User talk:ST47/Archive24

My Talk Page

My Contributions

This is a Wikipedia user talk page. If you find this page on any site other than Wikipedia, you are viewing a mirror site. Be aware that the page may be outdated, and that the user this page belongs to may have no personal affiliation with any site other than Wikipedia itself. The original page is located at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:ST47.

I should block you just for hogging Recent changes. At $5 a block, you made $2500 in the last three minutes. Drmies (talk) 01:59, 22 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I have a pretty long list of Akamai ranges. I feel like they could be better aggregated, but I don't want to cause too much collateral by expanding them to a /16 where I don't know what else is using that range. ST47 (talk) 02:06, 22 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Well if we ever get paid you'll be rolling in it. Thanks! Drmies (talk) 02:31, 22 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2021).

Administrator changes

TJMSmith

Boing! said Zebedee • Hiberniantears • Lear's Fool • Only • WGFinley

Interface administrator changes

AmandaNP

Guideline and policy news

• A request for comment is open that proposes a process for the community to revoke administrative permissions. This follows a 2019 RfC in favor of creating one such a policy.
• A request for comment is in progress to remove F7 (invalid fair-use claim) subcriterion a, which covers immediate deletion of non-free media with invalid fair-use tags.
• A request for comment seeks to grant page movers the delete-redirect userright, which allows moving a page over a single-revision redirect, regardless of that redirect's target. The full proposal is at Wikipedia:Page mover/delete-redirect.
• A request for comment asks if sysops may place the General sanctions/Coronavirus disease 2019 editnotice template on pages in scope that do not have page-specific sanctions?
• There is a discussion in progress concerning automatic protection of each day's featured article with Pending Changes protection.

Technical news

• When blocking an IPv6 address with Twinkle, there is now a checkbox with the option to just block the /64 range. When doing so, you can still leave a block template on the initial, single IP address' talkpage.
• When protecting a page with Twinkle, you can now add a note if doing so was in response to a request at WP:RfPP, and even link to the specific revision.
• There have been a number of reported issues with Pending Changes. Most problems setting protection appear to have been resolved (phab:T273317) but other issues with autoaccepting edits persist (phab:T275322).

Arbitration

• By motion, the discretionary sanctions originally authorized under the GamerGate case are now authorized under a new Gender and sexuality case, with sanctions authorized for all edits about, and all pages related to, any gender-related dispute or controversy and associated people. Sanctions issued under GamerGate are now considered Gender and sexuality sanctions.
• The Kurds and Kurdistan case was closed, authorizing standard discretionary sanctions for the topics of Kurds and Kurdistan, broadly construed.

Miscellaneous

• Following the 2021 Steward Elections, the following editors have been appointed as stewards: AmandaNP, Operator873, Stanglavine, Teles, and Wiki13.

---

Hello. Mind if I unblock Sleepinthestars under WP:SO? See User_talk:Sleepinthestars and note I see no recent evidence of block evasion with the checkuser tools. --Yamla (talk) 01:06, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Yamla: No objection from me! ST47 (talk) 01:44, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, just letting you know I have temporarily unblocked the IP range 103.225.140.0/22 to allow editing at an edit-a-thon/outreach event facilitated and supervised by Wikimedia Australia. I will restore the block when the event ends. Hope that's not a problem, let me know if any issue. --Canley (talk) 23:41, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

With regards to 83.229.13.7 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log) please see Wikipedia:Copyright problems/2021 March 24. -- PBS (talk) 12:25, 24 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Would you mind having a look at MediaWiki_talk:Spam-blacklist#Ivypanda.com, there are accounts popping up there that you blocked for socking/spam and I wonder if there are more domains / accounts linked there. I am likely going to blacklist this on globally. --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 23:56, 24 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2021).

Administrator changes

Alexandria • Happyme22 • RexxS

Guideline and policy news

• Following a request for comment, F7 (invalid fair-use claim) subcriterion a has been deprecated; it covered immediate deletion of non-free media with invalid fair-use tags.
• Following a request for comment, page movers were granted the delete-redirect userright, which allows moving a page over a single-revision redirect, regardless of that redirect's target.

Technical news

• When you move a page that many editors have on their watchlist the history can be split and it might also not be possible to move it again for a while. This is because of a job queue problem. (T278350)
• Code to support some very old web browsers is being removed. This could cause issues in those browsers. (T277803)

Arbitration

• A community consultation on the Arbitration Committee discretionary sanctions procedure is open until April 25.

---

Hi ST47, I hope you're doing well. Could I bother you to look at ACC request 301997? It's about a block of yours that might need lifting (at least if I'm reading this right). Best, Blablubbs|talk 22:51, 8 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I was recently doing a review of all the page restrictions I've placed or taken ownership of over the years, and I noticed that a majority of the pages were no longer battlegrounds and didn't require restrictions anymore. I was looking backwards a couple of months on the article history and talk page looking for major diputes, and for the most part things were pretty quiet. I've removed the BRD restrictions from about 70% of the articles that I had put them on, and the 1RR restrictions from probably 90% of pages.

I figured while I was at it I might as well try to track down the other pages with active sanctions and see if the admins who placed them might also be interested in doing a similar review. The following list might not be complete, but it's the best I could come up with by tracking usages of the American Politics AE template. (Perhaps you can compare it to whatever system you have for tracking your active sanctions.)

• Template:Editnotices/Page/2020 United States presidential election in New Hampshire - Talk:2020 United States presidential election in New Hampshire
• Template:Editnotices/Page/2020 United States Senate elections - Talk:2020 United States Senate elections
• Template:Editnotices/Page/Andy Ngo - Talk:Andy Ngo
• Template:Editnotices/Page/Biden–Ukraine conspiracy theory - Talk:Biden–Ukraine conspiracy theory
• Template:Editnotices/Page/Russian interference in the 2020 United States elections - Talk:Russian interference in the 2020 United States elections

I'm hoping that removing some of these restrictions can help restore some sense of normalcy to the topic area. In any case I hope this list is helpful. ~Awilley (talk) 00:24, 9 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi ST47. Could you take a look at OTRS Ticket#2020021910009843 in the checkuser-en-wp queue? A user asked for renewal of his IPBE on 4/11/2021. You granted it last time around. I have been given an intro to the usual practices for IPBE but surely don't have all the nuances yet. Granting this request looks logical. Since your name is on this request I thought I would ask first before taking any action. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 01:49, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

 Done @EdJohnston: ST47 (talk) 15:56, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2021).

Administrator changes

Enchanter • Carlossuarez46

Interface administrator changes

Ragesoss

Guideline and policy news

• Following an RfC, consensus was found that third party appeals are allowed but discouraged.
• The 2021 Desysop Policy RfC was closed with no consensus. Consensus was found in a previous RfC for a community based desysop procedure, though the procedure proposed in the 2021 RfC did not gain consensus.

Technical news

• The user group oversight will be renamed to suppress. This is for technical reasons. You can comment at T112147 if you have objections.

Arbitration

• The community consultation on the Arbitration Committee discretionary sanctions procedure was closed, and an initial draft based on feedback from the now closed consultation is expected to be released in early June to early July for community review.

---

Hi ST47, your input would be welcome at User talk:192.80.135.150. Thanks and best regards, ~ ToBeFree (talk) 21:06, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi sir! Is it okay to start a new account attach to the same IP address with which previous accounts are blocked? I wanted a new startup. Kindly inform me that should I abandon this account, or wait for decision about my previous blocked accounts. Regards Meluhacentrist (talk) 14:17, 1 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings,

I'm letting you know in advance about a meeting I'd like to invite you to regarding the Universal Code of Conduct and the community's ownership of its future enforcement. I'm still in the process of putting together the details, but I wanted to share the date with you: 27 June, 2021. I do not have a time on this date yet, but I will let you soon. We have created a meta page with basic information. Please take a look at the meta page and sign up your name under the appropriate section.

Thank you for your time.--BAnand (WMF) 15:06, 2 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A user at UTRS appeal #43954 has requested unblocking. Would it be possible to modify as Tamla suggests? Thanks, --Deepfriedokra (talk) 14:45, 6 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Deepfriedokra: The whois refers to kwdatacentre.com, so it would appear to be a datacenter IP range. Is the user claiming to be an employee of the datacenter trying to connect from their work computer? I don't see any reason to believe the range is residential. ST47 (talk) 21:06, 6 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Good afternoon, I had a quick question regarding the sock puppet investigation into me. Apologies if this is a basic question but I'm new here and relatively unfamiliar with the protocol for those investigations.

You responded to the investigation with an image of an X and the phrase "Unrelated." I assume the X means that you have looked into it and I've not been using sock puppets, but what does the "unrelated" mean here? Perpetualgrasp (talk) 12:47, 6 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page watcher)@Perpetualgrasp: It means no technical connection between the users in question. --Deepfriedokra (talk) 14:46, 6 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers for the explaining that. Perpetualgrasp (talk) 15:49, 6 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

While I thought a lot of opposes in this now-closed RfA were reasonable, I have to say that "Oppose per other voters who have noted serious concerns with NPOV and extremist views." is quite mean-spirited. Neither the terms "NPOV" nor "extremist" appear anywhere else in the entire discussion in this context, and one might make the reasonable assumption that if Vami IV did hold such views, they would have received Arbcom discretionary sanctions and have a block log to match, as that's where those sort of people end up. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 18:38, 8 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

user:Ahmet diriand User:Ahmet sami yen.The names and contributions of these two are almost the same and they are creating the same article again.Chief Minister (Talk) 04:42, 9 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2021).

Administrator changes

Ashleyyoursmile • Less Unless

Husond • MattWade • MJCdetroit • Carioca • Vague Rant • Kingboyk • Thunderboltz • Gwen Gale • AniMate • SlimVirgin (deceased)

Guideline and policy news

• Consensus was reached to deprecate Wikipedia:Editor assistance.
• Following a Request for Comment the Book namespace was deprecated.

Technical news

• Wikimedia previously used the IRC network Freenode. However, due to changes over who controlled the network with reports of a forceful takeover by several ex-staff members, the Wikimedia IRC Group Contacts decided to move to the new Libera Chat network. It has been reported that Wikimedia related channels on Freenode have been forcibly taken over if they pointed members to Libera. There is a migration guide and Wikimedia discussions about this.

Arbitration

• After a Clarification request, the Arbitration Committee modified Remedy 5 of the Antisemitism in Poland case. This means sourcing expectations are a discretionary sanction instead of being present on all articles. It also details using the talk page or the Reliable Sources Noticeboard to discuss disputed sources.

---

@ST47: Hello! I am friends with the owner (Mneylon) of a company in Ireland who provides both web hosting AND broadband connections to customers. They are a web hosting provider and an ISP. Unfortunately he and his customers are not able to edit Wikipedia. Looking into it, it seems that network ranges for his ISP business are being blocked from editing with the colocationwebhost template. When I told him this, he indicated that these IP address ranges are for his broadband customers:

78.153.198.0/24 78.153.207.0/24 185.97.236.0/22 194.36.58.0/23 2a01:ac::/32

When I look at the Talk pages for those IP ranges, I can see you were the administrator who added the blocks in either December 2019 or 2020. So I thought I would ask - how can the unblocking of those ranges be requested?

I have read WP:UNBLOCK but that seems to refer to individual user accounts that have been blocked. I have just tried adding the unblock template to one of the Talk pages for the IP address range. Is that what I need to do for the other ones? (He is unable to edit Wikipedia to make the request himself as his IP ranges are blocked.) Thank you for any guidance you can offer - this area of Wikipedia is new to me. - Dyork (talk) 02:06, 11 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Dyork: Okay, those ranges are unblocked. ST47 (talk) 03:42, 11 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

hi,
i am Al-Hussein S.M which was locked 2-3 days ago
you left in my talk page a block message and i didn't do anything then i am locked
you mentioned that my account was sockpuppet (i don't know what is that)
so please if you have a reliable reason to lock me mention it if not please return my account
thanks in advance--197.39.39.214 (talk) 17:22, 12 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello ST47 could you please remove the block on the IP above. It is a closed network for Starbucks patrons in Japan. I primarily edit from their service since my home internet is seriously outdated. Thanks. ❯❯❯ Mccunicano☕️ 00:37, 14 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please check User:PhotographyEdits,user:Wingwatchers The contributor looks like these two are the same people Chief Minister (Talk) 17:38, 14 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

How can I ever be a sock of Photograph? Wingwatchers (talk) 01:41, 15 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Vedbas:, that makes no sense, come and please check it then. Wingwatchers (talk) 01:43, 15 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Vedbas: it's considered quite serious to accuse someone of sockpuppetry here. We expect that if you suspect that two accounts are being used by one person in a way which goes against the sockpuppetry policy, then it is up to you to provide evidence. This is usually in the form of diffs comparing one account's edits with the other account, and explaining why you think that the edits show that the policy is being violated. Accusing someone of sockpuppetry without any evidence can be considered a personal attack. Please explain what you mean. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 01:55, 15 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Ivanvector: I have not made this complaint about the attitude of personal attack. I think I'm wrong to make this complaint. I saw some contributions and thought these two people were the same. I am getting acquainted with something new on Wikipedia slowly. Forgive if it's wrong. And. I'll be more careful later.i very Realy Sorry.Chief Minister (Talk) 02:04, 15 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for Guide Line sockpuppetry policy I will follow this guideline.Chief Minister (Talk) 02:07, 15 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Come to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/LukeAwesome93#Comments by other users. LooneyTraceYT comment • treats 00:40, 18 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Obviously you didn't post this. [1] Mvcg66b3r (talk) 18:49, 18 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The User:Dibol who I see has been blocked on numerous occasions and most recently by you last month for refusal to discuss edits and repeated reversions is carrying out the same activity on Kevin McKidd. I left a query on his talk page and also directed attention to a article talk page discussion but he has reverted numerous times with several other users as well as me and normally doesn't use edit summaries. Can you suggest an action for this?--Riftbase (talk) 10:14, 19 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This address range includes IPv6 tunnels (used to provide IPv6 access from otherwise non-IPv6-capable ISPs) served by "Hurricane Electric". This is not 'web hosting' or 'colocation'; it gives me an IPv6 address - 2001:470:82E9:0:5952:71D2:A217:2ED5 - that never changes. In any case, I don't see how such a block should affect me as a legitimate, logged-in user (i.e., not an anonymous 'IP'). With this block in place, I can only edit Wikipedia if I disable IPv6 on my network (as I'm doing right now, in order to write this message). Please remove this block! PatricKiwi (talk) 07:21, 12 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

What you are describing is a proxy or VPN service, which is subject to being blocked from editing to prevent abuse. ST47 (talk) 21:42, 12 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I have had a tunnel from HE since May 2011. Its address has never changed. HE's addresses are if anything more stable than addresses from normal ISPs. Since Wikipedia users have been using these tunnels for over a decade with no problem, nothing has changed at HE, and nothing has changed at the users, what exactly changed last week to merit a block? See https://tunnelbroker.net/ John L (talk) 15:31, 18 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nonetheless, policies like this (that apply to logged-in users, not just IPs) are going to frustrate lots of legitimate users (like me). (At the very least, I hope this block will no longer apply to me when I eventually become an "extended confirmed user".) PatricKiwi (talk) 23:33, 13 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I must agree with User:PatricKiwi that blocking all of Hurricane Electric is inappropriate. Hurricane Electric provides IPv6 transition network access, which is unlike a VPN or proxy service but more like an ISP allocating address space. In fact, by your definition you could block all ISPs as they do likewise. Hurricane Electric is IPv6 transition tunnelling in many cases is the only way end-users are organisations can obtain IPv6 network access if their own ISP does not provide it natively. My own network allocated by HE is a /48 (and a /64 which in IPv6 terms is the smallest allocatable address spaces).Sejtam (talk) 01:21, 15 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) @Sejtam: I think the best thing to do is to raise this on a more higher-profile noticeboard, such as Village pump - technical. A single administrator is unlikely to be familiar with the IP allocation policies of a random ISP. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 20:21, 16 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I seem to recall this coming up before, and the block log for the /32 range is most telling - including a CU undoing a soft block. Looking at the contribs, since I can't be bothered to delve into the archives right now, the previous discussions probably mostly related to this /33. I think we should at least throw around some IPBE, though looking at the CU log - it's not that bad - I probably wouldn't want to maintain a hard block. -- zzuuzz^(talk) 20:48, 16 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There's also a narrower block on 2001:470:7c::46, which catches a range of HE tunnels. I had to turn off IPv6 entirely on my firewall to be able to edit this. Blocking HE's tunnel brokers is way, way overbroad, since they belong to a user, not an ISP, and if that user (which is assigned an entire /64 to themselves) causes abuse, then that /64 should be blocked. Blocking all of HE's tunnels just discourages IPv6 adoption period. (I have IPv6 through my ISP, but not with a fixed address assignment.) -- Jay Maynard (talk) 00:09, 22 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Plus one on the immediately previous comment on Hurricane Electric. FlunkOut (talk) Sun Jun 27 20:19:41 EDT 2021

Please reconsider the 3-year IPv6 block 2001:470:8000::/33 that you added on June 6, 2021. The parent CIDR 2001:470::/32 is assigned to Hurricane Electric, a global leader and a staunch promoter of advancing the deployment of IPv6 on the internet. An IP block using a /33 prefix is far too aggressive and is a disregard of all the goodwill and resources that HE has freely allocated in bringing IPv6 to the doorstep of thousands of businesses, organisations, and individuals, around the world. The tunnel brokerage services offered by HE is not a colocation, proxy or VPN service. Thank you! — WILDSTAR^talk 20:16, 29 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Can you check whether the User Enronsap is a sock puppet of User Alandyept? 06:25, 2 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Do you really get paid more if you block for three years? Asking for a friend. Drmies (talk) 00:46, 1 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Just keeps it to be that much longer before they show up on User:ST47/rangeblocks_expiring_soon again :P ST47 (talk) 00:52, 1 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

So, just to be clear, not a bigger check. BTW I'm still waiting on mine. They said being an admin was like getting Willie Wonka's golden ticket. Drmies (talk) 00:57, 1 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Imagine if one day you get busy with those blocks, and Ser Amantio di Nicolao does this thing a thousand times in a row, and Fastily gets on one of their deletion rolls--y'all should get together and time that, and take screenshots of Recent changes. Drmies (talk) 01:31, 3 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Drmies:, Fastily, et al: what's this about pay? I got into adminship for the power and the adulation. Mostly the adulation. It's a great icebreaker at a bar, for instance. *waggles eyebrows* --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 01:40, 3 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ha, you go to bars? I'm too busy blocking ranges and running my socks! Drmies (talk) 01:41, 3 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Drmies, once in a while I like to remind myself what real life is like. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 01:43, 3 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please check that IP 150.129.101.67 is sockpuppet of user kambliyil and its sockpuppets User:Omg35 and User:Satya prakasham. It seems so. Thanks

News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2021).

Guideline and policy news

• Consensus has been reached to delete all books in the book namespace. There was rough consensus that the deleted books should still be available on request at WP:REFUND even after the namespace is removed.
• An RfC is open to discuss the next steps following a trial which automatically applied pending changes to TFAs.

Technical news

• IP addresses of unregistered users are to be hidden from everyone. There is a rough draft of how IP addresses may be shown to users who need to see them. This currently details allowing administrators, checkusers, stewards and those with a new usergroup to view the full IP address of unregistered users. Editors with at least 500 edits and an account over a year old will be able to see all but the end of the IP address in the proposal. The ability to see the IP addresses hidden behind the mask would be dependent on agreeing to not share the parts of the IP address they can see with those who do not have access to the same information. Accessing part of or the full IP address of a masked editor would also be logged. Comments on the draft are being welcomed at the talk page.

Arbitration

• The community authorised COVID-19 general sanctions have been superseded by the COVID-19 discretionary sanctions following a motion at a case request. Alerts given and sanctions placed under the community authorised general sanctions are now considered alerts for and sanctions under the new discretionary sanctions.

---

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for Creation at 21:54, 7 July 2021 (UTC). If you do not wish to recieve future notification, please remove your name from the mailing list.[reply]

Hi. You've helped in reverting the consistent over time deletion vandalism on this page. Might you be able to add it to your watch list? Thanks. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Eli_Dershwitz&action=history

--2603:7000:2143:8500:9458:8E90:62D1:98FE (talk) 08:09, 11 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Finally getting back into the swing of things, and I'm reviewing tickets in the checkuser VRT queue. Could you please look at Ticket#2021070910006363, which refers to a block you made? I don't like to monkey around with those kinds of blocks because it's not always obvious the basis on which they've been made. Hope you're doing well! Risker (talk) 04:48, 17 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Risker: It's definitely a datacenter / cloud services provider. If they provide residential service as well, they should do a better job of separating the two. The /24 that the user is complaining about is full of references to "colo" in the reverse DNS, and checking the /19 that is blocked reveals that it has successfully blocked users of multiple VPN services, including Touch VPN and Hide My Ass. I'm not sure why the stewards lifted the global block, it appears to be a good block. ST47 (talk) 05:17, 17 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please contact the Arbitration Committee at arbcom-enwikimedia.org at your earliest convenience. Thank you. Maxim_(talk) 15:05, 5 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I know you communicated directly with Maxim but please contact the the committee directly at arbcom-enwikimedia.org at your earliest convenience. Thank you. Barkeep49 (talk) 12:52, 23 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I don't work for Via Rail, Canada's intercity passenger rail carrier, but I sometimes take a Via train between Toronto and Montreal. On my most recent trip, I couldn't edit Wikipedia from my seat in the train because the proxy that the onboard wifi uses was on your naughty list. Could you please remove the block on 75.98.19.151 and the adjacent IP numbers used for VIA passenger wifi? Eastmain (talk • contribs) 16:29, 25 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

In accordance with the Committee's standing procedure on functionary inactivity, the Oversight permissions of ST47 (talk · contribs) are removed. The Committee extends its appreciation for ST47's service as an Oversighter.

Katie^talk 19:45, 28 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Discuss this at: Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard § changes to Oversight team

News and updates for administrators from the past month (July 2021).

Guideline and policy news

• An RfC is open to add a delay of one week from nomination to deletion for G13 speedy deletions.

Technical news

• Last week all wikis were very slow or not accessible for 30 minutes. This was due to server lag caused by regenerating dynamic lists on the Russian Wikinews after a large bulk import. (T287380)

Arbitration

• Following an amendment request, the committee has clarified that the Talk page exception to the 500/30 rule in remedy 5 of the Palestine-Israel articles 4 case does not apply to requested move discussions.

Miscellaneous

• You can vote for candidates in the 2021 Board of Trustees elections from 4 August to 17 August. Four community elected seats are up for election.

---

Hi, a couple of things have happened in the last 12 hours that have disturbed me. First, I blocked and tagged User:ModsAreOnApowerTrip as a sock. It was obvious from one of his two edits that he was a sock as he edited a page that one of the recent socks had edited, and the creation of the account came after the blocks of all the socks you found. Yet, at the same time, his comments seemed unusually aggressive for this sockmaster, although that may have been temper provoked by the blocks of all those accounts.

Second, I received an e-mail from User:Dairysmog, an account that was created on August 3 and had no edits. I won't repeat what the e-mail said, although if you wish, I can forward it to you. To say it's grossly offensive is an understatement. I blocked the account.

My request is to run a check against both accounts. I think it would be useful to know whether the Mods account is a sock of HaryanaMayil, and I would like to rule out any connection with Dairysmog and that sock farm; also, more likely, if the account is just one of the many obnoxious LTAs, that would be helpful as well.

Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:59, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Bbb23: I'm not sure what ModsAreOnApowerTrip's story is. The account is about 12 months old, and it is persistently on a /64 that has no other users on it. I would have to call them  Unrelated to the rest of the HaryanaMayil socks, and I don't immediately recognize them from the technical data as one of our joe jobbers either. Dairysmog is one of the cross-wiki LTAs, maybe GRP? I'll ask a steward to glock. ST47 (talk) 17:57, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Lord, sorry about my lapse on reading the dates of the Mods account. This is what happens when I have too little sleep. I've removed the tag but left them blocked. Thanks for your help.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:02, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This edit request to User:ST47ProxyBot has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Add to Category:Wikipedia adminbots. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 14:29, 5 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

 Done sure. — xaosflux ^Talk 15:41, 5 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi ST47, it appears I've been using an open proxy Internet unintentionally. Is there a way to stop this by using a recommended browser? On my phone, I use Samsung Internet or Google chrome for editing articles. However, I use Opera Mini as the platform to edit articles on my PC. I haven't activated any special anonymous protection or VPN on any of the Web browsers on both PC and phone. I've also been a wiki member for a year. The exemption on my page will expire in just one year; please is there a way to solve this so I can be an editor until I retire upon my choice? In addition, I can edit on wikipedia only for I've been banned on all other wikimedia projects. This means I can create only English wiki articles but I cannot create a wikimedia entry for any article I create. (Kwesi Yema (talk) 23:09, 6 August 2021 (UTC))[reply]

@Kwesi Yema: Due to the way internet addresses are assigned in your country, there is nothing that you can do. Your ISP always assigns multiple customers to the same IP address, and many users are either allowing compromised devices to be connected, or else intentionally installing software that makes their devices into open proxies. The IP Block Exemption permission allows established good users to edit in spite of the fact that your IP address would normally be blocked. So, there is nothing further to do at this time, and you should be able to edit freely as long as you are signed in. ST47 (talk) 02:31, 7 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Does that mean that after the expiry date elapses a year later, all I have to do is renew again for another year? And also, how do I exempt myself from being blocked on other wikimedia projects besides wikipedia. An example is the wikidata where I can no longer create wikidata information for articles I create on wikipedia. (Kwesi Yema (talk) 02:37, 7 August 2021 (UTC))[reply]

all I have to do is renew again for another year Yes

how do I exempt myself from being blocked on other wikimedia projects besides wikipedia A steward can grant you global IP block exemption, you can ask for it here.

Hope that helps, ST47 (talk) 02:39, 7 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much. I do not know much about grants on wiki so I must ask however that do I need to type in special request codes and fill in my IP address, or can I just type a normal statement asking for help?. Kwesi Yema (talk) 02:43, 7 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Kwesi Yema: Sorry, I messed up the link the first time. I fixed it. On that page, you should see "Instructions for making a request" and an "expand" button. Copy and paste that template, and add it on that page below the other requests that are there. You don't need to tell them your IP address, just state that you are affected by proxy blocks, were already granted IPBE on the English wikipedia, but also need Global IPBE in order to edit wikidata. ST47 (talk) 02:48, 7 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Kwesi Yema: I flagged down a steward on IRC, they have granted global IPBE. You should be good to edit on Wikidata now? ST47 (talk) 02:52, 7 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much. I was in the process of typing the complaint. I'm about to check if the exemption was effective on other wikimedia projects. (Kwesi Yema (talk) 03:01, 7 August 2021 (UTC))[reply]

After checking I realized it worked. Thanks once again for the help. However, does the global exemption also last for a year? And after its expiration will I have to renew it as well just like the wikipedia exemption?Kwesi Yema (talk) 03:07, 7 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Kwesi Yema: The global exemption does not have an expiration in this case, it lasts until it is removed. ST47 (talk) 03:15, 7 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'm curious, does 100.37.165.187 show up on your proxy tool? It's long been used by a particularly annoying LTA, one who typically uses proxies. This particular address, though, has been used by them since 2019 or 2020 and that's unusual. Doesn't show as a proxy on my own scans. --Yamla (talk) 00:47, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Yamla: It does not. Looks like a fairly normal Verizon FiOS connection, I don't have any references to it in any of my proxy-hunting logs. ST47 (talk) 00:50, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker)@Yamla: Looking at the source data, that IP isn't flagged as a proxy. ^{!ɘM γɿɘυϘ}⅃ϘƧ 00:50, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting. Thanks. I'm surprised they've popped up on that IP address again after so long. Heh. --Yamla (talk) 00:52, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I was wondering if you could exempt 45.79.101.112 from this range block? Wiki Education's Dashboard runs on that IP address and uses it to make edits on behalf of logged-in users (e.g., to create user pages, talk pages, and sandboxes for student editors). Thanks. Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 19:17, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• @Ian (Wiki Ed): I've made the block for that IP anon-only with account creation allowed, is everything working now? ST47 (talk) 20:12, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! I can't actually tell if everything is working or not, but hopefully that will do the trick. (I don't have server access, and the way things are set up I will only get alerts about failed edits once every 8 hours. ragesoss is on vacation this week, so I'm trying to bother him only in emergencies.) Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 20:24, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Ian (Wiki Ed): I've run into this before too with my range blocks, as have others. Is there any way to get this marked in WP:SIP? ^{!ɘM γɿɘυϘ}⅃ϘƧ 20:20, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@SQL: that would probably be really helpful. Let me talk to Sage about this when he gets back from vacation - I got a list of 8 IP addresses from him, and I think this is the only one that needs to make edits, but I'm not sure. Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 20:29, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

If I recall correctly, User:2600:3C03:0:0:0:0:0:0/32 will also block. That range should be good.

Last time it was 45.56.98.206 (talk · contribs · WHOIS), per User_talk:SQL/Archive_1#Linode_rangeblock_caught_dashboard.wikiedu.org. ^{!ɘM γɿɘυϘ}⅃ϘƧ 20:36, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@SQL and ST47: thanks! I've proposed adding it to the SIP template: Template_talk:Sensitive_IP_addresses#request:_Wiki_Education_Dashboard.--Sage (Wiki Ed) (talk) 21:49, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I thought there was sufficient behavioral evidence, even with only one edit, to block WooHead. However, post-block a couple of things have given me pause. The user does not deserve to be blocked purely based on the one edit if they are not a sock. Would you consider a check? Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 19:37, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Bbb23: It isn't really conclusive, as it is possible that they are using a proxy, but I would lean  Unrelated. ST47 (talk) 22:16, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I will unblock the user, who has been remarkably pleasant about all this.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:07, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

[2] Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 20:03, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Gråbergs Gråa Sång and BDD: Unfortunate that they were unblocked. I guess arbcom only looked at the fact that the legal threats were withdrawn, and completely ignored the COI issues and block evasion. ST47 (talk) 23:47, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please take a look at this blatant sock-puppetry case that is open for 10 days. You blocked the previous illegal account and I think you are familiar with this editor now. 86.120.179.32 (talk) 07:22, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Please could you check/share the rationale for your bot blocking 103.7.79.167? Their last edit was a good faith one in February 2021. They have been blocked three times in August, each time for 2 days and 23 hours. I'm unclear about the justification. Thank you. --Wavehunter (talk) 08:18, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Wavehunter: This IP address is an exit node for multiple proxy/VPN services. Due to the ability of these services to enable or amplify abuse, they are customarily blocked from editing. In this particular case, it is blocked to anonymous editors only in order to reduce the risk of collateral damage. The block duration is at the blocking administrator's discretion, however, if this IP address continues to be detected as an open proxy, it will be subject to escalating block durations. ST47 (talk) 20:28, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the explanation. --Wavehunter (talk) 09:14, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I was pointed to the above SPI and found more socks, some of whom you CU blocked as socks of Dusrapehelu who in fact seems to be the sockmaster. I'll tag the user pages and of course block the rest. Doug Weller talk 16:20, 21 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Would you mind having a look at User:DavyMonsterPantz? I did, but could not conclude anything definitively, and in terms of behavior there is one significant difference--besides the clear similarities. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 15:35, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Drmies: I'm not sure. It's certainly possible based on location, but I don't have that range or user agent in my notes. I'd call it {{behav}}. ST47 (talk) 20:34, 25 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks--I appreciate it. Did you make that call already, or do you want me to? Drmies (talk) 23:06, 25 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It seems your block of PapaTakaro ticked off the user - as seen here on the Wikipedia subreddit. For reference, I didn't actually see a reason behind the block; without having looked too deeply at their contributions, but seeing only one Cluebot reversion on their Talk page, what was the reason for blocking them? --Ineffablebookkeeper (talk) 20:28, 26 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

They had created a number of sockpuppets, one of which was used for trolling, and two of which were used to make similar edits to the same article. Almost seems like they were trying to break as many points of WP:BADSOCK as they could. ST47 (talk) 21:06, 26 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I have been contacted by User talk:Shahadusadik who reports that he was trying to demonstrate editing during an in-person Wikimania 2021 Editathon event ("We had an in-person Wikimania even so I was trying to show folks how they can add pictures to Wikipedia articles, I only attempted to grab photo of from Kwame Nkrumah's article... because it's a well-structured article." - possibly in relation to m:Dagbani Wikimedians User Group; see also m:User:Shahadusadik) and found his IP address was blocked. He requested an unblock but was unsuccessful.

The block message states that all the IP addresses within this range are proxies, implying a server or corporate proxy block. However, he reports that he is simply using a Vodafone SIM card in a routing device. Indeed, the IP block is registered to Ghana Telecommunications Company Limited, otherwise known as Vodafone Ghana. He was using 102.176.65.186 and is now using 102.176.65.67, which suggests to me the block is being used for NAT64 or similar.

I request that you consider refining this block as it is apparently incorrectly described and preventing legitimate users from editing, including those already registered. GreenReaper (talk) 08:24, 28 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This is a bad closure. Regardless of whether the person who raised the topic was banned, there were genuine behavioural concerns that needed discussion and the discussion also seemed to be going somewhere positive. — Bilorv (talk) 13:46, 28 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Bilorv. That LTA isn't a vandal per se, but getting into spats is what got them banned, it's what they always do within a very short space of time after creating a new account or starting on a new IP, and continuing the discussion at ANI is feeding the troll. I'm discussing the issues with TB on their talk page, but I agree with the close on the basis of WP:DENY and WP:RBI. Girth Summit _(blether) 14:05, 28 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, thanks for continuing the discussion, Girth Summit. As long as that is happening somewhere, I withdraw my objection. — Bilorv (talk) 14:08, 28 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I obviously came to the same conclusion - went to ANI to comment and saw that you'd already closed it. Let me know if you think the block should have been longer - I was assuming there would be no point since their IP will likely change soon. FWIW, I think that most if not all of the contributions on this range in the last three years are them - do you think it's worth a lengthy range block? Girth Summit _(blether) 13:43, 28 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

After a close look, I think there's little to zero collateral on that range, so I've blocked for a year. Girth Summit _(blether) 17:15, 28 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]