User talk:Sro23

SPI

If you haven't seen it already, Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/EditorManagerPH. -- RoySmith (talk) 22:32, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

Singora SPI

I hope you are fine. In case you didn't had the ping notification, see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Singora, given your past experience with the SPI.[1] Capitals00 (talk) 16:18, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

Above is resolved. The SPI which I had filed is now known as Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/TerentiusNew. Capitals00 (talk) 13:42, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Edit war

Looks like 37.235.108.98 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) is evading 167.24.24.150 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)'s ban on Ecce Homo (Martínez and Giménez, Borja)... ◊PRAHLAD^balaji (M•T•A•C) This message was left at 23:24, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

Ah, thanks. ◊PRAHLAD^balaji (M•T•A•C) This message was left at 23:28, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

About your block

Hey. I saw you blocked an experienced recent changes patroller from editing a page for edit warring. You are probably aware of this, but the reason he edit warred was because the IP editor kept making the same change to the article despite other editors telling him not to. I see that his reasoning for edit warring was not an exception to the 3RR rule. Was he still wrong to do this? Are there any other exceptions? Scorpions13256 (talk) 23:41, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

As far as I can tell, that IP editor wasn't adding copyright or BLP violations, vandalism or the like, so it was a content dispute. Prahlad balaji, I'm very sorry about the block. I really do not enjoy handing out blocks for edit-warring, but you have to understand, you made something like 10 reverts, so I had to be fair. Sro23 (talk) 23:46, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

Sro23, I was just telling them to go on the talkpage, like they told me to. That is not warring, that is them being ignorant after a 3rr warning and multiple reverts. ◊PRAHLAD^balaji (M•T•A•C) This message was left at 23:49, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

You still broke 3rr, and you were not exempt under WP:3RRNO. Feel free to appeal your block and another admin may review it, but like I said, I was only being fair. Both editors were edit-warring over what tense to use. That's not undoing vandalism, that's a content dispute. Sro23 (talk) 23:56, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

Sro23, fine, I will appeal later. See ya. ◊PRAHLAD^balaji (M•T•A•C) This message was left at 00:01, 10 September 2020 (UTC)

Thanks

Yes, I suppose I crossed a line with the talk about "A Long Walk To Water". I think I'll delete the whole section as being inappropriate in the way it asks for comments. Wastrel Way (talk) 02:19, 26 September 2020 (UTC) Eric

Another Evleckis sock

Based on edits like this and this, their first edit, user:Scrapewell is another sock of User:Harry Shuffle who you blocked a couple of days ago. Valenciano (talk) 13:57, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

A beer for you!

Since I semi-protected your talk page that Nazi can't leave any messages and it's gotten quiet, so I'm giving you a beer. Drmies (talk) 22:18, 8 October 2020 (UTC)

Okay, thanks Drmies. Sro23 (talk) 22:30, 8 October 2020 (UTC)

Icewhiz

Surely there must be a hint to what may have banned him. For most trolls, one can imagine why he got banned. Any evidnce of his edits? Then we can find his socks more easily. 4thfile4thrank (talk) 22:22, 8 October 2020 (UTC)

IP resuming sock activity

Thank you for your block of User:JoinOnIn. They have resumed activity under their latest IP, User:179.53.1.202, from the expected geolocation for the sockmaster. Could you extend the block to the IP please? Mutt Lunker (talk) 19:19, 31 October 2020 (UTC)

Don't worry, the IP has been blocked. Mutt Lunker (talk) 22:55, 31 October 2020 (UTC)

October harvest

treats --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:50, 31 October 2020 (UTC)

Quality Posts Here

If I may, I think you were perhaps over hasty in closing this SPI report. It was quite noticeable that the editor immediately stopped posting after I launched that SPI. Also, given the disruptive editing and POV slant they are seeking to impose I really don't think their motivation here at wikipedia is to build an encyclopedia. I find the gaps in the editing history rather suspicious even with the accounts they have disclosed and I haven't seen any explanation for having multiple accounts. What options exist to pursue this further. WCM_email 15:56, 17 November 2020 (UTC)

There are many reasons why people take long absences from editing; sockpuppetry isn't the only explanation. Quality Posts Here's explanation for starting a new account was they wanted a clean start and forgot the password to the old account, and that sounds reasonable enough to me. Even if the user seems suspicious to you, we generally don't block accounts for being "suspicious", there has to be a specific sockmaster in mind. CU was run and Quality Posts Here was found unrelated to HarveyCarter, and given all this, I'm quite confident this isn't HarveyCarter. You're still free to report the user to a variety of noticeboards (ANI, AN, NPOVN), etc. Sro23 (talk) 21:47, 17 November 2020 (UTC)

User K7797tyhkhijjn

I noticed that you blocked User:K7797tyhkhijjn for block evasion. Given the pattern of behavior, should this account be added to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/8yd, or is it not worth the trouble? I have a suspicion that this person could become a chronic problem. TornadoLGS (talk) 21:31, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

With these kinds of socks, it's usually best to adhere to WP:DENY and revert, block, ignore. Sro23 (talk) 21:44, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

The Who

If you look at 'The Who: The Official History', the band clearly refer to their proper noun as The Who. This makes sense grammatically. Reducing it to the Who does not.

It requires us to be specific, because some bands do use lowercase as a matter of style. Thanks. --Danny Mamby (talk) 17:41, 19 November 2020 (UTC)

Your reasoning is logical, but unfortunately it goes against what was decided by the Wikipedia community a few years back. And if we make that change to The Who, there are several dozen other articles of musical groups that will also need to be edited, and sometimes it's better to just save your energy and stick with the status quo, even if the rules don't make sense. Sro23 (talk) 18:51, 19 November 2020 (UTC)

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. 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 2020 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) 02:45, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

A CAT for you!

Saw your recent page protections and had to laugh a bit. At least some things never change.

EvergreenFir (talk) 06:26, 28 November 2020 (UTC)

Heh, you would think as the years go by and people grow older, eventually they would grow out of childish vandalism, but apparently not. Sro23 (talk) 06:36, 28 November 2020 (UTC)

2601:81:C400:DC30:0:0:0:0/64

FYI: After you blocked 2601:81:C400:DC30:0:0:0:0/64 (talk · contribs) a new account called Leaf from the tree (talk · contribs) registered to continue the edit war in List of wars and anthropogenic disasters by death toll. --Pudeo (talk) 21:01, 29 November 2020 (UTC)

Question on your revert

Why did you revert my edit here? I checked the source again, and it still doesn't list Lauren Faust as one of his influences. BlackcurrantTea (talk) 00:10, 6 December 2020 (UTC)

@BlackcurrantTea: my apologies for not looking carefully. I meant to revert disruptive edits by a blocked user and IP and hadn't even seen your edit there. I have restored your edit. Sro23 (talk) 00:23, 6 December 2020 (UTC)

No worries, it happens. Thanks. BlackcurrantTea (talk) 00:35, 6 December 2020 (UTC)

Abominable

I see you got another one of his but I'm not sure if you were familiar with this, Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Abusive editing. Someone had accused Dory Funk and other editor (still active) of being socks. Ironically, I suspected the accuser of being Mangoeater1000... they always seem to be clashing with one another. I was considering opening an SPI involving the active user but if you have ruled them out then I won't waste the time.LM2000 (talk) 07:26, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

Yes, those socks often liked to edit war with each other. I'm too tired to think deeply about this, but Mango socks that have been around for a while usually can't help themselves but edit school/university articles, and I'm not seeing any of that from Dilbaggg yet. Could just be the sockpuppets are getting more sophisticated. If you really want my opinion, I'm pretty confident all three users (Dilbaggg, Kesha, and Dory Funk) are socks, though I'm not sure who Kesha is. Could be Abominable too, I don't know, please feel free to start an SPI. With Dory Funk it was obvious enough that CU didn't seem necessary for a block. I just wouldn't be surprised if Kesha ends up CU-blocked. Like I said, I don't have the energy to look into this right now. Sro23 (talk) 08:29, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for the response and feel free to blank this to discourage further vandalism. I'll keep an eye on it, one is already at SPI and admins at ANI know about it, so I feel confident that we'll figure it out quickly. I just wanted to make sure you knew since you're close to the situation and blocked one of the accounts in question.LM2000 (talk) 08:46, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

Dory funk has indeed been proven a sock, my accusation stands correct LM2000: [2] but your accusation remains false, let check users verify [3] Dilbaggg (talk) 13:10, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

Partial unblock request

Hi, I have received an email from a user who you blocked early this month. This is a user I also blocked previously, under a different username. (Since I believe they are not an adult, I would rather not state their username here, but I'd be happy to specify by email.) They would like user talk page access restored in order to address the situation. This user has a history of violating several policies, but I believe their intentions are not bad, and I would like to hear what they have to say. I would like to restore user talk page access, and I will monitor the situation; but since you are the one who applied the most recent block, I wanted to check with you first. Thoughts? -Pete Forsyth (talk) 19:17, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

I also get the impression the user is younger, but that doesn't excuse the way they behaved. I won't object if you restore TP access, but please take it away if they start abusing it again. Sro23 (talk) 20:02, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

Agreed, thanks for the quick reply, and I will be sure to keep an attentive eye on the situation. -Pete Forsyth (talk) 21:14, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

@Peteforsyth: The user is going to take the standard offer and try for an unblock again after a few months. Sro23 (talk) 19:50, 23 December 2020 (UTC)

@Peteforsyth: This is unrelated, but I just realized it was your video ('Citing sources on Wikipedia') that taught me how to add my first reference years ago, way back when I had no idea what I was doing. So thanks!! Sro23 (talk) 04:51, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks your help by --Sunuraju (talk) 04:33, 19 December 2020 (UTC)

Yo Ho Ho

Donner60 (talk) is wishing a foaming mug of Seasons Greetings! Whether you celebrate your hemisphere's Solstice or Christmas, Diwali, Hogmanay, Hanukkah, Lenaia, Festivus or even the Saturnalia, this is a special time of year for almost everyone!

Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{subst:User:WereSpielChequers/Dec20}} to your friends' talk pages.

User:Shaddai Wright

For the record, I've revoked Shaddai Wright (talk · contribs)'s talk page access again. After the rigmarole vis-a-vis their most recent request to be unblocked, all they've done is posted multiple screeds, and ultimately this is turning into the same time sink that it was before. This user clearly has issues and at this time I don't see any benefit to allowing them to edit the project. Thanks. --Kinu ^t/_c 03:39, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

It's probably for the best. I can't help but empathize, because early on when I first started editing, I was younger and a lot more immature and also ready to quit whenever things didn't go my way. Somehow I managed to never get blocked. I have no clue how I would've taken it had that happened, though I'm sure it wouldn't have been pretty... I can even remember typing up and being this close to posting a WP:FLOUNCE-type rant and leaving. Thankfully I eventually grew out of it. Sro23 (talk) 04:21, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

Indeed. During the whole unblock phase, I had considered posting words of encouragement because, despite the NPA-violating rant against me which resulted in their talk page access being revoked originally, I was willing to assume that things had changed. However, given the "retirement" rant, the retraction, the subsequent rant, and what is ultimately the inability on their part to take any ownership of their actions, I don't think it's worth our time, unfortunately. I appreciate that you extended the olive branch to them, and for letting me know about it, but, alas, WP:AGF only goes so far. That aside, cheers and happy holidays, my friend. --Kinu ^t/_c 05:15, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

Tenebrae at WP:ANI

Since I've quoted you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Tenebrae, it seems only appropriate to notify you, as you may wish to comment. 109.158.199.97 (talk) 23:50, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

Not my best moment, to say the least

Hi Sro23, and thanks for your message. Yeah, that edit was just completely wrong, and will always be a black mark against me. I do have something of an, ahem, overactive sense of humour. Like Christopher Smart's cat Jeoffry, I'm a mixture of gravity and waggery. To be honest, it takes a supreme effort of self-discipline 24/7 for me not to pull pranks like that. Pete AU aka --Shirt58 (talk) 12:36, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

@Shirt58: If you get the urge, you are free to mess around in your own userspace pretty much to your heart's content, but article space is off-limits. I can't believe I'm lecturing a user (let alone a sysop) who has been here for 14 years that inserting vandalism into articles isn't okay. Sorry for the late-ish reply. Sro23 (talk) 19:35, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

Happy New Year!

Sro23,
Thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia, and a Happy New Year to you and yours! NASCARfan0548 ↗ 23:53, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

---

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

– Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year}} to user talk pages.

Rajput

So what's going on? I see you blocked one of the several IPs.[4] I'm thinking of blocking [5] for not sourcing. Doug Weller talk 19:45, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

Doug Weller That wide range was originally partial-blocked for spamming, and then an unrelated LTA started using it which is where my block comes in. The user in question doesn't seem to be connected to my block, but I say go for it if you deem it necessary. Sro23 (talk) 19:55, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll sleep on it. Doug Weller talk 20:05, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

Thank you!

Just wanted to express my gratitude for your protection of List of compositions by Dmitri Shostakovich a couple of weeks ago. Is there anywhere I can petition to request a more permanent solution for the problem on that page? You can catch up on most of the saga here, but the nitty-gritty is that a single user has been obsessed with incorporating the lead from the composer's main article (including with uncorrected factual errors) for half a year now. They have been opposed in this by at least three other editors aside from myself. Instead of collaborating with other editors, they appear set on antagonizing their fellow editors with personal insults and refusing to heed any advice. The work of admins who have semi-protected the page has been deeply appreciated, but the same user always returns as soon as any blocks are lifted. Ideally IP addresses from the range the user typically uses would be blocked permanently from editing the page, but not sure whether such a thing is possible. Any ideas or help in this matter would be received very gratefully. Thank you kindly in advance. CurryTime7-24 (talk) 21:14, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

@CurryTime7-24: You can learn more about this troll at Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/Best known for IP. He's been giving us grief for years and years, so I get your frustrations. You can always request re-protection at WP:RFPP, but I don't think that will be necessary anymore. I now have that page watchlisted and am ready to play whack-a-mole when he returns. He uses dynamic IP's so I can't permanently block them. Feel free to message me the next time he pops up. Sro23 (talk) 21:29, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

Issue with sock account

In the article List of wars and anthropogenic disasters by death toll Leafe From A Tree is a now blocked sock account. You had made the same revert to the “stable version” they claimed but it was not really as it removes sourced information he removed under various IPs during the time as well to edit war and censor for nationalist endeavors. So I restored the deleted RS information. This was in November but wanted you to be aware incase you wonder why I reverted the sockpuppet’s removals. If you have any questions, let me know and ping me here and will be happy to explain further. I’m surprised no one noticed the puppets removal and gaming. Though it took me a while to figure things out. Being that the warring prties are long blocked it is stable now. Hope you agree. Take care and Happy New Ywar. OyMosby (talk) 18:28, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

There were at least two different sockfarms (User:Jack90s15 and User:Accopulocrat) warring with each other in that article and others. It happens quite often that two different sockpuppeteers will seek out and edit war with each other, especially the nationalistic/ethnic warrior type socks. I'm fine with you reverting to whatever sock version you want, as long as you take responsibility for whatever content you add/remove. Sro23 (talk) 19:54, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

Noted and thanks. The information seems sourced so looks more like ethno wars as you said.Cheers OyMosby (talk) 20:53, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

I suspect something similar [here] with this Istinar fellow and to other IPs being all the same person. Again ethnic warriors and such. What do you think? Many editors are trying to revert the person. And the other two IPs within a similar time frame, after being blocked this account shows up. OyMosby (talk) 05:49, 8 January 2021 (UTC)

Definitely has the characteristics of a sock. I don't have the energy to look into this, but you're free to start a sockpuppet investigation. Sro23 (talk) 06:02, 8 January 2021 (UTC)

No worries, was just looking for your insight since you have experience in this matter. If they persist in disruptive behavior, I will compile a report. No idea if they are already creating another new account sock. Cheers! OyMosby (talk) 06:31, 8 January 2021 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for protecting that vandal's talk page. I hated the insults he gave to me and IanDBeacon. NASCARfan0548 ↗ 03:19, 8 January 2021 (UTC)

You know, with Nate Speed, it's best to not even leave him any warning, just silently report to AIV straight away, linking to WP:LTA/NS. Creating IP talk pages only encourages him and inevitably leads to more block evasion and edit wars. Sro23 (talk) 03:23, 8 January 2021 (UTC)

Evlekis again?

I'm confused, is that Evlekis? Or am I going up the wrong tree again? Pahunkat (talk) 21:12, 16 January 2021 (UTC)

No you're right. Impersonating new users, unrelated vandal accounts/other sockpuppets/spammers is part of his MO. Sro23 (talk) 21:19, 16 January 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll have to learn fast. I'm used to new users creating alternative accounts to contest deletions, but not LTAs impersonating sockpuppets/spammers. Pahunkat (talk) 21:21, 16 January 2021 (UTC)

BTW they just registered an account impersonating my username very well, if Pakunhat contacted you that wasn't me. Pahunkat (talk) 22:27, 16 January 2021 (UTC)

Yup, that was Evlekis. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 22:33, 16 January 2021 (UTC)

A beer for you!

Thanks for reverting the random talk page edit from the IP. That wasn't me who did that. So thank you for not jumping the gun. Modern Major General  I quote the fights historical 14:07, 17 January 2021 (UTC)