checkuser clerks,

The Anti-Harassment Tools team is seeking input about building the Interaction Timeline feature.

We’re inviting you to join the discussion because you use similar tools such as the Editor Interaction Analyser and User compare report during sockpuppet investigations.

You can leave comments on the on wiki discussion page or send an email to the Anti-Harassment Tools team.

For the Anti-Harassment Tools team SPoore (WMF), Community Advocate, Community health initiative (talk) 19:39, 9 October 2017 (UTC)

Please let us know if you wish to opt-out of all massmessage mailings from the Anti-harassment tools team.

Autoblocks

Regarding Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Unable to lift autoblocks it might be possible for you to modify your original indef block of User:Promise Njoku to clear the 'autoblock' check box. The particular autoblock #7892601 would have expired at 06:45 on 12 October anyway. EdJohnston (talk) 15:04, 11 October 2017 (UTC)

Somebody must have succeeded in clearing the autoblock. Thanks anyway, EdJohnston (talk) 15:22, 11 October 2017 (UTC)

After discussing it with the tech folks and getting a bug report filed, I went ahead and followed your suggestion. Thanks! ​—DoRD (talk)​ 15:27, 11 October 2017 (UTC)

Sockpuppetry

Dear user

i need your help with checking the ip address of a user who has been constantly harassing a my sister of by posting her name and picture one a very offending Wikipedia page/subject. He/She have been able to get away with it every time and has done so by making more than one users and using this as platform to smear and hurt my sister's reputation. we dont know the reason for this but we know it stems from the jealously or hatred the user has towards her.

Here are 2 of the users with the first being the most recent one in which edits have been used:

Fne03 Vonderjohn

Thank You — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.42.250.3 (talk) 10:11, 11 October 2017‎ (UTC)

Fne03 has been blocked as a sockpuppet of Vonderjohn, and I have asked for assistance with the article here. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 11:52, 11 October 2017 (UTC)

I appreciate it thank you so much, is there any way i get the IP address of the user. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.42.250.3 (talk) 05:32, 12 October 2017‎ (UTC)

No, I cannot share that information (please see this policy). If you believe that this user is a threat, or that the harassment will harm someone, you might consider contacting the Support and Safety team, who have more authority to deal with issues like this than volunteers like me and my colleagues. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 11:15, 12 October 2017 (UTC)

More from TomBarker23

DoRD - In addition to COVER, TomBarker23 created https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikisuicide which in my opinion, even as an essay, in not appropriate for Wikipedia. Please look at. Thanks. David notMD (talk) 21:47, 13 October 2017 (UTC)

Yes, I agree that it's inappropriate, although not inappropriate enough to invoke an IAR speedy deletion reason like I used for the other page. I'm waiting to see their response to Primefac's comments before going any further, though. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 21:51, 13 October 2017 (UTC)

MBP self-trolling

I noticed one of your recent blocks is of a user I have long suspected of creating self-attackers, whether for sympathy, drama, or to elicit help from supporters.

If you can say without sticking beans up your nose, how common is this? Anmccaff (talk) 20:03, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

I don't have any numbers to share, but most of the sockpuppetry I see isn't sophisticated enough to make this deception work. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 20:23, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

Thanks. Anmccaff (talk) 20:24, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

PS: There was a rather (deliberately) blatant example of this on ANI just closed now, I wonder if it's a frequent customer, so to speak. Anmccaff (talk) 21:32, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

Related account?

I see you've blocked our good friend Morty. Figured I'd drop a link to RemoveMorty. Not sure if its an account made to troll C-137 or if it's a sock of C-137. At any rate, you've been made aware. GMG^talk 12:40, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

I don't have time to look closely at the moment, but I did go ahead and block it. Thanks ​—DoRD (talk)​ 12:42, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

2 SPIs - possibly linked (+ others?)

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/213.162.72.246 and Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/GoguryeoHistorian - wanted to see if you had any knowledge of these IPs and accounts. Thanks, GAB^gab 17:54, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

Responded on BH's talk. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 20:21, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Arbitration Committee Elections December 2017/Electoral Commission

Just in case you have pings turned off, or the software messed up, I've closed Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Arbitration Committee Elections December 2017/Electoral Commission, and ... (drumroll) ... you've been asked to be a reserve commissioner, if one of the 3 can't serve after all. Please take a look at that page for a couple of comments I made in the close. Thanks for volunteering. --Floquenbeam (talk) 20:17, 24 October 2017 (UTC)

Wise suggestions, all, and thanks for taking the time to close it. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 20:37, 24 October 2017 (UTC)

Long-blocked IP sock is back

Janagewen is back. ( See SPI report ) Could you please re-instate the relevant IP rangeblock? Thanks in advance for whatever can be done. Jeh (talk) 17:06, 26 October 2017 (UTC)

 Done ​—DoRD (talk)​ 17:15, 26 October 2017 (UTC)

User:Drewmutt

You might want to take a closer look at User:Drewmutt, and in particular, the edit history of their now-deleted page User:Drewmutt/Tips Oshwah Doesn't Want You to Know. The use of terms like "dank" and "Oshwanker" makes me think that they might be related to other accounts. -- The Anome (talk) 15:10, 28 October 2017 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) I... highly doubt Drew is a sock of a blocked user. If this was created by them, I would presume it was an inside joke from IRC. GMG^talk 16:07, 28 October 2017 (UTC)

The Anome, I have to agree with GMG here. Drewmutt has been around for a long time and is a well-respected editor, so I'll also guess that the page was some sort of inside joke. Anyway, thanks for the note. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 16:37, 28 October 2017 (UTC)

He's not a sock puppet. The page was a humor / tips page :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 02:56, 29 October 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. It looks like I mis-read the situation: I will undelete, and offer my apologies to Drewmutt. -- The Anome (talk) 14:47, 29 October 2017 (UTC)

Proposed rangeblock

Hi, I am proposing to block the IPs used by AnnalesSchool for block evasion. The ip-range-calc tool suggests 92.143.89.171/18 as encompassing the two IP addresses they have visibly (to me) used. Naturally, as CU you have far more information. I should welcome your advice on a rangeblock; as to desirability, the best range and whether it would cause collateral damage. Just Chilling (talk) 23:09, 28 October 2017 (UTC)

I'm a bit too tired to go into detail at the moment, but that rangeblock won't be enough, I'm afraid. I haven't found any combination of rangeblocks that will stop AnnalesSchool without causing too much collateral damage, unfortunately. However, I'll take another look as soon as I get a chance. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 03:54, 29 October 2017 (UTC)

Thanks. I have blocked that range for now and we can alter it later in the light of your research. Just Chilling (talk) 18:08, 29 October 2017 (UTC)

Tech News: 2017-45

Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.

Recent changes

• You will no longer see the patrol log on Special:Log unless you specifically select it. [2]

Changes later this week

• The 2017 Community Wishlist Survey begins on 6 November. You can post proposals from 19:00 UTC and until November 19.
• The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 7 November. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 8 November. It will be on all wikis from 9 November (calendar).

Meetings

• You can join the technical advice meeting on IRC. During the meeting, volunteer developers can ask for advice. The meeting will be on 8 November at 16:00 (UTC). See how to join.

Future changes

• URLs that link to sections on Wikimedia wikis with non-Latin scripts have looked like this: https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Википедия#.D0.98.D1.81.D1.82.D0.BE.D1.80.D0.B8.D1.8F instead of https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Википедия#История. This will soon be fixed. Old links will still work. [3][4]

Tech news prepared by Tech News writers and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

18:45, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

BN Discussion

Hello DoRD, please see Wikipedia:Bureaucrats'_noticeboard#Resignation_from_the_Arbitration_Electoral_Commission. Thank you, — xaosflux ^Talk 15:11, 12 November 2017 (UTC)

Non-abuse checkuser help

Could you look at a few of the userpages transcluding Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:Toolserver IP and see if any of them are still being used by WMF bots? They were used by Toolserver bots, so I'm guessing that they're no longer used for the purpose; I know that 185.15.59.201 is no longer used for this purpose. Secondly, could you check a few of the bots in Category:Wikipedia bots running on Wikimedia Toolforge and tell me what IPs or IP ranges are used, as long as they're indeed WMF addresses?

Context — as you may be aware, there's been a history of bots editing while accidentally logged out; {{Toolserver IP}} tells admins to indefinitely softblock the IP, so that it can't edit this way. I'd like to levy such blocks on the current IPs, lest this problem arise again, but since I don't know what IPs the Toolforge uses, I can't do anything right now. Of course, if you have some other way of looking up those addresses, that would be equally helpful. Nyttend (talk) 15:21, 26 November 2017 (UTC)

There shouldn't be any traffic from the old Toolserver addresses, but I'll take a look when I get a chance. As for the Toolforge addresses, there must be a list of them somewhere. I'll look and ask around to see what I can find before resorting to CU. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 15:51, 26 November 2017 (UTC)

Part 1:

Nyttend - special:contributions/185.15.59.192/27, special:contributions/91.198.174.0/24, and special:contributions/2A02:EC80:101::/48 have no traffic that CU can still see. However, special:contributions/2620:0:860::/46 still has one bot running on it. None of them have any recent logged-out edits. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 16:27, 26 November 2017 (UTC)

Part 2:

So far, I have been unsuccessful in locating a list of current addresses, but I'll look some more when I get a chance tomorrow. As for CUing the bots, I'm sorry, but I'm going to have to agree with BU Rob13 here. There is a real chance that a bot op's personal IP address(es) could be revealed, and without evidence of disruption by that bot, that information is none of my business. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 21:56, 26 November 2017 (UTC)

Based on wikitech:Help:Access it seems like there is no list of IP addresses. I am told however that 208.80.153 is the Wikimedia IP range and 208.80.153.207 a proxy used by some instances. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 13:11, 27 November 2017 (UTC)

Revdel

Hi DORD, Should this be revdeled ?, it looks to have been done by a troll atleast judging by the comment and cite but didn't know if it's something that should be revdeled, Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 21:27, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

Sorted. Thanks. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 21:32, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

Brilliant thanks so much, Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 21:36, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

According to my watchlist you have declined a kitten. https://i.imgur.com/5bqFlQI.png This is unacceptable of course, so here is another kitten.

(((The Quixotic Potato))) (talk) 13:17, 18 December 2017 (UTC)

Ha! I would never decline a kitten, but yeah, that edit summary could have been better. Thanks! ​—DoRD (talk)​ 13:24, 18 December 2017 (UTC)

Happy Holidays

Happy Holidays

From Stave one of Dickens A Christmas Carol Old Marley was as dead as a door-nail. Mind! I don’t mean to say that I know, of my own knowledge, what there is particularly dead about a door-nail. I might have been inclined, myself, to regard a coffin-nail as the deadest piece of ironmongery in the trade. But the wisdom of our ancestors is in the simile; and my unhallowed hands shall not disturb it, or the Country’s done for. You will therefore permit me to repeat, emphatically, that Marley was as dead as a door-nail. So you see even Charles was looking for a reliable source :-) Thank you for your contributions to the 'pedia. ~ MarnetteD|Talk 00:45, 24 December 2017 (UTC)

Thank you, and Happy Holidays to you as well! ​—DoRD (talk)​ 15:14, 24 December 2017 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!

Hello DoRD: Enjoy the holiday season, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, —MRD2014 ^{Merry Christmas!} 02:12, 25 December 2017 (UTC)

Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Season's Greetings1}} to send this message

Thank you, and Happy Holidays to you, too! ​—DoRD (talk)​ 02:34, 25 December 2017 (UTC)

CU-blocked user messing around

Hello!

I noticed you CU-blocked Afterbucks. After the block, IP 50.252.214.51 posted this to the talk page for Afterbucks, which leads me to believe it is the same user editing while logged out. Worth keeping an eye on it, I guess :) –FlyingAce^✈hello 14:19, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

And...blocked. Thanks for the heads-up. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 14:23, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

Thanks

Hi DoRD. Thanks for your fast block on Special:Contributions/2600:387:1:805:0:0:0:65. I was about to ping you but you responded before I had a chance. The IP seemed to be attacking articles solely from my edit history. Kb.au (talk) 15:27, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

I was half expecting that they'd have been assigned a new IP address by now, but when I went back and checked, they were back to their earlier behavior. Anyway, you're welcome, and thanks for the report. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 15:30, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

ASK : Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Philthy D

Can not judge from editing timing and editing purpose?--O1lI0 (talk) 15:43, 14 January 2018 (UTC)

O1lI0, I don't understand your question. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 16:13, 14 January 2018 (UTC)

Extended content

I say WP:REPEATING / WP:CHRONOSOCK / WP:IPSOCK / WP:SPA. PS:WP:HARASS (diff | hist) 04:25, 24 Dec 2017 . . en.wikipedia.org . . 162.217.133.121 (talk | contribs) . . History of the People's Liberation Army (Undid revision 814478224 by O1lI0 (talk) (diff | hist) 04:26, 24 Dec 2017 . . en.wikipedia.org . . 162.217.133.121 (talk | contribs) . . No zuo no die (Removed redirect to List of Internet phenomena in China) (diff | hist) 04:26, 24 Dec 2017 . . en.wikipedia.org . . 162.217.133.121 (talk | contribs) . . Green Oasis School (Undid revision 813025845 by O1lI0 (talk)) (diff | hist) 05:09, 24 Dec 2017 . . ms.wikipedia.org . . 170.78.75.25 (talk | contribs) . . He Bingjiao (Membatalkan semakan 4179328 oleh O1lI0 (Perbincangan)) (diff | hist) 05:09, 24 Dec 2017 . . ja.wikipedia.org . . 170.78.75.25 (talk | contribs) . . 王勇 (O1lI0 (会話) による ID:64643093 の版を取り消し) 22:20, 24 December 2017‎ Philthy D (talk | contribs)‎ . . (253,699 bytes) (+957)‎ . . (replace it with archive link) 01:41, 14 July 2017‎ O1lI0 (talk | contribs)‎ . . (234,879 bytes) (-249)‎ . . (→‎Background: link dead) 01:45, 14 July 2017‎ O1lI0 (talk | contribs)‎ . . (234,895 bytes) (+16)‎ . . (→‎Background) 21:52, 28 July 2017‎ O1lI0 (talk | contribs)‎ . . (234,215 bytes) (-710)‎ . . (→‎Background: Removing unsourced content) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/170.78.75.32 2018年1月7日 (日) 09:16‎ 170.78.75.32 (会話)‎ . . (561バイト) (+319)‎ . . (取り消し) 2018年1月7日 (日) 09:59‎ 170.78.75.32 (会話)‎ . . (561バイト) (+319)‎ . . (取り消し) 12:41, 14 January 2018‎ Philthy D (talk | contribs)‎ . . (252,870 bytes) (+1,146)‎ . . (added more source so that you can no longer justify removal) 04:35, 13 January 2018‎ O1lI0 (talk | contribs)‎ . . (251,026 bytes) (-985)‎ . . (1. http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2003-05/26/content_887226.htm is dead link 2. {{main article|Islamicisation and Turkicisation of Xinjiang}} move to ==See also==)

--O1lI0 (talk) 23:00, 14 January 2018 (UTC)

Okay, I'm still not sure what you're trying to say or ask, but I'll try to answer. The case is not eligible for CheckUser, but it is still open. A clerk or admin will review the case and evidence that has been presented and will take action or make a recommendation. Please present any additional evidence there. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 23:10, 14 January 2018 (UTC)

Well...,thanks--O1lI0 (talk) 23:49, 14 January 2018 (UTC)

Ten years of adminship, today!

Wishing DoRD a very happy adminship anniversary on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Chris Troutman (talk) 18:42, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

Thanks. The actual date isn't until March, though. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 19:11, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

Sorry. I checked the RfA and indeed, 4 March is the correct date. This edit put you on the wrong date. Chris Troutman (talk) 19:24, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

Ahh, right, I got the bit back on this account on 23 January. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 19:34, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

let me wish you almost two months in advance. —usernamekiran(talk) 23:42, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

Covering admins

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Like a book: Admins can't read, but they do cover their fellow admins. - DePiep (talk) 21:33, 30 January 2018 (UTC)

DePiep, if you really need a lowly peon to tell you so that you'll believe it, then let me tell you should take the advice you've been given: develop a draft, request at WP:RFPP or via the requesting admin, and move on from this dispute. GMG^talk 21:39, 30 January 2018 (UTC)

Whatever. ADMINs block me from arguing anyway anywhere. - DePiep (talk) 21:51, 30 January 2018 (UTC)

The point is, DoRD GreenMeansGo, that the running TALK page discussion was closed prematurely by someone (ab)using admin rights. - DePiep (talk) 22:01, 30 January 2018 (UTC)

(by talk reader) No. The conversation was ended since your request should have been taken to WP:RFPP. It's that simple. You have no innate right to use any talk page however you choose. Chris Troutman (talk) 22:12, 30 January 2018 (UTC)

(ec) There were two things explained to you at WT:ADMIN:

1. WT:ADMIN is for the discussion of WP:Administrators, the policy, not administrators, or administrative actions, or anything else.
2. There is no such thing on WP as claiming the creation of a page. If you wish to create a page, create it. If you cannot create the page because it is protected, request unprotection at WP:RFPP or at the protecting admin's talk page.

​—DoRD (talk)​ 22:17, 30 January 2018 (UTC)

(ec) No to your No. There was no reason to close & lock that thread. Any editor could have argued(!): "Wrong place". [Then I could oppose: it is TALKpage!]. But an admin closing it down its another lever of abuse. Actually, my later arguments were removed. Now it looks like I am a lame editor. WP:TPO.- DePiep (talk) 22:24, 30 January 2018 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but what part of, "This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Administrators page," is so difficult to understand? The discussion was rightfully closed as it had absolutely nothing to do with WP:Administrators. If you want to discuss administrators (the users, not the policy), feel free to try WP:AN. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 22:31, 30 January 2018 (UTC)

It doesn't take administrator access to close a discussion. And... most folks most of the time are going to actually try to give you good advice and help you out as best they can. I've taken the liberty of dropping a note here to see if the person who protected it will consider downgrading the protection so you can edit it (for future notice, that's the correct place to start). I realize you pinged them, but those can be glitchy at times, and template editor is a fairly rare permission that should still pretty well protect the page from vandalism in the meantime. If he doesn't respond in a day or so, and you're not sure how to file a request at RFPP, drop my a line on my talk page and I can help. GMG^talk 22:32, 30 January 2018 (UTC)

re what part of, "This is the talk page ...," is so difficult to understand? Yes! yes! yes! it-is-a-talk-page! Now: what do *you* not understand? The difference between subject page and its talkpage? - DePiep (talk) 22:41, 30 January 2018 (UTC)

Please see WP:NOTAFORUM and WP:TALKNO. Stay on the correct topic. This is non-negotiable. Chris Troutman (talk) 22:49, 30 January 2018 (UTC)

(ec) It is a talk page for discussion of the Administrator policy not ... actually, never mind. This has gone on too long already. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 22:51, 30 January 2018 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Quick explanation

Apologies for this - just wanted you to know it was not intentional; rather, it was automatically added by NPP's page curation tool. I simply forgot about that unwanted feature auto-adding a notice on the page of the article creator, or I would've deleted it myself. ^{Atsme📞📧} 14:47, 3 February 2018 (UTC)

No worries, and no apology is necessary. I assumed that it was generated by some sort of tool and that you might not have realized that the message was left on a sock's talk page. To be honest, I'm not sure why I'm still watching that talk page, and it's probably time for another watchlist cleanup. Cheers ​—DoRD (talk)​ 15:08, 3 February 2018 (UTC)

Blake Clark et al.

Hi, I wonder if you could help.

I see that you recently blocked user 2600:8800:3981:7a80::/64 for disruptive editing, e.g. on Blake Clark. He has recently been active on the Manx Gaelic Wikipedia, adding short stubs on Blake Clark and other actors, but describing them using the Manx Gaelic word for "actress". No idea whether this is intentional.

Any suggestions on what to do about this?----Ehrenkater (talk) 17:27, 5 February 2018 (UTC)

Hello Ehrenkater. I'm going to assume that you're referring to these edits. I think that I'd start by simply correcting the articles, but if any of the pages need deleting, or if the disruption continues, you'll need to contact one of the two administrators there, Alison or MacTire02. Alison is also an admin here, so she might be able to give you better advice. (Alison, if you see this: as far as I remember, this IP isn't the target of the checks against the wider range.)

I hope that this answers your question, but if not, I'll be glad to try again. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 18:07, 5 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi all. It looks like they mean well, but their grasp of Gaelg isn't great. I'd say monitor for now, reach out to them if they persist or if they get really disruptive. Failing that, ping me on my talk page (either here or there), and I'll deal - Alison ^❤ 03:40, 6 February 2018 (UTC)

Revdel at WP:Teahouse

Hi. Just out of curiosity, is the revision-deletion at the Teahouse related to the recent banning of User:Soccerkid2009, and if so, what led to the revision deletion. Simply asking as one of the hosts who had replied to his (rather vulgar and inappropriate) queries. Thanks, Stormy clouds (talk) 21:13, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

I can't go into detail, but the redaction wasn't related to the block. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 21:19, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

OK. So long as it was not anything that I said I am fine with it. Thank you. Stormy clouds (talk) 21:23, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

User:Spurnrally

Hi DoRD, I noticed you've recently blocked Spurnrally, a user that came onto my radar yesterday when I reverted a nonconstructive edit of theirs. I've just looked at the user's contribution history, user page, and talk page, and I suspect that the user's edits, while generally not helpful, have all been made in good faith. The user even responded [5] to a template warning, indicating good intentions and a lack of understanding of the problem. I think it would be kinder to first have someone engage the user in conversation and teach them about constructive editing. I wouldn't mind leaving the user a message for starters. Perhaps blocking could be used only as a last resort if the user doesn't improve. Armadillopteryx^talk 21:49, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

Normally I'd agree, but I blocked them due to CheckUser evidence indicating that they were abusing multiple accounts, so their edits didn't figure into it. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 22:10, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

Ah. Got it. Armadillopteryx^talk 22:14, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

SPI

Hello, Can you help me move the content here: [6] to the main project page? I can't file a new case so it apparently went to the talk page. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:44B8:2DA:4F00:D5F4:FBE5:6A64:5583 (talk) 02:36, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

We need to have the case filed in the proper format, so please see WP:SPI. In the box labelled How to open an investigation:, click show, and then click show in the green box contained within. There you can file your report on the case talk page and someone will move it over for you. Please be careful to not include a leading space in the case name, though. Best ​—DoRD (talk)​ 02:49, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

Sorry

Sorry, that was my friend. It wont happen again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alfredateam (talk • contribs) 22:46, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

Revdel

Hi DoRD, Hope all is well, I was wondering if you could revdel this and the preceding edits after that please, Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 19:53, 10 March 2018 (UTC)

 Done and thanks for the report. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 20:45, 10 March 2018 (UTC)

Brilliant thank you and no worries :), Happy editing, –Davey2010^Talk 22:38, 10 March 2018 (UTC)

Question

Why you restore Avaay talk page access? Hhhhhkohhhhh (talk) 15:27, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

That is the default setting of the script that I used to block and tag all of the accounts I found. I also didn't know that it had been revoked, but if necessary, it can be revoked again. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 15:46, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

Revdel

Hi Dord, Hope all is well, Should this be revdelled ?, The editor has retired and I'm a tad worried this could be used against them so thought I'd ask, Many thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 18:57, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

Maybe, maybe not, but nobody should be harassed like that, so I went ahead and hid it. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 19:32, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

Agreed, Brilliant thank you!, Have a nice day. –Davey2010^Talk 19:35, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

Blocked user Aditya Mani Tripathi and their sock Iwikireviewer

Hello. If you look at the page history of a deleted earlier version of Talk:Brij Bhushan Mani Tripathi (a version deleted per WP:CSD G8 at 21:19, 20 March 2018) you will find two more suspected socks of Aditya Mani Tripathi, with no edits outside that talk page. When I saw them and their edits I suspected them of being socks, and added them to my watchlist, but can't find their names now since they had no edits outside that deleted version of the talk page, and my watchlist is currently 12,628 pages long. I would hate to see those accounts used for nefarious deeds, i.e. even more disruption than we have seen so far, so maybe you could check the deleted earlier version, see their names and do whatever needs to be done? Cheers, - Tom | Thomas.W ^talk 17:28, 21 March 2018 (UTC)

I found their names: Ifaizabadi (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) and Small-lindan (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), and that they with all probability are socks of Aditya Mani Tripathi can be seen from this edit by Ifaizabadi (an edit I hadn't seen before...). - Tom | Thomas.W ^talk 17:38, 21 March 2018 (UTC)

Thanks, Thomas.W, I did see those earlier, but failed to look at their deleted contributions at the time. They're now blocked as well. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 18:44, 21 March 2018 (UTC)

WP:NOR is CNN considered "Mainstream newspapers"

WP:NOR is CNN considered "Mainstream newspapers"? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 104.139.98.75 (talk) 11:46, 22 March 2018 (UTC)

While CNN is an acceptable source, the text you added, ...ramming the rear of his SUV with a white van, is not supported by the linked article. Looking at a photo (as seen in photographs of the scene) to come up with the previous text is what I was referring to as original research. The article doesn't say how it happened, so we don't know whether they forcibly pushed his car off the road or if the collision happened after he stopped. More recent reports hint that they did do as you speculated, but that wasn't the case earlier. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 11:55, 22 March 2018 (UTC)

New sock of User:Aditya Mani Tripathi

Hello. Aloknath yadav (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is an obvious sock of Aditya Mani Tripathi, repeating edits previously made by the sockmaster and one or more of their socks. Since new socks keep popping up I have filed a report at SPI: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Aditya Mani Tripathi. Cheers, - Tom | Thomas.W ^talk 15:16, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

I commented in the SPI case and blocked the account. Cheers ​—DoRD (talk)​ 15:33, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

A beer for you!

Hey, thanks for oversighting! I just hope nobody saved the information before it was oversighted. Zyc1174 chat? what I did 16:18, 31 March 2018 (UTC)

92.4.239.239

Is 92.4.239.239 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) related to GlobalPower. Look at the history of Talk:Salt Bae for similar behavior. --Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 22:26, 7 April 2018 (UTC)

It does appear to be related, but as it is a dynamic mobile address, there is little to be done with it now, from an administrative standpoint at least. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 22:32, 7 April 2018 (UTC)

Avaay

Hi! Can you tell me what the user Avaay is? This editor poorly constribs on cs wikipedia. Thank. --OJJ (talk) 15:55, 9 April 2018 (UTC), cs sysop

They are a sockpuppet of Josh.172 - please see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Josh.172/Archive for details and other accounts. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 16:20, 9 April 2018 (UTC)

Thank for informations. This user wants global rename. --OJJ (talk) 06:00, 10 April 2018 (UTC)

2006:470::/32

Sorry, it was 2001:470::/32 that was blocked, I don't know how I got 2006:470::/32 ​—Vchapman (talk)​ 13:11, 10 April 2018 (UTC)

Vchapman, I have unblocked it. Thanks for the heads up. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 13:45, 10 April 2018 (UTC)

Historylover

He is now using ip [7] arguing about his edits.--Shrike (talk) 08:42, 16 April 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up. Unfortunately, those IP addresses are reassigned quickly, so there's nothing to be done beyond your reverts. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 11:20, 16 April 2018 (UTC)

Shingling334

2405:205:2108:53AD:FC82:1F4A:448F:1047 (talk · contribs · (/64) · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) just showed up on Halloumi and repeated an edit made by the just blocked socks, but geolocates to India. Which of course doesn't mean that it isn't Shingling, since he has used lots of open proxies (helping us, since lots of proxies got blocked right after he had used them), and it isn't the first time I've seen Indian IPs doing typical Shingling-edits, I've seen lots of them, but haven't bothered do anything about it since they very quickly stopped editing. But since you've just taken a look at Shingling's latest sock I thought it might be worth taking a look on this one, to see if it's the same device/useragent that is being used here. Cheers, - Tom | Thomas.W ^talk 18:48, 16 April 2018 (UTC)

My apologies, Thomas.W, I meant to reply yesterday, but got sidetracked. I don't think that this is Shingling334, but I suppose that it's possible. There are other LTAs using that particular ISP, though, so it could easily be one of them just trying to confuse the situation. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 11:57, 17 April 2018 (UTC)

OK, thanks. You don't need to feel stressed if I ask a question, because I'm retired and in no hurry (if I feel a block is urgent because of ongoing disruption I post on WP:AIV, where a number of the regular admins seem to trust my judgement and block the IP or account I want blocked, without me needing to spill any beans...). Cheers, - Tom | Thomas.W ^talk 13:07, 17 April 2018 (UTC)

Filter observation

Hi DoRD. I noticed this. I think this now won't ever match anything much - because of what the first word of that line does. I don't know which is better and don't have a solution other than rewriting or finding another filter - just thought I'd make the observation. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 09:03, 24 April 2018 (UTC)

I was trying to prevent a couple of false positives I noticed, but I have to admit that the syntax is somewhat opaque to me. I'll monitor the current version. Thanks for the heads up. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 11:17, 24 April 2018 (UTC)

Special:AbuseFilter/624

I noticed Special:AbuseFilter/624 doesn't make any actions, and hasn't been updated in years. Are you still using it? What about you, DeltaQuad? We are still regularly hitting the condition limit, so I'm trying to disable some filters that are either stale or no longer being monitored. Many thanks — MusikAnimal ^talk 21:00, 24 April 2018 (UTC)

I'm not using it, and don't even remember the last time I looked at it. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 21:08, 24 April 2018 (UTC)

Request for deletion

Can you please delete page User talk:Misser Boss as a G6; Also, that page was created by IP vandals evading the block of Misser Boss. Thank you. 122.180.177.223 (talk) 15:40, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

I see no need for deletion there. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 16:28, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

Please delete that page as we do not need it at all. Thank you. 122.180.177.223 (talk) 01:46, 27 April 2018 (UTC)

No. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 02:07, 27 April 2018 (UTC)

I do not want to start a edit war, so I am asking you whois correct.

There is a very long time standing situation over at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Bollywood_films_of_2018 . This problem has existed for a long time, and me having a busy life, I do not have the time to fix all these issues. The major issue with article is the fact that there are two uses of IMDb as a source for a release date of a future movie. However that is the tip of the iceberg here. There are numerous number of unsourced release dates for future movies. In order for me to inform other users about the problems with the page, I created a the multiple issues template box at the top the page informing the users about the fact that Wikipedia is not a crystal bal, as well as the fact that IMDb is not a reliable source for anything. This version can be seen here : https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_Bollywood_films_of_2018&oldid=837955983 . However a IPv6 address promptly did not like having the template box, and said in it summary that it is not necessary, according to the history. The current page still has this massive uncited release dates, and two IMDb sources in it. Who is correct that IPv6 or me? Please reply as soon as possible. Aceing_Winter_Snows_Harsh_Cold (talk) 04:43, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

Aceing Winter Snows Harsh Cold, I have no interest in that article, nor do I wish to deal with any editing conflicts there, so you might want discuss this on the talk page. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 02:24, 27 April 2018 (UTC)

Revdel

Hi DoRD, Hope all is well, Could you revdel thisthisthisthisthis and this as well my revert edit please ?, Many thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 18:48, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

Done, I think, but please check to see if I missed anything. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 18:52, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

Whoops you missed [8] and [9] sorry, Thanks for revdelling all tho much appreciated, Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 19:19, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

 Done ​—DoRD (talk)​ 19:22, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

Brilliant thank you :), Take care, –Davey2010^Talk 19:35, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

Mistake/misclick?

[10] 2600:387:5:80D:0:0:0:C4 (talk) 02:13, 5 May 2018 (UTC)

Indeed it was, and thanks for reverting me. My apologies to Maile66. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 02:20, 5 May 2018 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Rungofed

I notice that you blocked LDasPoi (talk · contribs) as a sock. Well, Lactic47 (talk · contribs), like LDasPoi, created an article on the same company (though with slightly different titles, MZ Skin (Cosmetic Company) vs. MZ Skin (company)).

I also see that Bhavtosh sisodiya (talk · contribs) created MZ Skin, which was deleted at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/MZ Skin. There might be a connection, I think. --Calton | Talk 13:51, 10 May 2018 (UTC)

Oh, and throw in XanderCage10 (talk · contribs) while you're at it, who created MZ skin. --Calton | Talk 13:57, 10 May 2018 (UTC)

They're all  Possible from a CU standpoint, and given their editing, I blocked them all. Thanks for the info, Calton. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 14:18, 10 May 2018 (UTC)

Another one

See User talk:Ariusrolex. Quacking like a duck on steroids... Kleuske (talk) 21:59, 11 May 2018 (UTC)

Blocked yesterday, talk revoked today. Vandalism cleaned up as well. Thanks ​—DoRD (talk)​ 22:12, 11 May 2018 (UTC)

Someone trying to impersonate you on wikitech

Hi, just wanted to let you know that apparently someone was trying to impersonate you on wikitech, see https://wikitech.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/DoRD Dalba 03:43, 18 May 2018 (UTC)

That is definitely not my account. Thanks for letting me know. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 03:55, 18 May 2018 (UTC)

Akriti Khatri

Hi, recently you deleted Akriti Khatri due to G5. The article has been recreated in mainspace by a new SPA, MissFashionWorld. Worth a closer look? Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 20:21, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up. I deleted it again and salted it, and found a few more sockpuppets to block and pages to delete. One of the socks edited Draft:Akriti Khatri, but the creator of that page isn't a match to the socks, so I left them alone for now. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 20:50, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

Thank you

I knew he was a sock, but I had (inexplicably) forgotten about Hidden Tempo. It makes perfect sense now.- MrX 🖋

You're welcome, and thanks for the comments. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 15:26, 26 May 2018 (UTC)

FYI

JustBerry (talk) 22:12, 29 May 2018 (UTC)

Well, it didn't take long for an admin and two CUs to swoop in and take care of business. I didn't get a chance to do anything. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 22:20, 29 May 2018 (UTC)

Just in case you notice similar behavior elsewhere, that's all. --JustBerry (talk) 22:31, 29 May 2018 (UTC)

Revdel

Hi Dord, Hope all is well, Could you revdel this and my reversion after please?, Many thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 19:22, 31 May 2018 (UTC)

(talk page watcher)  Done --NeilN ^{talk to me} 19:30, 31 May 2018 (UTC)

Ah brilliant thanks so much NeilN, Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 19:47, 31 May 2018 (UTC)

Vivek Chourasia

hey dord, it's my mistake that i violate the wikipedia rules. please let me allow to rectify my mistake and unblock my page and let me allow to create an article on Vivek Chourasia. i assure you i will not violate the wikipedia rules — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2405:205:641C:EEE6:AC6A:1F20:711F:9939 (talk) 10:12, 2 June 2018 (UTC)

You continue violating the rules even today, so no, I won't be unlocking that page. If you want advice, you might try the Teahouse. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 13:32, 2 June 2018 (UTC)

2A00:23A8:4C18:C000:B9A2:311F:9F17:72A3

Needs some of the edit summaries and the personal attacks on the IP talk page got rid of too. DuncanHill (talk) 16:07, 2 June 2018 (UTC)

Everything looks to be sorted now, but if you see anything I missed, please let me know. Cheers ​—DoRD (talk)​ 16:19, 2 June 2018 (UTC)

I can't see anything else, many thanks, DuncanHill (talk) 16:34, 2 June 2018 (UTC)

Sock

Could you take a look at this? They're back. The editor whose username is Z0 18:50, 2 June 2018 (UTC)

Sorted. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 19:07, 2 June 2018 (UTC)

Another one. The editor whose username is Z0 09:03, 3 June 2018 (UTC)

Thank You

I just want to say Thank You for fixing my talkpage! This is a user that has been harassing me for sometime. I was wondering if you can do a CheckUser on that user! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Underman as a Sock of Simulation12. Bigteddy1 (talk) 22:21, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

@Bigteddy1: You're welcome! If you look here, you'll see that the CheckUser tool is what I used to find out who the user was. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 11:42, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

@DoRD: Can't say I'm surprised but I'm not! Thank you so much! Bigteddy1 (talk) 18:36, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

Who was Some sock?

Just curious...💵Money💵emoji💵^💸 00:26, 22 June 2018 (UTC)

It is as the label says. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 00:27, 22 June 2018 (UTC)

Long-blocked IP sock is back

Janagewen is back again. See SPI report Could you please renew the relevant IP rangeblock?

Thanks in advance for whatever can be done. Jeh (talk) 10:43, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

Hi, Jeh. I see the four processor-related edits that are clearly him, but I'm not seeing anything else recent on the range. The rangeblock I placed back in October is still in place for another few months, so I think that I'd rather watch this one a while before taking any action. If you see anything else, please let me know and/or add it to the open case. Thanks ​—DoRD (talk)​ 20:41, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

Might want to check the SP report again. New IPs have been active. The rangeblock you placed in October was for a different range, starting with 175.19, I believe. This is 119.53. The 119.53 block was placed, from what I gather from the SP archive, in late May 2017. Now it's expired, and he's using it again.

What's sad is that it's been well over six months since the last report, so he could have tried for the "standard offer". Jeh (talk) 06:03, 20 June 2018 (UTC)

otoh, the edit comment here is consistent with why he was indef-blocked in the first place. Jeh (talk) 09:07, 20 June 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for getting back to me - I've gone ahead and blocked the current range for a year. Yes, with comments like that, I don't think that an OFFER unblock would have been appropriate. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 12:02, 20 June 2018 (UTC)

Thank you. Jeh (talk) 12:17, 20 June 2018 (UTC)

Shingling334

Hello. Thanks for the check, but would you mind blocking the sock, JamaicanMeCrazy123 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), so that I can clean up after them? Cheers - Tom | Thomas.W ^talk 12:36, 22 June 2018 (UTC)

I meant to do that, but was in a rush and forgot.  Done ​—DoRD (talk)​ 14:05, 22 June 2018 (UTC)

Thanks. - Tom | Thomas.W ^talk 14:07, 22 June 2018 (UTC)

False

You are tricked. Its not my identity, its identity of person i know from WikiAcademy in my country. User:Ktrimi991 tried to harass me and to frighten me, as he thought it was me. That was in order to stop me from editing articles he edit, right after i reverted his removal of sourced content. So he just wanted to show me that he knows who i am! Can you imagine?! Thankfully it was not me, but still, this was failed attempt of OUTING. Can you help me, DoRD? --Ąnαșταη (ταlκ) 12:21, 25 June 2018 (UTC)

I am shocked he did that! Now i am afraid he will actually somehow find out my real identity! --Ąnαșταη (ταlκ) 12:23, 25 June 2018 (UTC)

Whether the information was true or not is immaterial, we treat mistaken outing the same as actual outing. I left them a warning about this, so hopefully it will not happen again. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 12:24, 25 June 2018 (UTC)

He threatened me that he will create article about this guy. That means he though he will create article about me! That is clear attempt of hounding. He also tried to falsely present other person from the same academy as me, and reported as as sockpuppets. That didn't go thought, of course. He is trying to chase us away from wiki. Please, help me somehow, everyone other are already gone with this torture of his!! --Ąnαșταη (ταlκ) 12:31, 25 June 2018 (UTC)

This seems to be a long-running dispute, in an area of the project I don't typically work. I will, though, try to send another admin around to this discussion. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 13:19, 25 June 2018 (UTC)

@Anastan I report socks, vandals etc anytime I notice them. I reported you for socking and admins blocked you for one week. I report Albanians and non-Albanians, and try to help other Balkan editors find consensus whenever possible. Hence barnstars and thanks by many editors to me, including admins who have sent me thanks for my fight against vandalism. Several of the most problematic articles in the past are now stable due to my intervention. On the other hand, out of curiosity, what do you give to this project? Do not answer, just do not talk crap about me, portraying me as a "nationalist". If I am an Albanian nationalist, why have I removed Albanian POV stuff such as "Serbs continue committing genocide against Albanians" and so on? Cheers to all and do not talk about me without knowing who I am. Ktrimi991 (talk) 13:37, 25 June 2018 (UTC)

@Ktrimi991 and Anastan: Look, I have no desire to intervene in your dispute nor to deal with anything to do with the wider dispute. Another admin advised me that they almost blocked the both of you some time ago, but if you leave my page now, I won't do that. You need to settle your dispute and/or leave each other alone, or the next admin you encounter will probably be handing out blocks. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 14:15, 25 June 2018 (UTC)

Do not worry DoRD. The Balkan topic is difficult, and editors have disagreements. Hence, few editors edit Balkan articles, and fewer admins can understand Balkan issues and solve them properly and honestly. After all, we are all volunteers and are free to get involved only in the disputes and problems we want. Thanks again for your WP:Oversight help. Cheers, Ktrimi991 (talk) 11:23, 26 June 2018 (UTC)

You've got mail!

{{you've got mail}} Home Lander (talk) 20:16, 25 June 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads-up. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 20:18, 25 June 2018 (UTC)

You're welcome! Home Lander (talk) 20:19, 25 June 2018 (UTC)

Houston we have a problem

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/2409:4052:707:A6A2:B4AD:7ECD:36ED:D30B: in a manner of speaking JarrahTree 12:05, 27 June 2018 (UTC)

Unfortunately, the range they're using is too busy for a rangeblock. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 12:08, 27 June 2018 (UTC)

grrr - obviously going to enjoy the havoc - apologies for a down under spelling - the engvar au tag is so satisfying when it shows the different spelling and dmy format - it helps revert weirdnesses - the big problem is no one has started an envgar us - to explain what the hell fall actually means in real terms. JarrahTree 12:11, 27 June 2018 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Where are the refs?

Altogen Labs CRO was created by Kessypeshoo, and edited by Carlbjornasson to include promotional content. It came under threat and Carl created Altogen Biosystems to make sure that the promotional article remains online. When that too was AfD'ed User Were are refs created Altogen Labs with similar promotional material. My surmise is that all these users are run by the same paid editor. 2Joules (talk) 12:11, 3 July 2018 (UTC)

Fair enough, but please present your evidence in the case rather than here. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 14:05, 3 July 2018 (UTC)

Proposed move to Akriti Khatri

• Akriti Khatri (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Please see this proposed technical move. It needs admin assistance because the target is salted by you. The new article at Akriti Khatri (Private Detective) seems OK at first glance, though the last editor tagged it for notability. Do you agree that this move should be done? Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 15:34, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

@EdJohnston: For what it's worth, I just blocked the account that created the article as another sock, but I don't have any objections to the move, as long as it has been cleaned up and whatnot. —DoRD (talk)​ 15:56, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

AN revert

Please don't revert posts like this. Rather rude. A message on my talk page would have been better.

Also the reason it "disappears" in the past few days is the bots remove the reports as stale, not because an admin deals with them. EvergreenFir (talk) 16:44, 22 July 2018 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) The reason there is an AIV backlog is that the overwhelming majority of admins prefer to let the bot get rid of bad reports or let someone else mass clear them as stale rather than decline them, because it simply isn’t worth the complaining about how 14 year olds are dangers to the wiki and we’re doing nothing. TonyBallioni (talk) 17:57, 22 July 2018 (UTC)

EvergreenFir, my apologies for any offense. I didn't intend to be rude, just expedient. As I'm sure you're aware, though, there are a number of admins who frequent AIV, and when they're not available, the queue can grow pretty long. Some of us stop by on occasion to deal with a few reports, but when the regulars are around, AIV is either empty or nearly empty. I don't find messages to AN to be particularly helpful because the regulars will go there without being notified, and while other admins will maybe go and handle a couple of reports, many others tend to avoid the page altogether. What I'm getting at, basically, is that AIV backlogs are short-lived, unlike other administrative queues such as SPI. —DoRD (talk)​ 19:45, 22 July 2018 (UTC)