Sro23
Your submission at Articles for creation: Black Jaguar-White Tiger Foundation has been accepted
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.
You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. If your account is more than four days old and you have made at least 10 edits you can create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.
- If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
- If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .
Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!
DGG ( talk ) 01:05, 16 March 2018 (UTC)Here's hoping you become an admin real soon
B/c, hello, fringe benefit. Check the posts from March 20, 2018 onward. In general, tho, I think you would make a great admin. Just don't physically abuse your power. Or something. --‖ Ebyabe talk - Health and Welfare ‖ 05:30, 23 March 2018 (UTC)
Question
Hi Sro23, I have confirmed and blocked a new account that belongs to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Whaterss, should I start a new entry for the record and mark it closed for the archive, or can I possibly post straight to the archive? I remember the former is the likely procedure, but wanted to double check. Thanks! Alex Shih (talk) 01:08, 26 March 2018 (UTC)
- Yeah, usually it's preferred to not edit the archive directly. Sro23 (talk) 01:09, 26 March 2018 (UTC)
- Cool, thanks. Does this look okay? Alex Shih (talk) 01:15, 26 March 2018 (UTC)
- Looks fine to me. Sro23 (talk) 01:17, 26 March 2018 (UTC)
- Cool, thanks. Does this look okay? Alex Shih (talk) 01:15, 26 March 2018 (UTC)
Your submission at Articles for creation: Erin Entrada Kelly has been accepted
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.
You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. If your account is more than four days old and you have made at least 10 edits you can create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.
- If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
- If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .
Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!
Theroadislong (talk) 20:36, 4 April 2018 (UTC)SPI
Hi, Regarding your decision at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Atlantic12, I wanted to ask: is behavioural investigation enough to judge whether a user is connected to technically-proved sockpuppets. Pahlevun (talk) 15:01, 13 April 2018 (UTC)
- Of course. Because the technical evidence is now stale, a decision will be made based on behavioral evidence. Sro23 (talk) 03:13, 15 April 2018 (UTC)
- Thanks for the reply, I thought that technical evidence is always needed. Regards. Pahlevun (talk) 20:21, 15 April 2018 (UTC)
Invitation to join Women in Red
 We think you might be interested in becoming a member of our WikiProject Women in Red where we are actively trying to reduce Wikipedia's content gender gap. You can join by using the box at the top of the WiR page. But if you would like to receive news of our activities without becoming a member, you can simply add your name to our mailing list. In any case, thank you for actively contributing to the coverage of women (currently, 17.55% of English Wikipedia's biographies). Our priorities for April:
| ||
|
To subscribe: Women in Red/English language mailing list or
Women in Red/international list. To unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list. Follow us on Twitter: |
Sockpuppet investigations
I realized my edits would probably be reverted but figured I'd take a shot airing grievances that keep coming up over and over again with different sockpuppet "users". Not sure where else to go and not convinced the amount of time it would take to find exact diffs and so on (when it's all obvious from the user's minuscule edit history) is worth it when this user (or some related meatpuppet or what have you) will just come back in another form to annoy and hinder me. Anyway, I apologize about not following protocol. This is a long-running frustration. I guess the best we can do is just to keep blocking the new sockpuppets. Wolfdog (talk) 22:49, 30 April 2018 (UTC)
- @Wolfdog: I understand the frustration, but if you find it too time consuming to follow the instructions for opening an SPI, I recommend enabling Twinkle. It allows you to report sockpuppets and creates SPI's automatically, and it's easy to use. Sorry for the late reply. Sro23 (talk) 16:54, 9 May 2018 (UTC)
TomWatkins1970 sockpuppet investigation closed by you
Hi, I'm referring to your edit here - https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3ASockpuppet_investigations%2FTomWatkins1970&type=revision&diff=841314109&oldid=840958970 . I think you are referring to the Bros page, which is temporarily semi-protected, but the The Time (Bros album) page is not currently protected, and another sockpuppet IP of this user has reverted my reverting of their edit (unverified and inflated worldwide sales claim). Could you please re-look at this case.Nqr9 (talk) 12:58, 15 May 2018 (UTC)
- @Nqr9: Thanks for notifying me. I have requested protection at WP:RFPP. Sro23 (talk) 14:16, 15 May 2018 (UTC)
Oops
I edited an archived report. Should I undo these changes? Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 01:54, 30 May 2018 (UTC)
- If you want to. Normally editing archives is discouraged, but it's not that huge of a deal. Sro23 (talk) 02:01, 30 May 2018 (UTC)
Archival skipped
Looks like this report didn't make it to the archive page. Just FYI. Good day/night wherever you are! — JFG talk 23:24, 6 June 2018 (UTC)
- Thanks for letting me know, fixed now. Sro23 (talk) 23:26, 6 June 2018 (UTC)
Sorry.
I want to apologise because I felt like I probably came off as unusually abrasive. Anyway, when are you going to run for RfA? You are so distinctively talented with SPI reports, and being able to see deleted contributions/removed logs would only help you to contribute even better. If you would allow me to nominate, I would do it in a heartbeat; although there are many other nominators waiting for you I think. Regards, Alex Shih (talk) 15:14, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
- (talk page stalker) Ditto —SerialNumber54129 paranoia /cheap sh*t room 15:23, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
- No, no need for apologies! This entire situation is pretty unusual but it certainly didn't help when I misread the SPI. I needed you, Bbb, and the sockpupeteer explain it to me via email before I finally got it through my thick skull. That was embarrassing but I'm glad you understand where the confusion is coming from :). Sro23 (talk) 15:25, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
When you closed the poorly done SPI report I made on Chuckski4 you said if the disruptive editing by IPs continued, to request semi protection. It has, and I am. I figured I'd just ask you rather than go to RPP, as you know the background. There's BLP issues centering on Kendra Lust, who has been the subject of recent threads at both BLPN and COIN. Thanks. John from Idegon (talk) 17:34, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
- I can't protect pages so I've made a request there. Sro23 (talk) 17:45, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
- I forget you're not an administrator. As Alex said above, you really should be. Thanks for the help. John from Idegon (talk) 17:49, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
Misuse of WP:Rollback Rights
Hi, Thanks for your contributions. Please check and read the WP:Rollback rights again. It is only to be used in cases of CLEAR VANDALISM. this revert was clearly not for vandalism. This clearly needed an edit summary for the revert. Please understand that these actions lead to edit wars. Continued misuse of WP:Rollback rights will lead to revoke of the right. --DBigXray 09:31, 9 June 2018 (UTC)
- That was a misclick, now corrected; Thanks for your diligence. Sorry for the late reply. Sro23 (talk) 03:35, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
- Thanks, the dummy edit was not required. Your confirmation and understanding is all that counts. --DBigXray 09:07, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
- Just as I predicted above we have an Edit war --DBigXray 09:13, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
Janagewen again
Please un-close the SPI. Janagewen is still active, just using a different IP. I've added another report with some of the new IPs (one of them the same as in the original report), a diff, etc.
See also this diff at commons. Same IP block. Jeh (talk) 05:49, 20 June 2018 (UTC)
.svg&oldid=prev&diff=306861229){kind=link}
- Sorry, I'm most certainly not the most knowledgeable person when it comes to rangeblocks - it looks like all recent edits on the range are from him, though I still don't know if that would justify a block of the particular range. Sro23 (talk) 07:37, 20 June 2018 (UTC)
- It did before... Could the case be left open pending judgment by someone more familiar with rangeblocks? Jeh (talk) 07:47, 20 June 2018 (UTC)
Clarification requested
re Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Sagatorium/Archive, the investigation was closed prior to receiving an answer to my question posed in the "admin comments" section. Full circle, I own the original mistake of flipping IP and Username in the original report, which caused the second report to be filed. This second report was "clean," but is now closed. Could you please answer my question posed in the "admin comments" section? UW Dawgs (talk) 00:28, 22 June 2018 (UTC)
- @UW Dawgs: I was also confused at the closure of the first report you filed, so I asked Bbb23 (you can read our conversation here). Basically, since the IP was blocked for disruption several months ago, and blocks are supposed to be preventative, blocking the account now wouldn't be justified. So while that might technically be block evasion, blocking the user for sockpuppetry wouldn't be practical. Of course if the account is being disruptive, there are other venues available to report them aside from SPI. At least that's my understanding of what he meant, please feel free to talk to him directly. Sro23 (talk) 18:36, 22 June 2018 (UTC)
- Thank you for the explanation and link, makes sense. Will purse via Talk and ultimately alternative venues if necessary. Cheers, UW Dawgs (talk) 04:00, 27 June 2018 (UTC)
Oops
Hello Sro23. I didn't see that you had already filed a report a couple weeks ago at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Euexperttime. IMO is editing of the recently unprotected article that is his prime target is the final giveaway. Since the two reports are about the same sock should they be merged? Whatever you think is the best thing to do is fine by me. Best regards. MarnetteD|Talk 16:37, 22 June 2018 (UTC)
- Looks like this has been taken care of. Sro23 (talk) 18:36, 22 June 2018 (UTC)
Could you please explain...
You marked WP:Sockpuppet investigations/Renamed user 49274c4c204245204241434b#16 June 2018 as closed, due to being stale.
Could you explain what that means?
I keep getting administrators passing the buck, telling me, at semi-protection, and elsewhere, that I should not be asking them for help dealing with sockpuppets, but should be looking for help at SPI.
We really need better procedures for protecting productive good faith contributors from harassment from vandals. I would prefer administrators and other quality control volunteers presented an united front against vandals.
I've updated the file, since you marked it as closed.
What should I have done? Geo Swan (talk) 15:42, 27 June 2018 (UTC)
- Geo Swan By "stale" I meant the IP addresses were no longer active, therefore making blocking the IP's pointless. The investigation was good when you first filed it, but there's a perpetual backlog at SPI. Cases can sit untouched for weeks, sometimes even months before being acted upon, that's just the unfortunate reality of the situation. The only thing I would have preferred you had done differently was when you added new IP socks to the already closed case - next time, please create a new report instead. Sro23 (talk) 01:37, 28 June 2018 (UTC)
Talkback
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
SPI rename tool?
Hi. Is there a tool available for renaming SPI's (such as what you recently did with Fshy89 / BBN Chuck and Ervin111899 / Ervin1118)? Or did you do this all by hand? — Richwales (no relation to Jimbo) 03:39, 29 June 2018 (UTC)
- No, not that I'm aware of. I've always had to move them by hand. Sro23 (talk) 17:16, 29 June 2018 (UTC)
- Hmmm. OK, thanks. — Richwales (no relation to Jimbo) 02:55, 30 June 2018 (UTC)
Ring any bells
Hello again. Does this seem like another Nsmutte? Or anyone else that you are aware of. Cheers and have a pleasant weekend. MarnetteD|Talk 22:58, 29 June 2018 (UTC)
- Hmm, probably not a brand new user, but the English is too good to be Nsmutte. Sro23 (talk) 23:04, 29 June 2018 (UTC)
- Thanks for taking a look. Much appreciated. MarnetteD|Talk 23:05, 29 June 2018 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
|
The Userpage Shield | |
| For having my back and reverting the vandalism on my user page. Thank you for watching me! |
A cup of tea for you!
|
Next GAB? I hope you can. Best wishes in RfA. Hhkohh (talk) 05:24, 3 July 2018 (UTC) |
- Seconding this. I really hope you make it. I suspect WP:SPI will be running a lot more smoothly for the rest of this year with you mopping it. :) Mz7 (talk) 08:22, 3 July 2018 (UTC)