Active requests[edit]

I noticed there's a big backlog of closed cases. Does the noticeboard need more clerks? Maybe I can facilitate if so, through The Signpost. Let me know if you want this. ☆ Bri (talk) 17:42, 11 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The backlog of closed cases is not worrying, but we could use more active clerks to handle open cases. I think the pool of editors who are interested, able to commit to it, and fulfilling criteria to be accepted is fairly small. An article at The Signpost could have the effect of just attracting a bunch of candidates that are rejected, which would be quite frustrating for them. On the other hand, if it managed to motivate even just one viable candidate, it would make it worthwhile. Also active admins would generally be good clerks, but I think it's unusual for admins to consider being SPI clerks... It'd be great to hear other opinions here. MarioGom (talk) 08:11, 28 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It would also be awesome to have some clerks who speak Chinese, Bangla or Hindi, but that's even a smaller pool. MarioGom (talk) 08:15, 28 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@MarioGom: a long time ago, I was very active at NPP, which in turn made me active at SPI. I can speak/read Hindi, and Marathi. But I am not sure if I want become a clerk for now. —usernamekiran (talk) 20:29, 28 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Good to know. Best, KevinL (aka L235 · t · c) 00:20, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@L235: sorry, my previous comment was sort of ambiguous. A couple of years ago, I was giving it a serious thought. But currently, my interests have shifted a little, and I'm confused regarding being a clerk. —usernamekiran (talk) 08:38, 30 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I was a clerk a long time ago and I could speak & write Chinese. But SPI clerking is such a thankless task and a time sink that I don't know if I ever want to get back in on it. One bad read on duck test and you get hauled to AN where people demand you to hand in your bits unless you come up with a strong justification. OhanaUnited^{Talk page} 04:33, 31 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have some command over Bangla and Hindi, while I don't think I have the on-wiki experience yet to be a clerk, consider me interested in helping out. :) Sohom (talk) 12:26, 2 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sohom is a talented volunteer MediaWiki developer and very pleasant to interact with. Would make a great clerk once they've amassed enough experience :) –Novem Linguae (talk) 20:14, 2 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Where have all the administrators gone? apparently encouraged three candidates to come forth. I can't remember the last time we've had three RFAs running at the same time. If The Signpost could do the same for SPI, that would be wonderful. I'll also note that as much as we need more clerks, we also need (perhaps even more so) more admins working SPI. Admins who are also clerks would be ideal, but non-clerk admins are almost as valuable.

And for people who are thinking of RFA but aren't sure if they qualify, historically being an active SPI clerk has been a reliable road to smooth sailing at RFA. RoySmith (talk) 15:03, 28 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Also, non-admin clerks at SPI are, rightfully, a very strong pipeline to RfA. The community has historically recognized that SPI clerks have very strong uses for the tools (particularly in viewing deleted content, in blocking socks, and in deleting G5s). KevinL (aka L235 · t · c) 19:48, 28 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry I didn't see this conversation had proceeded before the latest issue of The Signpost went out today. I've started something in News and notes for the next one. By the way, is archiving closed cases a one-click process with the spihelper.js script, or does it require more? ☆ Bri (talk) 04:21, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Bri It is indeed a one-click process, but only SPI clerks and CUs are allowed to do that per WP:SPI/PROC RoySmith (talk) 14:06, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

While it is technically a one-click process, it involves a last review of the case. Some loose ends are occasionally fixed at that stage. That is why it is not automated. MarioGom (talk) 21:20, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

In fact, when I train clerk trainees, one of the first things we discuss is the (fairly large) set of things that they should double-check before archiving it. For some SPIs, the archive stage is the only double-check from a clerk or CU, as non-clerk admins can adjudicate and close cases. Best, KevinL (aka L235 · t · c) 00:11, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Bri: Thanks for putting together the announcement. I think Any user in good standing is considered qualified to apply needs some editing. While any user in good standing can apply, not everyone is qualified, and I think it is quite common for applications to be rejected. So perhaps the announcement should link to Wikipedia:Advice for prospective SPI clerks to help in self-assessment. MarioGom (talk) 21:23, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have experience using CheckUser to identify and block sockpuppets on other wikis (with first hand experience dealing with User:A Den Jentyl Ettien Avel Dysklyver and similar tricky sockmasters) and would be willing to train as a clerk, as long as the community is okay with someone who comes and goes as an editor serving in such capacity. I come forth realizing that sockpuppet investigations on Wikipedia is inherently more complex than on smaller wikis due to the volume of visitors on Wikipedia. PCHS-NJROTC ^{(Messages)Have a blessed day.} 23:59, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I am fluent in several Indian languages, including Hindi, and I am also active at SPI. If you need a clerk, please let me know. – DreamRimmer (talk) 18:03, 12 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@DreamRimmer: Not quite how it works. They don't come to you, ask, and you choose; you go to them, ask, and they decide  :) ——Serial 15:10, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Serial Number 54129: Already did at Special:Permalink/1202349757#DreamRimmer. – DreamRimmer (talk) 15:17, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@DreamRimmer: good work pal  :) ——Serial 17:10, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm pleased to welcome @0xDeadbeef to the SPI team as a trainee clerk under myself. Welcome to the team Beef! Moneytrees🏝️(Talk) 17:34, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@0xDeadbeef I don't know why I didn't see this earlier, but let me be the first to offer belated congratulations. Welcome to the team, and may your sock drawer be overflowing. RoySmith (talk) 15:24, 21 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Congrats! Happy SPI clerking . Dreamy Jazz ^{talk to me | my contributions} 23:39, 21 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks all. 0xDeadbeef→∞ (talk to me) 04:13, 22 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to the team! Time for me to come back as well I guess. --qedk (t 愛 c) 19:40, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Moneytrees told me that this page is mostly historical, and the current process is that trainee clerks get promoted to full clerks after exhibiting good judgment for some time. We already seem to have correct information here: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/SPI/Clerks#Becoming a trainee clerk: traineeship is usually for an extended period, until the Checkusers (at the recommendation of a clerk) feel the trainee's track record demonstrates sufficient judgment and experience to be relied upon without supervision.

We should remove the historical training page from {{SPI navigation}}, or turn it into a redirect to the section. 0xDeadbeef→∞ (talk to me) 09:11, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like no one objected.  Implemented by removing the link in the navigation template. 0xDeadbeef→∞ (talk to me) 14:56, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am planning to come back to editing after an extended hiatus, historically I do not avoid editing pages where emotions can run high and misunderstandings are not as infrequent as we may like. I am also moving to another country in the immediate future, which might complicate SPI / hacked account investigations later. As such I am requesting confirmation that there is evidence that the person making this edit is likely the same person as who has made the previous edits connected to my account. Sorry for the OS change, I will make amends some time in the future ;) un☯mi 11:14, 13 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Realized I had VPN on originally. un☯mi 11:36, 13 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No. Spicy (talk) 13:28, 13 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This should do, thanks and have a fantastic day! un☯mi 16:20, 13 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, users from Japanese Wikipedia will report あすぺるがあすぺしゃりすと (talk · contribs)'s sockpuppets (Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/あすぺるがあすぺしゃりすと) on ja:Wikipedia:管理者伝言板/投稿ブロック/ソックパペット#ASPE, which made it possible for a cross-wiki collaboration on that case instead of catching them one by one, by ourselves. Is there anyone who are interesting in linking these two pages? -Lemonaka‎ 04:03, 14 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I thought the main problem with this case is that Meta admins aren't fast enough to lock accounts that we encounter, or that Japanese Wikipedia admins don't report them to Meta. Not sure what we should be doing to collaborate more here. 0xDeadbeef→∞ (talk to me) 12:27, 14 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Very🤔. Sysops from Japanese Wikipedia don't like distinguishing one LTA from another, they usually mark all of them as "sockpuppet", while requesting global lock for an account needs they are blocked on more than two projects or at least confirmed as a specific LTA. That's something need to be improved due to bureaucratic system, or we will have to check them again and again. -Lemonaka‎ 05:24, 15 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

One of the major gap of the current system is that CU from different languages and sister projects often don't talk to one another. This leads to piecemeal blocks on confirmed sockpuppets even if the evidence is 100% confirmed. You may have a sock blocked on Commons but same account continues to edit here or Wikidata. OhanaUnited^{Talk page} 06:21, 16 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And global lock requirements for such socks are unclear, mostly depend on the stewards who dealt with cases. E.g. isechika case and risto hot sir case.
What about a GHBH sock of a long term user? E.g. planespotterA320 case
Will write something on meta after I ended my internship... -Lemonaka‎ 08:48, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I trust that whoever maintains Special:AbuseFilter/1170 (archive actions by non-CU/non-clerk editors) watches this page. Could you please add my mobile alt, User:Sir Sputnik (mobile), to the ignore list for that filter? Thanks. Sir Sputnik (talk) 22:44, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Sir Sputnik and Sir Sputnik (mobile): done. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 22:49, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings everybody, I come here from recommendation of Spicy, as he told me this is the right place to request the complex case merging that is required [1]. The story goes like this: back in december I opened a SPI [2] that became fairly extense and on it I found out direct evidence (mostly usernames and editing behavior) that two sockpuppeters: Ghumen[3] and HipHopVisionary[4] are actually the same person (the bulk of the evidence can be found on this diff [5]), as can be seen by reading the complete case this is a very persistent and nocive vandal, with VPN usage being 100% confirmed[6][7], for which I think to merge both cases is necessary as it would make future SPI's on this editor smoothier and faster for checkusers/administrators, who tend to be very bussy and have no time to look carefully each implicated account. Pob3qu3 (talk) 21:48, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please merge WP:Sockpuppet investigations/Honey Honey Bee Honey into WP:Sockpuppet investigations/BMX On WheeIs, as a user on there confirmed the accounts to be BMX. --Leonidlednev (T, C, L) 15:57, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please tag the BMX SPI as crosswiki as well. --Leonidlednev (T, C, L) 16:17, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]