| Revision as of 19:15, 26 August 2019 view sourceIncnis Mrsi (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers11,646 edits →Enigmatic: new section← Previous edit | Revision as of 19:34, 26 August 2019 view source Bbb23 (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators270,060 edits Undid revision 912609834 by Incnis Mrsi (talk) oh go awayTag: UndoNext edit → | ||
| Line 195: | Line 195: | ||
| These are duplicate accounts of the same person: and . Some months ago this guy came with and . ] (]) 17:42, 26 August 2019 (UTC) | These are duplicate accounts of the same person: and . Some months ago this guy came with and . ] (]) 17:42, 26 August 2019 (UTC) | ||
| == Enigmatic == | |||
| Hello.<br/> | |||
| {{serif|I}} can’t realize how your stimuli are organized. Were you to care about reputation (of the site or your personal), you would then keep one-mile distance from actions like {{Special|Log|page|Misplaced Pages:Miscellany_for_deletion/Talk:Duodecimal/Archive_1|this}}. Were you ''not'' to care about reputation, you could then throw your unconditional support behind Vorbis dickeries and drive me out of the site—in essentially the same way as ru.Wikipedians pursued—with a very meagre chances for ensuing troubles. What causes you to stop serving evil at certain instances? | |||
| By the way. You won’t believe, but {{serif|I}}’m old enough to remember the age of ] when you behaved quite differently from modern well-known patterns. ] (]) 19:15, 26 August 2019 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 19:34, 26 August 2019
|
|
Tarantella33
I have reason to believe that User:Tarantella33 is a sockpuppet of the blocked sockpuppeteer User:Emilie2606. The account was created on July 26 (log), and on August 2 they made eleven edits before creating Michael Charles Rockefeller, which was originally created by Emilie2606. Over half of Tarantella33's contributions have been to that page (over 90% since becoming autoconfirmed). - ZLEA T\ 16:42, 13 August 2019 (UTC)
- The user also uploaded an image of Rockefeller, claiming that it is their own work (and that it was taken the previous day). Emilie2606 had also uploaded an image of Rockefeller and claimed that it was their own work, but it was later found that it was not free. - ZLEA T\ 16:58, 13 August 2019 (UTC)
Confirmed + Dionisiosss (talk · contribs · count). Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:05, 13 August 2019 (UTC)
- They're at it again, this time User:Sakors (notice where the userpage redirects to) created Michael Charles Rockefeller and a userpage of a nonexistent user with the same name. Once again, a large number of their contributions are to those pages and they uploaded File:Michael Charles Rockefeller.jpg again claiming "own work". - ZLEA T\ 14:56, 19 August 2019 (UTC)
- That one plus two others.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:25, 19 August 2019 (UTC)
- Thanks, but I noticed that you marked these as suspected sockpuppets. Is this a mistake? - ZLEA T\ 23:22, 19 August 2019 (UTC)
- No.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:39, 19 August 2019 (UTC)
- Thanks, but I noticed that you marked these as suspected sockpuppets. Is this a mistake? - ZLEA T\ 23:22, 19 August 2019 (UTC)
- That one plus two others.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:25, 19 August 2019 (UTC)
- They're at it again, this time User:Sakors (notice where the userpage redirects to) created Michael Charles Rockefeller and a userpage of a nonexistent user with the same name. Once again, a large number of their contributions are to those pages and they uploaded File:Michael Charles Rockefeller.jpg again claiming "own work". - ZLEA T\ 14:56, 19 August 2019 (UTC)
Hlevy2 other accounts
Did you ever get a response from Hlevy to your query on their talkpage? I've just asked you this over there, but they reverted very quickly (though in a way that didn't notify me). GoldenRing (talk) 14:13, 19 August 2019 (UTC)
- Their only "response" was to remove the comment about their other account from their userpage. However, I also ran a check (on July 14) and found no evidence of socking at that time, so I decided not to push it.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:38, 19 August 2019 (UTC)
Another potential sock of Joker5122
Hello,
I think User:Deadshot5122 might be another sock of User:Joker5122. Can you help? Cardei012597 (talk) 17:11, 19 August 2019 (UTC)
Done.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:25, 19 August 2019 (UTC)
About Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet investigations/Steven0306/Archive
Hi Bbb23,
I noticed another possible sock puppet of the same editor again StevenZelasoTVFan0306 on A Million Little Things. Please see the history . Can you take a look of that? — YoungForever 23:18, 19 August 2019 (UTC)
More Bothiman crap
Hi B, if you get a sec, could you please look for other Bothiman accounts? I suspect Gazigor (I blocked them as ducky) and Damberbzn (still active, also ducky). It's the same lickspittle-style editing at the Vijay awards page. Apparently every time he farts out an award, Bothiman is there to reverently catch it before it hits the dais. Thank you, sir. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:05, 20 August 2019 (UTC)
- The two accounts are Confirmed along with two others, one who hasn't edited, and one who edited the same article.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:41, 20 August 2019 (UTC)
Serious19
Serious19 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
New user who has popped up on my radar via the edit filter. Claims they are a new account. I am dubious but who knows. -Ad Orientem (talk) 19:35, 20 August 2019 (UTC)
Ad Orientem (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
- Are you claiming that I am lying ? -Serious19
- I am saying that I am dubious. Not quite the same thing. -Ad Orientem (talk) 19:42, 20 August 2019 (UTC)
- Surely you didn't mean to imply anything with that statement. Glad you made this topic, instead of actually editing things that are wrong. Have a nice day. -Serious19
UTRS appeal #26308
eugene_m1999 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • abuse filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Time: Aug 21, 2019 13:42:34
Message: null
Notes:
- If you do not have an account on UTRS, you may create one at the administrator registration interface.
- Alternatively, you can respond here and indicate whether you are supportive or opposed to an unblock for this user and your rationale, if applicable.
--UTRSBot (talk) 13:42, 21 August 2019 (UTC)
Alberto DeJesus
Hi, Bbb23 - I'm of the mind that article is a hoax and at the very least spam. I've checked the sources, the business address and the dates - it needs to be speedy deleted but I'm not sure what to use. The BLP is for a 20 yo - he has only been out of HS a few years, has supposedly attended 2 different universities and held down 3 different jobs long enough to get the funding & experience needed to run 4 different companies?? No way. The sources do not check-out, either. I looked up the address - 60 STATE STREET SUITE 700, BOSTON, MA 02109 - that's the address for The Hub Group. Also - look at the date of organization - 1 year ago. Now take a look at this timeline. No way!!! He was in HS in 2017. How is it even possible that he is bidding $36 million jobs?? Anybody can register for a license, and since he has just opened his doors (and probably hasn't done a single job) he has no complaints. His citations are to primary documents he has recently filed, the other sources are is high school stuff, other sources are Instagram and FB, the first is to Urban Dictionary, Boston Voyager Magazine is one of those you submit your article to and they publish it.... Talk 📧 14:44, 21 August 2019 (UTC)
- The article strikes me as inflated nonsense, but the only possible speedy tag I can see would be a g11, but it's borderline. I suggest you AfD it.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:06, 21 August 2019 (UTC)
- Too late. An editor moved it to draft space. Frankly, I would prefer to see it deleted rather than remain in draft space, but it's the latest thing to move deletable articles created by disruptive users to draft space.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:08, 21 August 2019 (UTC)
- Saw that. Did you see this and what Mer-C posted back in Feb?? Talk 📧 15:11, 21 August 2019 (UTC)
- I never see the point of notifying a blocked editor of these kinds of things, especially when you consider the nature of the block.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:14, 21 August 2019 (UTC)
- How do we go about getting that article deleted and salted so that this doesn't keep happening? Talk 📧 15:25, 21 August 2019 (UTC)
- If someone moves it back to main space, you can AfD it then if you wish.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:33, 21 August 2019 (UTC)
- We typically MfD articles in Draft - which is what I was doing - Enter the following text at the top of the page you are listing for deletion {{mfd}} per Misplaced Pages:Miscellany_for_deletion and then clicked on the red link to create the MFD. What did I get wrong? Talk 📧 16:13, 21 August 2019 (UTC)
- You just slapped a tag on the article without following the procedures to create an actual discussion page. Onel5969 fixed it for you.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:43, 21 August 2019 (UTC)
- Hey there speedy admin - I put the tag on it (per instructions at WP:MFD) and was in the process of creating the page by clicking on the red link (per instructions at WP:MFD) but you deleted it before I was able to add the first level section title and hit save. You reverted me at 11:04 - I created the red linked page at 11:06 within seconds of me adding the mfd template. It's all about timing and I just wasn't fast enough - it's an age thing. 😊 Talk 📧 17:07, 21 August 2019 (UTC)
- You just slapped a tag on the article without following the procedures to create an actual discussion page. Onel5969 fixed it for you.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:43, 21 August 2019 (UTC)
- How do we go about getting that article deleted and salted so that this doesn't keep happening? Talk 📧 15:25, 21 August 2019 (UTC)
- I never see the point of notifying a blocked editor of these kinds of things, especially when you consider the nature of the block.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:14, 21 August 2019 (UTC)
- Saw that. Did you see this and what Mer-C posted back in Feb?? Talk 📧 15:11, 21 August 2019 (UTC)
- Too late. An editor moved it to draft space. Frankly, I would prefer to see it deleted rather than remain in draft space, but it's the latest thing to move deletable articles created by disruptive users to draft space.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:08, 21 August 2019 (UTC)
Duck
Hello, Bbb23. Last month you blocked user Ahmad SCP – account created on 14 April 2019 – for being WP:NOTHERE. Among other disruptions, they were overwriting the Khokhar article with a non-notable BLP. It seems the same user has an older acount under the username Ahmed SCP – created on 10 Arpil 2019 – as that user is now overwriting the Khokhar article with the same BLP. He is also trying to hijack Ahmad Shah, which is a DAB page. BTW, I didn't file SPI as it seems like a clear case of WP:DUCK. - NitinMlk (talk) 19:29, 21 August 2019 (UTC)
- Master now blocked. Thanks!--Bbb23 (talk) 20:15, 21 August 2019 (UTC)
- Some hours after your blocking of the master, a new user with a similar name registered. But they haven't shown any signs to make them a suspect yet, although they did edit one of the articles edited by the master. BTW, their user page is unusual, as it seems like an unattributed copy of WP:PP. - NitinMlk (talk) 18:07, 22 August 2019 (UTC)
- They did the expected thing today. So I've filed an SPI: Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet investigations/Ahmed SCP - NitinMlk (talk) 17:16, 23 August 2019 (UTC)
- Some hours after your blocking of the master, a new user with a similar name registered. But they haven't shown any signs to make them a suspect yet, although they did edit one of the articles edited by the master. BTW, their user page is unusual, as it seems like an unattributed copy of WP:PP. - NitinMlk (talk) 18:07, 22 August 2019 (UTC)
No fair!
I got to be a punk and you took it away from me!-- Jezebel's Ponyo 22:38, 21 August 2019 (UTC)
- But now I get to be part of a "Bunch of nerds lol loosers". :-p --Bbb23 (talk) 23:04, 21 August 2019 (UTC)
- Now? You already were! -- Jezebel's Ponyo 23:11, 21 August 2019 (UTC)
- The nerdve of some people!--Bbb23 (talk) 23:50, 21 August 2019 (UTC)
- Now? You already were! -- Jezebel's Ponyo 23:11, 21 August 2019 (UTC)
128.77.80.116 / 76.64.129.163 / 77.18.55.28
Bbb23, you've previously blocked 128.77.80.116 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) / 76.64.129.163 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) a couple of times as a CheckUser block. They're back from those blocks now, editing with the same kinds of issues, as 77.18.55.28 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) and 128.77.80.116 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log). I don't know what the CU issue is, but can I assume that they still shouldn't be editing like this? Jayjg 17:47, 22 August 2019 (UTC)
- @Jayjg: If you believe their edits are disruptive, you should block them for as long as you deem appropriate.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:01, 22 August 2019 (UTC)
- Thanks, I've done so. Jayjg 18:25, 22 August 2019 (UTC)
- ...and now Rydosyll (talk · contribs) has shown up; clearly the same editor, editing the same pages. Jayjg 18:43, 22 August 2019 (UTC)
This is my account. And I apologize for some of the earlier edits, I will not do it again. However, the other edits are not mine and have not been done by me. Sorry for the inconvenience. This is my account. Rydosyll (talk) 18:48, 22 August 2019 (UTC)
- What do you mean "
the other edits are not mine and have not been done by me
? Of course they were done by you; it's the same articles and the same POV! Jayjg 18:59, 22 August 2019 (UTC)
Yash Gawli
Abhinav Lalvani is another sock - see here. Эlcobbola talk 18:05, 22 August 2019 (UTC)
- Disregard - steward has locked. Эlcobbola talk 18:58, 22 August 2019 (UTC)
It never ends...
Hey there, looking at this talk page, AlbinaJ, Fatima qandeel and Mimi3895 have all raised talk page complaints about a character Vedika allegedly not being in the main cast of this TV show. OK, whatever. But the triplet of these requests stinks of socking. I recently had to block Diva166 so maybe they're related, but Diva never responded to talk page notices or did any chit-chatting, so I can't be sure it's her. Another potential is Dimpletisha, since MahimaSeth was recently implicated as her, but if Dimpletisha is editing, then it could also be KaranSharma0445, so, I'm not quite sure where to begin here. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 02:39, 23 August 2019 (UTC)
- The three users who edited the Talk page are
Unrelated. I don't think there are any known sockmasters involved.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:42, 23 August 2019 (UTC)
- Wow! So a sudden explosion of insanely urgent complaints. Including a new one by Jualam. Weird. Thank you for looking, sir! Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:43, 23 August 2019 (UTC)
Admitted sock
Saw this at the WP:Teahouse: Special:Diff/912031748. Pierrot2007 has openly admitted to being the same person as DriverSafety. Since this is a pretty open-and-shut case, it seemed more efficient to bring this to and admin directly instead of adding the overhead of SPI. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 15:54, 23 August 2019 (UTC)
- I disagree. It's too weird and should be analyzed at SPI.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:58, 23 August 2019 (UTC)
- OK. Filed at Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet investigations/Pierrot2007. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 18:31, 23 August 2019 (UTC)
I need to temporarily undelete a page recently deleted
Hi, I need to make a hardcopy of the following page that was deleted today, a short while ago.
Can you please grant me access for an hour? I need to print this out tonight for a school assignment.
Take care, Adam — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ajmcquilkin (talk • contribs) 01:04, 24 August 2019 (UTC)
- I can't imagine what kind of "school assignment" would ask you to use Misplaced Pages to, at best, create a prank out of the Robert Frost article or, at worst and more aptly, vandalize it.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:28, 24 August 2019 (UTC)
Thanks for responding! I am a school trip leader (Dartmouth College, NH USA) and the school assignment I am referring to is meant to generate interest in a local (minor) celebrity Robert Frost. I had not intended to violate any Wiki code of conduct since I had assumed (incorrectly obviously) that working in a "sandbox" area would not be publicly accessible or otherwise interfere with legitimate Rober Frost content. I apologize but in any case I still need to, at least, generate a hardcopy of that "prank" page. I understand and appreciate your reticence to reactivate the page since evidently the sandbox area is public. Would it instead be possible for you to send me a .pdf copy so I can then print it? Take care, Adam — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ajmcquilkin (talk • contribs) 13:51, 24 August 2019 (UTC)
- How would creating a sandbox on Misplaced Pages "generate interest" in this other Robert Frost, and why did you piggy-back off the real Robert Frost, including his pictures, etc., when creating the sandbox? In any event, I don't e-mail users.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:58, 24 August 2019 (UTC)
Thanks for responding. The "piggy-backing" was an effort to make the material seem as reputable as possible and this evidently created problems with the legitimate content and I do apologize. As is probably obvious by now I am not a sophisticated wiki user. To answer the question about what point does this serve I suggest you think back to your school days where sometimes an instructor's most effective approach is to be shocking and provocative. I am leading a student trip, starting tomorrow, where I was planning to present this as a shocking introduction to the author. Again, I spent almost a day on this and simply need a way to produce a hardcopy. Is there a low impact way to make this happen even without having to resort to email? Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ajmcquilkin (talk • contribs) 14:17, 24 August 2019 (UTC)
- @Drmies: You're more in touch with universities, professors, and students than I am. I'm unwilling to do what Adam requests. Such a printout would be demeaning to Frost, and although I can't stop people from creating article forgeries on their own, I don't see why I or Misplaced Pages should facilitate it. Maybe I'm a curmudgeon, but I see no educational value in this assignment.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:40, 24 August 2019 (UTC)
Ok. I understand and respect you taking a stand on principle and refuse to help. I guess I will have to spend today recreating this. Can you at least instruct me how to do this without affecting the legitimate data and risk having it deleted? I simply need to make a hardcopy. Thanks again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ajmcquilkin (talk • contribs) 14:49, 24 August 2019 (UTC)
- We do allow Misplaced Pages resources to be used for class assignments, but normally they are sanctioned by Wikipdia in advance, rather than ad hoc. Here's what you do. Recreate your sandbox. In it put an article about your Robert Frost. Use absolutely nothing from the Frost article. After you are done, print it. Then you can either tag your sandbox with WP:CSD#U1, or, if you can't figure out to do that, post here again saying you're done and I'll redelete it. BTW, as long as you're here for a bit, learn how to WP:INDENT in discussions (this one) and WP:SIGN your posts.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:58, 24 August 2019 (UTC)
- Ajmcquilkin, I am a teacher too, and I suppose we should be happy you weren't trying to be "shocking and provocative" by simply vandalizing the article. What I see here is the use of Misplaced Pages for a non-Misplaced Pages purpose, which in some cases is fine if there is a Misplaced Pages context: if you were teaching a Misplaced Pages class, for instance. In this case, you copied an article (without attribution) and then inserted a hoax into it--that ashes stuff. I don't like it at all.
Bbb, I don't really know what to say. If teacher here (I don't know what "lead a school trip" means here or what it has to do with anything) had couched this in the context of a clear educational assignment, and this was something meant to prove, for instance, how to make something on the internet look believable (a section on rhetoric and persuasion), I might could go along with it--but lacking all that, I am aligning myself with the curmudgeons. Drmies (talk) 15:52, 24 August 2019 (UTC)
- Ajmcquilkin, after Drmies's comments and my own reconsideration, I withdraw permission for you to recreate the "article" per the steps I outlined above. Bottom line: there's nothing left for you to do here. Enjoy your trip tomorrow.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:01, 24 August 2019 (UTC)
Archived section with content deleted prior to archiving
Looking at Talk:Gary Null/Archives/2018/March, it's difficult to find what was "removed" (and what editor was blocked, as mentioned in the remaining visible content) because that all is part of the article-history at Talk:Gary Null prior to archiving. Would it be useful to have your comment include a diff of the removal? I didn't want to change your edit, or edit an archive related to an edit of yours on a page you might not be watching. Per WP:AN#Gary Null, might be useful for others to see this sort of history. DMacks (talk) 08:03, 24 August 2019 (UTC)
- I don't see the problem. As far as I can tell, I removed the comment made by the lawyer, and NeilN blocked them for legal threats. I don't see any rev/del'd edits.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:02, 24 August 2019 (UTC)
- The archive says "removed" (it was simply edited out, not revdel'ed or anything more techincal), but it's difficult to find the actual removed content--it's not in the history of the page that says "removed" because the archiving caused a hist-split. Instead, one has to know that it was removed prior to archiving, and therefore to look in the original page for the removed content. DMacks (talk) 06:58, 25 August 2019 (UTC)
- This is a normal artifact of archiving that different threads get archived to different archives. The Talk page revision history itself is very easy to follow, and I don't believe in editing archives except in extraordinary circumstances. I guess I don't see this being as big a deal as you do. Sorry.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:35, 25 August 2019 (UTC)
- Okay, that's why I asked first. DMacks (talk) 15:39, 26 August 2019 (UTC)
- This is a normal artifact of archiving that different threads get archived to different archives. The Talk page revision history itself is very easy to follow, and I don't believe in editing archives except in extraordinary circumstances. I guess I don't see this being as big a deal as you do. Sorry.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:35, 25 August 2019 (UTC)
- The archive says "removed" (it was simply edited out, not revdel'ed or anything more techincal), but it's difficult to find the actual removed content--it's not in the history of the page that says "removed" because the archiving caused a hist-split. Instead, one has to know that it was removed prior to archiving, and therefore to look in the original page for the removed content. DMacks (talk) 06:58, 25 August 2019 (UTC)
Highly suspicious thanks
Back on March 24 I happened to click onto Misplaced Pages moments after the main page was vandalized and I reverted the vandalism. This produced a few "thanks." No big deal but six months later I am still getting the occasional "thanks" for that edit. The latest being from Thaomat999 thao (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). Now rather suspicious I took a look at this editor and found only a single edit that was naked vandalism. I have blocked them. However I suspect that quite a few of the others are probably the same editor. The next to last to send me thanks was Jasdeep Singh gill (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). Unfortunately my notices log only goes back so far. But I suspect that the majority of those giving thanks for my edit after the first few days are an LTA. Not sure what if anything you can do, but I will be looking closely at any future such "thank you" notices. -Ad Orientem (talk) 19:15, 24 August 2019 (UTC)
why you delete the podcast link??
for 2nd times, why adding a podcast which is professionally discuss about a subject which is fit to it and just read a full version of its context, is forbidden and deserve to add a only warning in my discus page? with no refer to page ! Book of Dede Korkut , give me a reference. what policy allow you to call people spammer? old ver.
Rtirenji (talk) 05:38, 25 August 2019 (UTC)
Meatpuppetry
Hi I and one of the 2 other editors who !voted delete in 3 afd articles created by the same editor are being targeted by retaliation AFD nominations. The nominator has been inactive for a year and a half and has suddenly popped up to nominate articles created by the editors involved.
They have nominated here for user User:Epinoia
For me here
Just as a reminder the article creator also opened up an SPI case that you threw out against User:HighKing and myself. The article creator immediately !voted delete in the first 2 discussions. I suspect this is meatpuppetry and not sockpuppetry but I may be wrong so I wanted your advice as to whether to open an SPI or an ANI so that this stops. Cheers --Dom from Paris (talk) 14:29, 25 August 2019 (UTC)
- I have blocked Masum Ibn Musa (talk · contribs · count) and Riazul Islam BD (talk · contribs · count) as Confirmed. Your presentation above, though, made it harder. Please don't make me dig to figure out exactly which users you're talking about. List the users you suspect and then explain your reasoning referring to each by name in your explanation.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:17, 25 August 2019 (UTC)
- Sorry I deliberately avoided tagging them as I have been advised in the past not to notify potential sockpuppets. Is there a way of linking to their accounts without sending a notification? Dom from Paris (talk) 16:22, 25 August 2019 (UTC)
- First, let's get our terminology straight: there's a difference between tagging and notifying. Tagging means editing their userpages, which you shouldn't do for any reason. Notifying is usually meant in the context of filing an SPI report and notifying the suspected sock of the report. That's optional and should be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. Here you are not "notifying" them per se. You are identifying them for me. I don't really care if they get pinged because of it, but you can avoid that by using "noping" or even more easily by putting their usernames here without a link. What you did here is the equivalent of filing a report at SPI without listing the suspected users.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:30, 25 August 2019 (UTC)
- OK fair enough but what I was trying to do was to get some friendly advice from an admin that is an expert in SPI so as not to make a faux pas and open an unnecessary SPI. I'll be more careful next time. Sorry to have bothered you. Cheers. Dom from Paris (talk) 17:14, 25 August 2019 (UTC)
- You didn't bother me; you correctly spotted possible socking. But from your last response it doesn't sound like you understood anything I said about how you reported it. I never said you should have opened an SPI. I don't think it would have been wrong to do so, but bringing it directly to me wasn't wrong, either.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:19, 25 August 2019 (UTC)
- OK I get it, it must be the heat here in Paris slowing down the synapses! Thanks for you time.--Dom from Paris (talk) 17:28, 25 August 2019 (UTC)
- I have zero sympathy. Although I'm not fond of heat and I'm not that fond of major cities in general (I prefer the countryside), I still think of Paris as being one of the more glorious cities in the world. Say hi to best pals Trump and Macron, please.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:33, 25 August 2019 (UTC)
- OK I get it, it must be the heat here in Paris slowing down the synapses! Thanks for you time.--Dom from Paris (talk) 17:28, 25 August 2019 (UTC)
- You didn't bother me; you correctly spotted possible socking. But from your last response it doesn't sound like you understood anything I said about how you reported it. I never said you should have opened an SPI. I don't think it would have been wrong to do so, but bringing it directly to me wasn't wrong, either.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:19, 25 August 2019 (UTC)
- OK fair enough but what I was trying to do was to get some friendly advice from an admin that is an expert in SPI so as not to make a faux pas and open an unnecessary SPI. I'll be more careful next time. Sorry to have bothered you. Cheers. Dom from Paris (talk) 17:14, 25 August 2019 (UTC)
- First, let's get our terminology straight: there's a difference between tagging and notifying. Tagging means editing their userpages, which you shouldn't do for any reason. Notifying is usually meant in the context of filing an SPI report and notifying the suspected sock of the report. That's optional and should be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. Here you are not "notifying" them per se. You are identifying them for me. I don't really care if they get pinged because of it, but you can avoid that by using "noping" or even more easily by putting their usernames here without a link. What you did here is the equivalent of filing a report at SPI without listing the suspected users.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:30, 25 August 2019 (UTC)
- Sorry I deliberately avoided tagging them as I have been advised in the past not to notify potential sockpuppets. Is there a way of linking to their accounts without sending a notification? Dom from Paris (talk) 16:22, 25 August 2019 (UTC)
they're down in Biarritz working on their tans and manly handshakes but I'll see what I can do, I know Macron's press secretary so I may be able to work it! Cheers Dom from Paris (talk) 19:03, 25 August 2019 (UTC)
Ashiq Hussain
Can you please stop reverting my edits, I am trying to help Misplaced Pages and improving this page. thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.47.27.10 (talk) 09:46, 26 August 2019 (UTC)
Duplicate accounts
These are duplicate accounts of the same person: Mubu4editing and Mubu4writing. Some months ago this guy came with Mubthasim and Alan_wikieditor. 2405:204:D285:E68A:41CD:2E65:D4C5:9CD2 (talk) 17:42, 26 August 2019 (UTC)