Stewards' noticeboard/Archives/2021-12

Special:CentralAuth/Pack My Box

This user is suspected to be a sock of recently WMF-banned Rodhullandemu, see d:Wikidata:Administrators'_noticeboard#Pack_My_Box, and is blocked in all four projects this user edited. Can someone handle this? I do not post at SRG as a CheckUser is probably needed.--GZWDer (talk) 17:42, 14 December 2021 (UTC)

Has been handled (over SRG) since. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 01:23, 25 December 2021 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: DannyS712 (talk) 11:02, 31 December 2021 (UTC)

I am unsure of this situation.

I was blocked on a wiki where I was using another account and I tried emailing the administrator who blocked me, but they didn't respond. Some time afterwards, I tried emailing another administrator who had been involved in some previous situations related to me, but they didn't respond either. At least a few months later, I emailed the blocking administrator again, but they didn't respond. I'm not sure when, but a while after, I emailed the other administrator again, but they also didn't respond. I have previously tried asking users what I should do, but I didn't get any help. Anyway, I've decided that this is probably a better place to ask this, so what should I do? CheatCodes4ever (talk) 00:00, 5 December 2021 (UTC)

Stewards are unable to assist with matters on the English Wikipedia. It appears your block was appealed and upheld. Seems you've burned your last bridge there. Operator873 ^connect 00:04, 5 December 2021 (UTC)

@Operator873: This is not about Wikipedia, this is about another Wikimedia project and I was using a different account because at the time I created it, I did not know I could have a global account. The reason why I'm asking this here is because I would like advice. CheatCodes4ever (talk) 10:33, 6 December 2021 (UTC)

@CheatCodes4ever: What is the other account you're asking about? If you'd like assistance with this, you'll need to advise which account is in question and why you want that account unblocked instead of using your current account. Operator873 ^connect 09:32, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

You were not blocked. You were banned from English Wikipedia after a discussion and your request to be unbanned was similarly denied. Ruslik (talk) 21:03, 6 December 2021 (UTC)

Again, this is not about Wikipedia. This is about another Wikimedia project, and I used a different account to edit. CheatCodes4ever (talk) 20:42, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

How are we going to help you if we even do not know the name of the blocked account? Ruslik (talk) 20:53, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

I was asking for advice in this situation, I wasn't really asking you to get involved, I just wanted to know what I should do. But if you really need to know, the account is WikitionaryGuy. CheatCodes4ever (talk) 21:55, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

Also I do want to use my current account, I just want the WikitionaryGuy account to be unblocked first (or have the block settings changed) so I'm not evading my block. CheatCodes4ever (talk) 20:17, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Not relevant to stewards and general guidance provided, probably should be addressed to Wikimedia Forum for the general direction of the community.  — billinghurst sDrewth 11:08, 1 January 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by:  — billinghurst sDrewth 11:08, 1 January 2022 (UTC)

Need Stewards Help in ka.wiki

Dear Stewards, I need your assistance in noticing kawiki users about rfc I have started here and which concerns kawiki community . Because of my 6-month block I am unable to post a note in kawiki's village pump. Thanks in advance --M. (talk) 12:11, 28 December 2021 (UTC)

Dear M., if you responded with the same enthusiasm to our warnings as you are doing here now, you would definitely not have received a block. Unfortunately, you didn't take into account all your mistakes, which I and many other users pointed out for a long time and, accordingly, deservedly received a block. I recommend that you review your mistakes during this period, and then continue working. --Mehman 97 15:04, 29 December 2021 (UTC)

Dear Mehman, As I understand, you are not sysop in kawiki. Do you represents kawiki's sysops here? I don't understand why are you commenting here. Here I am asking stewards to post notice in kawiki about ongoing RFC about sysops rights abuse. --188.169.9.165 09:52, 1 January 2022 (UTC)

Not done Stewards have no delegated authority to place notice of RfCs into a wiki, and as it seems that the community has an awareness this is now redundant.  — billinghurst sDrewth 11:05, 1 January 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by:  — billinghurst sDrewth 11:05, 1 January 2022 (UTC)

Robotic locking by AmandaNP on "information" supplied by JavaHurricane

Happy new year, everyone. I'm posting here as Steward requests/Global is locked. Here is an ongoing discussion at en:wp:

Hamish Ross

TBH, the only reason I tagged the sock as ILT was because of this global lock. Why did Amanda think that?--Bbb23 (talk) 18:32, 29 December 2021 (UTC)

I get the impression that many stewards rely on what people tell them,[1] or rather, they're not usually too fussy about the lock reason. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 18:41, 29 December 2021 (UTC)

Huh (frowning). It's okay to rely on, uh, reliable users, but certainly not the one Amanda apparently relied on - unfortunate. Thanks for the explanation.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:46, 29 December 2021 (UTC)

I refer to a discussion which commenced on Talk:Stewards requests/Global at 18:05, 16 July 2018 (to be continued - I'm off to a party) — The preceding unsigned comment was added by 79.68.133.21 (talk) 19:21, 31 December 2021 (UTC)

Some handy links: en:User talk:Zzuuzz and Talk:SRG/A/2018. NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 19:43, 31 December 2021 (UTC)

Noting that I have reverted the latest addition to this report as trolling; please feel free to revert me without asking me if you disagree. JavaHurricane 14:23, 1 January 2022 (UTC)

Courtesy link to previous discussion: Special:Permalink/22522643#Global lock for LTA Vote (X) for Change socks. It is not for you to remove a report on your own misconduct. Make sure you don't do that again. 79.68.133.21 14:34, 1 January 2022 (UTC)

┌─────────────────────────────────┘
And this is why Vote (X) (79.68.133.21) is banned from enwiki. It's a confusing mishmash of misinformation. Names are not really important when it comes to long term abuse (although they can help). If anyone wants some context for my comment above, it was an explanation, not a complaint.[2] I am one of an extremely small number of people who can reliably identify socks of Hamish Ross, who has been abusing enwiki for 15 years. In fact I'd be amazed if anyone else got it right. Keep up the good work stewards (and feel free to remove this comment if you want to remove any drivel posted by the IP).. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 14:45, 1 January 2022 (UTC)

@Zzuuzz: If this was Hamish Ross, then I'd be happy to change the reason. Can you confirm? -- Amanda (aka DQ) 16:53, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

Hi Amanda. I'm really not bothered by this, and would rather we focus on more interesting things. So I'm like meh. However I can confirm this is Hamish - I posted a link to a recent run of Hamish accounts just above (recent, if you can call a 5-year old sleeper recent). It's easy to find a couple more in my enwiki contribs. No others are locked; and probably none really need to be locked (although there's no loss if they are). Thanks. Meh. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 17:12, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

Special:Redirect/logid/44999832. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 23:59, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

Indeed, and thanks to Amanda who I know to be most diligent. So, this section relates to nothing in the title or the OP, it was started without anyone asking or notifying me, we've amended a thing which no one asked for and no one will ever notice, and we've maybe learned some things about a pair of enwiki-banned users. I don't know about anyone else, but I was done with this thread before I even saw it. Take care, see you later. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 14:46, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

It's also unclear how JavaHurricane, who is mentioned in the topic title, relates to any reports of the accounts mentioned here. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 15:26, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

As I said above, from Vote(X) you'll just get a confusing mishmash of misinformation. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 15:41, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

I am closing this to avoid further trolling. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 15:36, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 15:37, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

Size of Steward requests/Global

Hello. Steward requests/Global is above the post-transclusion include size again (I previously noticed this happen in October; the thread is here), so the status and MultiLock templates at the bottom and the footer aren't being transcluded. While getting more requests taken care of will lower the size again, I think a better long-term solution might be to split global (un)block requests and global (un)lock requests, which would make exceeding the include size harder. Tol (talk | contribs) @ 01:53, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

I've been thinking about this too and maybe having a seperate page for spambots where people can just list them instead of making a new section (just an idea). -- Amanda (aka DQ) 13:43, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

Agree AmandaNP 's idea. Also I think we may split Global (b)lock request for Long term abuse and obvious vandal request. There are many backlog cases are related to LTA at present. SCP-2000 14:29, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

Not to side track this, but a lot of the LTA ones have no evidence and no local blocks, which means stewards have to dig to figure out which takes a lot of time, hence why it's not done often. We can't just take people's word that it's an LTA. People also seem to mistake the definition of LTA for time, when it's really reserved for some of the most abusive users. -- Amanda (aka DQ) 17:12, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

Maybe there needs to be some sort of rule that you have to link to the master or at least explain why they are a LTA? Similar to how enwiki SPI requires diffs. What also confuses me is when I see local CUs posting on SRG - don't they have checkuser-l, where they can share further evidence? --Rschen7754 02:52, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

Since many people use the script, maybe this can at least be encouraged by having a field pop up in TwinkleGlobal when selecting the "Long-term abuse" rationale similarly to how one appears in the CSD dialogue for the "Custom reason" option? @Xiplus ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 17:27, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

I think that would help at minimum. And for Rschen on Checkusers, I personally will take a CU at their word because they have access to CU and it's their reputation if I have to come back and revisit a lock because they abused it. That's the only time I take someone at their word though. I think at minimum though we should split the IPs now, and we can see if we need to split it further. -- Amanda (aka DQ) 18:55, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

Agreed with splitting up blocks and locks. Best, —DerHexer (Talk) 15:13, 15 December 2021 (UTC)