Archives

Archive 1 (May 2015 - July 2016) Archive 2 (July - August 2016) Archive 3 (August - November 2016) Archive 4 (November 2016 - March 2017) Archive 5 (March - September 2017) Archive 6 (September 2017 - February 2018) Archive 7 (February - September 2018) Archive 8 (September 2018 - July 2020) Archive 9 (August 2020 - August 2021)

Hi Sro23. I loves Meghan Trainor has been blocked indefinitely is about five years ago. But now, I just awared at Bbb23's talk page archive she striked other IP's comment and saying "I have striked the IPs comment as for the pure and simple fact they are MariaJaydHicky's socks trying to pull the wool over peoples eyes". So I posted that I want she'd explain and why on her user talk page in about two years ago. Despite as an archive of past discussions can't edit, would like to ask Bbb23 instead. 113.211.163.196 (talk) 11:16, 29 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:46, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Somewhere in your merge of Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Haiyenslna, the section created by Extraordinary Writ and checked by me has gone missing entirely. It's not in the archive or the current open cases.-- Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 21:43, 1 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It's there Ponyo, right here. I got distracted right after I did the merge and didn't have enough time to clean up the archive and tags. Sro23 (talk) 22:52, 1 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, I see. It's out of chronological order, which is why I missed it.-- Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 22:56, 1 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Sro23 (talk · contribs), we are currently engaging in a discussion around the WSJ lede statement concerning the Journal’s editorial board. You made a change to this statement in the past. If you’d like to contribute to this conversation, please join us at Talk:The Wall Street Journal under the heading “Should editorial opinions be posted in the lede summary.” Take care. Stallion55347 (talk) 01:40, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A recently closed Request for Comment (RFC) reached consensus to remove Autopatrolled from the administrator user group. You may, similarly as with Edit Filter Manager, choose to self-assign this permission to yourself. This will be implemented the week of December 13th, but if you wish to self-assign you may do so now. To find out when the change has gone live or if you have any questions please visit the Administrator's Noticeboard. 20:06, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

		Holiday cheer
		Here is a snowman a gift a boar's head and something blue for your listening pleasure. Enjoy and have a wonderful 2022 S. MarnetteD|Talk 19:29, 19 December 2021 (UTC) [reply]

@MarnetteD: Thank you for the gifts! Happy holidays to you and your family. Sro23 (talk) 13:39, 22 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Christmas 2021[edit]

CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 22:13, 24 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A token of thanks Hi Sro23! I've nominated you (along with all other active admins) to receive a solstice season gift from the WMF. Talk page stalkers are invited to comment at the nomination. Enjoy! Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}} talk ~~~~~

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:50, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, a few years ago I wrote out the summary of the movie here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maniac_Magee_(film)#Plot under my original account name of Jabrona and it was apparently too long that you put a notice there in May 2016, updated in November 2019 by a user named AnomieBot (I went to that person's page and posted this same message, thinking they were the one who put the notice, but only the update as brought to my attention by another user here). I finally got around to shortening the plot significantly and wanted you to come review it to see if it still needs improvement or if it's in the clear. My accomplishment was limiting word usage to describe certain things and taking out things that did not really need to be stated like what a character said ver batum. Have a look at that and get back to me as soon as you can about this. Thanks. -- DevonteHuntley (talk) 15:20, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The suggestion is that film plots be between 400-700 words, so it's still way too long. Anyway, I have blocked for sockpuppetry. Sro23 (talk) 15:35, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi!

You get this message because you are an admin on a Wikimedia wiki.

When someone edits a Wikimedia wiki without being logged in today, we show their IP address. As you may already know, we will not be able to do this in the future. This is a decision by the Wikimedia Foundation Legal department, because norms and regulations for privacy online have changed.

Instead of the IP we will show a masked identity. You as an admin will still be able to access the IP. There will also be a new user right for those who need to see the full IPs of unregistered users to fight vandalism, harassment and spam without being admins. Patrollers will also see part of the IP even without this user right. We are also working on better tools to help.

If you have not seen it before, you can read more on Meta. If you want to make sure you don’t miss technical changes on the Wikimedia wikis, you can subscribe to the weekly technical newsletter.

We have two suggested ways this identity could work. We would appreciate your feedback on which way you think would work best for you and your wiki, now and in the future. You can let us know on the talk page. You can write in your language. The suggestions were posted in October and we will decide after 17 January.

Thank you. /Johan (WMF)

18:14, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

I saw your filter request addition. When I edit Akane Yamaguchi, a pink sockpuppet box appears under the BLP box. With the Maureen Wroblewitz article, that sockpuppet box is not there. Maybe add a sockpuppet notice to the Maureen Wroblewitz artice? Might help a bit. Cheers Adakiko (talk) 08:12, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It would be helpful if the socks could be prevented from spamming talk pages in the first place, so that the pink box wouldn't be necessary. Sro23 (talk) 10:06, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Since you are familiar with Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/PAKHIGHWAY, can you take a look at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/SpicyBiryani? Asking because it is lying dormant for 2 weeks.

The latter had to be filed on the former because a suspected sock here is a sock of PAKHIGHWAY.[1]

I believe that merging this new report into the SPI of PAKHIGHWAY would make things more smooth in the future. Aman Kumar Goel ^(Talk) 04:36, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

84.189.84.17 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) Do you think this is them? Same snarky editing style, geolocates to Bonn, Germany wizzito | say hello! 01:00, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No. BKFIP has more "tells" other than just being snarky. The range you mention is a little bit more suspect but I don't think that's BKFIP either. Sro23 (talk) 03:18, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sro. I know you didn't do this, but would you like to either elaborate, or investigate, why this happened about 24 hours ago? There is warning for disruptive edits, which is one thing (that I roundly deny), and there is blocking with is another thing. And then, there is blocking and denying talkpage access. There is no LTA. Asides me not being the same person to make disruptive edits seven years previously, it is hardly "LTA" where Blablubbs is concerned. I was actually in the middle of writing to you about this, and had completed my draft when it failed to save due to being blocked. You're both checkusers and admins, yet apart from you having becoming involved and Blablubbs not, it seems you had taken different approaches. I am considering an off-Wiki grievance here for this level treatment I firmly believe I don't deserve. My wish is to resolve the issue regarding RU wiki (I speak Russian). What are your comments regarding the admin actions? --37.0.71.218 (talk) 17:43, 23 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Before you made those reverts, an LTA was making the same sort of edits on Verst. @Blablubbs:, there seems to have been a mistake. I'm pretty sure 37.122.177.183 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) is not Evlekis, though I can see why you thought so. The IP geolocates to Montenegro, and I believe Evlekis is based in another country. Sro23 (talk) 23:08, 23 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Alas Sro23. You, Blablubbs and dare I mention the name, Thomas.W (whom I have pinged with good reason) need to be aware that I am somebody who is based in another country. And while this malarkey was all taking place live, I was 35,000 feet in the air aboard the Ryanair flight between Stansted and Podgorica. I am the very same editor who operated the Evlekis account right up to the end of 2013. If anybody at this point is expecting an outburst of profanities, I am sorry to disappoint you, but none will be forthcoming. It is "assumed knowledge" that I have been active on Wikipedia since the indefinite ban which actually occurred from May 2013, but anybody believing that any single account blocked from the final day of 2013 (when my provider contract expired and to which I have never returned) is "mine" is mistaken. There has been a derailment of continuity and I am very disappointed that nothing in that department has "made its appearance" these past 36 or so hours. The events came to my attention (after I arrived here) for other reasons, and in all truth, I haven't followed "events" surround this fictional "Evlekis" for several years. I denied the sockpuppetry accusations at the time (what I actually did was indeed against policies but that is also irrelevant now), and was up against an army of partisan editors with whom I had clashed in the previous years (and I am 99.9% certain that I never met Thomas.W in that time; his username does not even ring a bell). It's basically a long story. For another batch of reasons, I as an individual have not touched the edit button on en.wiki since late 2018. Prior to this edit, no account ever created by me has ever "registered" on these "sleeper checks" that have happened down the years. Indeed your community has one or more LTA nutjobs on your case, but I am telling you person-to-person, my hands are fully sanitised here. It is also the case that no edit I have made since 2013 has ever been reverted as nonconstriuctive, and not really reverted at all except where actualities in the real world have overtaken the details I originally entered. Note that I am not seeking that the Evlekis account be unblocked, but I just feel that certain people need to know, you're dealing with somebody else. I appreciate what Blablubbs is doing here ("no tags") but the archive page gets longer and longer with perpetuity and tells to the world potentially libellous information that I was the creator of a few hundred accounts, when in fact I can easily produce real-life evidence that no I am not. I hope you will have the decency to leave this comment in tact for the others to read it, even if procedure forces you to block this IP. My intention anyhow is to contact checkusers via email and hold a protracted behind-the-curtains exchange that will enable me to disclose personal data so that one way or another, the name "Evlekis" becomes disassociated with the lunacy that seems to be happening ad infinitum. In doing so, I will also disclose the reasons for 1) why I have edited after being "banned", and 2) how I have been editing below the radar (and many things enable this), 3) why I have not been active since late 2018, and 4) what precisely happened to alert me to what had been going on, and why it took me so long to make any personal representations. Yet just to provide you with the details of one of the last accounts I used prior to the IPs these past hours, I will log in and acknowledge this email, and you can then see how that particular account was never questioned by anyone, and never came up as a "sleeper". It will also reveal the nature of my edits, the subtlety behind the mannerism, and I only hope that no live contribution be reverted/deleted simply because it was performed by a "banned editor" (the edits are in good faith, and you would never have known they were from a "banned editor" had I not made this disclosure). In the coming days, I will email the checkusers and hopefully they will become satisfied that the project's nemesis is not who you have hitherto believed it to be. --37.0.71.218 (talk) 05:00, 24 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Evlekis' parents are from former Yugoslavia, and he has been in Podgorica before; my assumption was that he is visiting family or on holiday. My take was that the likelihood of someone with that geographical connection jumping in on that page in this manner without being Evlekis was very very small (especially considering how little editor attention it attracts), and hence I blocked. If you think I made the wrong call, I have no objection to you unblocking. Though considering that the IP above (and account below) admit to evasion either way, I suppose that might be moot. --Blablubbs (talk) 09:37, 24 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Thomas.W - please read the above. Blablubbs If you block this account, then it is fine. My future contact with checkusers will be using email. Regards. 👍 --Mirko je OK (talk) 05:02, 24 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Well, this might be of interest to people. It's a confession. It's should also be catalogues among IPs. It's also believable that the IP blocked this morning was him. He's not exactly known for honesty. oknazevad (talk) 17:35, 20 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I see. And how would you know about my "honesty"? And how do you get across 2,000 miles in three hours in time to hop onto a static IP? You've got no evidence Oknazevad. However, what is clear are two things: 1) People's dislike of you is 100% vindicated; 2) you only know of one account that I operated between 2014 and 2018, because I only volunteered one of them. You do not have a cat in hell's chance of finding out which the other accounts are, because if the checkusers don't know, I can't see how someone like you will. I can see what the problem is. Checkuser "evidence" operates on the basis of a fallacy called appeal to probability, which is different from balance of probability. You look at the IPs of "suspected Evlekis sockpuppets" and you can find that I was allegedly in Serbia, England and Switzerland back and forth the same day. Make your mind up editor. I've looked into this thoroughly. It goes from "behavioural evidence" to "technical evidence" to "joe-jobbing?" (whatever that means) to "John admitting he was Trev, and Trev was blocked as a sockpuppet of Evlekis because Trev had behaviour traits, and meanwhile Kev uses the same IP range as Trev, therefore Kev is Evlekis, and meanwhile Gav made exactly the same edit as Kev. Year, after year, after year, you have been moving farther and farther away. How would you like to arrange a real-life link-up (social media, etc.)? If you're so sure I am "dishonest", let's see you explain it the next time you get blanket-reverted while you know I am physically incapable of having made any edits at the time in question. You're living in a dream. --89.111.237.25 (talk) 18:16, 20 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• @Zzuuzz: Would you mind comparing User:Mirko je OK with recent Evlekis sockpuppets (like Epsom Headcase) before it goes stale? I don't personally care what we name the LTA but let's just put this silliness to rest. Sro23 (talk) 18:50, 20 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Good call Sro23. Thanks. I too wish to retire in serenity afterwards! :)))))))) --89.111.237.25 (talk) 20:46, 20 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Epsom Headcase and Here2Improve are the same person we usually call Evlekis (hereafter called current Evlekis). So is Obsolete Finnish units of measurement. Current Evlekis edits from a different country to the anon above (identifying as Mirko je OK). It's usually fairly consistent where current Evlekis edits from, though of course it's possible they might visit other countries (I've never actually seen it). From what I can tell, it seems likely that the original Evlekis account edited from very roughly the same place as the current Evlekis. I'll be the first to say that many SPIs go off the rails at some point due to ambiguous data, or sloppy analysis or wording, so the truth is I don't currently have a direct connection from the current Evlekis to the original one. And of course I can't confirm the anon is original Evlekis either. The anon has a practically identical user agent to the current Evlekis, but in reality that's not a useful metric. And for the record, I have seen no evidence that the supposed 2,000 mile trip would be impossible. Have them log into the original Evlekis account at the same time current Evlekis is editing from another country, then I might be able to say something useful. HTH. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 22:31, 20 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Evlekis is locked, so a login check probably won't be possible. --Blablubbs (talk) 22:41, 20 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@ZZuzz. It's sods law. I (Evlekis) have been here since before the Ukraine war began, but as you can see from this account also, I do not edit wiki any more. Much of the nonsense that admins dealt with throughout late-2013 was me testing water: what gets picked up and what doesn't. Though you as a checkuser and I as the original editor know full-well that one of the red flags was the provider I had. Once I changed provider, after the last day of 2013 and after a bitter dispute between them and me, I found I could subtly reintegrate myself into the community with a low profile, and with different accounts. Though as I said earlier, those accounts have never caused disruption and nor have they even really overlapped on pages. You won't find any of them engaged in edit wars, and then proliferating on that page to indicate there is "more than one person". I packed up editing in 2018 after seeing how Wikipedia had changed from 2005 when I first edited up to that time. I feel I have nothing more to contribute here because I oppose the reliable and unreliable sources to the extent that in real life, I say it is the other way around. I'm talking about news and media here, not music, science or medicine, etc. The other thing is that I didn't say it was "impossible" (three hours approx from Oknazevad's report to my reply), but just unlikely. I'll be in this locality for some time yet. I cannot be sure whether the "Epsom Headcase" individual/s are reading this and that is another reason I would prefer not to disclose when I return to England where I still live most of the year. I hope this helps. --Darko Temelkov (talk) 07:19, 21 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Why reverted official club links and vandalised pages...open my summary if can read...i wont stop only can lock pages forever 93.142.88.171 (talk) 01:58, 24 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

for nejmeh open second external link, word professional seen instantly...i can only hope users who read properly will tell nehme enough, there are more examples of all things i revert. scandal will go on as long as i live or users start reading. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.142.88.171 (talk) 02:15, 24 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, thanks for taking care of 93.142.88.171 (talk · contribs · WHOIS)'s edits. Can you please delete this diff? It contains my first name. Thanks, Nehme₁₄₉₉ 11:10, 24 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The article Max Gilardi has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

The only secondary sources that even remotely cover his work are the Kotaku and Gizmodo sources, which are 1-2 small paragraph blurbs with little analysis. The rest are either one-sentence trivial mentions, unreliable sources (like the Hypertext blog) or non-independent interviews. Fails WP:BIO.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

This bot DID NOT nominate any of your contributions for deletion; please refer to the history of each individual page for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 10:00, 25 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

22:53, 15 April 2022 (UTC)

Happy First Edit Day!

Have a very happy first edit anniversary!

From the Birthday Committee, Comr Melody Idoghor (talk) 12:49, 22 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Sro23. Thank you for blocking User:Bloodthirsty Bob without tagging, and may I say that if the account geolocated to the same location as the other post-2014 accounts of the same alleged master, then it is definitely not me (keeping this low profile). Yes I have shifted national boundary since the last time I arrived, and I am sorry it has taken a few hours for me to register. I only personally watch two editors as well as the project page, so I don't know of any other instance where the "master" has been named since (I think) April? I'm still here Sro23 - as in former Yugoslav countries. My life and family currently is in this region. That's all I can say! :) Please feel free to share this with other checkusers, but I am keeping it low profile where the two main accusers are concerned, and not mentioning my old username. --79.101.23.168 (talk) 02:17, 31 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

PS. Would you also kindly keep Thomas.W in the loop too because examples of this nature and really beginning to frustrate me after I already signalled to him via ping previously he's got the wrong "culprit". There was no "quiet" few weeks regrding User:Marching on Leeds and my team is not and never has been Leeds Utd, it was just not picked up until a few hours ago hat he was allegedly "Evlekis" (which it wasn't). If Marching On Leeds is currently in Serbia, then I'm Florence Nightingale. He and the other one just refuse to let it sink in that I am one person, and they are dealing with one or more other persons with grudges with them that are not me. Thanks. --79.101.23.168 (talk) 02:27, 31 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Sro23,

I hope you are well. I was wondering, what was so offensive with this edit or this one that you revision deleted them as well as the username? It just looks like they were adding an unnecessary empty line or space. What am I missing? This was a long-time editor. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:30, 11 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Liz: Read aloud the titles of the last 3 pages the user edited. It's a personal attack against another user. Sro23 (talk) 02:55, 11 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect 92nd century and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 August 28#92nd, 98th-99th centuries until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Regards, SONIC678 14:20, 28 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

To err is human. Don't revert for something you can fix yourself. That revert on the Connie Glynn article was unnecessary. Unnecessary reversions such as that are lazy. Mr. C.C.^{Hey yo!}_{I didn't do it!} 17:16, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You'll notice I reverted your edits "in good faith" per the edit summary. Please assume good faith instead of calling me lazy. It is not my nor anyone else's responsibility to fix your mistakes for you. I was restoring the article to the most recent stable version. You caught me on an especially bad day so please do not talk to me again if you are going to personally attack me. Sro23 (talk) 23:22, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Sro23, you "fix" articles all the time. To err is human. I didn't notice. So instead of an unnecessary revert, you could have just fixed the error. That's all. Oh and "stable" isn't the correct word. Mr. C.C.^{Hey yo!}_{I didn't do it!} 15:43, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a reason this account wasn't also blocked? I know it's been about 18 months since the discussion, but it looks like this one may have slipped through the cracks. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 18:54, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Also, I hope my message doesn't sound rude. I was merely curious because I was looking at this category and noticed that account was the only one not blocked. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 19:53, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Nihonjoe and sorry for the late reply. I guess I just missed the sock, maybe because the account wasn't formatted in the typical {{checkuser}} template. Sro23 (talk) 15:32, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No worries. I was just curious. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 17:41, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:24, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Whatever you celebrate at this time of year, whether it's Christmas or some other festival, I hope you and those close to you have a happy, restful time! Have fun, Donner60 (talk) 00:16, 23 December 2022 (UTC)}} [reply]

Donner60 (talk) 05:21, 24 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

MBlaze Lightning (talk) 09:10, 25 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 12:20, 25 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

	Happy New Year!
	Hello Sro23: Did you know ... that back in 1885, Wikipedia editors wrote Good Articles with axes, hammers and chisels? Thank you for your contributions to this encyclopedia using 21st century technology. I hope you don't get any unnecessary blisters. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 20:01, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Happy New Year elves}} to send this message

CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 20:01, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Sro23. The LTA behind your now 2.5 year old block, Special:Contributions/72.64.0.0/20, is still active, and used an IP from this range to bother me on Commons following a recent /40 IPv6 block and 3-4 other scattered IPv4 blocks. I'm pondering if this range block needs to go ahead and be extended since it's clear they're still active from it. There's no evidence they plan to stop, as I've probably issued more than 40 blocks against them in the last couple years, including at least 10 this past year. -- ferret (talk) 21:55, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This is Bigshowandkane64 btw. Very much still active. -- ferret (talk) 00:56, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, it appears he's been on that range for 10+ years. Some people just never quit. Do what you need to do. Sro23 (talk) 01:03, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I extended it out and used the opportunity to note the primary IPv6 co-range. -- ferret (talk) 01:36, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Sro23. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 06:00, 17 January 2023 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

BilCat (talk) 06:00, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Sro23, you protected Tarleton helmet about a week ago for sockpuppetry. It's been recreated today at Tarleton Helmet by a user who became active that day, and edit by another new user. I've tagged it for CSD in the meantime. Thanks. BilCat (talk) 04:49, 23 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I've deleted the page. Thank you. Sro23 (talk) 05:04, 23 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Should both pages be salted? BilCat (talk) 05:11, 23 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think that's necessary right now. It can sometimes be useful to leave a honeypot open. Sro23 (talk) 05:19, 23 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

He certainly can't resist, can he? BilCat (talk) 05:24, 23 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Do you know who IWantAleicaMoore is? They mention you on their userpage.--Bbb23 (talk) 01:04, 24 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It's User:Electricbassguy. Sro23 (talk) 01:28, 24 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Huh. Never heard of them. Unless there are untagged socks, their edits were a long time ago.--Bbb23 (talk) 01:33, 24 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There are several untagged socks (see the edit history of Baseball Mogul) and also a lot of logged out vandalism. Sro23 (talk) 01:37, 24 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

On Lithuaniaball2, you seem to have mistagged the sockmaster as a sockpuppet of itself - the correct template on that page would be {{sockmaster}}. -- Prodraxis^talk_contribs 20:07, 7 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This? Probably User:Gugrak who has been adamant there. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 06:45, 8 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Sro23, You recently blocked User:Gugrak as they are a sock however it's become apparent to me that they have a unified login and have only been blocked in the Wikipedia namespace. They've taken to acts of vandalism in the Wikimedia namespace on my usertalk page (blanking) and another user's usertalk (redirecting). They'll probably do the same again in other namespaces sooner or later as juvenile as it is. AlanS^talk 14:09, 12 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Precious

Five years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:30, 3 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for blocking IP 2.48.47.158, however I request that you make this block permanent, rather than just for 72 hours. The IP became active about 20 minutes after Deb had blocked IP 37.245.41.140 and the new IP immediately started making the same edits on the same pages all of which was a continuation of the actions of recently blocked User:Bateros e.g. Operation Dragnet (sorry for some reason I can't copy diffs). Bateros was a sock of User:Orchomen a recidivist socker active since 2016. Mztourist (talk) 03:08, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No, IP addresses are not blocked indefinitely. He will just hop to a different IP. Unfortunately with this sockmaster, semi protection or whack a mole are pretty much all we can do. Sro23 (talk) 05:36, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Well they have already created another account User:Baseros and editted the same pages, request that you permanently block that. It really is tiresome how much time people like this waste Mztourist (talk) 06:14, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for blocking that, and they've immediaely created another account, the inventive User:NZtourist to edit a new set of pages that I created. Request you block that also. regards Mztourist (talk) 07:14, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, tehy really are working overtime, they also created User:MStourist. regards Mztourist (talk) 07:19, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

And User:Wztourist. I'm sorry that you have to waste your time on this. Mztourist (talk) 07:24, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

And IP 94.58.129.244 from the UAE where Orchomen lives who posted this taunt on my Talk Page: [2]. regards Mztourist (talk) 07:50, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Mztourist, I would strongly recommend against engaging with this LTA by responding to his posts, as it only feeds the troll. Best practice would be to revert, block, ignore. Sro23 (talk) 07:54, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Noted thanks. Mztourist (talk) 08:03, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there, I just blocked Soqunter and tagged them. You may not agree with tagging these socks at all, but did I at least get the master right? Nice to see you.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:13, 13 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:45, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]