You are a scrutineer for the 2021 enwiki ArbCom electionEdit

Hi Sotiale. Thank you for indicating your willingness to volunteer as a scrutineer for the 2021 English Wikipedia Arbitration Committee election. You have been appointed to be a scrutineer, and I will be shortly requesting that the Arbitration Committee grant you temporary checkuser permissions on the English Wikipedia to aid you in this role. If you do not wish to continue to serve in this role, please notify me or another member of the Electoral Commission (listed here). Thank you again for agreeing to serve in this important role. We deeply appreciate it.   Mz7 (talk) 03:22, 1 November 2021 (UTC)

Should I resubmit the checkuser requests today or reopen those requests?Edit

I attached the details (reasons, evidences) for these not-done requests in Steward_requests/Checkuser requested by Liuxinyu970226 today. Should I resubmit the requests, or we make it simple by reopen them? Itcfangye (talk) 07:53, 7 November 2021 (UTC)

@Itcfangye: I don't prefer reopening an already closed request, for the logging purpose. If your time permits, would you please request again? Thank you. --Sotiale (talk) 07:55, 7 November 2021 (UTC)
Done. Itcfangye (talk) 08:41, 7 November 2021 (UTC)

Re check Kapol6360 sock'sEdit

I think CreeperDigital4651 that was Kapol6360 socks. Can you take a look or any action?-- Willy1018 (talk) 13:10, 24 November 2021 (UTC)

Could you explain why you thought so? Simply the fact that you think so doesn't give me any clues. --Sotiale (talk) 13:59, 24 November 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for replay it's Yage wu socks. Willy1018 (talk) 21:18, 24 November 2021 (UTC)

Take careEdit

Glad to see you around, seems SK COVID cases are a lot recently, take much care. :) Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 12:39, 4 December 2021 (UTC)

Fortunately, in the area where I live, there are not so many confirmed cases. Although the spread of the Omicron COVID variant has recently begun, it has not yet spread nationwide. Thank you for caring about me. You, too, take care of your health! --Sotiale (talk) 13:06, 4 December 2021 (UTC)

thanksEdit

  The Original Barnstar
感谢您长期以来帮助处理用户查核。桐生ここ (talk) 12:42, 4 December 2021 (UTC)
谢谢! --Sotiale (talk) 13:11, 4 December 2021 (UTC)

Why lockEdit

Hello sir why you block my account Jebat2? I can't access my account now. 2402:9D80:22A:2EAD:0:0:1C1B:7539 07:07, 5 December 2021 (UTC)

Please global lockEdit

See Steward_requests/Global#Global_block_for_126.34.82.137. Please global block 126.34.80.0/20 (talk · contribs). LTA.--126.34.84.101 03:46, 12 December 2021 (UTC)

About the blockageEdit

Excuse me, I want to ask why you suddenly block my account on incubator? I haven't used any other account anymore after the warning, but you blocked me using abusing multiple accounts a few hours ago. Can you provide a reason for that? --Bosco1122 (talk) 04:32, 12 December 2021 (UTC)

There seems to be some misunderstanding. I didn't warn you, I asked you a question for an explanation. What you described as calling langcom's attention deceived langcom and seriously interfered with their business. Other users are also socking, explaining as you claim. Generally, users send mail to langcom, contact members, or leave requests on talkpage, not socking. And it's also quite strange to explain that you were afraid that contributing to multiple projects using multiple languages would be considered abusive. It is not taken into account in blocking, but I wonder if you really claim to have nothing to do with this and this. --Sotiale (talk) 05:47, 12 December 2021 (UTC)
Actually I don't know what you meant about socking. I know that using multiple accounts is not a good behavior so I do not use other accounts anymore, instead I start recruiting people to contribute to incubator, either in real life or in social media. I don't understand why you said I have relations with these two accounts, I only use one account recently. --Bosco1122 (talk) 08:22, 12 December 2021 (UTC)
You mean you've never used the above two accounts? Okay. Regarding your block, if you want to review it, ask incubator admins other than me to review the block. They can review my block and deal with it from a neutral standpoint. --Sotiale (talk) 09:39, 12 December 2021 (UTC)
Ok, but where can I contact other admins? --Bosco1122 (talk) 15:33, 12 December 2021 (UTC)
Contact MF-Warburg or Minorax (most active admins). --Sotiale (talk) 13:08, 15 December 2021 (UTC)

Update on Gungbe Wikipedia (Wp/guw) approvalEdit

Hi Sotiale, thank you for your work on assisting languages in incubator. Please is there any update on our approval? Is there anything we could do to support the process of final approval? Please let me know. Thanks.--Samatics (talk) 04:37, 12 December 2021 (UTC)

A few langcom members have expressed their favor, but many have yet to comment. Sometimes members are busy and forget to send comments, which delays the process. I will send them a reminder. --Sotiale (talk) 05:50, 12 December 2021 (UTC)
Thanks.--Samatics (talk) 06:55, 12 December 2021 (UTC)
Hi Sotiale, Trust you are fine. Please is there any update on our approval?--Samatics (talk) 05:05, 29 December 2021 (UTC)
I sent a reminder to langcom the day(12 Dec 2021) I communicated with you, and the comments were all favor. I look forward to starting the process for approval soon. --Sotiale (talk) 14:14, 31 December 2021 (UTC)
Glad to hear this! Thanks for the update.--Samatics (talk) 15:32, 31 December 2021 (UTC)
@Samatics: Oh, I was busy so I didn't check, now it's in the stage of getting opinions from linguistics experts. Awaiting a reply from them. --Sotiale (talk) 04:32, 1 January 2022 (UTC)
Ok. Thanks.--Samatics (talk) 04:39, 1 January 2022 (UTC)

Error in mniWikipedia & mniWiktionaryEdit

Hi, @Sotiale: Why admin rights are not updated in mniwiktionary. Same happened for Mniwikipedia also. https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:MobileDiff/22488991 A Mangang (talk) 06:10, 24 December 2021 (UTC)

@Awangba Mangang: Hi. It happens sometimes. Your flags on 2 wikis have been set. --Sotiale (talk) 11:20, 24 December 2021 (UTC)

UnblockEdit

Hi! I'm Dswitz10734, an editor on Wikipedia. I recently went to edit a page, and realized I was blocked. Currently, I'm editing from another device. Is there any reason I was blocked? If so, please contact me and I'll do my best to get back to you as soon as possible. Thanks, Dswitz10734 (talk) 14:23, 27 December 2021 (UTC)

@Dswitz10734: Hi. Sorry for the inconvenience you experienced. It's very likely not your fault. If you use a VPN or a function that hides your IP, the IP may be blocked and your editing may be difficult. If you turn it off, you can edit without problems. In order to figure out what the problem is, please send the message and IP that appears when blocking to my wikimail. Thank you. --Sotiale (talk) 02:19, 28 December 2021 (UTC)
@Sotiale, my IP is 104.225.180.69 and when I try to edit, this message comes:
     IP address is in a range that has been blocked on all Wikimedia Foundation wikis. The block was made by Sotiale (meta.wikimedia.org). The reason given is Open Proxy/Webhost: See the help page if you are effected.
I'd just like to thank you for working with me to solve this problem. I know we're not out of the woods yet, but hopefully soon. Dswitz10734 (talk) 14:05, 28 December 2021 (UTC)
@Dswitz10734: Your IP assigned to iBoss seems to be the service you use for secure connection. If you want to edit on enwiki only, you can get a local IPBE flag and edit freely. But, if you are active on other wikis, you can freely edit by requesting a GIPBE. If you don't mind asking for this, turn off the secure connection service or VPN. --Sotiale (talk) 02:46, 29 December 2021 (UTC)

How we will see unregistered usersEdit

Hi!

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

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

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

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

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

Thank you. /Johan (WMF)

18:17, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

Re: And isn't it too harsh to post 7 requests at once?Edit

Apologies, there was a significant backlog in the zhwiki local request page (and most of those requests have been waiting for over two to three days), and I was slightly inactive on HAM to SRCU requests during that time, so I had to defer them to SRCU all at once.

I recently pushed a discussion on zhwiki on converting local HAM page into an SPI system similar to that of enwiki's, which has gained a lot of support. I expect that the procedures would be complete by the end of the month. There will possibly be clerks (zh, en) doing the job of confirming whether cases are suitable for CheckUser, so I hope the new local procedures would enhance the efficiency and provide a smoother process on CheckUser requests to avoid backlogging or pushing of stale/inappropriate requests onto Meta.

I am also aware of the Foundation notice that CheckUser might be returning to zhwiki in the near future (well of course, the prior being the local community accepting the offer and following the provided procedures). I would like to thank you for you help on zhwiki CheckUser cases in the past and the future, I am sure that your contributions would not be forgotten.

Regards, Luciferian 04:21, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

@LuciferianThomas: Oh my, please don't take it too seriously. As you can see the speed of processing that day, I'm already quite familiar with the zhwiki checkuser, so it's not a burden to me unlike the first time. I was just joking to communicate comfortably with you. As always, I will continue to provide my services for you as long as I can work. Also, I will follow the method that is more convenient for you. --Sotiale (talk) 04:28, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
I know, I didn't take it seriously, but still I do owe an apology :P Thank you! --Luciferian 04:29, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
If the local community decides to set up a quick CU request channel as in w:en:WP:SPI#Quick CheckUser requests for RfIPBE checks, would it be too much workload for stewards? According to numbers provided by a sysop, there are in average 32 RfIPBEs per week. Of course, requests will be submitted in batches, possibly once per day or two. Luciferian 09:48, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
Normally, it would be an additional task for local checkusers, so stewards would not be obligated to handle it. Moreover, assuming such a thing happens, it is likely that most of those tasks will be handled by me. Yes, that would be no different than appointing me as the zhwiki checkuser. --Sotiale (talk) 12:49, 21 January 2022 (UTC)
In the discussion of adding such process on RfIPBE, members of the community were concerned about whether stewards would accept such requests (I do understand that stewards are not obligated to handle these requests), so I came to ask you if you could help with such requests, and if you do, I'm sure that the community would very much appreciate your help, especially sysops who are in the awkward position of having to just accept all RfIPBEs due to the lack of CheckUser, and possibly overdoing RfIPBEs that no open proxies is practically defunct. Luciferian 13:26, 21 January 2022 (UTC)
It will be an issue that needs to be considered. It's about what you're asking for and what ways to make it more comfortable, and whether your community has the trust in me to do that or not. Of course I will also have to consider how much my workload is. --Sotiale (talk) 13:44, 22 January 2022 (UTC)

Regarding possible sock of zhwiki LTAEdit

Pardon me for posting a request here. On local Administrators' noticeboard/Miscellaneous, a user reported user 臭臭貓 to be a suspected sock of LTA:SiuMai. While investigating the contributions of the reported user and the LTA main account (and as listed evidence on ANM), there are quite some similarities between the two. Adding to the report was that the last found sock ABX456 was blocked one day before 臭臭貓 was created, which was back in January 2021. While I do find it   Possible through behaviour analysis, I am still very uncertain of the relationship of the two users. I understand that any past data of found socks would have been stale, but I would like to ask for your help to see what to do about this case and future cases where the past identified accounts are long stale, to prevent inappropriately identifying authentic new editors who are not actually LTA socks. Do we have to abandon the report as unidentifiable and either on the good side not wrongly blame a new editor or on the bad side let loose a past LTA? (Concern being blocked users are not allowed to clean start, given the fact that they aren't "clean" record anyways.) Thank you! --Luciferian 04:56, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

@LuciferianThomas: Oh, I saw this and forgot.. Sorry for the late reply. Are there any accounts I've investigated among them? --Sotiale (talk) 11:21, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
Yes, it would be Steward requests/Checkuser/2021-01#Ca11ist0@zh.wikipedia, inconveniently the exact case where a zhwiki user posted something not nice about Stewards and made you unhappy. Luciferian 12:51, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
Hello, would there be any insight for now? Thanks! --Luciferian 03:10, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
I don't recommend it as it can be inaccurate, but the data may still be mine if I investigated it. If you really think you need it, get consensus from HAM and request for it. --Sotiale (talk) 03:56, 20 January 2022 (UTC)

Request for Meta IPBE rightEdit

Hello Sotiale! Sorry for interruption. I'm currently in China Mainland, thereby I have to use a proxy to edit meta-wiki. Can you please grant me local IPBE right of meta? Thanks. --Tranve (talk) 05:40, 21 January 2022 (UTC)

Done. --Sotiale (talk) 12:50, 21 January 2022 (UTC)

Result via thisEdit

In local,I request check Judasmujer20991 and Zoetay20112([1]),but Timmyboger forgot submit this two users,so you can check this two users?--MCC214#ex umbra in solem 10:27, 22 January 2022 (UTC)

I believe they excluded those accounts because 90 days have passed since the last activity. --Sotiale (talk) 11:37, 22 January 2022 (UTC)
I recheck this two users last edit time,Judasmujer20991 is stale (23 October in last year) but Zoetay20112 is not (23 November in last year,so I feel Zoetay20112 have data on it.--MCC214#ex umbra in solem 06:05, 23 January 2022 (UTC)
Well, Zoetay20112 is confirmed, but no other account found. --Sotiale (talk) 06:28, 23 January 2022 (UTC)
Thanks,I report this update in RFCUHAM.--MCC214#ex umbra in solem 07:02, 23 January 2022 (UTC)

Happy 설날Edit

Hey, happy 2022 설날. Hope the year ahead will be a good and meaningful one for you. Stay safe. Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 12:17, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

Greetings, Camouflaged Mirage. I am having a happy holiday. These days, my stamina isn't as good as it used to be, so I'm just doing what I want to do, but I'm hoping to get my stamina back soon. The world is noisy due to the spread of Omicron. Hope you are safe too. --Sotiale (talk) 12:28, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

Question about CUEdit

May I ask if it is possible to request checking against a claim (i.e. user claiming he's using a company's broadband service)?--1233 T / C 14:13, 12 February 2022 (UTC)

Hi. It depends on the specific circumstances, but in general, it is rarely acceptable to check for that purpose(for example, why is it necessary? ... etc) It would be helpful to explain the specific situation. --Sotiale (talk) 14:40, 12 February 2022 (UTC)
This is regarding a recent SPI on Wpcpey (since the case involves IP socks, an SPI case was filed, since there is no other place to file it before SPI opens next Monday). Wpcpey is suspected for abusing IP socks while being temporarily blocked. The editing patterns are similar (gaining interest on the same article across Chinese and Yue Wikipedias at the same time) and the editing time patterns almost matches, and the main IP used is only active during when the user is blocked and has no edits between when the user's second last block expired and when the current block was placed (spanning six days). While most behavioral evidence goes against the (blocked) user, the user claims to have not used IP socks and says that they are using a different ISP than that of the IPs, and there are also a few pieces of behavioral evidence that shows possibility that the IPs found are actually not Wpcpey. There are mixed and even contradicting conclusions and findings between to-be clerks, so we are asking if it is possible to request a check on such claims, or even just "whether the user is actually abusing socks or the found behavioral evidence is just completely coincidental". Thanks! Regards, Luciferian 15:30, 12 February 2022 (UTC)
@1233 and LuciferianThomas: So to sum up what you're saying, you suspect this is an IP socking case, right? Perhaps this is more intuitive than comparing ISPs. I would like to point out that revealing an account and IP (or range) relationship publicly and IP socking investigation are clearly different. I may decide to take action in such a way that I do not provide any conclusive judgment regarding the relationship between the IP (or range) you present as evidence and the account. Consider two instances where I previously declared abuse on zhwiki; This is something I refrain from doing on zhwiki for special reasons, but in general this is within the scope of checkuser as long as it is within the privacy policy. If this is not possible, you will be unable to respond even if the admins are IP socking. This is very absurd and bureaucratic. If you suspect block evasion through IP socking, you think it is clear that it is disruptive to your project, I will investigate. However, I hope that the clerks will form a consensus regarding this investigation as there are clerks, rather than reviewing all the evidence as in the previous case I did. --Sotiale (talk) 02:57, 13 February 2022 (UTC)
Thank you for your reply and check, helping us clear up the case. I would also like to add a question: are these conditions (individually) suitable for sleeper checks?
  1. LTA known for creating sleeper accounts, leaving them for a few days to fulfill the autoconfirmed requirements, possibly making seemingly normal edits in the process;
  2. LTA known for creating accounts that they do not dispose even after being reported (e.g. in the case of w:zh:LTA:SiuMai);
  3. Checking for dormant LTA accounts before they get stale.
This would help the clerks and the community to get clear of what exactly are suitable for CheckUser requests. Thanks! Luciferian 11:13, 13 February 2022 (UTC)
In some cases it may be, and in some cases it may not. This is because it is necessary to comprehensively evaluate the situation. It seems difficult to state general principles that are suitable for all situations. The basic principle of checkuser is to investigate the relationship between two or more accounts, and it is inappropriate to recheck the accounts that have already been checked unless there is a special reason. --Sotiale (talk) 12:27, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

Steward_requests/Checkuser/2022-02#Royalfanta@zh.wikipediaEdit

I asked a few questions about the SRCU request at Steward_requests/Checkuser/2022-02#Royalfanta@zh.wikipedia, and it got auto archived before it got noticed. Can I please raise your attention for the questions? Thanks! Luciferian𖤐 03:35, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

I was on a business trip, so the reply is late. All I can say is, if they were at a level that I could take action, I would have taken action. The same goes for the confirmed group. If their IP is assigned to VPN, or if it's assigned to an institution, I've published it to help you out. --Sotiale (talk) 11:41, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
Thank you! Luciferian𖤐 11:47, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

ดิฉันศึกษามาน้อยเลยไม่กล้าสมัครใช้กลัวจะกดแล้วเสียเงิน กลัวโดนหลอก LEKtoa (talk) 17:57, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

SRCU via HBNEdit

大阪十万浪人十万野爹 is not global locked.--MCC214#ex umbra in solem 06:25, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

Request on approval of Gun Wiktionary (Wt/guw)Edit

Hello Sotiale, trust you are fine. Please kindly comment on this. It is a request for the approval of the gungbe Wiktionary together with the gungbe Wikipedia. As we now have a newly recognized user group dedicated to these projects, it will make our work more easier if we can get the approval for both projects. Please look into it and let me know your thoughts on the possibility. Thanks for your anticipated response. --Samatics (talk) 05:24, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

Since the approval process for Wp/guw is already in progress, Wt/guw must be processed separately. This can happen at the same time, but it means Wp/guw will be approved first. So if Wp/guw doesn't have any issues, it will be approved first. Personally, I am optimistic about the sustainability of Wt/guw. I'll start the process for approval when I have time and let you know. --Sotiale (talk) 00:04, 5 March 2022 (UTC)
Thank you for looking into it and your response. I look forward to starting of the process for approval of Wt/guw.--Samatics (talk) 05:50, 5 March 2022 (UTC)
Yes, good luck to you and your community. --Sotiale (talk) 06:24, 5 March 2022 (UTC)
Hello Sotiale, soft reminder on assisting in starting the approval process for Wt/guw. Thanks. Samatics (talk) 17:58, 14 March 2022 (UTC)
There is an opinion that it would be good to start the approval process for Wt/guw next month, so it will be. --Sotiale (talk) 09:17, 15 March 2022 (UTC)
Ok. Thanks. Samatics (talk) 10:10, 15 March 2022 (UTC)
Hello Sotiale, trust your are fine. Please can you assist in starting the approval process? Thanks.--Samatics (talk) 18:30, 1 April 2022 (UTC)
This month's activity is also included, so it should be at least mid-month. Please contact me again at the end of this month unless another member or I send you a message. --Sotiale (talk) 11:38, 3 April 2022 (UTC)
Ok. Thanks for your response.-- Samatics (talk) 16:30, 3 April 2022 (UTC)
Hi Sotiale, trust you are good. Here is a gentle reminder on assisting in starting the approval process for Wt/guw. Thanks!--Samatics (talk) 05:45, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
@Samatics: Hi, Samatics. The discussion process for approval has begun. Please continue to be active within your project. --Sotiale (talk) 10:20, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
Wow!I am very glad to hear this. The community will continue to be active as usual. Thanks.--Samatics (talk) 12:03, 2 May 2022 (UTC)

EmailEdit

I send email to you, please check it, thanks.--MCC214#ex umbra in solem 09:34, 10 March 2022 (UTC)

I didn't find any mail from that user in my mailbox, and I don't know what the ticket is because I haven't been processing the VTRS queue lately. It's hard for me to handle it unless I lock the user or I must help it. --Sotiale (talk) 11:14, 11 March 2022 (UTC)
I know least two user when they have been global lock,they send email to steward@ wikimedia.org and need VTRS check their unlock request,but not any reply at long time.--MCC214#ex umbra in solem 13:50, 11 March 2022 (UTC)
What does "least two user when they have been global lock" mean? "I lock the user" means I am the steward who first locked their master account, or locked them first. Handling lock evasion is not included in this. And since the backlog of the current stew queue is very much pushed back, most tickets may not be answered in a short time. I'm quite sorry for the situation, but for a quick review it would be good to contact the steward who locked them right away. --Sotiale (talk) 03:09, 13 March 2022 (UTC)
I send email to Martin Urbanec and Tks4Fish.--MCC214#ex umbra in solem 06:45, 13 March 2022 (UTC)
If so, they will review the reqeust to see if it makes sense. --Sotiale (talk) 08:56, 13 March 2022 (UTC)

Also,my SRCU unban request process progress is?--MCC214#ex umbra in solem 09:35, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

I wonder if you mean you submitted in 2021 or if you submitted a new request. At least for 2021 it was decided to keep it as I remember. --Sotiale (talk) 03:09, 13 March 2022 (UTC)
I send SRCU unban request to steward@ wikimedia.org at 8 March in last year.--MCC214#ex umbra in solem 06:32, 13 March 2022 (UTC)
I remember that the request sent last year was decided not to change the action on you. --Sotiale (talk) 08:56, 13 March 2022 (UTC)
As an aside, please click the minor edit checkbox when making minor edits after you first posted your post. Your frequent minor edits send me quite a few unnecessary notifications, which makes me uncomfortable. --Sotiale (talk) 03:09, 13 March 2022 (UTC)

SRCU result via thisEdit

I find other user Dennishu522,edit in same page,similar edit behavior (SPA).--MCC214#ex umbra in solem 07:04, 14 March 2022 (UTC)

Post to SRCU via your HAM clerk. --Sotiale (talk) 09:18, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

Update on CU request on Tommy860119Edit

Hi. On this previous check on Tommy860119's sockpuppet, you provided two additional possibly related accounts that were not locally registered on zhwiki at the time, Tony Tiger 3.0 and Johnny to 19960110. I am here to report that these two accounts attached to zhwiki earlier and did start making abusive edits like Tommy860119 (or 光俊) did (and are both now blocked), please note that to your record. For future check requests on this sockmaster (if needed), I guess I should specify that this will require a x-wiki check? Thanks with regards, Luciferian𖤐 10:36, 14 March 2022 (UTC)

Ah, I think my explanation was insufficient. The two accounts I presented were technically confirmed accounts. You can safely see them as the same user. In principle, the local checkuser should be local, but since the case user uses a detour, you can refer to the suspect wiki and ask the stewards to find the potential accounts. Of course, this may or may not be accepted by the stewards at their discretion. --Sotiale (talk) 09:25, 15 March 2022 (UTC)
Aha, I see. Thank you for your clarification. Luciferian𖤐 13:39, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

I uhhhh hbhbfhfefjifEdit

Hello. Disregarding the subsequent edits to the talk page, how was this "nonsense/gibberish"? ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk)
17:09, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

As I left on the person's talkpage, the reason for blocking is wrong. I'm just leaving it unchanged to see how the person reacts to unblock review because they have other reasons for blocking. --Sotiale (talk) 21:45, 16 March 2022 (UTC)
I've been busy lately, so it's a bit late, but I just changed the block reason. --Sotiale (talk) 10:50, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Sorry for making mistakesEdit

Hello, Sir.Sotiale. I have found that you are one of the sysops of kowikisource. Sorry for making the wrong report on GS. Pavlov2 08:44, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

It's a mistake anyone can make during global activities, and I don't think it was bad intentions. It would be great if it helped you with your experience. --Sotiale (talk) 10:49, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

SRCU result via thisEdit

Local user said ST680 is stole and login by VOA ParkHider via other confirmed user (see this),please recheck this result via Group 1,because I think local admin and steward is misjudge (local blocked indef and steward global lock).--MCC214#ex umbra in solem 10:49, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

Well, make that claim with your clerk first, then let them ask me. --Sotiale (talk) 11:11, 21 March 2022 (UTC)
@LuciferianThomas, Itcfangye, SCP-2000, Timmyboger, and 1233: Clerks, I have received several inquiries from him about checkuser. Regarding his inquiry, if you need it, please ask me after discussion. Of course, I am not sure if I can give you a meaningful answer about hacking claim. And I wonder if someone can make these individual requests directly to me. Your consensus, as I understand it, is that clerks can request for a zhwiki checkuser except in exceptional cases. --Sotiale (talk) 11:19, 21 March 2022 (UTC)
I don't know why he (MCC214) did that but clerk team surely has been notified as it is already written at local SPI page.
I don't see anything that a CU check can help if it is related to account hijacks.
@MCC214: Please do the "I want to request check again" locally first before approaching stewards. What you have done (not only this time) not only creates nuisance (particularly Sotiale) but also creates unnecessary workload to everyone. 1233 T / C 14:40, 21 March 2022 (UTC)
  Comment
Sir Sotiale, I'm sorry for this case. MCC communicated with me about this case on the other site. However, I didn't respond in time. It might be the cause that made him directly come to you for help. If you permit, I'd like to make some translations for MCC's sentence.
MCC meant that "It seemed User: ST680 is a compromised account. This evidence for compromising has been mentioned locally. If it's right, will you have a look at this case again?" It seemed he didn't mean that "you should do the check user again."
We'd like to make an apology for our terrific English writing and communication and heavy workload for you. Pavlov2 09:04, 22 March 2022 (UTC)
Excuse me, but what is the difference between "will you check this case again" and "you should do the check user again"? Both are totally equal in meaning and is requesting for another check. Luciferian𖤐 09:09, 22 March 2022 (UTC)
Checking the case again means taking new evidence into consideration, instead of "checkuser", while, seemingly that the word "check" is misleading. Pavlov2 09:12, 22 March 2022 (UTC)
Word changed to "have a look at", hoping better. Pavlov2 09:16, 22 March 2022 (UTC)
I would say that it's totally unnecessary anyways, as you also said, T&S is the way to go, instead of steward requests. Luciferian𖤐 09:33, 22 March 2022 (UTC)
Well, this case seemingly is just something about grammars and words, MCC doesn't intend to do this kind of childish "requests", maybe. Or maybe not... I have warned him on his User talk page. Pavlov2 09:58, 22 March 2022 (UTC)
On behalf of Clerk team, there is no consensus to re-check ST680. Thanks for your notice. SCP-2000 02:32, 22 March 2022 (UTC)
Or to be even more precise, us clerks have consensus against re-checking ST680. We find a total lack of need to re-check even for this as both compromised accounts and sockpuppet accounts are due to be locked anyways, and checking does not change anything. Even if the check result is that the account is compromised as opposed to being a sockpuppet account, it will not help with unlock or unblocks in any way. The standard practice is for compromised accounts to be handled by the T&S team and not stewards, as I suppose MCC214 should've known for his long-term activity in Wikimedia projects. Luciferian𖤐 05:14, 22 March 2022 (UTC)
By the way, if you really want to make a request for unblocking an compromised account, the owner of the account need to go to Suca instead of talking about it here. Pavlov2 09:18, 22 March 2022 (UTC)
There is no need to do a recheck since it's obvious STO680 is a stolen account (according to Ericliu1912). And Meta Stewards lock stolen accounts (no matter whether it's stolen by an LTA) to ensure they are not used to cause more harm.
So unless MCC214 finds evidences that makes him suggest ST680 is not a stolen account but the LTA HMGY itself, there is no need to re-checkuser. If ST680 can retrieve the stolen account, they can request for an unlock; otherwise they have to register a new account (and state their identity). (最后这段话我用中文表述一下:除非MCC214发现了他认为有可能表明ST680是HMGY本尊而非被盗的证据,否则不需要重新查核。如果ST680能找回旧账号,那可以申请解锁,否则就只能注册新账号了。)Itcfangye (talk) 12:41, 22 March 2022 (UTC)

Consider temporary suspending the potential approval process of Sassarese and Campidanese, please?Edit

Regarding Requests for new languages/Wikipedia Sassarese and Requests for new languages/Wikipedia Campidanese Sardinian. Annyeonghaseyo, a recent RFL page about Logudorese Sardinian, shows somewhat a hassle matter on dialects of Sardinian, and some Incubator tests for them, it looks like for both test projects, the active contributors don't seem contributed in good faith (no idea if saying so is proper or not), someone pointed that (iirc) both sdc and sro test wikis are having scowiki-like problems, that contributors don't speak both dialects, nor they speak other languages in Sardinia, and they copy-pasted pages from Sardinian Wikipedia (using macrolanguage code sc) without showing attributions. Probably the eligibility for both RFL pages in this topic are affected too. Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 09:35, 26 March 2022 (UTC)

Late reply. You've probably seen a related mail on langcom-l. Along with you, I would like to thank the person who sent me an anonymous mail. --Sotiale (talk) 10:23, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
Ladies/Gentlemen, please be advised that I never send anonymous e-mails. Among the active contributors to Wp/sdc, in the year 2022, there are two users who were born in Sardinia and speak and write correctly in Sassarese. There is also a user born and currently living in Corsica who speaks and writes correctly in Sassarese. Some years ago, the President of the Region of Sardinia created a Commission for the Unified Sardinian Language which is actually an artificial language, given the variety of Sardinian spoken on that island. This Commission has caused the birth of a movement in Sardinia, which is contrary to this project and argues that the Unified Sardinian Language tends to debase the two languages Campidanese and Logudorese, because some linguists consider these two not languages, but rather different spellings of the Sardinian language, that is spoken in the central and southern part of Sardinia. After 4 years, this Commission did not produce any concrete results, indeed, and under the current President of the Region of Sardinia the project for the Unified Sardinian language seems to be waning. But the dispute between linguists does not tend to diminish and is unfortunately also present on Wikipedia. However, on sc.wiki (in Sardinian language) there are pages in Logudorese and also in the dialect of Nuoro, but there are no pages in Sassarese that can be 'copied' and transferred to Wp/sdc from scratch.
Sassarese is a language of its own, born in the 13th century in the north-western part of Sardinia, around the new city of Sassari, which then became an autonomous state-city: it is the language of merchants and traders, with words derived from Latin, Greek, French, Italian, Ligurian, Catalan and also from Logudorese: it reflected the political and economic interests of the cosmopolitan population of the new city of Sassari. Sassarese has its own literature, its own popular music, its own theater plays, its own vocabularies and appears in ancient official documents. Sassarese is unrelated to the dispute over the Unified Sardinian language. The Chair of Linguistics at the University of Sassari is very active in defending the identity of the Sassarese language. Please consider the efforts to get the Wp/sdc project out of the Incubator, as recently requested a couple of times. All the best, --Sirmio Cabinigre 11:51, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
P.S. 1 Category:Wp/sdc : [2]
Catanalysis Wp/sdc : [3] --Sirmio Cabinigre 14:57, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
P.S. 2 Fausta Samaritani for sc.wiki [4]
SurdusVII for sc.wiki [5]--Sirmio Cabinigre 16:24, 28 April 2022 (UTC)

Request to unblock my accountEdit

Hello, I've received an information that my account is being blocked and I'd like to ask you to give me the access to it. From what it's written my current IP address is 185.58.42.217 and block ID is #513724. Looking forward to hearing from you. Best regards, Natalia Natalia Szelachowska (WMCZ) (talk) 17:45, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

The IP you are using is blocked because it is used as a VPN or proxy. The way to solve this problem is to disable the feature. But assuming that you have a reasonable reason to use such an IP, I have granted you a GIPBE. You should request removal of GIPBE when you no longer need to use VPN or OP. --Sotiale (talk) 10:30, 31 March 2022 (UTC)

Username changes on zhwikiEdit

There is lot of backlog on that page (zh:Wikipedia:更改用户名) . Can you help ? Willy1018 (talk) 20:12, 18 April 2022 (UTC)

@Willy1018: Sorry, my answer is late. I've checked it periodically before, but now I'm not. If you have a lot of backlog, ping me anytime. It all seems to be taken care of now by another renamer. --Sotiale (talk) 10:27, 22 April 2022 (UTC)

Suspicious Anonymous IP Local Wiki VandalismeEdit

Dear, Sotiale.

Something is wrong the user anonymous 36.78.203.122 they starting attacking the all rest article of Indonesia Wikipedia they inserting the false year and make misinformation on selected article, can you block this IP before they doing troublemaker again!

Please Proceed my answer ASAP! AF1011 (talk) 01:06, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

I temporarily blocked the IP from editing for 6 hours. Well, I could take action on this since the IP had an edit on enwiki(if blocked on idwiki, move to another wikis) but basically hard to intervene about vandalism on idwiki only. There are several admins there and they can handle it properly. --Sotiale (talk) 01:17, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

Username changes on zhwikiEdit

Hi Sotiale! There is lot of backlog on that page, could you help us? Thank you very much! BureibuNeko (talk) 11:28, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

With the exception of one request that required a question, all other requests were processed. Thanks for letting me know. --Sotiale (talk) 12:00, 26 June 2022 (UTC)