User talk:Sergecross73/Archive 104

Archive 100

←

Archive 102

Archive 103

Archive 104

Archive 105

Archive 106

BlaccCrab back on another registered account

I'm not necessarily expecting you to block them based on my say-so, but I'm entirely sure Chopdrop1999 is BlaccCrab, already back after they used that IP address in September last year that @Ad Orientem: blocked. I can tell their tone and the style of their edits from a mile off, always buzzing around on hip hop articles: [1] [2]. They were using 98.117.49.13 until they registered the account last month, obviously because their fighting over what's a "promo single" and what's not (as you might know is part of BlaccCrab's MO) was not working out for them (reverting Issan Sumisu on a Sum 41 article).

• To establish BlaccCrab's previous prolific interest in Sum 41: reverting Issan Sumisu years ago (among 20 other edits), and this on the new account, and editing a Sum 41 single.
• Editing Jeezy discography here, editing it as BlaccCrab several years ago.
• Editing the Chainsmokers discography here, block evading after BlaccCrab's block here, BlaccCrab editing it.

Among other connections. As I pointed out in September of last year, they will always return to the same topics. Ss112 21:57, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Ping @Drmies. Would your Magic 8 Ball be of any use here? -Ad Orientem (talk) 03:08, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

Hmm well kind of but no, not really--but you should go ahead and block em both, for a long time. Drmies (talk) 03:13, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

@Drmies @Ss112 Chopdrop1999 indeffed. The IP hasn't edited in at least two weeks so I'm not comfortable with a block there. But if they resume, I will drop a long block on them. -Ad Orientem (talk) 03:31, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

Thank you! Sergecross73 msg me 03:32, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

Members

Here are some examples straight from Dustin:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=097i_TmLEaE

Also: https://www.reddit.com/r/Starset/comments/rr8yeb/did_cory_juba_join_the_band/

"Yes. At the Columbus show, Dustin said he was officially in the band and how it's nice to have the band finally having a "complete" feel since he is doing the stuff live instead of having prerecorded things."

Also, they have official numbers now. Siobhan is 7701, Zuzana is 7702, and Cory is 7703. Hpylori808 (talk) 18:27, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

Fan shot Youtube videos and reddit posts are not reliable sources on Wikipedia. They violate WP:USERG. This won't cut it. Please keep the discussion on the article talk page. Sergecross73 msg me 18:32, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – March 2024

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

Administrator changes

• Sdkb
• The Night Watch

• East718
• Isabelle Belato
• Mzajac
• Staecker
• Stan Shebs
• Sugarfish
• Tamzin

Bureaucrat changes

SilkTork

Guideline and policy news

• Phase I of the 2024 RfA review is now open for participation. Editors are invited to review, comment on, and propose improvements to the requests for adminship process.
• Following an RfC, the inactivity requirement for the removal of the interface administrator right increased from 6 months to 12 months.

Technical news

• The mobile site history pages now use the same HTML as the desktop history pages. (T353388)

Miscellaneous

• The 2024 appointees for the Ombuds commission are だ＊ぜ, AGK, Ameisenigel, Bennylin, Daniuu, Doǵu, Emufarmers, Faendalimas, MdsShakil, Minorax, Nehaoua, Renvoy and RoySmith as members, with Vermont serving as steward-observer.
• Following the 2024 Steward Elections, the following editors have been appointed as stewards: Ajraddatz, Albertoleoncio, EPIC, JJMC89, Johannnes89, Melos and Yahya.

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:22, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

List of calypsos with sociopolitical influences

Hi Sergecross73, hope everything is alright with you. I stumbled upon List of calypsos with sociopolitical influences. Since you're also editing music-related articles, what do you think of it? I am not sure if it's needed at all, are particular genres of music typically broken down by topic in a list? soetermans. ^{↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK} 20:26, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

Yeah, that's a pretty weird article. Not a normal cross-section of topics at all. And despite its massive lengthy, there's really not much of substance. There's no context beyond a ton of song names that largely don't have their own articles for context either.

Peesonally, I don't think it's appropriate...but because every item appears be sourced, it probably wouldn't be a slam dunk at AFD either. I think you might get some push back. Sergecross73 msg me 22:29, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

Technical help with page move over redirect?

Hello Sergecross73, I was wondering if you might be willing and able to move Friendly Fire (Linkin Park song) to Friendly Fire (song). If I had the page mover right, I'd just do it myself. Per the disambiguation at Friendly Fire#Music, there appears to be no other notable songs with the title, just a B-side from I Get Along (Pet Shop Boys song) that can be added as a hatnote if need be. Thanks. Left guide (talk) 00:27, 5 March 2024 (UTC)

Happy to help. Done! Sergecross73 msg me 01:03, 5 March 2024 (UTC)

Thanks again! Left guide (talk) 01:06, 5 March 2024 (UTC)

No problem. I'll do it any time (provided the request is policy-based and has no consensus against it, of course.) Sergecross73 msg me 01:13, 5 March 2024 (UTC)

Might you also be willing to move Minutes to Midnight (Linkin Park album) to Minutes to Midnight (album)? There's only one other album of the same name, and the comparison of daily page views is 592 vs. 2, so this looks like a clear primary topic in an WP:INCOMPLETEDAB situation. A {{for}} hatnote for the Jon English album can be added to the Linkin Park album page to maintain navigation. Thanks. Left guide (talk) 22:39, 5 March 2024 (UTC)

I personally agree with you, but it looks like that happened due to an unanimous (albeit small) talk page consensus at Talk:Minutes to Midnight (Linkin Park album)#Requested move 26 March 2017, so it may be better to start up a new discussion on that one first. If you pursue it, let me know and I'll participate. Sergecross73 msg me 18:51, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

Out of curiosity

Hey Serge, I see that you have active eyes always on the Mario article. Is it of interest to you to work on the article beyond general maintenance? Such as expansion, sourcing, all that.

I ask because this is more or less on my radar, and I think a collab would be fun. Thinking GA at the very least, to TFA at the most. Panini! • 🥪 20:21, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

I'd be happy to help - I'm pretty knowledgeable and interested in everything Mario. But...you'd have to be leading the way. It's not the sort of thing I'd lead - my interests often change on a whim, and I don't usually care about the whole GA that much either. So I'd help...but I'd probably fall somewhere between helper/assistant/consultant type help I guess. Sergecross73 msg me 14:29, 8 March 2024 (UTC)

Possible problematic editor

Hi Sergecross73, I recently saw the edits on some video game articles by TruthseekerW. They also made some edits to controversial topics (abortion, vaccines). I've left them a message, but their reactions feels very hostile very quickly. I'd rather not have another protracted dispute like with Atmospherpolyphonic, so I came straight to you. soetermans. ^{↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK} 22:42, 8 March 2024 (UTC)

I left them a note, but I wouldn't worry about them too much. RGW editors like that are generally pretty quick to be reverted and dealt with at ANI. Sergecross73 msg me 22:54, 8 March 2024 (UTC)

Cancelled N64 games

Hey, Surge, thanks for all your hard work on List of cancelled Nintendo 64 games, it looks fantastic. I went poking through the articles in the cancelled N64 and 64DD games categories, and after culling out everything already on the page and 64DD games that went to cartridge, here's the remaining games Wikipedia has categorized that are missing from the master list:

• N64: Airport Tycoon, Battlecruiser 3000AD, Big Red Racing, Chicken Run (video game), Darkstalkers 3, Dead or Alive (video game), Disney's Aladdin in Nasira's Revenge, Endorfun, Frogger (1997 video game), Grand Theft Auto (video game), Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone (2001 video game), Hyperdrive (video game), Independence War 2: Edge of Chaos, Jeff Gordon XS Racing, Kao the Kangaroo (2000 video game), Looney Tunes: Space Race, Montezuma's Return!, Mortal Kombat: Special Forces, Need for Speed II, Pikmin (video game), POD (video game), Pong: The Next Level, Prince of Persia 3D, Rampage Through Time, Red Baron (1990 video game), Tenchu: Stealth Assassins, Tomb Raider (1996 video game), and V-Rally 2
• 64DD: Captain Commando, Fin Fin on Teo the Magic Planet, Dragon Quest VII, Snatcher (video game), and Samurai Shodown 64: Warriors Rage

I'm sure some of these have good sources on their individual articles and can be just moved over to the main page, but I'd like a little help vetting each of these and making sure we can find sources to confirm they belong in those categories or if they should be removed. (I'm already a little shaky on including Harry Potter, since Nintendo did make a pitch but the game technically never entered production.) I figure the five 64DD games would be harder to find stuff on since they might not have gotten much coverage in English sources, so if you'd be willing to poke around for those, I can start chipping away at the rest. No pressure, though; just something to consider if you want to keep fleshing the article out. Thanks! Cyberlink420 (talk) 17:24, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the kind words, and for helping out some. I've been working on converting these lists to the "extended format" that gives details for the last couple years, and there's not usually many others working on it. Which is fine, its been more of my pet project, but its still appreciated when someone does help.

So, some thoughts on what you've said above:

1. If you want to put that list on the article's talk page, we can tag team checking through it, leaving notes, etc. There may be a lot of false-positives - in cleaning up other lists in the past, it seems like there's a lot of false leads in working through Wikipedia's category system. Still worth doing, but just an FYI, there's a lot of junk to search through
2. The 64DD article is pretty well developed, so I was planning on combing through 64DD#Proposed for leads as well.
3. I've personally generally included "rejected pitches" in the cancelled games lists, as long as I could find reliable sources to write the entry, so I wouldn't be opposed to including HP.
4. I've had a lot of luck searching through https://www.ign.com/games/platform/n64 both for sources and for entry ideas. It helped with a lot of entries I was going to remove as verification failures.

I do plan on working on it further...but I've also been contemplating taking a brief break on it for now just to do something different for a bit (I spent a lot of time on it this year so far.) But if I take a break, I don't believe it'll be too long. Sergecross73 msg me 17:59, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

Sounds good. I've removed a handful of entries added by anons that I couldn't find mention of or sources for anywhere. I'll get the new list made over on the talk page. Thanks again! -- Cyberlink420 (talk) 18:19, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

Wild 9

Why did you revert the composer on Wild 9? Dikiciyan is credited as Additional Music with his alias "Sonic Mayhem". [3] You don't have to add citation on every staff who worked on the game when the info is readily available. Emiya Mulzomdao (talk) 11:44, 19 March 2024 (UTC)

You need to follow WP:V, and we're talking about an obscure 25 year old game stuck on the PS1 - that info is not in-fact "readily available" - we must follow WP:YOUTUBE as well. Sergecross73 msg me 11:53, 19 March 2024 (UTC)

That timestamp I linked is an in-game staff roll, which is about as accurate as it can get. What's the template for citing that source? Emiya Mulzomdao (talk) 12:01, 19 March 2024 (UTC)

That violates WP:YOUTUBE. Sergecross73 msg me 12:07, 19 March 2024 (UTC)

No, I'm not talking the YouTube video; I'm trying to cite the staff roll that can be accessed within the video game. I merely posted the YouTube link to show what it looks like. Emiya Mulzomdao (talk) 12:11, 19 March 2024 (UTC)

Obvious sockpuppet of Pjesnik21

Hi Serge. User:Pjesnik21 has re-registered with the account Drolq. You might remember this user is clearly based in the Balkans somewhere as they primarily edit articles of people from that area, pop music articles in general, and they couldn't stop habitually overlinking. The biggest giveaway: Pjesnik21 created List of number-one singles of 2023 (Croatia), and Drolq has created List of number-one singles of 2024 (Croatia). You protected the 2023 list so socks couldn't edit for a while, but it expired. Also:

• Blocked Pjesnik21 sockpuppet User:Jovarca1000000 created Aleksandra Prijović discography and Drolq is keeping that updated: [4], [5].
• Pjesnik21, Jovarca1000000 and the other blocked sock User:ChalgaPeperudka edited Jala Brat habitually, Drolq is too: [6], [7]. Ss112 00:54, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
• Editing topics relating to Charli XCX. Pjesnik21: [8], [9], [10], [11], [12]. Drolq: [13], [14], [15], [16].
• As for the overlinking, look no further than Drolq doing this: [17].

All seems pretty obvious to me. Ss112 00:54, 18 March 2024 (UTC)

Btw Pjesnik21 is continuing to evade their block. @Ferret and Ad Orientem: in case it warrants further analysis (I personally don't think it does). Ss112 23:32, 19 March 2024 (UTC)

I welcome additional input. I'm stuck at "possible, but is it probable?" Sergecross73 msg me 00:12, 20 March 2024 (UTC)

@Ss112 Confirmed,  Blocked and tagged, go forth and WP:BANREVERT. You should probably be on the look out for more. -- ferret (talk) 01:53, 20 March 2024 (UTC)

Regarding Greenish Pickle!

Greenish Pickle! is continuously removing stuff he/she don't like in the articles even if it's sourced and have engaged in arguments with me and other Wikipedians in the past. Can you please talk to them and warn them. Thanks. Kazama16 (talk) 11:28, 23 March 2024 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) Hi Kazama16, if there's an issue with a particular article, could you please provide the diffs? I can't really tell you try to resolve an issue either, except for User talk:Greenish Pickle!#Reverted edits on Mario, which is a three weeks old discussion. soetermans. ^{↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK} 12:08, 23 March 2024 (UTC)

The user gave me hate speech (kinda) here [18] there are more hate speeches directed to me in the past months. But actually we are fine now since the user ended the dispute. [19] Kazama16 (talk) 13:30, 23 March 2024 (UTC)

I think you both could stand to be a bit nicer to each other, but that's about it. Wikipedia is a collaborative project, especially when you're working on high profile, popular pages like Mario or Link. Disagreements are bound to happen. Just start up discussions on the talk page when that happens, and work towards finding a WP:CONSENSUS. I watch over the Mario article and can add Link to my WP:WATCHLIST too. Sergecross73 msg me 14:31, 23 March 2024 (UTC)

How about we shouldn't let him edit a highly visible articles like Link and Mario yet? Look at this [20]. GreenishPickle! (🔔) 07:18, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

I'm really confused, are you jealous of me or something? because you only see negativities in me. How about [21] and [22] and also I removed Anime News Network encyclopedic articles because they are unreliable and can be edited by anyone, I also gave this template [23] in the edit summary but you still reverted my edit. See my friend I don't want any arguments with you and wish the best for you ❤️ Kazama16 (talk) 14:16, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

The heck, why would I get jealous over a naive person with zero achievement?🤡 Also, with that Anime News Network stuff, I self-reverted myself. GreenishPickle! (🔔) 22:11, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

Congrats. Kazama16 (talk) 09:44, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

I don't believe anybody needs to be full on blocked from the article. There is currently a lot of community interest in working on the Mario article so I believe issues with the article will be ironed out through edits and talk page discussions. Sergecross73 msg me 15:32, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

This same user discussed here also made accusations toward me in the AfD discussion for Charlie Morningstar and here, which I do not agree with. AfDs can sometimes get too contentious, so I'll probably lean toward staying away from them in the future. In any case, I will work to be better with commenting in the future.Historyday01 (talk) 12:50, 28 March 2024 (UTC)

IPv6 hello

@Sergecross73 2601:842:C180:4A00:382E:78F6:25EF:DC7E (talk) 20:40, 29 March 2024 (UTC)

Hi, can I help you? Sergecross73 msg me 20:51, 29 March 2024 (UTC)

Elden Ring talk page

Hey Sergecross73, is Talk: Elden Ring on your watchlist? In short succession, Phlogistonatorspam (talk · contribs), IAintReadingALLThat (talk · contribs), Bellbearinghunter (talk · contribs) and RoyBokChoy (talk · contribs), all new accounts, made gameguide-like suggestions. Three of the four accounts claim to be studying at the University of Minnesota. Same person or weird coincidence of four like-minded individuals? soetermans. ^{↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK} 14:00, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

That ones actually not on my watchlist, so I hadn't noticed. Yes, it could be WP:SOCK or WP:MEAT violations. Or it could just be a bunch of buddies who joined at the same time or something, and they're all equally unaware of how Wikipedia works. To me, its really only an issue if they're they become disruptive or appear to be WP:CANVASSing with one another to get their way. Not opposed to others doing a CU if they believe otherwise though, but I'd just work on trying to get them up to speed first. Sergecross73 msg me 17:24, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

Hello! Just want to make some clarifications and provide some background into the suspicious influx of multiple likeminded accounts on Elden Ring. Myself, Phlogistonatorspam (talk · contribs), RoyBokChoy (talk · contribs), and IAintReadingALLThat (talk · contribs) are all University of Minnesota undergraduate students studying social computing. One of our projects involves making edits to Wikipedia pages of interest and documenting the process. We all pair up in groups and contribute in some way to a page we find interesting. Elden Ring happened to be a page of interest for a couple groups in this class. Apologies for any violations of community norms... I am very new to this and have yet to learn the standards of making Wiki edits. But yeah... no WP:SOCK or WP:MEAT issues here :) Bellbearinghunter (talk) 18:57, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

Okay, no worries. This sort of thing happens. You haven't done anything wrong, it's just that long-term editors see a lot of people try to abuse Wikipedia and wish to be quick to address it, and sometimes there are false-positives. As long as you four dont go around teaming up in every discussion together to get your way in debates, you should be fine.

It may be a bit overwhelming, but there is all sorts of guidance at MOS:VG on what to include or exclude on video game related Wikipedia articles. WT:VG is a good place to ask questions too. There's plenty of editors, myself included, who you can ask questions too. Sergecross73 msg me 19:28, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

Thank you Sergecross73for providing some guidance on what to include on video game related Wikipedia articles. As Phlogistonatorspam said, we are new to the Wikipedia editing process, but overall we just want to improve the wiki. I was actually unaware that other people from our class chose to do editing on Elden Ring, haha. Please provide us with any suggestions or comments with the edits that we propose. I will look over the two articles you provided in order to gain a better understanding of what is relevant for video game articles. Nice to meet you all. RoyBokChoy (talk) 19:39, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

Sergecross73 (talk · contribs) Thanks for the guides. I will look into these and apply them to future discussions and edits. I appreciate it! Bellbearinghunter (talk) 19:50, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

I'll try to come on some of your talk page questions soon. Sergecross73 msg me 01:56, 28 March 2024 (UTC)

Hi everyone, sorry my late reply. Great that you all decided to help out Wikipedia. I didn't mean to come off as suspicious! Like Sergecross73 said, I've seen my fair share of abuse, but I try to assume good faith.

But now, what's weird, is that there's a similar thing going on at Talk: Helldivers 2. There is ZNeptune (talk · contribs), Blund013 (talk · contribs) and Pherur (talk · contribs) made new topics in 24 hours. Two of those accounts were created on March 1, the other March 2. And similarly, they created their userpages first. Like the four Minnesotan editors here. Are these also part of the social computing studies? Shouldn't a class project be clarified? soetermans. ^{↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK} 00:12, 30 March 2024 (UTC)

@Brianda (Wiki Ed) Are you aware of a class for UoM going on? Looks like there may be a couple of classes active and working together here that are not advertised as such. -- ferret (talk) 00:18, 30 March 2024 (UTC)

I think we can add DuMmyfizh (talk · contribs) to that list as well. soetermans. ^{↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK} 00:19, 30 March 2024 (UTC)

Hi, yes we are also apart of the class, sorry to appear suspicious to y'all. There are actually several groups of people working on different articles, hence why we were working on a different page. Those two places for guidance about videogame edits would have been very helpful earlier on in this task, we were just given some general guidance about good Wikipedia editing and stuff. Sorry for any naive additions we may have tried to make, we were just genuinely trying to provide some good contributions. Also sorry about the lack of advertisement. I think the general assumption from our professor was that since we are only adding quality contributions (trying to at least) disclosure of it being part of a course may have been overlooked. Thank you all for being so helpful and understanding about this, the deadline for this assignment is soon so I assume you won't see more suspicious groups pop up in the near future. ZNeptune (talk) 00:59, 30 March 2024 (UTC)

Hi ZNeptune, I will definitely give you all the benefit of the doubt, since the edits were all in good faith and mostly on talk pages anyway, but I don't understand: all these accounts were created at the start of this month. Besides creating a userpage, these accounts haven't made any edits until March 27 and the days following, but the deadline of the assignment is soon? Don't get me wrong, I am no stranger to procrastination - I am doing so as we speak! But what is the assignment? Why does it involve video game articles talk pages? soetermans. ^{↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK} 01:30, 30 March 2024 (UTC)

Yes we all had to make accounts when we submitted a proposal for what topics we wanted to work on, hence them all being made at the same time. Its not specific to videogame pages, it just happened to be that a few groups choose those pages. We are supposed to try to contribute to a page and they also wanted us to post on the talk page to discuss changes I think, but it seems like discussions about that happen more in places like MOS:VG and WT:VG. We had to write a paper reflecting on our experience making changes, what we changed, why and how we thought it improved the page, etc. We were definitely supposed to spread out our edits more, but school and life happens and a lot of work ended up being done near the deadline unfortunately. I have let the professor know about us being flagged as bots in the reflection essay, and hopefully they will learn from this and have students disclose themselves if they do the assignment again next year. Hopefully that helps clarify things. ZNeptune (talk) 01:48, 30 March 2024 (UTC)

@ZNeptune To be clear, nothing was really done wrong. But the way everything lined up, it led to suspicion. If you want more material for writing up your reflection essay, the relevant pages are WP:SOCK (One person with multiple accounts) and WP:MEAT (Multiple people acting in concert). Unfortunately, these are both very common issues, so 8(+) accounts behaving like this can raise some eyebrows. -- ferret (talk) 01:54, 30 March 2024 (UTC)

While I'm here, I'll note a couple days ago, a set of 3-4 editors announced they were editing Discord together. I suspect it may be the same class. -- ferret (talk) 01:55, 30 March 2024 (UTC)

I'm glad to hear we didn't do anything wrong (besides unknowningly making gameguide suggestions/edits), and I totally understand how it seems very suspicious, I would have thought the same in your position. I made sure to add in those SOCK and MEAT aspects to the paper. It might be, the specifics for what page a group could choose, was that it had to have at least 10 edits per month, and at least 3 talk posts a month. The assignment was assigned at the beginning of March (before spring break), and due at the end, and group sizes were 3-4. Hopefully that helps. ZNeptune (talk) 02:13, 30 March 2024 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – April 2024

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

Administrator changes

• Kbdank71
• Kosack
• NrDg
• TLSuda

Guideline and policy news

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

Technical news

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

Arbitration

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

Miscellaneous

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

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:48, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

Vandalism part 33

Serge's 33rd iteration of his own personal WP:AIV and WP:RFPP. Feel free to report anything you feel may need admin intervention. Sergecross73 msg me 21:20, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

• Consistently Heinous (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) Received multiple warnings to stop adding inappropriate WikiProject Banners to article talk pages but went back and re-added them. --ThomasO1989 (talk) 19:54, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

  72 hour'd. -- ferret (talk) 22:52, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

• OHIO 97876 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) Making a lot of unnecessary edits, when warned or asked it's brushed off with "oops my bad". --ThomasO1989 (talk) 20:31, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

  Looks like he's on the verge of needing something, but I don't think he's messed up again since ferret gave him the warning of being indeffed if he adds any more unsourced content? Sergecross73 msg me 11:52, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

  I've been waffling on whether they've crossed the line or not. -- ferret (talk) 15:11, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

  To me it looked like they do the same things some other problematic editors who refuse to use sources do instead of changing - simply make minor tweaks that don't require sources. Which usually isn't sustainable and leads to unsourced editing again when they think no one is looking anymore. So a block will probably be needed...eventually. Unless they turn it around. Sergecross73 msg me 15:15, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

• Can you protect Beyblade (manga)? due to edit warring Timur9008 (talk) 04:45, January 10, 2024 (UTC)

• Can you give me a little more background on what's going on here? Sergecross73 msg me 15:15, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

User:Cleter merged content per Talk:Beyblade#Requested_merge_12_October_2023 but that discussion has not closed and people oppose the move. Looks like he stopped eidt warrring though.

He created a second account User:Jalos92 which was blocked indefinitely and he was warned. Timur9008 (talk) 16:09, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

I gave them a final warning, and a bit of an explanation, as I'm not sure all the templated responses necessarily conveyed the issues. But there's little room for confusion now. Let me know if it happens further. Thanks. Sergecross73 msg me 17:25, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

• Taqi Inalessa Sany Plus (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) Seems to be WP:NOTHERE, creating drafts for "Kirby & Friends" fan fiction. --ThomasO1989 (talk) 01:43, 20 January 2024 (UTC)

  Someone beat me to it! Sergecross73 msg me 13:38, 21 January 2024 (UTC)

Hey Sergecross73, you could check out Inteqaam (talk · contribs)? This edit warring already, perhaps a WP:CIR issue. Thanks. soetermans. ^{↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK} 11:14, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

Its not a competence issue instead of engaing in the talk page your reverting my edits even when clearly the other user was at fault. Inteqaam (talk) 11:24, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

Looks like someone beat me to it. Sergecross73 msg me 15:31, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

Thanks anyway! Different question: what do you make of SomeWeb (talk · contribs)? Here for four and half years, 19 edits, all related to pornography, including adding inappropriate external links. They received several warnings. WP:NOTHERE? soetermans. ^{↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK} 18:10, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

Hey Sergecross73, did you see my previous message? If no action is needed I understand, but at the same time I feel that if an editor would do those kind of edits in a very short they would be indeffed quickly. Thoughts? soetermans. ^{↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK} 11:09, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

Yes, sorry, I did miss this. It looks like it came through around the same time as a bunch of other messages.

I gave the guy a more comprehensive warning about sources, but since his damage to the project is fairly minimal (he edits pretty infrequently) I didn't think it was time to jump to a block yet. Sergecross73 msg me 12:24, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

• JustYourImaginaryGuy (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) This guy is completely robotically obsessed with ruining images and getting reverted, sometimes by himself. They're almost all replacing photos with no problems, or just blatantly downgraded in quality, with the subject's face obscured, or from past years for no reason. Just needlessly disruptive, even of Good articles like Steve Jobs. Check the Talk page of endless blatant pointless violations. All falsely marked WP:MINOR for no reason at all and with no WP:EDITSUMMARY. He even already got blocked for spamming page protection requests and still did it repeatedly after, like this. It's a completely disruptive and unresponsive nuisance. Thank you. — Smuckola(talk) 06:31, 17 February 2024 (UTC)

  Final warned. Sergecross73 msg me 18:00, 17 February 2024 (UTC)

  As I sadly predicted, he carried right on. He replaced three photos using no edit summary and falsely flagged as minor, including one without updating the caption[24]. And of course no response to anybody on Talk. — Smuckola(talk) 21:59, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

  He kept ignoring me despite another shot too, so he's is blocked. Sergecross73 msg me 13:17, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

• Sam Willard (talk · contribs) This guy is WP:MEATBOT spamming WP:OR about supposed census data with no sources and with WP:LEAD violation. Maybe it's AGF of the lowest order of WP:CIR but I believe he will never stop or acknowledge without a block. Is there a mass revert function? Thanks. — Smuckola(talk) 10:26, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

  Blocked. While I'd be more sympathetic if it was simply someone trying to learn the website still, some of the edits were just blatant vandalism that there's no reason to believe anyone would think are okay, whether you understood the website or not. I did give them a path to being unblocked though. We'll see if they engage or not. Sergecross73 msg me 17:32, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

  Ok thanks. It is an unreal scam, that Wikipedia has a corporate prime directive to honeypot everybody on the planet into editing this site and officially uses every lie that we desperately need them and their every contribution, without requiring or even offering any qualifications or training or reputation, and barely even an automated attempt to scan for or report blatant rulebreaking. Or even track abuse once we dig it up! The toxic positivity culture mandates that we coddle the abusers and blame the victims for being needlessly angered or for reacting responsibly, and nobody ever implicates or even mentions the corrupt governance, or even ensures the cleanup. This just cheaply hides behind Internet anonymity, and no physical system could ever survive this culture of abuse akin to American gun laws where pages like this one are our "thoughts and prayers". I don't even know where in WMF to track and vote on such policies. So anyway, is there any mass-revert function for this guy's meatbot spam? He injected alleged 2020 numbers in articles that have no 2020 sources! — Smuckola(talk) 21:46, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

  I don't know of any mass-revert options outside of WP:ROLLBACK rights, which I'd probably less than what you're looking for. Sergecross73 msg me 00:29, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

• ComputerUserUser (talk · contribs) This is a WP:TENDENTIOUS problem user who is 100% aggressively and hatefully combative and edit warring as you can see on his Talk page. If you disagree, you're wrong. If you help, you're wrong. Never an WP:EDITSUMMARY, tons of needlessly spammed micro-edits per article, and tons of needless edits among some good edits. Lots of WP:OR because he is absolutely WP:NOTHERE and this is his nostalgic toy. He WP:OWNs this site, and is at the point of vindictiveness against correction. This and the last two editors I reported here have aggressively obliterated countless hours of my time (and of others) just reviewing and often reverting, I state every bit of help and I state my goal of enhancing their efforts and preventing them from being blocked, they are hateful, there are more in the swamp that I just can't even bring myself to report because I doubt anybody will do anything, and it super sucks. — Smuckola(talk) 21:03, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

  Smuckola appears to be feeling upset due to his difficulty in managing situations where others exhibit behavior similar to his own. ComputerUserUser (talk) 23:33, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

  This is too vague to take action on. I'd need difs. And context too. It's easy for me to take action when people make blatant falsehoods like "Nintendo created Mario in 1864". I can't just eyeball issues related to tweaks on things like fluorescent lamps and LCD screens. Sergecross73 msg me 00:28, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

  Ok sorry bro, but for starters did ya check his exhaustive Talk page and his preposterously abusive responses that disavow the existence of any and all policy because he WP:OWNs the world? He's explicitly anti WP:EDITSUMMARY and anti MOS:TENSE and such, way more than all the others lately. Thanks for listening and trying. I can also dig up diffs from the timeframe of those warnings on his Talk page. He has a WP:TENDENTIOUS pattern of spitefully vindictive edit warring like this latest one, where he arbitrarily reverts a perfectly correct edit simply because I am the one who made it. Regarding his above comment, I had to read it several times because it's so nonsensically twisted with spite, but he's simply taunting us for even questioning any of his edits on this site that he WP:OWNs. I'll try to look for more but I've been so wrecked by endless abusers for so long, including two problem editors who also happen to be admins, one of whom I emailed you extensively about and mentioned here twice a few months ago. I haven't made any new content forever and I see countless others give up and leave Wikipedia. — Smuckola(talk) 01:46, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

• Jimthing (talk · contribs) is exactly the same, except only WP:OR or garbage citations. He cites mainly nothing at all, secondly tech support notes or forum posts, and occasionally a lot of anti-WP:RS like Daily Mail which are so bad that the system flagged a warning and NikkiMaria has auto-deleted them. But no WP:RS ever, and he aggressively combats the very notion of WP:RS as you can see on Apple community, Shazam (app), and their talk pages, especially here where he edit warred and generally combated an admin who was severely remiss in not blocking him. He always instantly deleted all my warnings and my exhaustive attempts to help on his Talk page, without response, or gave an insult once and deleted. WP:IDIDNTHEARTHAT. With ComputerUserUser and Jimthing (and countless others), I gave very unsolicited tutoring and encouragement, reviewed all their edit history, dutifully (often reluctantly) clicked "thank" on each good one, but received only spite. He WP:OWNs this site. At the very least, you could engage them please. — Smuckola(talk) 21:12, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

  You have a history of overstating and misrepresenting facts, don't you. As per my response to your previous cherry-picking my edits and hysterics here. Jimthing (talk) 11:54, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

  Smuckola makes a few good points - generally speaking, it looks like you should revert less and discuss more, and probably be a bit more careful with the sources you use. But that aside, I'm confused as to why you were reported on Feb 19, when you had been inactive for 3 days. This one is also too vague to act on. I don't see how this would have escalated to a block yet, let alone after 3 days of not editing at all. Sergecross73 msg me 12:10, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

• Hey, there. I've just encountered a potential IP hopper with the most recent IPs 2600:1700:6da0:4fc0:d8f9:2cdb:b777:3a6c (talk · contribs · WHOIS), 2600:1700:6DA0:4FC0:2C71:785C:DB49:FB4E (talk · contribs · WHOIS) and 2603:3006:1016:4D00:A138:AB12:4B68:D8D2 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) making unexplained deletions on articles related to Disney and Universal theme parks. Can you please look into this? Thanks, Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 03:21, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

  Sorry, I missed this one. Looks like they've all went inactive since 2/19 though, so I don't think there's anything to be done unless you catch them at another IP. Sergecross73 msg me 15:49, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

  Just found some more recent IPs: 2600:1700:6da0:4fc0:9921:831b:3808:faef (talk · contribs · WHOIS), 2600:1700:6da0:4fc0:e8b4:6c09:97ab:cc2a (talk · contribs · WHOIS), 207.140.241.131 (talk · contribs · WHOIS), 2600:1700:6da0:4fc0:b0be:a803:ae23:b777 (talk · contribs · WHOIS), 2600:1700:6DA0:4FC0:3572:6FE6:CC9C:3797 (talk · contribs · WHOIS), 2600:1700:6DA0:4FC0:6950:F1F5:10A6:DFD5 (talk · contribs · WHOIS). Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 05:28, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

  They seem to be quick to change, so I don't see a block helping much, and I'm having a hard time seeing where page protection would be helpful either. Reverting the unhelpful edits may be the best approach on this one... Sergecross73 msg me 20:17, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

  Gotcha. Just wanted to double check. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 21:11, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

  The IP range (2600:1700:6DA0:4FC0:0:0:0:0/64 (talk · contribs · WHOIS)) has now been blocked for three months. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 06:42, 5 March 2024 (UTC)

  Oh good, glad to hear it. I don't know how to do range blocks, so I couldn't have done that one. Sergecross73 msg me 13:51, 5 March 2024 (UTC)

• Hey Serge, might you be able to protect Bbno$? An IP from Vietnam has been blanking content, removing formatting and reverting constructive edits [25] [26] [27]. Ss112 15:33, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

  Hello. So, the edit warring and lack of edit summaries or discussion is of course problematic...but I feel like some of their edits have merit. I'm blanking on the Wiki alphabet soup link, but retail/distribution/storefront links like that generally shouldn't be used as sources on WP:PROMOTIONal grounds. All those Apple Music links really ought to go... Sergecross73 msg me 16:24, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

  The editor is now blocked for blanking sections of another article. To clarify: I didn't add the sources. I don't really care whether they're there or not, but to note, the entries are unsourced without them. I am aware of WP:AFFILIATE, I cite it all the time myself and I do not personally source content to Apple Music or Spotify. I haven't worked extensively on this article and only came across the edit by chance, but this is indisputably disruptive behaviour. Reverting six intermediate constructive edits of mine for nothing and edit warring to retain the edits makes me overlook any apparent "merit" their edit(s) may have. I still think the article should be protected. Ss112 21:15, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

  I didn't mean to suggest that you did anything wrong or didn't know any of that, I just meant to say that there seemed to be some salvageable aspects to their otherwise disruptive edits. Sergecross73 msg me 21:20, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

• 2600:8804:A80:60C0:20A5:8BDC:C2BB:B2F0 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) This guy has apparently sockpuppeted three IP addresses in two days (here and here) to spam many Apple related pages with "about" templates that are redundant to the legitimate existing "about" template, and full of junk. Plus edit warring about it. — Smuckola(talk) 19:56, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

  This is not sockpuppetry. Users have no control over the rotation of their IPv6 /64. -- ferret (talk) 20:05, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

  And the edits, while not necessary, weren't really that damaging, and were pretty quickly and easily reverted. I don't really see much need for action... Sergecross73 msg me 20:21, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

  As I said, he already blockably violated WP:EW. Even if you're going to skip acting on that, yes most were reverted but only at my own risk of WP:3RR so therefore I need help reverting, like here. It didnt stop. — Smuckola(talk) 20:42, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

  I agree that the notices are unneeded...but they're not really vandalism. This should really be handled more like a content dispute. (Talk page discussion, contacting Wikiprojects for input if necessary, etc.) Protection or blocking should only be if they continue even after there's a talk page consensus established. Sergecross73 msg me 22:39, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

• 103.164.147.166 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) Edit-warring on Mario vs. Donkey Kong --ThomasO1989 (talk) 04:01, 5 March 2024 (UTC)

  Protected, encouraged discussion on talk page. Sergecross73 msg me 13:50, 5 March 2024 (UTC)

• This user made a handful of edits throughout February and March that removed quality information. Panini! • 🥪 16:54, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

  I think that's another one that I'd say I don't agree with their edits, but I can see how they could be making them in good faith. Probably better handled through reverting, discussion, etc. Sergecross73 msg me 01:47, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

• 69.123.102.47 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) This block-evader with the nonsense edit summaries ("Racing in style!") is back. --ThomasO1989 (talk) 04:07, 8 March 2024 (UTC)

  Blocked for longer than usual, since he's been returning to that same IP for a while now. Sergecross73 msg me 14:39, 8 March 2024 (UTC)

• Boyohboy231 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) So a user who is fresh off of their second block for unsourced editing made this edit without changing the source, which mentions nothing about accounting and legal affairs, or 323 employees in 2024 (and it's a source published in 2020). The rest of that change and some of their other edits look questionable too in terms of WP:V and WP:OR. Left guide (talk) 08:10, 19 March 2024 (UTC)

  Thank you for bringing this to my attention. I cant believe after all their blocks and warnings, they still refuse to stop... Sergecross73 msg me 12:06, 19 March 2024 (UTC)

  And thank you for the assist. I can't believe it either; those policy violations are just clear as day. After five years, 7k edits, and two blocks (now a third), I'm not sure there's any more WP:ROPE left to offer. Left guide (talk) 12:28, 19 March 2024 (UTC)

  They've now since been indeffed. Sergecross73 msg me 13:53, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

• Moline1 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) A user who has previously received two blocks (and countless unreplied-to talk page warnings) for unsourced editing and original research made this edit without supplying a citation, or being mentioned or sourced in the body of the article. Furthermore, that genre doesn't appear to be mentioned or sourced in the infobox at the article of the band in question, or its musical style section. Left guide (talk) 04:29, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

  Thank you for seemingly keeping an eye on editors I'm not keeping an eye on. I've blocked him, with the condition that I'll unblock if he finally starts addressing these issues. Thank you! Sergecross73 msg me 13:56, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

• Miked1992 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is another one that merits attention. Earned a past block for unsourced editing, received another warning for unsourced editing less than a month ago, and then earlier today made a series of eight edits at Disney's Yacht Club Resort creating three entire sections of content with no sources. Left guide (talk) 14:23, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

  Blocked for a month. Sergecross73 msg me 22:55, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

  Just a heads-up, the editor replied to you on March 31 at User talk:Miked1992#March 2024 but didn't ping you, so you may have missed it. Left guide (talk) 20:49, 4 April 2024 (UTC)

• Rice n Noodles (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) Since August 2022, this user has received many warnings for persistently adding unsourced content (including multiple "final warnings"), none of which have been replied to. I just had to make this mass revert/removal at The City That Never Sleeps (nickname), which is entirely unsourced and most of those entries were added by that editor. Less than a month ago, they added three wholly unsourced sections to Melting pot, which was rightfully reverted by another editor. There are other recent examples too. Left guide (talk) 21:22, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

  Final warned. Which is probably more lenient than they deserve. But blocks are meant to be preventative, and their edits in recent days (probably by luck) aren't as bad. Sergecross73 msg me 00:01, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

  Definitely gotta keep an eye on this editor; even small seemingly innocuous ones like these two are problematic since every single other location mentioned in that sentence has an inline citation directly attached to it; originally looked like this:

  Many parrots, especially monk parakeets, have been introduced to areas with temperate climates, and have established stable populations in parts of the United States (including New York City), the United Kingdom, Belgium, Spain, and Greece.

  It truly baffles me how someone can add unsourced entries to a list or series where every single existing entry is already directly supported by an inline citation. Anyways, thanks again for helping out. Left guide (talk) 01:39, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

  Later blocked a week for further unsourced editing. Sergecross73 msg me 00:50, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

• 2600:6C63:4500:12CE:1CEB:E0C8:761B:1505‎ (talk · contribs · (/64) · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · block user · block log) (an editor which appeared in the 2600:6C63:4500:12CE:0:0:0:0/64 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) range which was blocked for edit warring at Styx (band) and Godzilla vs. Megaguirus yesterday) has been causing problems at the latter article. Can you please look into this? Thanks, Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 03:41, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

  Protected. Sergecross73 msg me 03:44, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

  Thanks. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 03:48, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

  Unfortunately, the IP disruption on the Godzilla vs. Megaguirus page has resumed shortly after the protection expired (the history is here). Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 03:14, 6 April 2024 (UTC)

• Keep an eye on NoahMusic2009 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), who just launched a personal attack at an AfD. Last month, this user also shouted at another editor in the edit summary with a personal attack at the end while edit-warring in an unreliable source. I've left a warning at user talk. Left guide (talk) 21:36, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

  Agreed, their comments are pretty out of line. Chimed in on your warning. Sergecross73 msg me 22:16, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

• 86.150.242.153 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) was blocked for blatant persistent vandalism at the article 2023–24 Premier League, and now 86.135.146.223 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) is performing the same vandalism. Please consider blocking the latter IP and protecting the article, thanks. Left guide (talk) 10:45, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

  Looks like someone beat me to it. They did the same thing I would have though, so it all worked out. Sergecross73 msg me 17:25, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

• Yo, you mind protecting Pizza Tower again? Previous protection expired and since then the same brand of disruptive editing has returned. Basically every edit by an IP or new user is almost immediately reverted. JOEBRO⁶⁴ 16:25, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

  Protected. Sergecross73 msg me 12:28, 6 April 2024 (UTC)

• Wabbit98 See this edit[28] in incoherent and NPA response to my warning of his mass mistakes and link to one of the examples. There's more where that came from randomly. — Smuckola(talk) 22:48, 5 April 2024 (UTC)

  I don't understand what's wrong with his edit. I think you're going to need to more clearly explain the issue. -- ferret (talk) 22:52, 5 April 2024 (UTC)

  I warned the editor of NPA...but I didn't see anything else to be done. Sergecross73 msg me 22:54, 5 April 2024 (UTC)

  @Ferret: Hi guys. I explained it again here but I didnt see that explanation got eaten by an edit conflict. But it's just what I had already said here and in the linked comment which the user claimed doesnt exist. Follow the above link and read the existing comment with another link to the original problem like you would with any report. I said that user is not previewing the edits, and has therefore orphaned the old census refs on at least two articles such as what I linked above. Follow that link and then to that article's next edit, and you see the bot trying to repair the damage.[29] That's the proof I directly gave the user which he blindly said I didnt give, and then he abandoned his damage. So now the article has redundant census citations, defeating the whole purpose. If there's two such things from a new account, from such an aggressively hostile and oblivious editor, who made hundreds of such mass edits, then there's likely more. So he needs to be instructed to stop editing and review all edits for mistakes. Thanks. — Smuckola(talk) 16:11, 8 April 2024 (UTC)

  @Smuckola So to be clear, there is no issue with the editor's actual update to the Census data, and in fact, they are providing a proper source and figure update? It certainly can be problematic to create orphaned references, but AnomieBOT exists to repair such and no real harm is done, and the re-use of citations is never all that clear in either editor. -- ferret (talk) 16:28, 8 April 2024 (UTC)

  @Ferret: The bot can't really repair the orphaning, just the formatting of the orphaning. So yeah the new citation is formatted correctly, I assume the new data is accurate but I'm not a census person so I didnt check it all, but the old citation remains orphaned to falsely cite nothing or maybe to vaguely cite something, I dunno which. That's still a false citation, or a formatted orphan. It may as well be located in Mario, right? I thought that an infobox is only supposed to have current census data and not mix years. But hey if you checked it and you know that the world of census citation likes doing this, and that it isnt just the aggressive negligence it seems to be and that the user's oblivious and abusive arrogance seemed to then confirm, then ok! He explicitly refused to even check his edit, and replied to my link by saying the link didn't exist. Census stuff is intense and special sometimes. I guess I can see if theres a Wikiproject Census or whatnot but the citation pollution stands. My second car when I was a kid was a Chevy Citation and it was wicked broken, so now I check everything for safety. Thank you. — Smuckola(talk) 16:48, 8 April 2024 (UTC)

  What are you talking about? AnomieBOT can fully repair orphaned links. If you mean that the infobox's footnote field should have also been updated to the new reference, that's a different issue than what you've described. The user did not update the infobox, they updated the estimate table further in the article. That table happened to use the same reference, and AnomieBOT repaired it successfully. If the infobox ALSO needs updated, that's a different issue that has not been, or has poorly been, conveyed. You absolutely did not explain that to the user properly. You misused the uw-disruptive3 template, a rather verbose and large template, with no prior warnings with an unclear explanation of the problem buried in the middle to the user. It's no surprise they reacted negatively. I had no idea what "confusing between years" meant myself, though I now presume you mean population table versus infobox. They did not explicitly refuse to check their edit, nor did they reply saying that a link didn't exist. Are we reading the same user talk pages? -- ferret (talk) 17:24, 8 April 2024 (UTC)

  Just chiming in briefly before I archive the section - my original comment remains and I share ferret's concerns. I dont believe the the issues are that major, nor do I believe they were given enough explanation of the issue or good-faith in general for any further action being taken. Sergecross73 msg me 00:54, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

• 174.90.83.170 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) appears to be resuming vandalism at Mitch Marner after you issued a 31-hour block. Also, I like this concept of an administrator-specific WP:AIV/WP:RFPP! . —Sirdog (talk) 13:52, 9 April 2024 (UTC)

  Blocked. And I'm glad you like the concept. I like giving people an alternative to those venues (and other admin boards) that often have bureaucratic or toxic traits. I'm happy to help you with stuff like this. My only request with people is that they don't give me too much grief if I disagree with them. (Even then, you're free to go to other admin/venues too if I decline to intervene.) Sergecross73 msg me 14:10, 9 April 2024 (UTC)

• 2603:7080:bc39:24c::/64 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · block user · block log) has been using the 172.58.30.242 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) IP to evade their one-week block and continue the same disruption on articles such as Ursula (The Little Mermaid) and Itchy & Scratchy: The Movie among others (the previous IP, 172.58.27.202 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log), was just blocked for 24 hours). Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 17:33, 10 April 2024 (UTC)

  I blocked/protected a few recurring problem spots that weren't already blocked/protected. Sergecross73 msg me 17:51, 10 April 2024 (UTC)