User talk:NinjaRobotPirate/Archive2022-2

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Reporting $tarstruck

$tarstruck (talk · contribs)

This editor keep making changes in Funk Wav Bounces Vol. 1 without explaining why [1] [2] [3] [4]. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 01:10, 2 July 2022 (UTC)

I don't really understand what the dispute is about. Is a "guest appearance" different than a "guest vocal"? Or are the guests unsourced? Or something else? NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 01:40, 2 July 2022 (UTC)
Nevermind, it's not big deal anymore. Sorry for this pointless report. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 01:52, 2 July 2022 (UTC)

Southwestmetal

Hi, sorry to bother you, but I saw you were looking into some potential alternate accounts of Southwestmetal. Would you mind also running a check on this user please? It's probably nothing, and I'll gladly drop it if my suspicions turn out to be wrong, but them having a similar name, joining after Southwestmetal was blocked, and making an edit related to the image that started the edit war in the first place...I dunno, it just raises some red flags. Thanks very much. -- Cyberlink420 (talk) 05:14, 3 July 2022 (UTC)

Looks unrelated to me. But that's an odd coincidence. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 05:33, 3 July 2022 (UTC)
Okay, no worries, just wanted to make sure. Thanks for checking! -- Cyberlink420 (talk) 05:35, 3 July 2022 (UTC)
Okay, seriously, I'm sorry to bring this up again, but are you sure they're unrelated? Their behavior and way of speaking feels very similar. -- Cyberlink420 (talk) 07:06, 3 July 2022 (UTC)
People sometimes pretend to be obvious sock puppets just to mess with people. Architect 134 (talk · contribs) does that, though this is the wrong geolocation for him. Or sometimes blocked editors recruit their friends from some off-site forum to act on their behalf. It's possible that someone uses proxies to edit, but most people can't even get a ping to work correctly. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 17:23, 3 July 2022 (UTC)

Just one quick check

Hello NinjaRobotPirate! Can you check is this TREESECO321 (talk · contribs) the same as GSEC200 (talk · contribs) who is the sockpuppet of Thecorrector21 (talk · contribs)? Some similar edits especially at the Pakistan Navy and for example here Tariq Ali (admiral). Thank you! Nubia86 (talk) 04:45, 6 July 2022 (UTC)

I'm on a touchscreen, which makes everything more frustrating. If I were really careful, maybe I could get through the process without blocking the wrong person, but it looks like both of those old accounts are too stale to compare, anyway. Best thing to do is probably file a case at SPI. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 05:03, 6 July 2022 (UTC)

And about this, I am not sure but could be Johnnyboi123459 (talk · contribs) of recently blocked Worldwar1989 (talk · contribs)?Nubia86 (talk) 05:16, 6 July 2022 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – July 2022

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

Technical news

  • user_global_editcount is a new variable that can be used in abuse filters to avoid affecting globally active users. (T130439)

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

  • The New Pages Patrol queue has around 10,000 articles to be reviewed. As all administrators have the patrol right, please consider helping out. The queue is here. For further information on the state of the project, see the latest NPP newsletter.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:29, 10 July 2022 (UTC)

Crunchyroll

Here I have a user who insists on putting Gen Fukunaga and his wife as one of those Crunchyroll founders that according to him, Funimation announced that it would change its name Crunchyroll, LLC after acquiring the streaming service of the same name in August 2021 and despite leaving several summaries of editions[5], I've gotten tired of showing some links on Fukunaga's profile on Linkedln so that a certain Aoito understands that what they see on the file they are the true founders of Crunchyroll instead of Funimation which was founded in 1994 by Fukunaga himself and his wife and the other in 2006 by a group of graduates from the University of California, Berkeley.

See his profile here for example:

https://www.linkedin.com/in/gen-fukunaga-29a2b45

https://www.crunchbase.com/person/gen-fukunaga 148.101.59.221 (talk) 22:41, 10 July 2022 (UTC)

I'm not really sure what's going on here. @Aoito: are you saying that the founder of a company automatically becomes the founder of any company that he buys? @Ferret: is this related to what you brought up before in special:permalink/1076761546? NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 02:40, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
I actually unwatchlisted all of the funimation and crunchyroll articles as I didn't have the time or interest to further try to keep them accurate. They're an absolute mess and have been inappropriately merged/conflated. Fukunaga founded Funimation, which purchased Crunchyroll, Inc. Funimation then renamed itself to Crunchyroll, LLC. LLC owns Inc. I tried to keep this straight but eventually it was too annoying to stop people from combining the two company pages. Aoito's edits have made a dog mess of everything involved, but they didn't do it alone. -- ferret (talk) 03:12, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
Yeah, sometimes it doesn't seem like it's worth the effort. I think I understand the issue better now, though. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 05:00, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
Hello. At the moment, the article talks about Crunchyroll, LLC (formerly Funimation, founded by Gen Fukunaga and Cindy Brennan), not Crunchyroll Inc. We need to determine, this article is about the streaming service (which was operated by Crunchyroll Inc, then Crunchyroll, LLC) or about the company. To be clear: Funimation renamed itself Crunchyroll, LLC, which now operates the streaming service of the same name. Aoito (talk) 08:09, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
Aoito has never been able to provide evidence that Crunchyroll, Inc, was dissolved or upmerged. The split of Funimation -> Crunchyroll, LLC into two articles is simply a terrible move. Funimation the company simply renamed. It did not end and get recreated. Now all the sourced content of Crunchyroll, Inc, itself independently notable, has been erased or conflated to be about Funimation. But I gave up, and we can just let this be wrong. It's too much effort to keep company articles complete with the CIR editors who work in that space. -- ferret (talk) 12:42, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
OK, enough of this edit warring. Aoito, you're partially blocked. You can discuss this issue on the article's talk page, where you can provide sources that show these people as founders of Crunchyroll in 2006. As far as I can tell, we already have an article on the company that Gen Fukunaga founded, and it's at Funimation, which was founded in 1994. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 17:24, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
I wasn’t at home, so I couldn’t answer. You misunderstood the situation. Aoito (talk) 21:30, 11 July 2022 (UTC)

Sacha

I don't have personal notes for PlayerSacha. Ludoyo caught my eye today and tickled my brain. -- ferret (talk) 22:21, 11 July 2022 (UTC)

I don't remember much about that case, and it doesn't look like I took any notes, either. However, something must have made me suspicious, too, because my browser thinks I've already poked around and clicked on these links. I ran a check on User:Discret User, and some of those IP addresses are still in the CU log. Probably the best any of us could do is compare those IP addresses to this user. It wouldn't really prove anything, but it might be enough to push the weight of evidence toward a block. I could run a check if you find my logged actions difficult to follow. There's also a logged IP address from Bbb23 on 2019-11-11 for PrincessPeachWriter. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 00:08, 12 July 2022 (UTC)
Not Sacha, wrong continent. I'm still suspicious of an earlier account but didn't find anything conclusive. -- ferret (talk) 01:00, 12 July 2022 (UTC)

Request to unblock

Hello, could you answer my request? Aoito (talk) 09:39, 13 July 2022 (UTC)

You'll probably have to wait a while. The situation you embroiled yourself in is confusing, and few administrators look at unblock requests. You've also made no effort to discuss your edits on Talk:Crunchyroll with other contributors or to provide sources that show Gen Fukunaga founded Crunchyroll in 2006 along the other people listed in the article as founders. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 17:10, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
I participated in the discussion on your page when I was tagged, but for some reason you gave me a ban when I did not take any action to break the rules. I disagree with my ban and gave arguments why I didn’t break the rules. I’m waiting for your answer to my request. Aoito (talk) 19:53, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
You just got it in my previous reply, and I'm not going to repeat myself. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 20:13, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
Where can I complain about the administrator’s abuse of authority? Aoito (talk) 20:20, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
I guess there's Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents. However, I would advise against posting there. You might talk yourself into getting a site-wide block. Instead, you should follow what I just told you to do and post to the article's talk page and get consensus for your edits. I don't understand why you're refusing to do this. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 21:37, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
I'm worried about the block log entry. I've been on Wikipedia for almost 4 years and this is my first ban. I joined the discussion when I was tagged on your page. Why did I get banned for reverting two edits by an anonymous user to a Crunchyroll article? :( Aoito (talk) 22:55, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
You have been edit warring to add this unsourced statement since May 2022. For example: Special:Diff/1087421616, Special:Diff/1087616981, Special:Diff/1087863698. Ferret already warned you about disruptive editing related to Crunchyroll. The block is 1 month because this has been going on since May, and it seemed likely to me that you'd continue trying to add that content. This partial block is does nothing but stop you from editing that one article until you have discussed the issue and gained consensus for your edits. You can still edit the article's talk page, and I have told you to go to Talk:Crunchyroll and discuss your edits three times now: Special:Diff/1097607867, Special:Diff/1097985065, Special:Diff/1098029414. For some inexplicable reason, you refuse to do so. This is starting to look like a refusal to hear what I'm saying. I will not tell you to do this a fourth time. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 00:20, 14 July 2022 (UTC)
Oh, my fault, I already forgot about these edits that I made a few months ago. You made the right decision in this situation. Will the entry in the block log remain forever, or will it disappear after the ban expires? Aoito (talk) 00:52, 14 July 2022 (UTC)
Block logs are forever. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 01:51, 14 July 2022 (UTC)
Hello. Could you cancel my ban early? It's been 11 days since the ban was received. I’ve been discussing (Talk:Crunchyroll) it for over a week. Aoito (talk) 13:50, 22 July 2022 (UTC)
I personally would prefer to see your edits get consensus on the talk page, and it looks to me that you're arguing based on your interpretations of primary sources, such as a company's terms of service page. I think this was part of the initial problem, because you're not going by what independent, secondary reliable sources say. I just checked, and there are a bunch of newspaper articles about Crunchyroll at The New York Times and The Wall Street Journal. This is what the article should be based on. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 17:23, 22 July 2022 (UTC)
No, I'm discussing a user's draft, this has nothing to do with the current Crunchyroll article. Aoito (talk) 17:48, 22 July 2022 (UTC)
That doesn't change anything about what NRP is telling you in regards to your misuse of primary sources. -- ferret (talk) 18:12, 22 July 2022 (UTC)

2a02:8084:f1be:9180::/64

Hi, I've placed a lengthy, hard block on 2a02:8084:f1be:9180::/64 for long-term disruption. I see you've CU blocked it in the past so thought you might want to know. Best, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 19:51, 17 July 2022 (UTC)

Probably still allocated to the same person. That one had a history of personal attacks and harassment. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 20:30, 17 July 2022 (UTC)

Unsourced edits to George of the Jungle (film)

Hello. You sent me a message about adding unsourced content on George of the Jungle (film). I'm not trying to vandalize Wikipedia. May I get better if I don't add unsourced content? Thanks. Toasy Cake Fan 100 (talk) 03:19, 18 July 2022 (UTC)

I'm not really sure what you're saying. You need to cite reliable sources for content that you add to Wikipedia. Help:Introduction to referencing with Wiki Markup/1 is a tutorial on sourcing, and there's also Help:Referencing for beginners. I never really thought it before, but I don't know why there's two different tutorials on that topic. It took me a while to figure out where to look for this stuff. If you're curious, here's a few that I commonly use:

I usually check a country's national archives first. For example, you could check the Norwegian Film Institute for a Norwegian film. If there isn't enough information there, you could check, I don't know, Aftonbladet. That's the only Norwegian newspaper I've ever heard of, so I'd probably check there and run the results through Google Translate. After that, I'd look at Mass media in Norway to find out what other newspaper exist. There's always Allmovie if you can't find a better source. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 03:43, 18 July 2022 (UTC)

Alright, thank you. Toasy Cake Fan 100 (talk) 03:46, 18 July 2022 (UTC)

Explanation for sanctions and lack thereof

Hi @NinjaRobotPirate, you've issued a sanction with only a vague explanation of "persistent hostility" whatever that means, and you've also made an edit on the talk page of the user I have questioned you about regarding unseemly allegations of violating copyright and plagiarism (here). Judging by the fact you haven't imposed sanctions on the user, I have to presume it is acceptable to repeatedly accuse somebody of violating copyright and plagiarism and not even retract said allegation, and this is not persistently hostile either? Can you offer any guidance whatsoever here if you are unwilling to do so on my talk page? All my warmest wishes, ItsKesha (talk) 20:10, 18 July 2022 (UTC)

Are you saying that because I haven't yet blocked anyone at WP:AIV or WP:SPI today that vandalism and sock puppetry are allowed on Wikipedia? Because I don't really think that sounds logical. If you're asking for evidence of hostility, recent examples are Special:Diff/1098562475 and Special:Diff/1098829329. In the first one, you berate an editor for "pathetic and lazy editing" and accuse them of bad faith. In the other, you call this person a hypocrite. You've been warned before for hostility, and, your reaction to being politely asked not to be patronizing is to be patronizing in Special:Diff/1096134071. After I warned Dilbagg of sanctions, he chose to be polite and try to drop the feud in Special:Diff/1098794495. Your reaction was to, once again, berate him and accuse him of bad faith in Special:Diff/1098813539. So, that's part of the reason why you're sanctioned but Dilbagg isn't. The other part is that if you think I'm going to personally deal with every single issue that's reported on English Wikipedia – well, in the words of a great poet, you've got another thing coming. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 21:12, 18 July 2022 (UTC)
"Because I don't really think that sounds logical" - good job I didn't make that argument then isn't it 👍. You say the user "drop[ped] the feud" in that edit you link to, at 14:44 on 17 July, yet two hours later on that exact page he made the edit here, Special:Diff/1098816752 ("I tried to be kind but you are not worth it"), and thirty minutes after that he makes this edit Special:Diff/1098821668 ("Either ways to me he did plagarise"). Is that him choosing to be polite, in your opinion? All my warmest wishes, ItsKesha (talk) 22:08, 18 July 2022 (UTC)
As an aside, seeing as you are the one who has sanctioned me for this; if behaviour that could be, perhaps harshly, described as "pathetic and lazy editing" continues for months on end, how should I proceed without describing it as "pathetic and lazy editing"? All my warmest wishes, ItsKesha (talk) 22:08, 18 July 2022 (UTC)

Persistent disruption from IP range

The following IPs have been stirring up trouble at BvS and other DC-related film articles:

Looks like a cellular provider in Chile. The first one in the list is the newest offender.

If it was just one article, I'd say protect the page, but it may be time to block the range and force users to create accounts. Wasn't sure which venue to take it to, so figured I'd drop you a note first and see what you thought. Thanks in advance! -- GoneIn60 (talk) 04:20, 22 July 2022 (UTC)

Actually, I saw that but forgot about it before I looked further into what was going on. It looks like there are multiple blocks in the history there but no range blocks. I did a short block on Special:Contributions/201.188.128.0/19, which will hopefully deal with it. If not, I guess we can try something harsher. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 05:19, 22 July 2022 (UTC)
Good start, appreciate it! --GoneIn60 (talk) 12:17, 22 July 2022 (UTC)

Well that didn't take long, unfortunately: 1, 2. Already getting into it with another editor as well at Zack Snyder's Justice League. --GoneIn60 (talk) 21:34, 29 July 2022 (UTC)

That's why I made the link clickable – easy to reinstate. I can try a month this time. I left account creation on, so accounts might show up. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 21:54, 29 July 2022 (UTC)

Quick Question

How can I contact you privately? Sun Sunris (talk) 09:21, 26 July 2022 (UTC)

Well, you could use Special:EmailUser/NinjaRobotPirate, but if you need help or advice, Wikipedia has lots of forums you can use for that, like Wikipedia:Teahouse and Wikipedia:Help desk. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 19:03, 26 July 2022 (UTC)

Ooo boy...

Stumbled onto a deeper one than I thought there with NatsFan. I actually didn't think to check the master there, was just dealing with the obvious socks at the time. -- ferret (talk) 22:55, 26 July 2022 (UTC)

I often get the benefit of more data by the time someone's unblock request comes up. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 01:12, 27 July 2022 (UTC)

REVDEL

Can you please WP:REVDEL the edits by 5.213.174.75 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)? Google Translate shows that they're putting in an address and phone number and other details of someone. Might also warrant a block. —Locke Cole • t • c 03:30, 27 July 2022 (UTC)

Yeah, not sure what's going on there, but it doesn't look good. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 03:39, 27 July 2022 (UTC)

You've got mail (totally not the most obnoxious template ever) (well I suppose there’s worse)

Hello, NinjaRobotPirate. Please check your email; you've got mail!
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.Sun Sunris (talk) 09:58, 27 July 2022 (UTC)

EditingProperly

EditingProperly I haven't looked at this one just yet, only reviewed contribs. The name alone is suspicious, hahah. Do you have any old notes for Ibrahim.rashid55 or UltraUsurper? I'm reminded of both. -- ferret (talk) 13:31, 28 July 2022 (UTC)

I took a few notes on UltraUsurper. I can email them. Yeah, that username sounds suspicious. Sometimes kids do strange things like put "I'm not a sock puppet" on their user page. Kids are weird. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 16:14, 28 July 2022 (UTC)
This looks like a miss, but it's still oddly suspicious. Wrong continent altogether. -- ferret (talk) 16:52, 28 July 2022 (UTC)

UTRS appeal #61310

User:PlanespotterA320 is requesting unblock. Thoughts? OK to unblock? Deepfriedokra (talk) 23:34, 28 July 2022 (UTC)

That block was originally done by User:The Blade of the Northern Lights. What happened was that PlanespotterA320 made several comments about how it would be necessary to engage in sock puppetry if nobody unblocked her. After that went on for a while, I revoked talk page access. The UTRS unblock request sounds good at first, but it descends into wikilawyering. For what it's worth, this topic is under general sanctions (Wikipedia:General sanctions/Uyghur genocide). Sometimes I think we should have a list of "controversial things that nobody cares about except obsessed fans", such as beauty pageants and fictional grudges in professional wrestling. Then, we should have a different list of "controversial real world issues", such as genocide, slavery, war crimes, etc. When you get blocked indefinitely for being disruptive in beauty pageants, you have to edit Indian castes or Nazi war crimes. When you get blocked indefinitely for being disruptive in articles about genocide, you have edit articles about professional wrestling or anime characters. Shuffle them off to the "opposite" topic, where they'll be bored stupid and have no reason to argue with anyone. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 01:21, 29 July 2022 (UTC)
Thanks. Deepfriedokra (talk) 02:34, 29 July 2022 (UTC)
Hello NRP and User:Deepfriedokra. I happened to see this item on NRP's talk. I looked over the UTRS you mentioned and feel like the block should *not* be lifted. Perusing other Wikipedias, I see that PlanespotterA320 is also indef blocked on ruwiki but surprisingly is doing OK work on Commons. As a sign of what might be in store if we unblock him here, take a look at an RfC which he opened at Meta, meta:Requests for comment/Crimean Tatar coverage on ruwiki. Conceivably Planespotter might even be right about some of the disputed points regarding Crimean Tartars, but persuading him to take his issues through normal dispute resolution would probably exhaust the oatience of everyone else involved. The wide span of Planespotter's interests and his ability to argue about many many issues, suggests that trying to unblock him under a topic ban might not be worthwhile. Also leaving a ping for User:Tamzin since they have just today reserved the UTRS. EdJohnston (talk) 03:35, 29 July 2022 (UTC)
Thanks for the ping, Ed. I was just rereading the AN/I thread and had already reached the conclusion that, if an unblock is possible, it would have to come with a pretty broad TBAN involved. I've just asked a trusted ru-N Wikimedian if they could summarize the ruwiki indef for me, and have asked Planespotter the same question by UTRS. I'm curious to see how the responses compare. (I believe Planespotter takes she/her pronouns, by the way.) -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she|they|xe) 03:51, 29 July 2022 (UTC)
@Tamzin and EdJohnston:Thanks, y'all. Sometimes I need more people looking at UTRS's like this one. Deepfriedokra (talk) 10:42, 29 July 2022 (UTC)
Bozhe moy ! Deepfriedokra (talk) 10:49, 29 July 2022 (UTC)

Block TPA

See User talk:47.40.45.254. Thanks. Nasty little bugger that! BilCat (talk) 04:16, 29 July 2022 (UTC)

Done. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 04:46, 29 July 2022 (UTC)
Thank you! BilCat (talk) 04:56, 29 July 2022 (UTC)

Possible block evasion by Rishabisajakepauler

149.7.35.226 (talk · contribs)

Possible block evasion by Rishabisajakepauler. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 06:07, 29 July 2022 (UTC)

Well, it's a proxy, so I blocked it regardless of who's on it. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 06:15, 29 July 2022 (UTC)

Persistent disruptive editing/block evasion

For a while now, I've been seeing a lot of pointless and disruptive editing from 175.176.68.236/24. When the edits aren't completely pointless copy/pasting of article content to talk pages (e.g.)), it's silly infobox things (e.g. adding Infobox Chinese module to Japanese BLPs), and generally copying/pasting stuff from Japanese wikipedia into English wikipedia with no regard for MOS, sourcing, BLP requirements, or anything at all, really. The account Mimi Myoui was recently blocked 31 hours for exactly the same activity, and I've long assumed it's from the same range since the behavior is basically identical. But now it looks like the same person(s) edited from that IP range during the account's block, so I'm bringing this up as possible block evasion in addition to the constant disruptive editing, in the hope that maybe we can give the range a timeout and save the time of the productive editors who have to regularly clean up those edits. Any chance? Thanks either way for taking a look. Indignant Flamingo (talk) 03:13, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

You're not really giving me much to go on here, but Special:Contributions/175.176.68.0/23 looks disruptive enough to block. They seem to be disruptively editing infoboxes in the same articles, at least. If the account becomes active again, I guess I can block it, too. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 03:52, 1 August 2022 (UTC)
Restricting that /23 range will definitely help, thanks. I suppose I can also file a longer SPI with diffs if it keeps up/resumes. Hopefully this will do the trick, though! I appreciate you taking a look at it. Indignant Flamingo (talk) 04:00, 1 August 2022 (UTC)
And they're back. They stopped shortly after I reported to AIV, but it's just the same infobox silliness again. For informational purposes, the three latest Mimi Myoui edits are variations on the edits from the now-blocked IP range (e.g. [6] [7]). If you don't feel like blocking for persistent disruptive editing, I can file an SPI when I get a chance to assemble more diffs. Apologies for dragging this out. Indignant Flamingo (talk) 18:47, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
Well, I did say that I'd deal with it, so that probably makes it my problem to sort out. I was going to do a shorter block, but I did a month-long block to mostly match the IP block. Even the edit summaries are the same. It's awkward for me to block IP editors like this because then everyone assumes that I used the CU tool. I don't have to in cases like this. It's too obvious. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 19:08, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
Yeah, not too subtle, this one. Thanks again for your help. Indignant Flamingo (talk) 19:19, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
And again, from different IP range. Same disruptive infobox edits to same articles. They can't stay away from Asuka Saitō, and they still don't know the difference between katakana and hiragana, so as usual it's pretty easy to spot. Indignant Flamingo (talk) 20:44, 27 August 2022 (UTC)
I have poor eyesight, and it's hard for me to find these posts in the middle of my talk page. Please make a new section. I blocked the IP, though. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 02:03, 28 August 2022 (UTC)

Block evasion by Slgsx

Tonydictionary (talk · contribs)

Slgsx is obviously evading the block [8] [9] [10] [11]. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 20:56, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

@AmazingPeanuts: I'm not that user though and didn't evade the block. Could you please check the IPs? Tonydictionary (talk) 21:03, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

 Confirmed to Slgsx. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 21:12, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

Probably behind the new Wildkratts19892 account too, given their immediate re-opening of the Lamar Johnson RM [12] and editing the murdered musicians list. Nohomersryan (talk) 23:08, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

That one's confirmed, too. My range block wasn't wide enough. If you find more of them, let me know. It's tedious, but the data collected will hopefully let me know what IP ranges to block. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 23:21, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

Worth noting, appears to still be out there. Although a stale IP, Special:Contributions/2600:6C40:5400:55A6:FDFE:1C1D:7184:7279 is clearly them. Nohomersryan (talk) 22:11, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

Block evasion by Isaacsorry

Gullyshine2468 (talk · contribs)

Isaacsorry is block evading again [13] [14]. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 16:01, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

Yeah, that looks pretty clear-cut. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 17:00, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – August 2022

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

Administrator changes

readded Valereee
removed Anthony Appleyard (deceased) • Capitalistroadster • Samsara

Guideline and policy news

  • An RfC has been closed with consensus to add javascript that will show edit notices for editors editing via a mobile device. This only works for users using a mobile browser, so iOS app editors will still not be able to see edit notices.
  • An RfC has been closed with the consensus that train stations are not inherently notable.

Technical news

  • The Wikimania 2022 Hackathon will take place virtually from 11 August to 14 August.
  • Administrators will now see links on user pages for "Change block" and "Unblock user" instead of just "Block user" if the user is already blocked. (T308570)

Arbitration

  • The arbitration case request Geschichte has been automatically closed after a 3 month suspension of the case.

Miscellaneous

  • You can vote for candidates in the 2022 Board of Trustees elections from 16 August to 30 August. Two community elected seats are up for election.
  • Wikimania 2022 is taking place virtually from 11 August to 14 August. The schedule for wikimania is listed here. There are also a number of in-person events associated with Wikimania around the world.
  • Tech tip: When revision-deleting on desktop, hold ⇧ Shift between clicking two checkboxes to select every box in that range.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:44, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

User:Bythere

Thanks for sparing me from more ranting.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:21, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

Yeah, the argumentative ones can be tiring. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 01:59, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

Reporting $tarstruck again

$tarstruck (talk · contribs)

This editor keep making changes in Funk Wav Bounces Vol. 1 by moving the guest features (which are credited in track order) without explaining why [15] [16] [17]. I have go to their talk page and explain why the features are credited that way but didn't get a response from them, days later the editor went back to the article and made these edits without explaining why again. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 04:09, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

Sometimes I sort things a certain way – usually, as they're given by the source cited, so they can be quickly and easily verified later by skimming over the source. I find it frustrating when people decide something like "no, this person or band or whatever is my favorite, and it should be listed first", but I'm not really sure that this, by itself, is blockable disruption. But I also don't really see any attempt by $tarstruck to engage in communication. I left a note, but you should raise the issue on the article's talk page. It's become increasingly obvious that some people simply aren't going to communicate until you block them, but I think we have to give them enough opportunities to communicate first. Some people are really shy or whatever, and they need some prodding before they'll communicate. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 05:40, 12 August 2022 (UTC)
Even I do raise the issue at the article's talk page, they gonna ignore it and keep doing what they doing. I deal with editors like this before and it's annoys me, let's see the editor will respond this time. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 06:58, 12 August 2022 (UTC)
We are obligated by policy to at least go through the motions. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 08:04, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

Paydayfan

Would it be possible to get a WP:NOTHERE block for Paydayfan (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) and possibly a WP:REVDEL on the edit summary that appears to be used to just spam some AV software? —Locke Cole • t • c 16:29, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

This is probably the same person as Charlingtonglaevio, and they both appear to be Wikkkj3. I'd guess that the edit summary is some kind of stupid, ironic meme, not really spam. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 17:07, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

Draft:Khejarla Jaitaran Road

Now reference added. Make it publish. MahendraPrajapatKhejarla (talk) 08:52, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

Thanks

I'd sooner someone up and said I was being a dickhead (or some variation thereof) than pretending that nothing was the matter. Thank you for doing so[1]. No hard feelings. Mako001 (C)  (T)  🇺🇦 07:01, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ Strictly speaking you didn't call me a dickhead, but it wouldn't have been unfair to do so
Admin noticeboards are prone to a lot of drama and don't need more. Most people struggle occasionally with remaining civil, me included. Just make an effort, and remember that Wikipedia is not a video game. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 23:18, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

Request to unblock

My account has been blocked under "suspicious reasons" since 2015 and I'm unable to make valuable edits in this platform. I don't know if someone has misused my account before but I would love to get my editing rights back after missing out for such a long time. S.Das (talk) 07:58, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

Sorry, don't know what you're talking about. You don't seem to be affected by any blocks. If you were, you wouldn't be able to post on my talk page. If you are affected by a block, there should be detailed instructions on how to appeal it. You have to follow those instructions. They're not just bureaucratic hoops designed to frustrate you; we really have no idea how to help you unless you follow those instructions. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 14:45, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

My edition in Dark Water (2005) was reverted by you

Why did you revert my edit on the 2005 Dark Water movie article? Because the truth is you are deleting data that has been released a long time ago. Many sources describe that the budget of that film is 30 million dollars. I chose IMDB because it is a reliable source to learn a lot of facts about TV series and movies. And by the way, you shouldn't have removed Vertigo Entertainment and Pandemonium Productions either, because on every poster, on every DVD and Blu-ray back cover, and in various sources that mention the film, and in the same film, Vertigo Entertainment and Pandemonium Productions are credited on the production companies section, along with Touchstone Pictures. Ivo Reátegui (talk) 12:40, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia summarizes what reliable sources say. The IMDb is not a reliable source, so I don't really care what it says. We already have a source for the production company, and it doesn't mention those companies. Your addition was unsourced, so it doesn't belong here. The essay Wikipedia:Verifiability, not truth may help explain this. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 06:19, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
OK. I stand the fact that you say. I already read the essay. But I have to let you know that the movie Dark Water of 2005 have in its credit section the productions companies Vertigo Entertainment and Pandemonium Productions along with Touchstone Pictures, because these productions companies names appears at the beginning scene of the movie itself, and also, they appear in every poster of the movie, and finally, they appear on every DVD and Blu-ray back cover of the movie. So, can I add the productions companies names Vertigo Entertainment and Pandemonium Production in the production companies section from the Inbox of Dark Water of 2005? Ivo Reátegui (talk) 01:14, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
Is there a language barrier here? I just explained this to you. It's also explained in Template:Infobox film, which says to cite a reliable source that identifies the production companies. And I also explained it in Special:Diff/1027634792. A logo on a poster is not a reliable source. All it means is that a logo is on a poster. Interpreting what that logo means is original research done on a primary source, which it's disallowed by policy. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 02:32, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

Apologies for the ping.

My bad. Doug Weller talk 15:17, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

It's not a problem. It's just that I'm getting a lot of pings, and the blocked editor was asking me questions about stuff that I don't know anything about. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 17:38, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

Can you help me out?

Can you make sure that Buried needs to be still a Spanish English-language film without USA, UK or France co-productions, for me please NinjaRobotPirate? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stvincent1999 (talk • contribs) 07:41, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

Blocked as a sock, though it's going to take a little work to untangle who's a sock of whom. I think one of your earlier accounts got mistagged as a sock of someone else. You need to make an unblock request instead of making new accounts. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 18:16, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

thanks for the clean up

ya know what I'm talking about. Might want to SBL that url. I already ran a COI bot report. PICKLEDICAE🥒 05:26, 28 August 2022 (UTC)

You mean 2600:1012:B1C4:AFD:0:0:0:0/64? That range block isn't wide enough; they'll just come back in a few minutes. I widened it, which should help. Unfortunately, I lost track of the URL before it got oversighted. It looks like someone else did it, though. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 05:34, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
I am assuming its some sort of sneaky lta, I didn't see anything looking at the edits in the /44 that was obviously them but I guess it doesn't matter much at this point. PICKLEDICAE🥒 05:37, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
Most people bounce around on a /39 or /40 on Verizon Wireless. I don't think there's anyone especially disruptive on that IP range, but there's this troll, who also posted to ANI, so who knows. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 06:17, 28 August 2022 (UTC)

Genre warring at Dawn FM

51.198.25.73 (talk · contribs)

There's an editor who is adding unsourced or poorly unsourced genres in the article [18] [19] [20]. This could be MariaJaydHicky who is block evading for all I know. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 08:09, 28 August 2022 (UTC)

This duplicates a now-removed AIV report. Sockpuppetry would also pretty much be the only reason not to block both participants of such an edit war, TheAmazingPeanuts. Especially edit warring with an edit summary complaining about the edit warring is suboptimal. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 10:22, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
@ToBeFree: Did you even look at the edits? The editor is adding unsourced or poorly sourced genres in the article. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 10:29, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
TheAmazingPeanuts, I did have a look, even at the sources, and found the situation to be disputable enough not to treat this as a purely one-sided form of disruption. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 10:31, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
@ToBeFree: That's still no reason to changes genres without discussion first, we already have an discussion months earlier. The IP is being disruptive, not me. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 10:45, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
The IP user has fortunately joined that discussion (which is one of the reasons I have removed the report instead of taking any action). Their message remains unanswered so far, though. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 10:51, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
@ToBeFree: I have reply to the editor, maybe it's the best to lock the page for now. Sorry for edit warring. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 12:04, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
TheAmazingPeanuts, replying to the editor was the only necessary action; reverting yet again wasn't. Anyone agreeing with your position could have done that, and there was no rush to do so. The only reason you're not blocked now is that blocks are not meant to be punitive, and it's too late to prevent your action. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 12:07, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
With respect to the sock puppetry concerns, I don't remember much about MariaJaydHicky. You'd be better off filing a case at SPI. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 15:11, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
That was now done with diffs at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/MariaJaydHicky, and 51.198.25.73 is indeed clearly block evading. To be fair, it should be noted that this means that all of the reverts were fine. I doubt this was the reason for the reverts as the edit summaries contain different justification attempts, so I hope this is not seen as a form of encouragement. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 22:46, 28 August 2022 (UTC)

Resumption after block

You mentioned at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/IncidentArchive1106#2A02:8084:8020:2280:0:0:0:0/64 that you would consider a longer block if the IP continued ignoring WP:ENGVAR. Recent edits in range show he is. Geraldo Perez (talk) 23:03, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

I did it for a month this time. The editor will have to get bored eventually and click on that link to the complaint at ANI. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 23:33, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – September 2022

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

Guideline and policy news

  • A discussion is open to define a process by which Vector 2022 can be made the default for all users.
  • An RfC is open to gain consensus on whether Fox News is reliable for science and politics.

Technical news

Arbitration

  • An arbitration case regarding Conduct in deletion-related editing has been closed. The Arbitration Committee passed a remedy as part of the final decision to create a request for comment (RfC) on how to handle mass nominations at Articles for Deletion (AfD).
  • The arbitration case request Jonathunder has been automatically closed after a 6 month suspension of the case.

Miscellaneous

  • The new pages patrol (NPP) team has prepared an appeal to the Wikimedia Foundation (WMF) for assistance with addressing Page Curation bugs and requested features. You are encouraged to read the open letter before it is sent, and if you support it, consider signing it. It is not a discussion, just a signature will suffice.
  • Voting for candidates for the Wikimedia Board of Trustees is open until 6 September.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:12, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

Disruptive after block (evasion)

Continuing from this entry higher up the page, the month-long block on 175.176.68.0/23 has expired and someone in that range has immediately resumed one of the signature disruptive behaviors already discussed in my initial complaint, specifically the copying and pasting of random content from article pages into talk pages. Not the same behavior as the infobox edits, but consistent with previous disruption from the /24. See 1 and 2 for the most recent examples. Indignant Flamingo (talk) 01:44, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

Well, that's a kind of weird thing to do, but it doesn't seem especially disruptive. If it becomes a major nuisance, I can reblock the range, though. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 02:52, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

Possible block evasion

Possible block evasion by Rishabisajakepauler [21] [22] [23]. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 23:34, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

Not a sock, but it is still a single. 24.28.40.72 (talk) 00:21, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

What do you mean by "a single"? Magnatyrannus (talk | contribs) 00:53, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

@Magnatyrannus: the edit I made, an official Billboard source said that song article I edited was an official single, but it is getting reverted on suspicions of block evasion. 24.28.40.49 (talk) 02:14, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

I did a range block that should take care of the IPs. If the IPs start pinging you, let me know and I'll disable talk page access for the IP range. I'd rather not do that, but this sock has been getting very chatty lately. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 02:48, 3 September 2022 (UTC)
Alright, got it! Magnatyrannus (talk | contribs) 02:50, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

Astrobios

The behavior that lead to the block was Astroios re-creating Draft:Cerberus_Optical_Network, then editing a bunch of space-related articles as Cygnius did. Odd, though, as the latter's creation of "Cerberus Optical Network" seemed to be referring to an actual networking company, whereas the version Cygnius created was more fanciful like their other edits. However, it doesn't really make sense that Astrobios would've innocently try to create a legit article given that the company's name doesn't have "optical" in it; see [24]. OhNoitsJamie Talk 21:56, 7 September 2022 (UTC)

Cygnius is on a bunch of IP ranges, some of which are libraries, and others are probably proxies. It looks like a different country, though. I don't understand what's going on in the space articles. "Cerberus Optical Network" doesn't really get any worthwhile Google hits. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 22:31, 7 September 2022 (UTC)

The now-closed discussion

Hi. Now that you've closed the discussion, what conclusions should be understood about the DE/POINTY accusation with which it was launched? Can you clarify? Thanks.

It's not a court case. There isn't any precedent that needs to be followed. Multiple people told the people restoring unsourced content that this was counter to policy, and some were asked to stop by an admin. Isn't that enough? NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 03:01, 9 September 2022 (UTC)
So this meanings my talk page moves are allowed, and reverts are not, and that I can continue my practices with respect to uncited material, correct? Nightscream (talk) 11:52, 10 September 2022 (UTC)
Already answered above. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 17:41, 10 September 2022 (UTC)

Can we finish "talk page moves"

Hi: I understand your frustration, but may I suggest your closing the Wikipedia Nightstream ANI was premature in that I think there was likely to be consensus that "talk page moves" are disruptive but no agreement on remedy other than the offender should cease and desist. It is pretty clear that every editor experiencing a "talk page move" on pages they monitor found it disruptive. Let me give you an example of why it is disruptive if not vandalism:

From [Wikipedia Citation hunt https://citationhunt.toolforge.org/en?id=ef274aa1] I got this random citation in Oxford_University_Press#Scholarly_journals : ”The OUP is a member of the Open Access Scholarly Publishers Association. [citation needed] “ Based upon the theory underlying “talk page moves’ I can remove the tag and material solely because of the age of the material. I have no subject matter expertise and the sentence seems reasonable to me so why should I have the right to remove it without at least investigating? As it turns out it took me about 2 minutes to find a RS – OASPA Members - OASPA listing OUP. In my view, my moving the sentence to the talk page would be disruptive; moving mass content then is multiple disruptions and in my view vandalism or and/or WP:BADFAITH.

In vandalization reversion occurs regardless of content, but apparently stating my opinion further confused the discussion leading to your frustration and your closing the ANI. I apologize for creating the confusion.

I would have preferred the inclusion of revision as part of the remedy, but some editors and most administrators would not approve of reversion of "unsourced." I don't like just ceasing the action and leaving the mess behind for other editors to correct but at least that would stop the one practice and create precedence for future stoppages. So may I request you reopen the ANI with discussion limited to whether or not it is disruptive, and the editor notified of such should decease.

If you are not interested in reopening the discussion on ANI I would appreciate your suggestion as to where to continue the discussion. I see three protentional forums:

  1. Village pump (policy)
  2. Wikipedia talk:Verifiability: Specifically, clarify "... may be removed ..." in WP:BURDEN to require a good faith effort at determining verifiability before removing any material (much less a lot of material))
  3. Wikipedia:Vandalism types: Specifically, clarfiy WP:V/RMV by changing "unreferenced" to "not referenceable" to require a good faith effort at determining verifiability before removing any material (much less a lot of material))

Bottom line, I think "talk page moves" are burning down Wikipedia to save it and this needs to be discussed further.

Your thoughts and suggestions would be appreciated. Tom94022 (talk) 19:56, 10 September 2022 (UTC)

This is exactly what I was hoping would not happen, but OK. I guess my talk page is going to be temporarily be ANI 2.0 briefly. However, I strongly suggest that you drop the stick. The community is tired of this dispute, and that's one of the reasons why people were asking for the ANI thread to be closed. The relevant policies have been explained repeatedly. If you want to change what the relevant policies say, you can make proposals at the Village Pump. Frankly, I couldn't care less what some essay or random web page says. Wikipedia is guided by its policies and guidelines. So far, nobody has been blocked, but that could change. Assuming good faith is mandatory, and choosing not to assume good faith is grounds for a block. Vandalism similarly has a very specific definition on Wikipedia, and accusing a good-faith contributor of vandalism is a personal attack. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 21:29, 10 September 2022 (UTC)
I'm going to take this to Village pump (policy). FWIW I don't think coercion. which is what "talk page moves" are, is a "good faith" act. Tom94022 (talk) 22:15, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
If "Tag bombing is a form of disruptive editing." then it remains an open question whether a "talk page move" is also WP:DE? If it is, then an editor may be asked to stop and if continued blocked. It appears to me the discussion got way off track because of the debate over remedies beyond asking/blocking and you then closed it. BTW, there is no discussion of remedy for WP:TAGBOMB and I suspect some purists would object to reverting {{Cn}} tags placed by a tag bomber on the theory that the tagged material is not verifiable; a theory without any evidence. So if you are up to it, may I again suggest you reopen the discussion with a strict limitation to the question of whether a "talk page move" is WP:DE? Tom94022 (talk) 18:53, 18 September 2022 (UTC)
I know what you're thinking: "This guy said I have to assume good faith, but I'll just ignore that because the rules don't apply to me. Although he explicitly told me that he doesn't care what essays say, I'll convince him by quoting more essays. Also, even though he told me to drop the stick, I'll keep arguing about this issue because he's just bluffing and won't block me for 'I didn't hear that'." Seems like a big gamble to me. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 19:59, 18 September 2022 (UTC)
The policy states: The fact that the disruption occurs in good faith does not change the fact that it is harmful to Wikipedia.. It seems that in the discussion the "talk page move" act should have been evaluated against policy, but the discussion was stopped before it was resolved. You may not like my good faith effort to resolve this but threatening to block me seems inappropriate and uncivil. Tom94022 (talk) 20:18, 18 September 2022 (UTC)

Prim96/LJstats

Hello NRP. I see you've established a link between the above mentioned editors. I've not been able to find a sockpuppet investigation page specifically for Prim96 and so it may be easiest if I express the concern I have here on your talk page, and for this reason I will ping Drmies who originally blocked the Prim96 account. Do you think it is worth running a check on User:Abbasi786786? The similarities bear more than a passing resemblance, and there is a little something else regarding Abassi that - believe it or not - makes me laugh my head off this side of the monitor. And you're gonna laugh as well when you've spotted this. At the RfC on Talk:Average human height by country, it's not just the fact that LJstats and Abassi both supported the inclusion of a table and its properties, but see they both presented their roughly equal-in-length arguments the same way and make clear their approval of "pooled analysis" and "NCD-RisC data" here and here. I mean right or wrong, it's downright obscure, and yet lo and behold, an anonymous editor messages Abassi and suddenly praises his good clear opinion before propositioning him to restore the edit based on this random "NCD-RisC" appraisal. If I'm right, then this alleged act of good faith might just have been for keeping up appearances. If I'm wrong and they are all in different parts of the world, then please accept my humblest apologies, but I hope you can detect the anomalies. --Coldtrack (talk) 21:51, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

I fully support this move and hope it goes ahead.
Anything to help clear my name 🤣🤣🤣
Nothing for me to worry about because I'm one guy who doesn't use any other accounts and who doesn't pull any funny business with VPNs or IP Addresses.
--- Abbasi786786 (talk) 22:23, 15 September 2022 (UTC)
No problem Abbasi, and congratulations on finding this needle in the haystack within 33 minutes after five full days of stony silence. NCD-RisC :) --Coldtrack (talk) 22:28, 15 September 2022 (UTC)
No, I don't think there's a SPI case for this. I don't really see a connection. It looks like someone was trying to canvass Abbasi786786, but it didn't take. Sometimes sock puppets talk to each other, but that's usually a thing with younger editors. Sometimes they like to create personas for each sock puppet and roleplay. Adults don't usually ask their own sock puppets to canvass for them. They just do it. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 22:36, 15 September 2022 (UTC)
Not to worry. That's fine. I did say it was just a hunch. Regards. --Coldtrack (talk) 22:38, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

Request

Hello NRP, considering your block of 47.16.96.33 (talk · contribs · WHOIS), could you also take a look at 47.23.40.14 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) and 98.116.128.15 (talk · contribs · WHOIS)? They appear to be the same person looking at this discussion. ~ KN2731 {talk · contribs} 03:47, 17 September 2022 (UTC)

Yeah, blocked both of them for a while. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 04:16, 17 September 2022 (UTC)

70.68.168.129 spamming their talk page

70.68.168.129 (talk · contribs) has decided today was a good day to spam their talk page following a block. Since you were the blocking admin, could you revoke their talk page access, please? LilianaUwU (talk / contribs) 05:42, 19 September 2022 (UTC)

Done. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 05:55, 19 September 2022 (UTC)

Reporting 96.244.18.223

96.244.18.223 (talk · contribs)

Binksternet says this editor might be using multiple accounts for adding unsourced or poorly sourced in articles [25] [26] [27] [28] [29] [30]. I wandered if this is the same person. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 01:01, 22 September 2022 (UTC)

Even a cursory glance at these IPs shows there's little glance of being the same user. Different ISPs, different cities and states. Most likely just meat. -- ferret (talk) 01:05, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
You could be right. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 01:15, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
I talked with 96.244.18.223 and they said they were only using another IP by accident, editing the same article. There are sources out there such as Genius which support the IP's preferred album name, I Got Issues, for the single "Scared Money". So I don't think we should be spanking this person. Binksternet (talk) 01:18, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
@Binksternet: Okay, thank you for responding. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 01:20, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
OK, well, if it's settled... NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 04:13, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
Also this editor is making up false statements. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 11:11, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
It looks like someone addressed the IP's vandalism accusation, which is technically a personal attack. "Wikipedia vandalism" seems to have morphed in the popular consciousness into "edit I don't like". NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 02:27, 24 September 2022 (UTC)

Move from suspected sock

Hi NRP,

I've just declined Apple Idea's unblock request, as the editor's name change is actually further behavioural evidence linking them to the Eluike/Finnish Idea sock that's currently only indicated as suspected. Nosebagbear (talk) 01:44, 24 September 2022 (UTC)

If I remember correctly, that account was confirmed to a couple vandalism-only accounts that were historically on the same IP range as Eluike, but Eluike had gone stale. That's usually what I mean when I do a {{checkuserblock-account}} but tag it as suspected. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 02:22, 24 September 2022 (UTC)

WP:PROXYING by User:Veverve?

I was looking at Veverve's talk page where it seems that they've been instructing other editors on what edits to make despite currently being blocked. Is this considered asking others to edit on their behalf? It seems like a gray area, and I'm new and not familiar enough with policy to be comfortable issuing a warning. User:Bbb23 instructed me to either contact you or file a report at ANI, and this seemed like the least disruptive way to see if I understand policy correctly. Thank you, and my apologies if I've wasted your time! EducatedRedneck (talk) 22:33, 24 September 2022 (UTC)

I don't think it's that big of a deal. Ververve is just arguing about policy. If people don't want to engage in those arguments, they can mute him. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 00:00, 25 September 2022 (UTC)
Roger that; thank you for clarifying, and I appreciate the response! Have a great day! EducatedRedneck (talk) 00:12, 25 September 2022 (UTC)

Block evasion by LTA

Hello. I noticed that the LTA you blocked on Talk:Cyclone Bulbul has returned. Same pattern of edits (weather, see Talk:Hurricane Fiona) with similar geolocation. Please block. Thanks, Destroyeraa (Alternate account) 22:48, 24 September 2022 (UTC)

It looks like a community center. Blocked that one for a year, too. This one is really persistent. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 00:17, 25 September 2022 (UTC)
Yet another IP just popped up. Same geolocation, interest, etc. Thanks for taking care of the last one. Destroyeraa (Alternate account) 02:23, 25 September 2022 (UTC)
Another static IP that has been blocked in the past for block evasion by this same person. Blocked this one for a year, too. There's no collateral damage on any of these blocks, which is a nice change. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 03:08, 25 September 2022 (UTC)

Reporting Phuc180802

Phuc180802 (talk · contribs)

Keep making unconstructive edits in the article My Beautiful Dark Twisted Fantasy [31] [32] [33] [34]. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 06:56, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

Hard to tell if this is a vandal, an obsessed fan, or a mix of both. I blocked for disruptive editing, but if this continues, I think we should treat it as vandalism. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 15:38, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

Block evasion by 2603:8000:400:0:0:0:0:0/40

Hi. Would it be possible to issue a block on 2603:8000:400:0:0:0:0:0/40 for block evasion? I've contacted you in the past about this user because they are persistent in resuming editing after their accounts (here's a list of their socks) or IP's are blocked. Yowashi (talk) 23:53, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

Done. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 00:07, 29 September 2022 (UTC)
It appears that the block evader has created a new account under Coola0986. Yowashi (talk) 06:26, 1 December 2022 (UTC)
Hello? May I get a response please? Yowashi (talk) 04:01, 2 December 2022 (UTC)
You have to start a new section at the bottom of my talk page if you want me to see stuff. I'm visually impaired and won't see new posts to the middle of my talk page. Blocked that account and another one, though. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 04:25, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

Unreasonable block? 2a02:14c:200:0:0:0:0:0/39

So basically no freedom of speech here in wikipedia? Spreading truth is also porhibited and you block users by calling this "abusive". What a shame 2.53.178.144 (talk) 18:50, 30 September 2022 (UTC)

Free speech means that you can set up your own website where you can tell everyone your opinions. If you want to use this website, you have to obey our rules. See Wikipedia:Free speech. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 00:43, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – October 2022

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

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • The Articles for creation helper script now automatically recognises administrator accounts which means your name does not need to be listed at WP:AFCP to help out. If you wish to help out at AFC, enable AFCH by navigating to Preferences → Gadgets and checking the "Yet Another AfC Helper Script" box.

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:43, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

Blonde (2022)

The article is being vandalized by an anonymous ip editor who removes sourced stuff to add unsourced genres. Can you recommend to protect the film page against IP vandals? Chairmaind2 (talk) 19:39, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

That's not really vandalism. Still, there's a lot of back-and-forth changing of the genres, so I semi-protected the page for two days so the IP editors can hash it out on the talk page and get consensus for their edits. WP:RFPP can be used to request page protection. You can also ask specific admins, but you never know if they'll be around. I just got back from getting sushi, actually. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 19:54, 1 October 2022 (UTC)
  • That was a surprise. Thanks for checking.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:09, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
    • I think a lot of these older 2015-era socks have tried to quietly return to Wikipedia ever since the pandemic. I didn't notice it at first, but the edits and genre warring match up perfectly, and they're on the same IP range. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 17:19, 5 October 2022 (UTC)

Crunchyroll again

Hello, could you check the history of edits on the Crunchyroll page and revert the only stable edit, the user TheWikiMan95 has altered the page when adjusting pending changes configured to the page due to the persistent disruptive edit of this because everyone here is speculating that Crunchyroll is actually an entertainment company that specializes in Japanese anime dubbing and distribution if I was primarily focusing on the opening sentence to accommodate the article a bit like Disney+ for example, thank you. 148.101.50.218 (talk) 01:00, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

I don't know anything about Crunchyroll or its history. If you think there's a problem with the article but others disagree, maybe you should explain what's wrong on the article's talk page. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 01:34, 2 October 2022 (UTC)
Well, the bad thing is that the article in which I was trying to reverse my two edits was not allowed to be accepted nor are they constructive, the problem with the opening sentences that TheWikiMan95 added was a holy mess in describing Crunchyroll as an entertainment company and a streaming service that specializes in dubbing and distributing Japanese anime but it doesn't seem to be an in-house dubbing studio based in Dallas or is it. 148.101.50.218 (talk) 05:30, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

Blocked IP for 6 months

I need my IP address/range being blocked temporarily for 6 months to stop all this sockpuppetry and later my original account (Agustin Sepulveda Venegas 2004 Fan) will be globally unlocked by a steward. Thank you! Right? 191.125.227.217 (talk) 13:37, 6 October 2022 (UTC)

Can't you just stop engaging in block evasion? This website is like a playpen for every unsupervised child on the internet, and I don't understand why. Wouldn't you rather play on Wikia or TV Tropes? NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 15:23, 6 October 2022 (UTC)

LastBreath64 is back again

Hi. Do you remember blocking Thesickreservoir (talk · contribs)? They are a sock of LastBreath64 (talk · contribs). Now they are back under the Stuntneare (talk · contribs) name. Editor Interaction Analyser link. I also included Mspriz (talk · contribs) too make it more clear, because they were Mspriz before Thesickreservoir. Renat 19:00, 8 October 2022 (UTC)

Yeah, basically  Confirmed to Danloud (talk · contribs). Same IP range, same edits, slight differences in technical data. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 19:20, 8 October 2022 (UTC)

Justdad78

I wouldn't have a problem with unblocking you to edit encyclopedia articles about those topics. Frankly, I'm not sure why you're considering endorsing an unblock for this user, but putting that aside for the moment, I wanted to make sure that you noticed that I blocked Lapelyoke as a sock of Justdad. I can't be sure the new account is a sock, but it's very likely either a sock puppet or a meat puppet, which, policy-wise, makes little difference. Have you run a check on the two accounts?--Bbb23 (talk) 21:24, 8 October 2022 (UTC)

Yeah, they're in different countries. I quit caffeine again, so I'm probably less irritable and back to being a bit more laid back about Wikipedia. That said, it's not like I'm proposing that editor be immediately unblocked. Just an idea of potential path forward. Nobody ever says, "You know what, I'd love to help expand articles about Indian castes and fix any potential POV problems they have. Forget trying to disruptively whitewash this controversial article!" So, it's not like it even matters. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 23:58, 8 October 2022 (UTC)
Thanks for checking. Justdad didn't even respond positively to your idea, which only shows how wrapped up he is in his agenda. Basically told you to go pound sand and that he was going to "deactivate" his account. Good luck with that.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:54, 9 October 2022 (UTC)

Disruptive editing

There's an editor who is using multiple accounts for adding unsourced recording dates in articles [35] [36] [37], with this range. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 22:26, 10 October 2022 (UTC)

That's not multiple accounts. That's just how the internet works. People usually get allocated a new, random IP address every so often unless they pay exorbitant amounts of money to reserve a single IP address. What I do is give them standard warnings on whatever IP address they happen to be using currently. For IPv6, you can usually see all the edits that user has made by appending /64 to their current IP address. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 02:59, 11 October 2022 (UTC)
Alright. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 03:17, 11 October 2022 (UTC)
Also the editor restore the unsourced edits with another account just recently [38] [39] [40]. I think these accounts might be related to MakaveliReed. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 03:35, 11 October 2022 (UTC)
Wrong country for MakaveliReed. Dude, just give the IP editor warnings or something. It looks like they're up to {{uw-unsourced3}} now. I just put on some Ministry, which always put me in the mood to block people. Once the IP adds unsourced content after receiving a level 3 warning, and I've gotten to some of the more aggressive tracks, I can block the IP or something. We're still on level 2 warnings, though. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 03:51, 11 October 2022 (UTC)
Okay, sorry for bothering you. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 04:06, 11 October 2022 (UTC)

AndrewTheWikiEditor

AndrewTheWikiEditor has been using multiple IPs to disrupt articles on both Simple and here. [41], [42], [43] [44], [45] 2600:6C40:5400:5E68:296F:5AF8:BD2E:EC98 (talk) 15:24, 11 October 2022 (UTC)

Block evasion by Special:Contributions/2600:6c40:5400:55a6::/64. I don't know why I never blocked your /48 before, but I've done it now. I should leave myself notes on these things. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 16:44, 11 October 2022 (UTC)

Unsourced birth year of voice actresses

The IP has repeatedly added the years of birth to the two voice actresses that were already removed by other IPs without adding news references or anything (eg Atsumi Tanezaki and Sarah Wiedenheft) and incurs in altering the short descriptions of several articles having with so many occupations that they shouldn't drag it all out.

Here is the proof: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/2600:1700:A3F2:300:B57F:2C88:9236:859D this is the IP just in case.

148.0.114.52 (talk) 04:11, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

It's someone logging out to edit war and add unsourced content. I blocked the IP range for a year. It wasn't who I thought it was, though. I guess either I'm wrong sometimes, or that person is using multiple accounts that didn't show up. Doesn't matter; the edit wars to add unsourced content should at least stop now. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 17:16, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

IP vandal with talk page disruption

Hi @CX Zoom ' s thread Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/IncidentArchive1110#WikiProject ratings changer IP vandal was archived. I understand that the IP is range blocked and I dont see any disruption since then. In future should we directly report this vandal to you for range block? since you are aware and AIV does not take action. Venkat TL (talk) 17:50, 15 October 2022 (UTC)

Special:Contributions/2405:201:800b:6000::/52 is currently anon-blocked, so there should be any IP-based disruption. I left account creation on because it's a wide IP range. I'm probably not going to remember why I blocked that IP range in a month, but if the disruption does start up again, and you remind me why I blocked it, I can redo the block. You can just post here on my talk page. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 20:02, 15 October 2022 (UTC)

69.255.225.138 / SpideyGeek13's block

Hi! I'm kind of involved in this situation (see here) so I thought I'd give my two cents. While it is clear that this user doesn't have the best blocklog, I think this time they really have learned from their mistakes and won't evade blocks ever again, as they quote "Ok, I won't use the IP address anymore and instead use my SpideyFan13 account for editing." I hope you see to it that their block is at least shortened a bit, because to me it looks like they really want to be a better person. Thanks! - 𝐒𝐞𝐫𝐞𝐧𝐛𝐥𝐢𝐬𝐬 (let's chat!) 20:42, 19 October 2022 (UTC)

What? That doesn't even make any sense. How can someone "not evade blocks ever again" if any edit they make evades their current block? NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 21:32, 19 October 2022 (UTC)
If that's the case, then should SpideyGeek13's block be changed to indef? Magnatyrannus (talk | contribs) 21:33, 19 October 2022 (UTC)
No. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 21:42, 19 October 2022 (UTC)
How about now? Surely the blatant block evasion now on display is sufficient reason for an indefinite block? Barry Wom (talk) 11:21, 23 October 2022 (UTC)
Yeah, his promises don't seem to be worth much. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 14:43, 23 October 2022 (UTC)
Well yeah, they do have a lengthy history of blocks and warnings. I just wanted to inform you of their request because they keep begging to be back on Wikipedia again, it was getting to my emotions. 𝐒𝐞𝐫𝐞𝐧𝐛𝐥𝐢𝐬𝐬 (let's chat!) 16:11, 23 October 2022 (UTC)
I mean when/if they are unblocked. 𝐒𝐞𝐫𝐞𝐧𝐛𝐥𝐢𝐬𝐬 (let's chat!) 00:10, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

I don't know what the etiquette is on this matter, but both the I.P. addresses that were used still have their blocks expiring in three months. Should these be extended too? Barry Wom (talk) 11:34, 24 October 2022 (UTC)

Guys, there are a bunch of admins who are posting to the talk page. The situation is being handled. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 17:38, 24 October 2022 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – November 2022

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

Guideline and policy news

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:23, 1 November 2022 (UTC)


Blocked editors and edits to other projects

I see that you recently told a blocked editor to spend six months editing another project and then request an unblock. I don't know whether you already know this, but in case you don't, that recommendation, which used to be part of the "standard offer", was deprecated many years ago. That is because administrators at other projects, particularly simple English Wikipedia, found that many editors who were so disruptive as to have been thrown off English Wikipedia continued to be disruptive on their projects, and since there are far fewer administrators on those projects than here, it was very difficult for them to cope with. If you already knew that and have made a conscious decision that, nevertheless, you still think sending our cast offs to other projects is a good idea, then obviously that's your choice, but if not, you may like to consider stopping doing so. JBW (talk) 22:24, 1 November 2022 (UTC)

It's still in Wikipedia:Standard offer: "Banned users seeking a return are well-advised to make significant and useful contributions to other WMF projects prior to requesting a return to English Wikipedia per this 'offer'." Simple English Wikipedia also has an expedited system of dealing with cross-wiki disruption, simple:WP:ONESTRIKE. @Vermont: sorry for the ping, but is Simple English Wikipedia being overrun by our castoffs? We could probably amend a few pages, such as the above, if this is causing problems. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 23:32, 1 November 2022 (UTC)
Meh. It's a concern, but we tend to be able to block them quickly enough. We have had a few success cases...where the deterministic characteristics of success tend to high levels of interest in constructive contributions and competency (i.e. not a CIR or incivility block), but possibly difficulties adjusting to certain types of communities or bureaucracy. So...the vast majority of enwiki blocked people will be blocked on simple if sent there. But there's a specific type of good faith and competent people who have difficulties here who do well on simplewiki. Vermont (🐿️—🏳️‍🌈) 23:50, 1 November 2022 (UTC)
OK, that's very different from messages from simple that we received many years ago. I wonder if the difference may just be that we don't send anything like as many blocked editors to Simple as we used to ten years ago, so it's easier to cope with them. Anyway, thanks for the clarification, Vermont. JBW (talk) 12:51, 2 November 2022 (UTC)
Yes but I’d also reiterate that the vast majority of people should be recommended to get a new hobby, not to start editing another Wikimedia project. There are relatively few of the type of person who gets blocked here but succeeds elsewhere, but they do exist. Vermont (🐿️—🏳️‍🌈) 13:46, 2 November 2022 (UTC)

Don't get me blocked for this

If I seriously get blocked for this just because of "block evasion", I'm going to be so mad. I saw a horrible template on the talk page of Suthasianhistorian8, and I need it removed. I don't mean any ill intent; please do as I say and don't get me blocked for any period of time; the template was the unblock reviewed template, I need it removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:8800:508E:9400:F995:49BC:75DC:C88 (talk) 04:00, 6 November 2022 (UTC)

Uh huh. Well, good luck not getting blocked with the history of overt vandalism on Special:Contributions/2600:8800:508E:9400::/64. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 04:14, 6 November 2022 (UTC)
So what you're saying is that if I remove it once, I'm gonna get blocked for a long time without any warnings?? What?! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:8800:508E:9400:F995:49BC:75DC:C88 (talk) 04:30, 6 November 2022 (UTC)

Possible socking

Looks to me like Cactihasbik is a sock of Toomanyyearskodakblack. Can you check?--Bbb23 (talk) 13:57, 6 November 2022 (UTC)

It looks like I was too slow and someone already confirmed it. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 17:52, 6 November 2022 (UTC)

CU results on Stark578?

Hi there, as I was interacting (read: reverting) with a lot of Stark578's initial edits across various pages over the summer which led to today's ANI about the continued behavior, can you share who were the other usernames alluded to in the blocklog? It'd help me recognize patterns when he resurfaces, so the damage can be minimized quicker. Thanks, JesseRafe (talk) 21:20, 7 November 2022 (UTC)

There are no other registered accounts that I'm aware of. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 22:34, 7 November 2022 (UTC)
Oh, interesting, per the note you left you said it was for evading a previous block and on the ANI Sarek said they were CU blocked, which I assume was your block rationale? So was wondering what the prior accounts were, not if there were any other currents. Thanks, JesseRafe (talk) 15:18, 9 November 2022 (UTC)
I just told you that this person has never used an account before. Please just drop it. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 16:35, 9 November 2022 (UTC)

Reporting Central16

Central16 (talk · contribs)

The editor keep violating WP:SYNTH by making connections not explicitly stated in the sources in the article The Life of Pablo and they are also edit warring [46] [47] [48] [49]. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 06:04, 10 November 2022 (UTC)

It looks like there's some discussion on the talk page, but it's spilling out into the article, too. I protected the page to force further discussion, which hopefully is enough for now. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 06:26, 10 November 2022 (UTC)
Thank you but I think the editor is only being disruptive and ignoring WP:SYNTH. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 06:33, 10 November 2022 (UTC)
Yeah, I picked up on that. I can always block later if it continues. Part of it is that I don't really want to deal with it right now. I don't want to read an entire Wikipedia article about something that doesn't interest me, read a talk page where several people are arguing about that topic, and read a bunch of cited sources. It sounds like a lot of reading when I could just go to sleep instead. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 08:12, 10 November 2022 (UTC)
This editor show a great amount of uninterested in learning our guidelines and policies and editing according to them as seen in this discussion. I'm convinced that this editor is not here to build an encyclopedia. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 05:44, 12 November 2022 (UTC)
Dude, Central16 hasn't done anything for the past 24 hours but argue on a talk page. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 07:06, 12 November 2022 (UTC)

a rangeblock is needed for 2A02:14F:85:2AFD:0:0:0:1

he has made disturbing/disruptive edits about terrorist attacks and needs to be blocked. ItsMeKeys (talk) 18:58, 10 November 2022 (UTC)

Thanks! cheers~ ItsMeKeys (talk) 19:09, 10 November 2022 (UTC)
Yeah, I did a range block, but it's not wide enough to stop them. I think it'll slow them down for a while, though. I guess we'll see. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 19:15, 10 November 2022 (UTC)
i think it will slow them down.thank you for ding that, i really appreciate it.cheers~ ItsMeKeys (talk) 19:20, 10 November 2022 (UTC)

The Walking Dead (season 11)

Hello NinjaRobotPirate, a few months ago there was this user who continously keeps deleting things without any reason and caused a disruptive editing. You already partially blocked him once as a warning. However, yesterday I saw that he is removing the same thing as before (his contributions) while also sent me a offensive message towards me. Please, if you can do something about it. Thanks. --Tobi999tomas (talk) 08:08, 12 November 2022 (UTC)

What an odd case. Indefinitely blocked, as promised before. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 08:25, 12 November 2022 (UTC)

Unsourced IP edits

Hi there. Would you have a moment to look at List of Italian-American actors and List of Italian-American entertainers. An IP from India/Bangladesh has been adding unsourced content for weeks (only to the porn actors). I leave warnings on one talk page, then the IP changes and it starts all over again. Thanks! Magnolia677 (talk) 11:49, 16 November 2022 (UTC)

I range blocked Special:Contributions/103.190.42.0/24 for a month, which should stem the tide. Those lists are a mess. How can anyone tell what parts are sourced and what parts aren't? The lists themselves should be properly sourced instead of demanding that people follow every link to see if there happens to be a citation in some other Wikipedia article that verifies the content stated in the list. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 22:40, 16 November 2022 (UTC)
I totally agree. Thanks for your help. Cheers. Magnolia677 (talk) 16:33, 17 November 2022 (UTC)

Leatherface

Hello NRP. Just thought I would let you know that the Leatherface revision draft is nearing completion, however I have come across a little dead end in my work. In my expansion of the article I have been diving into the character and his development in each of the films, as each one was different in style and tone in every entry. Although I have a LOT of work done, I have tried to find information pertaining to the design of the character in the 2017 prequel and have only managed to find a behind the scenes featurette on that particular film but it can only be accessed via hard copy of the DVD/Blue ray which I have been unable to acquire. I will ask DarkKnight to see if he can handle that piece of info but I was wondering if you could assist in finding additional information on the character's design of that film and from TCM 2. if you are unable to that is okay, I will find a way. just trying to gather additional help is all. Anyways happy editing! Paleface Jack (talk) 19:33, 18 November 2022 (UTC)

With slasher films, I've often found that the longer the series goes on, the less coverage it gets in mainstream sources. Horror magazines, such as Fangoria, are a better place to look. There are digitized back issues at Archive.org, though you may need to create a free account there to access them. The last time I tried to do a major expansion to a horror film, I had to go to The Wikipedia Library and request free e-books from them because I couldn't find anything in the mainstream press. If you haven't tried those avenues, that'd be a good idea. I could try poking around to see if I find anything interesting, but I'm not really very knowledgeable about that film series. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 21:00, 18 November 2022 (UTC)

Yeah, that tends to happen. For me it was the abundance of sources but with specific things it gets a little dicey. I didnt used to have that much knowledge or skill with Character articles cause my main experience with editing has been film so I had to train myself with these wort of things. If it is out of your area of expertise then you dont have to help. I have been doing it myself for the most part and its always welcome to have another eye come in and see things I do not. I have a specific image for the character in mind but all I have seen so far are black and white versions of if so I am gonna also try to look for a colored version of that. Anyways thanks for the speedy reply.--Paleface Jack (talk) 21:10, 18 November 2022 (UTC)

You've got mail!

Hello, NinjaRobotPirate. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 14:36, 19 November 2022 (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.

Drmies (talk) 14:36, 19 November 2022 (UTC)

Nomination of Attack of the Sabretooth for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Attack of the Sabretooth, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Attack of the Sabretooth (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:02, 21 November 2022 (UTC)

New message from Sjones23

 You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Grave of the Fireflies § Plot summary format. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 21:45, 23 November 2022 (UTC)

Block request

100guestpost (talk · contribs) has made four edits over a span of ~3 months, and they've all been to insert spam links. I've reverted the most recent two, but an indef block would be appreciated as the account is unlikely to end up being a productive contributor. —Locke Cole • t • c 19:56, 24 November 2022 (UTC)

Yeah, Alq001501, too. I didn't look too deeply for more, but those two are confirmed to each other. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 21:10, 24 November 2022 (UTC)

Block evader

Blocked user GOG88 (talk · contribs) has made a new account by the name Gbgob (talk · contribs) making the same disruptive edits. SpinnDoctor (talk) 6:53, 28 November 2022 (UTC)

That would be User:Albertpda. If you find more sock puppets, you can report them here on my talk page or at WP:SPI. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 07:13, 28 November 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

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) 00:32, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – December 2022

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

CheckUser changes

removed TheresNoTime

Oversight changes

removed TheresNoTime

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • A new preference named "Enable limited width mode" has been added to the Vector 2022 skin. The preference is also shown as a toggle on every page if your monitor is 1600 pixels or wider. When disabled it removes the whitespace added by Vector 2022 on the left and right of the page content. Disabling this preference has the same effect as enabling the wide-vector-2022 gadget. (T319449)

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:44, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

Sorry

I apologize if the tone that I used in my previous comment seemed offensive. That was not how I intended it to come out. I had no knowledge of your condition, and I figured that since the discussion wasn't archived, that it would be an exception. Thank you for the help that you have provided, and I'm sorry for the inconvenience. I won't bother you ever again. Yowashi (talk) 05:51, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

Reporting 184.14.201.194

184.14.201.194 (talk · contribs)

This user keep vandalizing the article Her Loss [50] [51] [52] [53] [54]. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 06:00, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

That doesn't look like vandalism to me. The person in question was born in England. If it's that important, why not cite a source? That would demonstrate the information is both true and worth mentioning. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 06:21, 2 December 2022 (UTC)
At the rapper's talk page, this discussion declared he should be called "Atlanta-based rapper" not English rapper since it's not supported by sources. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 07:06, 2 December 2022 (UTC)
Well, I'm not sure that consensus on that page automatically transfers to every other page. And even if it did, that might make the edits disruptive but still not vandalism. Vandalism would be calling him a French heavy metal guitarist, which is obviously a hoax. If you told the IP editor about the existing consensus, maybe that'd be convincing enough to end the edit war. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 10:45, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

Possible sockpuppetry

Dalesndikaa (talk · contribs) ASonicPixie (talk · contribs) RockhaJewelsx (talk · contribs)

I think these editors might be the same person because they been editing the same articles, especially articles related to Kendrick Lamar [55] [56] [57] [58] [59] [60] [61] [62] [63]. What your take on it? TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 04:17, 4 December 2022 (UTC)

They're all  Confirmed to User:Sweethavxn. It would be nice to get an explanation for this from one of these accounts. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 11:51, 4 December 2022 (UTC)
Should they all be blocked? I know the accounts are not used for vandalism or anything but it would confuses other editors if they not using their original account instead. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 13:26, 4 December 2022 (UTC)
We don't seem to be getting any response. I'll leave a talk page message. After that, yeah, probably blocks. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 16:32, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
I think Sweethavxn is using another account [64] [65]. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 04:05, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
Yeah, that's another confirmed sock. I did say I was going to block them all, didn't I? OK, they're all blocked now. By the way, it's easier for me to find these posts if you create a new section at the bottom of the talk page. It's easier now that Wikipedia highlights them and such, but it's still a pain. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 05:00, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
Okay, I do that next time. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 05:02, 30 December 2022 (UTC)

Mail

Hello, NinjaRobotPirate. Please check your email; you've got mail!
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.

-- Yamla (talk) 14:28, 6 December 2022 (UTC)

User:Bgoogbgo sock?

It just occurred to me, and the editing felt similar to User:Gbgob which was banned by you as a sock. Wasn't sure or not, so I posted to you as you dealt with Gbgob before. Regards, Govvy (talk) 13:02, 7 December 2022 (UTC)

Yeah, that's User:Albertpda. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 13:14, 7 December 2022 (UTC)
k, I reverted back Croatia national football team which was messed with. I will try and keep my eyes open on that one. Cheers. Govvy (talk) 13:22, 7 December 2022 (UTC)

Could you confirm?

Hi! At the end of October and the start of November I sent two emails to paid-en-wp@wikipedia.org about a case of suspected WP:UPE. However, I have not heard anything back in any form. Could you confirm that those specific emails were received and are being addressed in some way? (I signed off with my username.) I don't mind if the case has to wait in line for a while, but I've heard nothing to confirm that the emails were noticed or even received, so it would be good to know that I'm not just talking into a void. I asked another admin listed at WP:FUNC, but have not received a response. Thank you for your help. —Ganesha811 (talk) 23:19, 7 December 2022 (UTC)

Sorry, I don't pay much attention to off-wiki stuff. I don't even have access to OTRS, so I can't see paid-en-wp. Getting access to those mailing lists requires jumping through bureaucratic hoops, which could be why it seems like nothing is getting done. This is the same reason why cheap locks (and blocking people from Wikipedia) work: if you put a trivial barrier in front of people, most will turn away and find something else to do. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 00:20, 8 December 2022 (UTC)
Ok, thanks. Given my difficulties here, perhaps an email to Arbcom is the next sensible step. It didn't feel "big" enough for them, but the other email system seems to be inoperative. —Ganesha811 (talk) 00:29, 8 December 2022 (UTC)
Yeah, that's a possibility. If they're guilty of disruptive editing or promotion, you could just report them at WP:ANI and not mention anything that might involve outing. Blocked is blocked, and the specific reason someone gets blocked isn't important. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 00:42, 8 December 2022 (UTC)
The user's edits are certainly promotional in nature, but not ridiculously so - I think any reasonable case for blocking requires non-public evidence to avoid outing. I'll email Arbcom. Thanks for the advice. —Ganesha811 (talk) 00:53, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

Suicide Silence

Hello NinjaRobotPirate, I need your help with this problem hopefully you can agree with me upon this. I will send a link because this will take awhile to explain so you can see it for yourself. Suicide Silence (album) Revision history --Tobi999tomas (talk) 18:33, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

Sorry, don't know what you want from me. If it's a content dispute, maybe try discussing it on the talk page? NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 08:07, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
Well, we already tried to talk about it through those messages. He disagreed that introductory sentence should not be "American deathcore band" but "American metal band". The reason that I disagree his opinion is because of the consistency. Changing the lead genre to match the band's article no matter what genre is the album. An example, Metallica's main genre is thrash metal, but because they play more than just thrash metal, the lead genre for them is heavy metal. The lead genre should be broad. The band is often described as other genres (heavy metal, alternative metal) that isn't just thrash metal. Even though Suicide Silence had only one album with a different genre, the concept is that the lead genre should always be consistent and match the band's article. Tobi999tomas (talk) 09:08, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
There's nothing relevant on the talk page except some five year old discussion about an unsourced genre. Why don't you post your reasoning to the talk page. If nothing constructive comes of it, you could start an RFC. The only thing I could do right now is fully protect the article, which would just force people to go to the talk page anyway. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 10:03, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
So I tried to create a consensus on this matter and we still cannot go to a conclusion. I already gave my opinion and reason for my edits but the arguments that the editor wrote me are really not giving a final result. The editor even stopped answering so I really do not know what to do. Maybe your opinion about this can do something about it. Tobi999tomas (talk) 16:35, 26 December 2022 (UTC)
"If nothing constructive comes of it, you could start an RFC." NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 21:01, 26 December 2022 (UTC)
I have never used it so I do not know how it works. Perhaps you can do it instead of me. Tobi999tomas (talk) 07:19, 27 December 2022 (UTC)
This doesn't need an admin. You can ask for help at Wikipedia:Help desk. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 14:43, 27 December 2022 (UTC)
Ok. I made a RfC and unfornately no progress on this. Tobi999tomas (talk) 18:19, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

Invitation to the noticeboard

You are invited to this section of the Administrators' noticeboard. BattleshipMan (talk) 04:30, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

We need more alerts like this. "NinjaRobotPirate, we request the pleasure of company at AN/I at six o'clock this evening. Black tie optional, refreshments to follow." GeneralNotability (talk) 22:56, 16 December 2022 (UTC)
Well, these days I only drink tea. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 11:41, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Block evasion by Mdd97

Jacobturner6 (talk · contribs)

Mdd97 is block evasion yet again [66] [67]. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 00:38, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Yeah, that's him.  Blocked and tagged. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 01:09, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Crunchyroll parent company

Imperial meter insists on repeating various statements that Crunchyroll is owned by Sony's Crunchyroll, LLC in opening sentences without waiting until Funimation completed the transfer of all its anime licenses to the platform since it was founded in 2006, and I won't even tell you why it appears on the parameter "Parent" in the infobox and I get tired of repeating many times on this topic, doesn't understand, he goes ahead with the continuity altering the whole page and even several users have had to revert all his garbage editions because it confuses one by comparing with both companies that managed or operated for years and they have not clearly discussed what will happen in the future if they do not finish the merger of both companies of the same name or thus leave the name of the streaming service with all its licenses inside. 148.0.114.180 (talk) 05:00, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

Look at the edition history here, here and also here for more details.
And between the two affected articles are: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Crunchyroll&action=history and https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Funimation&action=history 148.0.114.180 (talk) 05:10, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
I have no clue what you're talking about. If someone is being disruptive, you can report them to WP:ANI. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 00:11, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

Why did you block me?

Hello, NinjaRobotPirate. You blocked my IP as a "checkuserblock" block a month ago. First of all, I am not the "checkuser" that you were blocking. Second of all, you removed my ability to edit my own talk page so I could not defend myself. I appealed on UTRS, and the block reviewer was just as helpful as a broken pencil on a test. They told me to email wikipedia or some shit. I didnt even have an email besides my school one. Why did you block me? Honestly, why? 2604:2D80:AB02:A100:B084:F116:37D7:4B45 (talk) 06:12, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

There are troll accounts on your IP. If it's a shared IP, edit from somewhere else. If this isn't a shared, find some other hobby. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 00:30, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
Ok, now on my phone's mobile data, so problem should be solved. 2600:1008:B12E:1F1B:40F8:6DFF:FE16:531E (talk) 00:41, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

ItsKesha

Hello. I see you have had experience of this user before from his talk page. You may or may not be aware of this, and have some comments: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2023_PDC_World_Darts_Championship&action=history -- The "unsourced pile of shite" edit comment in particular seemed rather unnecessary. There is a de facto edit war, where the user is deleting things without seeking consensus, and seems uninterested in engaging in civil debate on the article's talk page, where I attempted to start a discussion on the matter. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.110.26.224 (talk) 16:16, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

My desire to read through drama on Wikipedia isn't very high right now. You could try WP:ANEW if there's been a 3RR violation, or WP:ANI if the discussion has degenerated to personal attacks. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 00:54, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

Happy holidays!

Happy New Year!

Happy Holidays and Happy New Year, NinjaRobotPirate!

The other day, I was having a conversation with someone about holiday cards and social media. It occurred to me that, in the years since I left Facebook, the site I use most to communicate with people I like isn't actually a social media site at all. If you're receiving this, it's pretty likely I've talked with you more recently than I have my distant relatives and college friends on FB, at very least, and we may have even collaborated on something useful. So here's a holiday "card", Wikipedia friend. :) Hope the next couple weeks bring some fun and/or rest. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 18:51, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

Ha, interesting image. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 23:43, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

Seasons Greetings

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)}}

Donner60 (talk) 04:23, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

Writing like a policy

This edit summary has prompted me to offer a link to the policy on writing policies and other pages. Wikipedia:Policies and guidelines#­Content says "Even in guidelines, help pages, and other non-policy pages, do not be afraid to tell editors directly they must or should do something."

You might also be interested in Wikipedia:The difference between policies, guidelines and essays, since this is a common enough misunderstanding to have made the FAQ. WhatamIdoing (talk) 03:19, 29 December 2022 (UTC)

Maybe I should write an essay about how you should never use "must" in an essay. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 03:43, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
Why not use the full scope of the English language in an essay? One of the roles of an essay is to provide an opportunity for editors to advocate for their positions. Why would we want to constrain people's expression of their views? Both WP:BLUE and WP:NOTBLUE include the word must. Wikipedia:What "Ignore all rules" means includes it. So do Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions, Wikipedia:Verifiability, not truth, Wikipedia:Don't demolish the house while it's still being built, Wikipedia:Coatrack articles, Wikipedia:The duck test, and – I hope you are amused by this one – Wikipedia:Don't cite essays or proposals as if they were policy. What's wrong with that? WhatamIdoing (talk) 03:54, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
Several people, around the same time, said "I was just following WP:STATUSQUO, so I shouldn't be/have been blocked for edit warring". If the essay isn't written like it's some kind of policy that gives people a 3RR exemption to restore "the status quo version" (which is always their preferred version, somehow), maybe it will help reduce a certain kind of edit warring somewhat. Whether it says "must" or not, who really cares. I just want it to stop making my life harder. I do have a dry, sarcastic sense of humor, though. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 04:26, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
Have you asked those people how recently they've read QUO? My experience is that the English Wikipedia works more on word of mouth than the written page. When I change a policy, it often takes two years before editors start quoting my own words back at me. If they're relying on the fact that five years ago, another editor claimed that QUO said X or Y (and they believed that editor), then perhaps they should actually read it.
On that point, I do like your addition that Edit warring to maintain "the status quo version" is still edit warring, and you can be blocked for doing this. I have added some bold formatting to that. If it keeps up, maybe we can find a "no edit warring" image to add to that section. WhatamIdoing (talk) 05:42, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
I've boldly added another sentence related to your area of concern. I hope you will freely improve upon it. WhatamIdoing (talk) 06:08, 29 December 2022 (UTC)

Block evasion by Rishabisajakepauler

190.7.211.50 (talk · contribs)

Rishabisajakepauler evades their block yet again [68] [69] [70] [71]. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 03:41, 29 December 2022 (UTC)

That IP is allocated to an ISP in Costa Rica. Odd that it's restore edits by blocked IPs. I guess it could be a proxy or something. I blocked it for a week. I guess we'll see what happens after a week. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 03:53, 29 December 2022 (UTC)

Block Request

Hi can you block this IP please? More information are here WP:AN/I on "Block Request" section. Sorry if I brought it in here, seemed like no admin cares. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Progrock70s (talk • contribs) 17:59, 29 December 2022 (UTC)

I'll take a look at it. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 01:09, 30 December 2022 (UTC)

LegerPrime

Hi NinjaRobotPirate, your opinion would be welcome at User talk:LegerPrime; there is currently an unblock request on hold at the bottom of the page. Thanks and best regards, ~ ToBeFree (talk) 02:39, 30 December 2022 (UTC)

Troll or LTA?

Lobster from Maine.--Bbb23 (talk) 03:07, 30 December 2022 (UTC)

Commenting on SashiRolls is kind of weird. I'd be tempted to just let it play out and see what happens, though. Someone else already ran a check a couple hours ago, so I presume it came back empty. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 04:50, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:01, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:NinjaRobotPirate/Archive2022-2&oldid=1134644266"