Cannabis Ruderalis

Content deleted Content added
Bbb23 (talk | contribs)
Tag: Reply
Line 177: Line 177:
:Regardless of the route, appellants can get "stuck" because local admins may be hesitant to unblock absent an unlock, and stewards may be hesitant to unlock absent an unblock. It probably doesn't help that the blocking policy doesn't offer any guidance, and that there is no written (un-)locking policy. Replacing (or augmenting) locks with "true" global account blocks similar to global IP blocks might help streamline this, but I doubt that's happening anytime soon (see [[phab:T17294]]). I hope this helps. --[[User:Blablubbs|Blablubbs]] ([[User talk:Blablubbs|talk]]) 18:04, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
:Regardless of the route, appellants can get "stuck" because local admins may be hesitant to unblock absent an unlock, and stewards may be hesitant to unlock absent an unblock. It probably doesn't help that the blocking policy doesn't offer any guidance, and that there is no written (un-)locking policy. Replacing (or augmenting) locks with "true" global account blocks similar to global IP blocks might help streamline this, but I doubt that's happening anytime soon (see [[phab:T17294]]). I hope this helps. --[[User:Blablubbs|Blablubbs]] ([[User talk:Blablubbs|talk]]) 18:04, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
::Taking this out of the realm of the hypothetical, take a look at [[User talk:Sadbunny3]]. In reality, I should request a global lock of the sock, but I've resisted because I am slightly sympathetic to the procedural obstacles. It's made worse by the user's denial of a connection to the named master (and the technical evidence wasn't a slam dunk in that area). What would you do in this case? Your comments always help.--[[User:Bbb23|Bbb23]] ([[User talk:Bbb23|talk]]) 18:42, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
::Taking this out of the realm of the hypothetical, take a look at [[User talk:Sadbunny3]]. In reality, I should request a global lock of the sock, but I've resisted because I am slightly sympathetic to the procedural obstacles. It's made worse by the user's denial of a connection to the named master (and the technical evidence wasn't a slam dunk in that area). What would you do in this case? Your comments always help.--[[User:Bbb23|Bbb23]] ([[User talk:Bbb23|talk]]) 18:42, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
:::If they aren't actively engaged in cross-wiki abuse (and they don't seem to be), I'd say it's entirely fair to hold off on the lock request if you don't feel like it. For what it's worth, the CU log not only strongly connects them to {{noping|Puyomino}} and {{noping|Alibino}} but{{snd}} more interestingly{{snd}}also suggests they may be the same as {{noping|Lopbunny69}}, who is blocked as Jungkook420/[[Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Kamen rider saber]]. --[[User:Blablubbs|Blablubbs]] ([[User talk:Blablubbs|talk]]) 18:55, 21 January 2023 (UTC)

Revision as of 18:55, 21 January 2023

RfA sock?

I suspect God keep our land glorious and free, who opposed at the current RfA to be a sock, but I also have a possible master in mind: User:Walter Görlitz. If you look at the intersection between MB and Walter, particularly some of the discussions, you will see plenty of motive for Walter to oppose MB's candidacy: see here. Walter appears to be stale, but I imagine there is CU log data to help + Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Walter Görlitz itself.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:03, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Acknowledging that I've seen this; I got caught up in some other stuff, but will try to have a look tomorrow; though given Amanda's block, I suppose the question is now partly academic. Happy new year, --Blablubbs (talk) 20:47, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Having had a(n admittedly brief-ish) look at the EIA, I must admit I'm not quite sure which interactions you were referring to – there seems to be relatively little history of interaction between the two, and I didn't see anything I'd describe as "real" conflict. Is there anything specific you were thinking of? For what it's worth, there does not appear to be any usable CU log data for Walter Görlitz. --Blablubbs (talk) 12:37, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I'm puzzled by your comment about the EIA, which I thinks shows a very large intersection and, if not "interaction", at least opposing views in discussions, but given the unblocking of the user and the disclosure of their IPs, it seems that the new user edits from eastern Canada and Walter from western, so unless he moved... Also, there's no record of Walter using IPv6s. I gotta say, though, that if a user wants to create an account after editing for a "long time" as an IP, and it appears to everyone that they created that account just to oppose a candidate at RfA who at that point had no oppose votes, you'd think they would choose a username that is not so attention-getting. Thanks, as always, for your time. I mean, if I were trying to avoid scrutiny... --Bbb23 (talk) 14:09, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

New Pages Patrol newsletter January 2023

Hello Blablubbs,

New Page Review queue December 2022
Backlog

The October drive reduced the backlog from 9,700 to an amazing 0! Congratulations to WaddlesJP13 who led with 2084 points. See this page for further details. The queue is steadily rising again and is approaching 2,000. It would be great if <2,000 were the “new normal”. Please continue to help out even if it's only for a few or even one patrol a day.

2022 Awards

Onel5969 won the 2022 cup for 28,302 article reviews last year - that's an average of nearly 80/day. There was one Gold Award (5000+ reviews), 11 Silver (2000+), 28 Iron (360+) and 39 more for the 100+ barnstar. Rosguill led again for the 4th year by clearing 49,294 redirects. For the full details see the Awards page and the Hall of Fame. Congratulations everyone!

Minimum deletion time: The previous WP:NPP guideline was to wait 15 minutes before tagging for deletion (including draftification and WP:BLAR). Due to complaints, a consensus decided to raise the time to 1 hour. To illustrate this, very new pages in the feed are now highlighted in red. (As always, this is not applicable to attack pages, copyvios, vandalism, etc.)

New draftify script: In response to feedback from AFC, the The Move to Draft script now provides a choice of set messages that also link the creator to a new, friendly explanation page. The script also warns reviewers if the creator is probably still developing the article. The former script is no longer maintained. Please edit your edit your common.js or vector.js file from User:Evad37/MoveToDraft.js to User:MPGuy2824/MoveToDraft.js

Redirects: Some of our redirect reviewers have reduced their activity and the backlog is up to 9,000+ (two months deep). If you are interested in this distinctly different task and need any help, see this guide, this checklist, and spend some time at WP:RFD.

Discussions with the WMF The PageTriage open letter signed by 444 users is bearing fruit. The Growth Team has assigned some software engineers to work on PageTriage, the software that powers the NewPagesFeed and the Page Curation toolbar. WMF has submitted dozens of patches in the last few weeks to modernize PageTriage's code, which will make it easier to write patches in the future. This work is helpful but is not very visible to the end user. For patches visible to the end user, volunteers such as Novem Linguae and MPGuy2824 have been writing patches for bug reports and feature requests. The Growth Team also had a video conference with the NPP coordinators to discuss revamping the landing pages that new users see.

Reminders
  • Newsletter feedback - please take this short poll about the newsletter.
  • There is live chat with patrollers on the New Page Patrol Discord.
  • Please add the project discussion page to your watchlist.
  • If you no longer wish to be a reviewer, please ask any admin to remove you from the group. If you want the tools back again, just ask at PERM.
  • To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

Talk page trolling

Please take a look at User talk:95.181.164.59... you already rangeblocked them, and they are just using the talk page to post endless diabtribes against Bbb23. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 05:16, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Drm310: Thanks. Looks like Cullen beat me to the TPA yank, but I revdel'd some of the harassment. --Blablubbs (talk) 14:04, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! It even continued on Italian Wikipedia, of all places. But the admins there appear to have already handled it. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 14:24, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It's even extending across projects, e.g. [1] --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 22:41, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

How about revoking TPA for this user? Thanks. Sarrail (talk) 14:42, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

 Done, thanks. --Blablubbs (talk) 14:44, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sock of Marco lion?

Ralon = Marco lion? See User talk:ScottishFinnishRadish/Archive 14#Return the darft.--Bbb23 (talk) 03:14, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

 Confirmed via "park jii", along with
No unblocked sleepers as far as I can tell. I'll put some tags on them. --Blablubbs (talk) 13:01, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:39, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – January 2023

News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2022).

Administrator changes

added
readded Stephen
removed
  • Andrew Yong
  • Dbenbenn
  • DESiegel
  • GlassCobra
  • Joe Decker
  • Nancy
  • Pathoschild
  • StuffOfInterest
  • William Pietri
  • Wwwwolf
  • Xdamr

Interface administrator changes

removed Nihiltres

CheckUser changes

added Moneytrees
readded
  • Ivanvector
  • SilkTork

Oversighter changes

added
  • GeneralNotability
  • Moneytrees
readded
  • Guerillero
  • SilkTork

Guideline and policy news

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

  • Voting for the Sound Logo has closed and the winner is expected to be announced February to April 2023.
  • Tech tip: You can view information about IP addresses in a centralised location using bullseye which won the Newcomer award in the recent Coolest Tool Awards.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:08, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I suspect we might needs different master. I found User talk:Madhab chandra jena and also User talk:Babagyan. These date from a long time ago, so this information may be expired and thus worthless. I was playing with seach and this search yielded the extra information. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 22:27, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think this IP User:2003:E1:3F25:579C:10D:693F:B0A4:C51D may well be another sock of Nalanidil. Same editing concerns and phrasing. Netherzone (talk) 18:29, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Block adjustment for dashboard.wikiedu.org

Hi! Could you adjust this block so that it avoids hitting dashboard.wikiedu.org? On IPv6, it uses 2600:3c01::f03c:93ff:fe24:db1b. Thanks! Sage (Wiki Ed) (talk) 19:21, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Sage (Wiki Ed): My bad, I should've caught that. Switched to anon only with account creation enabled – I think that should do the trick? --Blablubbs (talk) 19:28, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, that should do it, thanks! Sage (Wiki Ed) (talk) 20:38, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Global locks

I may have asked this before of someone, but if I did, I don't remember the answer...assuming there is one. Let's assume that you have an LTA. The master and all of their socks are globally locked. As I understand it, globally locked accounts cannot log in and therefore cannot post to their Talk page. What is the procedure for the LTA to request an unblock?--Bbb23 (talk) 17:36, 20 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Bbb23: There are basically two options:
  1. They can appeal their enwiki block through the "normal" channels for those without TPA (UTRS, arbcom, #wikipedia-en-unblock on IRC) in which case either the unblocking admin or the appellant needs to ask stewards to unlock in case of a successful appeal.
  2. They can appeal their lock directly to stewards via UTRS or VRT, in which case they'd then also have to ask for a local unblock.
Regardless of the route, appellants can get "stuck" because local admins may be hesitant to unblock absent an unlock, and stewards may be hesitant to unlock absent an unblock. It probably doesn't help that the blocking policy doesn't offer any guidance, and that there is no written (un-)locking policy. Replacing (or augmenting) locks with "true" global account blocks similar to global IP blocks might help streamline this, but I doubt that's happening anytime soon (see phab:T17294). I hope this helps. --Blablubbs (talk) 18:04, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Taking this out of the realm of the hypothetical, take a look at User talk:Sadbunny3. In reality, I should request a global lock of the sock, but I've resisted because I am slightly sympathetic to the procedural obstacles. It's made worse by the user's denial of a connection to the named master (and the technical evidence wasn't a slam dunk in that area). What would you do in this case? Your comments always help.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:42, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
If they aren't actively engaged in cross-wiki abuse (and they don't seem to be), I'd say it's entirely fair to hold off on the lock request if you don't feel like it. For what it's worth, the CU log not only strongly connects them to Puyomino and Alibino but – more interestingly – also suggests they may be the same as Lopbunny69, who is blocked as Jungkook420/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Kamen rider saber. --Blablubbs (talk) 18:55, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Leave a Reply