User talk:Yamla/Archive 40

Creating a new account due to my IP account

I saw your message on my talk page about declining my request to unblock my account here on Wikipedia. There is any way to delete my old account and create a new account so I edit the List of Major League Baseball articles that I created or edited within the last two years? Answer me back as soon as possible. Thank you and good day. [[User:WikiMaster2K15 |WikiMaster2K15]] (talk) 14:53, 2 April 2023 (UTC)

Stop being rude. No, there's no way to delete your current account. Nor would it be appropriate for you to set up a new account, as you are not an editor in good standing. You need to stick with your current account and your current sanction. --Yamla (talk) 10:34, 3 April 2023 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – April 2023

News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2023).

Administrator changes

Aoidh

KillerChihuahua

CheckUser changes

Ferret

Guideline and policy news

• A community RfC is open to discuss whether reports primarily involving gender-related disputes or controversies should be referred to the Arbitration enforcement noticeboard.

Technical news

• Some older web browsers will not be able to use JavaScript on Wikimedia wikis starting this week. This mainly affects users of Internet Explorer 11. (T178356)
• The rollback of Vector 2022 RfC has found no consensus to rollback to Vector legacy, but has found rough consensus to disable "limited width" mode by default.
• A link to the user's Special:CentralAuth page will now appear in the subtitle links shown on Special:Contributions. This was voted #17 in the Community Wishlist Survey 2023.

Arbitration

• The Armenia-Azerbaijan 3 case has been closed.
• A case about World War II and the history of Jews in Poland has been opened, with the first evidence phase closing 6 April 2023.

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:12, 4 April 2023 (UTC)

User:Davinia Priscilla

Did you intend to only impose an indefinite partial block or was that a misclick? I thought you wanted to indef. —  Salvio ^giuliano 11:53, 5 April 2023 (UTC)

Misclick. Thanks very much for pointing that out! --Yamla (talk) 11:59, 5 April 2023 (UTC)

User talk:Benicioleite2122

Okay. Good luck with your other pursuits. Priceless.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:59, 7 April 2023 (UTC)

Editing Talk Pages

I thought about your reply about my message to my talk page about making constructive suggestions on article talk pages and I don't think like that idea at all. But, I was thinking that instead of that, how about I do editing full talk pages or the posts on the talk pages for 3 months and maybe that will help me to unblock my account here on Wikipedia. Sound a good idea and respond to me back and tell me what is your response to me about that idea if your agreed with it. Thank you and good day. WikiMaster2K15 (talk) 12:31, 8 April 2023 (UTC)

I don't understand what you are suggesting to do. You are not permitted to edit other people's comments on article talk pages, so definitely don't do that. If you are trying to get back into editing articles, you need to demonstrate you are capable of doing so and I've pointed out how you can accomplish that. You seem to not want to do that. That's fine, but then you shouldn't expect your block to be lifted. --Yamla (talk) 12:37, 8 April 2023 (UTC)

So what I need to do get back to editing certain pages like List of Major League Baseball career home run leaders for example. And the reason why I don't want to making constructive suggestions on article talk pages is I am afraid to screw it up and cause more trouble here. Help me to find another way to unblock me so I continue to edit the List of Major League Baseball articles and those are the most important articles I need to do between now and September. Please, I begging, sir. I am begging! WikiMaster2K15 (talk) 15:07, 8 April 2023 (UTC)

No. If you aren't capable of suggesting edits on the article's talk pages, you most certainly aren't capable of directly editing the article. --Yamla (talk) 16:50, 8 April 2023 (UTC)

Threatening post

Could you look at the talk page of SCP9482? They posted what appears to be a threatening message against one or more parties. It doesn't appear to be directed at any specific users, but is definitely concerning. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 13:49, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

Definitely WP:NOTHERE. I'll go block. I don't think there's anything there that warrants WP:EMERGENCY, but feel free to report it there if you wish. Yeech, that was a bad one. --Yamla (talk) 14:17, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for that. I will probably leave it be, unless they post something again as bad or worse in response. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 14:22, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

Unjustified Block

Hi, somehow I got blocked... I was told that the reason I was blocked was that my IP Address belongs to "Forcepoint Cloud Services" (no idea who they might be)... I have Comcast at my house and my IP Address is 98.37.10.192. Could you please unblock me? Thanks and regards, 2601:644:8E80:73FA:0:0:0:C6 (talk) 02:18, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

As you are able to leave a comment here, you are not blocked. Forcepoint Cloud Services is security software which may be running on your computer. --Yamla (talk) 11:21, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

Barack obamna lover seems to be back with a new sock.

Barack obamna lover 2 seems to be Barack obamna lover's sockpuppet who's using the classic "My cousin did it!" excuse on their userpage. Thought you might want to have a look as you were the one who declined Barack obamna lover's unblock request. -- Shadow of the Starlit Sky 20:27, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

Already blocked! --Yamla (talk) 21:23, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

Ok, no problem. If they're back with more socks I will let you know. -- Shadow of the Starlit Sky 03:05, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

How come you blocked 75.63.213.46 as a proxy?

According to https://whatismyipaddress.com/ip/75.63.213.46 , it is AT&T. As far as I can tell it's not a proxy server. Do you even bother checking or just assume all IPs are proxy servers? Acrobat3642 (talk) 10:06, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

I verified it is running a service on port 22. --Yamla (talk) 10:09, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

Also port 8000. --Yamla (talk) 10:19, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

Sockpuppet on my talk page

An IP who just left me a message on my talk page under the header "Gringo" says that he is using an IP to evade a global lock (message may need to be translated because it's in Spanish). I'd file an SPI but I'm not sure who the sockmaster is. ChrisWx (talk - contribs) 16:43, 23 April 2023 (UTC)

A very similar message was left by a similar IP on User talk:United States Man under the header "Para empezar", and is continuously adding a non-notable tornado to Tornadoes of 2023, making the egregious claim that anyone who reverts his edits is against the country of Cuba. A rangeblock may be necessary since he also says that his IP changes frequently. ChrisWx (talk - contribs) 17:33, 23 April 2023 (UTC)

I've blocked the whole range, while still allowing people with accounts to edit. It's a rather large range, unfortunately, but one that's been blocked before. --Yamla (talk) 18:35, 23 April 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for taking care of that. They were being really disruptive. ChrisWx (talk - contribs) 18:45, 23 April 2023 (UTC)

Pending changes

Greetings, I see I approved the pending changes of a sockpuppet that you recently blocked. In retrospect, is there something I should have been more careful about? The changes looked reasonable to me, and I did not investigate copyright, since that's not the bar for approving PC imo, but perhaps I am wrong and would be open to your suggestions. ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 08:29, 24 April 2023 (UTC)

You aren't obligated to check copyright. I agree, the changes looked generally reasonable. They were pretty close to those contributed by the earlier account, but you wouldn't have seen those most likely, nor were you obligated to do so. You did nothing wrong by approving the changes. --Yamla (talk) 11:24, 24 April 2023 (UTC)

Request

I hope this message finds you well. In January of this year, you and Bbb23 reviewed an unblock request from a user where it was discovered that they were editing logged out almost every single month during their block, and the user subsequently asserted that he was unaware that sockpuppetry entailed anonymous editing. [User talk:MehmoodS] I believe there is a strong likelihood that the whole thing was a deliberate distraction possibly to move on to another account. I filed a SPI on the 15th, but unfortunately no-one has gotten around to it yet. [Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/HaughtonBrit]. Your insight would be greatly appreciated if you get a chance to look at it. (PS: Only the Javerine section is pertinent, the rest, particularly the "Notes" section is auxiliary and doesn't require immediate attention) South Asian Historian (talk) 00:06, 24 April 2023 (UTC)

I'll take a look later today (assuming nobody else beats me to the punch). Thanks! --Yamla (talk) 11:57, 24 April 2023 (UTC)

Help! I am in need of critical assistance!

I am in desperate need of your assistance. A user by the name of Ostalgia keeps spamming various Wikipedia articles with unsourced information, and when I try to confront him about his malicious activity, he engages in edit warring against me and is very rude and hurtful in tone. For instance, when I warned him that his edit warring could result in him being blocked, he replied "Bye Felicia" and continued to be unethical. I tried to be calm and civil with him but it clearly hasn't worked, so since I am in a state of emergency with this unreasonable person, I am desperately asking for your help and deal with Ostalgia. Thank you and please respond as soon as possible. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.119.233.226 (talk • contribs)

You are currently evading the block on 199.7.157.100. Once that block has expired, but not before, you can take your concerns to WP:AN/EW. --Yamla (talk) 14:07, 25 April 2023 (UTC)

More than that. You personally are banned. Any edits you make may be thrown away. Wikipedia isn't the place for you, not until you successfully contest your ban. --Yamla (talk) 15:03, 25 April 2023 (UTC)

You've got mail!

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

-- Shadow of the Starlit Sky 18:49, 26 April 2023 (UTC)

Suspicious

Hi Yamla, you recently made CU findings at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/HaughtonBrit involving, among other editors, Ronnie Macroni. A new editor, Ralx888, although already editing at the time of your check, is very suspicious. Despite the fact that the new editor has only about 50 edits, the two accounts intersect on 7 articles. Neither uses any particular editing platform. And the new account seems to know their way around Wikipedia. See, e.g., Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:CrashLandingNew reported by User:Ralx888 (Result: ). Although I'm not sure how relevant it is, there was also an odd conversation on Ralx888's Talk page (since deleted) involving a legitimate editor and Javerine, a sock of HaughtonBrit/MehmoodS, in which Ralx888 did not participate. See this version of Ralx888's Talk page. Finally, their userpages are similar, although not especially distinctive. What do you think?--Bbb23 (talk) 13:44, 28 April 2023 (UTC)

That's quite the overlap, especially considering this editor hasn't edited all that many articles. I was surprised by the SPI to find two editors unrelated to the rest, but I do agree with you, there's enough here to check. I'll file the paperwork. Thanks. --Yamla (talk) 20:13, 28 April 2023 (UTC)

Good call, Bbb23. You called it.  Confirmed. --Yamla (talk) 20:17, 28 April 2023 (UTC)

Thanks, Yamla.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:32, 28 April 2023 (UTC)

FYI on the sock you just blocked; Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/CanadianSingh1469 (big intersection with Ralx888 as well). Presumably meatpuppetry since you didn't pick up any other sleepers. Black Kite (talk) 20:23, 28 April 2023 (UTC)

Thanks, Black Kite. Just left a comment there. Yeah, wrt CanadianSingh1469, I concur about the meatpuppetry. There's a lot of it going around right now. :( --Yamla (talk) 20:23, 28 April 2023 (UTC)

My edit at Ivan Katchanovski and dodgy IP

I edited this page no long ago, and checking its tp found a message by an IP complaining about a potential BLP vio, over which there appears to have been a bit of a discussion earlier. Checking the paragraph in question, it seemed to be sourced to an article that does not reference the subject directly (it only does so very, very indirectly), and removed it (actually moved it to a more suitable article). However, on replying to the IP I noticed it had been banned by you a couple of days ago, and other IPs in that range (entire range is banned) had also been involved with the Katchanovski article a while ago. While I am confident my edit is well grounded, I wanted to run it through you in case you feel it's "tainted" by it being more or less demanded by a banned user. Ostalgia (talk) 17:02, 28 April 2023 (UTC)

It's all sockpuppets, all the time at the moment. :) No, your action was made in good faith. Better than that, I don't believe the specific person who complained about the BLP violation was caught up in the particular case here. I haven't gone back and double-checked, but I'm pretty sure. You did good, reading about a potential BLP violation, determining for yourself that it had merit, and removing the BLP violation. Even if this had been brought up by a blocked or banned user, which does not appear to be the case here, you still did the right thing. BLP violations are serious business. --Yamla (talk) 20:33, 28 April 2023 (UTC)

UTRS

Don't know what to do with those underlying IP blocks. Afraid of screwing something up. In so far as Kevt2002 goes, I did the last one, so tag, you're it. 😛 -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 16:45, 29 April 2023 (UTC)

Almost all the UTRS requests from accounts with underlying IP blocks are proxies or P2P proxies. Unfortunately, the Apple iCloud private relay service catches a lot of people. Probably you can just tag them for checkuser and I (or someone else, there are a couple of us patrolling UTRS) will take action. The requests from anonymous users are even more frustrating. "Proxy block"... "I don't know why I'm blocked"... "Proxy decline". Heh. --Yamla (talk) 20:24, 29 April 2023 (UTC)

tanks -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 20:27, 29 April 2023 (UTC)

I'm rather thirsty right now, I'll do a complete pass over UTRS tomorrow morning. The more serious concern is the number of on-wiki requests that are stale. I keep on saying I'll write up some thoughts on that. I... really should. --Yamla (talk) 20:28, 29 April 2023 (UTC)

Lost hope long ago. Stay thirsty my friend. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 20:33, 29 April 2023 (UTC)

For the first time in weeks, we have zero outstanding UTRS requests! Party party! --Yamla (talk) 10:52, 30 April 2023 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – May 2023

News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2023).

Administrator changes

Spicy

• Ale jrb
• Dbachmann
• DGG (deceased)
• Jimbo Wales

CheckUser changes

Jimbo Wales

Oversighter changes

Jimbo Wales

Guideline and policy news

• A request for comment about removing administrative privileges in specified situations is open for feedback.

Technical news

• Progress has started on the Page Triage improvement project. This is to address the concerns raised by the community in their 2022 WMF letter that requested improvements be made to the tool.

Arbitration

• The proposed decision in the World War II and the history of Jews in Poland case is expected 11 May 2023.

Miscellaneous

• The Wikimedia Foundation annual plan 2023-2024 draft is open for comment and input through May 19. The final plan will be published in July 2023.

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:23, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

UTRS appeal #72958

if you have a moment. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 19:57, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

Responded to the user there. Thanks. --Yamla (talk) 20:19, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

UTRS appeal #73120

OK to grant WP:IPBE? -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 14:02, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

Yeap, ok to grant. Note that I normally look to ensure the UTRS request is confirmed. That particular request says, "This appeal has not been or will not be verified to the account on the wiki." But based on the request on the user's talk page and based on checkuser data, it's clear it's coming from this user. You are free to grant IPBE now that this has been checkuser-cleared. If you don't grant it, I'm happy to do so later today! --Yamla (talk) 16:01, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

Thannks. done -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 16:16, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

Yakhchāl of Moayedi

Hello,

I am currently doing a rewrite of the page for yakhchāl, and I noticed that the page for Yakhchāl of Moayedi was deleted. Do you remember anything about this page? Was it just vandalism jibberish, or anything that should be kept on the main yakhchāl page?

Thank You,

Fephisto (talk) 17:32, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

(Not just that page, but a number of yakhchāl pages were deleted.) Fephisto (talk) 17:35, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

That article was created by a sockpuppet account, POS78, evading a block on M.k.m2003. You are most definitely not that person so are free to create that article. The article itself, prior to deletion, had no significant content. --Yamla (talk) 18:05, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

User edit warring, please help

User @Sundayclose has repeatedly edited in false information, knowingly, and reverted it back to his liking on wiki page Codrus. Please help. PaUZz LYte (talk) 22:04, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) @PaUZz LYte: One revert of your three prior edits is not an edit war, and @SundayClose explained the revert in their edit summary and on your Talk page. General Ization ^Talk 22:16, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

Yeah but so did I. He accused me of edit warring and got me banned for a day a month ago despite the user still adding back in the false information and the user is doing it again. Idk what to do. PaUZz LYte (talk) 22:32, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

@PaUZz LYte: You might start by reading about the meanings of consensus and edit warring, as you apparently don't understand either one. General Ization ^Talk 22:35, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

what makes you say that? PaUZz LYte (talk) 22:36, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

Editor blocked indef. General Ization ^Talk 23:45, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

174.55.91.169

Hi Yamla. 174.55.91.169 (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · proxy check · block user · block log · cross-wiki contribs · CheckUser (log)) has been editing since almost immediately after your 1-year CUblock expired in January. Behaviorally I'm quite confident it's still the same person on the IP, but it still needs a CU to confirm that the main block is still active and assess for hardblockability. Would you mind taking a look? Thanks. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (she|they|xe) 19:13, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

Unfortunately, the accounts involved are stale. The particular IP address is comcast residential, so there's a good chance it's the same person, but I want to be clear, there is no technical data I can snag to rule on, here. I can say the article overlap with the unnamed accounts is clear enough for a block. Let me know if you'd rather I made the block, but I'm happy for you to make it. Based on CU data, I can say a hardblock is definitely the right plan. --Yamla (talk) 19:24, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

Yeah, I didn't expect a new CU match, I just wanted to make sure this wasn't a case where the original block had expired or been lifted. Hardblocked 30 months. Thanks! :) -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (she|they|xe) 19:45, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

Thumbs up! :) --Yamla (talk) 21:46, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

We need a better than button

One that says, Hell, yeah! -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 12:18, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

Hear hear. :) --Yamla (talk) 12:18, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

A digital marketing expert should know that Wikipedia doesn't tolerate spam. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 12:23, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

It's so weird. I think "digital marketing experts" think what they do isn't spam, unlike what all the other digital marketing experts. I have nothing (much) against marketing, but it's really sleezy to do it on an encyclopedia. --Yamla (talk) 12:24, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

I believe that inside every digital marketing expert is a constructive user trying to get out. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 12:38, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

It's really rare but it does happen. They tend to be interested in writing, definitely a positive for Wikipedia. --Yamla (talk) 12:59, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

I don't know

I don't know. I don't know where Ima gonna go, when the volcano blow. --Jimmy Buffert. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 19:57, 12 May 2023 (UTC)

Boaxy is back

Hello. I regret to inform you that user Phrasia, aka Boaxy, has returned under the new name Bronoton. Apparently, he has not learned his lesson from before, and has yet again violated WP:SOCK and WP:EVADE to continue his same editing behaviors as before (i.e., adding unsourced genres/categories).

This is his first sock since I spotted his previous account, 22Headlights, making similar disruptive edits in 2018. He created his current sock account the same year his previous sock was blocked, but I am only just taking notice of this now... Loyalmoonie (talk) 18:19, 13 May 2023 (UTC)

I'm not really familiar with the case. You should probably file a report over at WP:SPI. :) --Yamla (talk) 20:09, 13 May 2023 (UTC)

My apologies. I was of the opinion that you remembered because you declined his unblock request on his previous aforementioned account. Nonetheless, I shall proceed with WP:SPI ASAP. Loyalmoonie (talk) 03:50, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

Bot block was released without action

Hey, sorry for the confusion. Although I have never intentionally used a proxy, it seems that Netflix "curated" by their Singapore partner inserts one for subscribers in Indonesia. So when I tried to login here while lazily not logging out of Netflix, I got bot-blocked. I still think there could be more clarity about the instructions, especially "your block may have expired already" -- give an example of how this could happen, so editors don't wander in the dark wondering what we should do. Thanks for your input. Martindo (talk) 08:48, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

Stalking IP

Yamla, I believe 73.236.210.215 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) is a IP sock of HaughtonBrit (whom you have dealt with before) since I had interacted with and blocked some related sock accounts/IPs a few hours back, and IP seems to be disruptively editing the pages I have edited since then. There is also a slim possibility that the IP is the user Kkggzz or Kamal Afghan01 (whom Ponyo just blocked for socking) instead. Irrespective of the identity of the sockmaster, whom you can't publicly identify in any case, can you review the IP's edits and block/revert/protect as appropriate? Abecedare (talk) 21:57, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

I blocked the IP. -- Ponyo^{bons mots} 22:22, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

Thanks Ponyo. Abecedare (talk) 22:35, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for this, but apparently issues continue

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ASf123456&diff=1150992129&oldid=1150471587 In ictu oculi (talk) 11:56, 19 May 2023 (UTC)

What specific issues are you seeing? --Yamla (talk) 12:22, 19 May 2023 (UTC)

Hope you are having

a nice vacation. I'm saving UTRS appeal #73781 for you, unless you don't want it back. Best -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 14:21, 22 May 2023 (UTC)

Thanks. I'll follow up there. --Yamla (talk) 20:59, 23 May 2023 (UTC)

202.65.173.44

I'm requesting to block this IP Address for persistent vandalism. 46.63.9.118 (talk) 17:23, 4 June 2023 (UTC)

 Note: @46.63.9.118 The IP editor you mentioned wasn't edited after the final warning. ☀DefenderTienMinh⛤☯☽ (talk) 17:28, 4 June 2023 (UTC)

 Done Widr has blocked 202.65.173.44! ☀DefenderTienMinh⛤☯☽ (talk) 17:37, 4 June 2023 (UTC)

Excellent! :) --Yamla (talk) 19:02, 4 June 2023 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – June 2023

News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2023).

Administrator changes

Ingenuity

• Ddstretch
• Prodego
• Resolute

CheckUser changes

Courcelles

Guideline and policy news

• Following an RfC, editors indefinitely site-banned by community consensus will now have all rights, including sysop, removed.
• As a part of the Wikimedia Foundation's IP Masking project, a new policy has been created that governs the access to temporary account IP addresses. An associated FAQ has been created and individual communities can increase the requirements to view temporary account IP addresses.

Technical news

• Bot operators and tool maintainers should schedule time in the coming months to test and update their tools for the effects of IP masking. IP masking will not be deployed to any content wiki until at least October 2023 and is unlikely to be deployed to the English Wikipedia until some time in 2024.

Arbitration

• The arbitration case World War II and the history of Jews in Poland has been closed. The topic area of Polish history during World War II (1933-1945) and the history of Jews in Poland is subject to a "reliable source consensus-required" contentious topic restriction.

Miscellaneous

• Following a community referendum, the arbitration policy has been modified to remove the ability for users to appeal remedies to Jimbo Wales.

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:34, 5 June 2023 (UTC)

User talk:เผลอ

Hi Yamla, I'm trying to understand why you semi-protected the above Talk page. I read the bizarre unblock request by the user that you removed (similar to the first unblock request) and the UTRS appeal, which was pretty much the same as the unblock request, but why didn't you just revoke TPA rather than semi-protect the page? I didn't see any history of IPs or other accounts editing the Talk page. Did I miss something?--Bbb23 (talk) 13:42, 6 June 2023 (UTC)

I believe the protection would stop that particular user from editing for a period of time. What I'd rather do is revoke TPA entirely, but only for a limited amount of time. But of course, a block's a block. You can't have an indefinite block combined with a brief TPA revocation. My intention is for the user to realise their unblock trolling isn't productive but allow for a constructive unblock request in the future. So, that's my intention. A straight-forward revocation of TPA would probably have been a better option here, but I've been criticised in the past for being too eager to revoke TPA. Let me know what you think. I'm happy to hear your opinion here and welcome your disagreement with this approach. --Yamla (talk) 16:15, 6 June 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protection will permit the user to edit their Talk page sometime tomorrow, which is about as "limited" as possible (smiling), so it seems to me like a waste of energy. I of course cannot decline any unblock requests, but if I were not the blocking admin, I would not have removed the second unblock request, but declined it and warned the user that any additional disruptive unblock requests would result in TPA being revoked. Frankly, I've seen all sorts of unblock requests, but these are a new species I haven't seen before. What's your opinion of the second unblock request? Is it an admission of socking, or am I just unable to decipher what the hell the user is saying?--Bbb23 (talk) 16:38, 6 June 2023 (UTC)

I don't think there's any actual meaning to the second unblock request. I think this is most likely an LTA just trying to waste our time. What's strange, though, is that it must have taken some time on their behalf. I've seen a few ChatGPT-generated content-free requests recently, but this isn't one of those. I agree, strange. Thanks for your feedback, that's helpful. I'll keep it in mind for future cases like this. --Yamla (talk) 16:42, 6 June 2023 (UTC)

UTRS appeal #74788

So where do we go from here. Not feeling like sticking my neck out. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 15:37, 14 June 2023 (UTC)

That was all seven years ago . . . . . -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 15:37, 14 June 2023 (UTC)

NeilN is long gone -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 15:38, 14 June 2023 (UTC)

Well, NeilN just revoked TPA. Zzuuzz is still pretty active. This is a case where I strongly think WP:SO applies, without further jumping-through-hoops. It should be pretty obvious pretty quickly if they return to vandalism. Sockpuppetry complicates things but there looks to be no recent evidence of that. Let me know if you see anything wrong with that reasoning! --Yamla (talk) 15:41, 14 June 2023 (UTC)

Yes! Works for me. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 15:45, 14 June 2023 (UTC)

Right. You wanna check with Zzuuzz or should I? I'm okay either way. If you do it, you are welcome to say you have my agreement. --Yamla (talk) 15:46, 14 June 2023 (UTC)

Left 'm a message. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 15:48, 14 June 2023 (UTC)

Incorrect unblock

You recently unilaterally unblocked User:Timmy96, who is community-banned. If you thought their ban should be lifted, you should have raised this for discussion on the administrators noticeboard. I hope you will reverse your incorrect unblock, and give some explanation for your actions. 109.144.21.141 (talk) 06:29, 15 June 2023 (UTC)

Taken to WP:ANI, see Special:Diff/1160275758. --Yamla (talk) 13:01, 15 June 2023 (UTC)

Keep up the good work

	Dunking on them
	This gave me a solid chuckle. You're doing good work, as always. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 14:30, 16 June 2023 (UTC)

Thanks, ScottishFinnishRadish! Much appreciated! --Yamla (talk) 14:34, 16 June 2023 (UTC)

Probable sock

Hey, as long as you've put yourself ITN, I thought I'd ask you to do something before you go on vacation. I would have asked Girth Summit as he was the last person to look at this, but apparently he's out gallivanting somewhere (hasn't edited since June 6). I strongly suspect that ZanderAlbatraz1145 is a sock of YouCanDoBetter. Although there is a not a large amount of intersection between the new account and two blocked accounts, there's enough, and everything else seems to be similar, including the timing of the creation of the new account, the edit summaries, the style, and the kinds of articles. If you prefer that I open an SPI (there is none), let me know.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:55, 15 June 2023 (UTC)

I think there's enough here for a look. I'll file the SPI based on the above and take a look. Thanks! (And let's hope the WP:ANI thread can wrap up before I leave; still lots of time and I'll have my laptop with me in any case). --Yamla (talk) 16:00, 15 June 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/YouCanDoBetter. --Yamla (talk) 16:04, 15 June 2023 (UTC)

Done. Earlier sock is now confirmed but the new account appears unrelated. --Yamla (talk) 16:17, 15 June 2023 (UTC)

Good thing I didn't block behaviorally. I've closed the SPI. Thanks so much for checking.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:08, 15 June 2023 (UTC)

There has been much gallivanting, if by that you mean writing end of year reports and preparing for school productions. Roll on July... Girth Summit _(blether) 16:12, 17 June 2023 (UTC)

"optimistically"

Yeah. We'll view it optimistically. Thanks by the way -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 11:42, 18 June 2023 (UTC)

Yeap. :) --Yamla (talk) 11:43, 18 June 2023 (UTC)

Declining Proposed deletion request

Good day @Yamla i consider you as one of the unbiased Wikipedia Administrators Article on Favi was listed on Articles for deletion but the article was not written on any personal connection. i can swear i do not know him personally i just saw him on multiple news, newspapers and magazine publications that meet up with Nigerian wikipedia standards for notability and importance the article was written with some mistakes i understand i will try to remove any self promoting talk which has ben corrected. and i also added some additional citation from Sun Nigeria the voice of Nigeria. Another reason i wrote this article was because i understand that wikipedia is an unbiased platform i did my investigation because i knew i can not just Publish anything on here, i noticed that he is part of a new rising type of genre in Nigeria which is afro-Trap and is considered one of its many pioneers so those are the reason it was written i hope this few points of mine, helps you consider removing it from the articles for deletion category. Digitalageohio (talk) 20:32, 21 June 2023 (UTC)

Sorry, I'm on vacation at the moment. The place to make your case is Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Favi. --Yamla (talk) 23:23, 22 June 2023 (UTC)

Query

Hello, Yamla,

You might know that I work with a lot of CSD G13s. Well, I was looking at one that is finally coming up for deletion, Draft:Active flow network. It caught my eye because it had been submitted and declined a whopping 12 times. This led me to look into the content creator User:Holcman1 and their sockpuppet, User:David1212121 whom you blocked. One of the articles they worked on was David Holcman. I noticed that there is a new draft Draft:David Holcman by User:HansMueller321. Although the other accounts are stale, I was wondering if you look into whether this new editor is also a sockpuppet. They might just be an individual who works at Holcman's university but I thought I'd check. Ordinarily, I'd file a request at SPI but I don't think a case was ever started on this editor so I'm coming directly to you since you might be familiar with this situation. Thank you. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:02, 8 June 2023 (UTC)

Oh dear! Liz, I was away when you wrote this and didn't mean to ignore your comment! Nevertheless, that was rude of me. I'll go take a look now. --Yamla (talk) 15:42, 14 June 2023 (UTC)

@Liz: Based on the extreme similarities between the last version of David Holcman before it was deleted and the first version of Draft:David Holcman, it's very clear this is either direct sockpuppetry or a case of WP:MEAT. I haven't looked at the checkuser data because I strongly suspect the older accounts would be stale by now. I think the user should be blocked as a sockpuppet based on this, no WP:SPI necessary. Let me know if you agree and if you'd like to do it or if you'd prefer I do so. --Yamla (talk) 15:50, 14 June 2023 (UTC)

You were away and I do a sucky job and checking back to see responses to messages I post on talk pages! I trust your instincts as a checkuser so if you think there is a connection, please act on it (whenever you can get to it!). Thank you. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:47, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

Vandal

This one is this, no doubt. I know it's an LTA, and I am sure there are people who remember who it is. Drmies (talk) 14:49, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – July 2023

News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2023).

Administrator changes

Novem Linguae

• Deckiller
• Electionworld
• MBisanz
• Penwhale
• Raul654
• Roadrunner
• Viridae
• Yannismarou

Bureaucrat changes

MBisanz

Guideline and policy news

• Contributions to the English Wikipedia are now released under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License (CC BY-SA 4.0) license instead of CC BY-SA 3.0. Contributions are still also released under the GFDL license.

Technical news

• Discussion is open regarding a proposed global policy regarding third-party resources. Third-party resources are computer resources that reside outside of Wikimedia production websites.

Arbitration

• Two arbitration cases are currently open. Proposed decisions are expected 5 July 2023 for the Scottywong case and 9 July 2023 for the AlisonW case.

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:59, 1 July 2023 (UTC)

UTRS

FYI; I wouldn't be surprised if disruption resumed given that perplexing comment. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 23:24, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll keep my eye on it. --Yamla (talk) 13:00, 1 July 2023 (UTC)

LTA?

Hi Yamla, I'm curious, have you looked at YonkerDonk? Perhaps another CU has done so? Given their post-block comments, they pretty much confess to having multiple accounts. If I were to play who's the master, I would guess that a check's been done and there was no evidence of socking, either because it simply uncovered no other accounts (not a lot of edits from the blocked user), or because the blocked user is using proxies. But such "games" are more frustrating than fun. Speaking of fun, I hope you had a good time on your recent vacation.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:39, 3 July 2023 (UTC)

Responding via email. For those following along, no evidence of socking and I won't be disclosing private information via email, obviously. -- Yamla (talk) 15:45, 3 July 2023 (UTC)

Oh! Also, my vacation was great. :) Campervan held up well, we saw harbour seals and porpoises and orcas, and ate altogether too much tasty food. Hooray! -- Yamla (talk) 15:57, 3 July 2023 (UTC)

Sounds absolutely wonderful! Thanks for the e-mail.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:59, 3 July 2023 (UTC)

User talk:AugustusAudax

Hey Yamla, you put a block notice on the user's Talk page but did not actually block them.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:31, 6 July 2023 (UTC)

Thanks. I closed the wrong tab and then got confused when it said the (different) user was already blocked. Done! --Yamla (talk) 18:32, 6 July 2023 (UTC)

I think all the world's woes should be blamed on tabs. :p --Bbb23 (talk) 18:34, 6 July 2023 (UTC)

And social media. :) --Yamla (talk) 18:36, 6 July 2023 (UTC)

Much worse than tabs. You're a functionary - delete them all! --Bbb23 (talk) 18:47, 6 July 2023 (UTC)

Jstewart2007

Some days ago you blocked User:Jstewart2007. I have no opinion about the block itself, but as you have talked in his talk page his drafts are now abandoned and may eventually be deleted by lack of activity. I have informed the Wikiproject comics of the situation at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Comics, so that someone may grab the drafts if keep them active. I have declined both in the past, but they may be notable in the future.

I'm telling this to you, the blocking admin, for the sake of transparency. I'm not interfering with the block and appeal process (at least, I do not intend to), only to preserve the drafts and prevent the good work from going to waste. The user has not contacted me in any form, I simply noticed all this because the review tool automatically adds the user talk pages to my watchlist. Cambalachero (talk) 03:25, 8 July 2023 (UTC)

Your actions are appropriate. Thanks for doing this. --Yamla (talk) 10:56, 8 July 2023 (UTC)

Sockpuppet reappear

Dear admin, Please take a look at the banned sockpuppet user:Toomanyyearskodakblack (last time banned by @Bbb23:). This user has reappeared with new sock accounts named (@SahafatKaLover18 & @Sadiokabaita) and has started doing and restoring same "political agenda based edits", edit wars, and POV edits on several Pakistani articles, including Imran Khan, Maryam Nawaz, Sanaullah Khan Niazi, Asim Munir (general), Inter-Services Public Relations, PTI prohibited funding case, and Toshakhana reference case. 2402:E000:62D:BF08:71EA:E137:11B3:6F2F (talk) 09:21, 8 July 2023 (UTC)

You are likely correct but I'm afraid I don't have the time at the moment to look into this as I'm leaving shortly and will be without Internet for a few days. WP:SPI is your best bet, most likely! --Yamla (talk) 10:57, 8 July 2023 (UTC)

User:أسامة بن عبد الله وليد‎

Yamla, do you wish to take over/extend the user's block beyond the week I had imposed? Cheers. Abecedare (talk) 00:06, 2 July 2023 (UTC)

No thanks. I did find a sockpuppet, but not one with a lot of edits. Hopefully they smarten up once your block expires. :) --Yamla (talk) 05:26, 2 July 2023 (UTC)

Lets hope so. But keep your CU tools polished!:) Abecedare (talk) 06:33, 2 July 2023 (UTC)

Could you check the above account against Bensebgli & company? The new account was created (May 26) soon after I blocked the last identified sock (May 21); same topic of interest (Gurjars); and same accusations in their unblock appeal (compare ShriBalajji vs 1 etc). But what really made me think of Bensebgli is that, suddenly, the new account brought up Re Packer&Tracker with some venom even though the two have had on interaction... and the last time Re Packer&Tracker and I interacted was over that Bensebgli SPI. Let me know if you'd like me to copy this over to SPI. Abecedare (talk) 22:11, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not for you

Why would you write the following to me?

"Wikipedia clearly isn't the right place for you. Yamla"

Did you take the time to actually read more than my latest Request to have the ban lifted? Are you aware of how the other administrators blatantly ignore my other reasons given in the earlier Request applications?

Or did you just see that I gave a reason which some might consider sarcasm, and think that this is all this person is able to produce?

This started with me providing several peer reviewed sources which other users immediately remove without reading them. They then demand consensus, but refuse to engage in productive conversation, and claim that I am the one doing edit warring when I restore my contributions.

Did you actually see that?

As an administrator you shouldn't provoke people by writing "Wikipedia clearly isn't the right place for you. Yamla", it doesn't matter if you think what the user has written is sarcastic, even if you're right. IndyCar1020 (talk) 16:11, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

I don't normally say this myself, but blocked contributor IndyCar1020: Wikipedia clearly isn't the right place for you. Yamla was correct. BusterD (talk) 16:44, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

And based on what do you say that?

The fact that you arrogantly come here and say that without any explanation should make it pretty obvious that Wikipedia is actually, not for you, BusterD.

Don't you understand that I feel offended by your words? IndyCar1020 (talk) 16:55, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

User is blocked indefinitely by another admin as WP:NOTHERE. --Yamla (talk) 11:29, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

CU vs Clerk

With regards to your comments such as this and this, I would add that CU has say over clerk according to SPI's hierarchy. You don't need approval of a clerk and you can run CU even without the request from any user as long as the use falls under the global CU policy. Aman Kumar Goel ^(Talk) 02:43, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

Thanks. That's helpful. Nevertheless, clerks have more experience in the specific task of endorsing or declining checkuser requests on SPIs and so I'd definitely listen to their opinions on SPIs. --Yamla (talk) 11:29, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

About deleting BattleBit Remastered

I understand that the user who created BattleBit Remastered must've been blocked or banned or something. However, doesn't G5 specify it applies to articles "that have no substantial edits by others"? I made several fairly substantial edits to that article and expanded it considerably from how it was in the creator's initial draft. Unless there's something I missed, doesn't that mean the article shouldn't have been deleted? Or are there more factors that aren't mentioned there, like a number of other editors or something?

Regardless, am I allowed to recreate the article myself? And if so, how do I go about restoring it to the last revision before deletion, if that's allowed or possible? I know deletion review exists—I actually only found it today—but I'd prefer knowing if there are any other avenues I can take to access said revision to work with. AdoTang (talk) 01:51, 22 July 2023 (UTC)

I have restored the article so you can continue working on it. Thanks for raising the concern! --Yamla (talk) 11:14, 22 July 2023 (UTC)

Thank you. And is it also possible for you to restore the two deleted image files used in the article? I don't really mind if you can't because I have replacements ready. AdoTang (talk) 20:15, 22 July 2023 (UTC)

No, sorry. Far better that you upload replacements! Thanks. --Yamla (talk) 22:15, 22 July 2023 (UTC)