New Pages Patrol newsletter June 2023[edit]

Hello Girth Summit,

New Page Review queue April to June 2023


Redirect drive: In response to an unusually high redirect backlog, we held a redirect backlog drive in May. The drive completed with 23851 reviews done in total, bringing the redirect backlog to 0 (momentarily). Congratulations to Hey man im josh who led with a staggering 4316 points, followed by Meena and Greyzxq with 2868 and 2546 points respectively. See this page for more details. The redirect queue is steadily rising again and is steadily approaching 4,000. Please continue to help out, even if it's only for a few or even one review a day.

Redirect autopatrol: All administrators without autopatrol have now been added to the redirect autopatrol list. If you see any users who consistently create significant amounts of good quality redirects, consider requesting redirect autopatrol for them here.

WMF work on PageTriage: The WMF Moderator Tools team, consisting of Sam, Jason and Susana, and also some patches from Jon, has been hard at work updating PageTriage. They are focusing their efforts on modernising the extension's code rather than on bug fixes or new features, though some user-facing work will be prioritised. This will help make sure that this extension is not deprecated, and is easier to work on in the future. In the next month or so, we will have an opt-in beta test where new page patrollers can help test the rewrite of Special:NewPagesFeed, to help find bugs. We will post more details at WT:NPPR when we are ready for beta testers.

Articles for Creation (AFC): All new page reviewers are now automatically approved for Articles for Creation draft reviewing (you do not need to apply at WT:AFCP like was required previously). To install the AFC helper script, visit Special:Preferences, visit the Gadgets tab, tick "Yet Another AFC Helper Script", then click "Save". To find drafts to review, visit Special:NewPagesFeed, and at the top left, tick "Articles for Creation". To review a draft, visit a submitted draft, click on the "More" menu, then click "Review (AFCH)". You can also comment on and submit drafts that are unsubmitted using the script.

You can review the AFC workflow at WP:AFCR. It is up to you if you also want to mark your AFC accepts as NPP reviewed (this is allowed but optional, depends if you would like a second set of eyes on your accept). Don't forget that draftspace is optional, so moves of drafts to mainspace (even if they are not ready) should not be reverted, except possibly if there is conflict of interest.

Pro tip: Did you know that visual artists such as painters have their own SNG? The most common part of this "creative professionals" criteria that applies to artists is WP:ARTIST 4b (solo exhibition, not group exhibition, at a major museum) or 4d (being represented within the permanent collections of two museums).


Happy Holidays[edit]

Peace is a state of balance and understanding in yourself and between others, where respect is gained by the acceptance of differences, tolerance persists, conflicts are resolved through dialog, people's rights are respected and their voices are heard, and everyone is at their highest point of serenity without social tension. Happy Holidays to you and yours. ―Buster7 

NPOV RFK Jr[edit]

Hello, I am talking to you because of a discussion in the RFK Jr wiki talk page about neutral point of view. I have also said this on Largoplazo and Ian.Thompson’s talk page. I noticed you on Ian.Thompson’s and thought you would know more about it. Since I am not an expert I have decided to go out and contact the experts so they can make their decisions on it. Thank you. Logawinner (talk) 02:06, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ian.thompson hasn't been around for years, unfortunately, so I don't think he'll be able to help. I have not particular knowledge of or interest in RFK Jr, and have no desire to enter into a discussion about our article about him. Rather than dropping notes on individual exitors' talk pages, you should go consider going to a noticeboard to make more uninvolved people aware of your concerns. WP:BLPN is where potential breaches of the biographies of living people policy, and WP:NPOVN is where to go to discuss articles that are not written from a neutral perspective. Girth Summit (blether) 07:10, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. Logawinner (talk) 20:11, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Potentially sockpuppet but no strong evidence[edit]

I'm uncertain about an editor who I suspect might be a sock puppet of Giubbotto non ortodosso. I've noticed that this editor appears to focus heavily on Chris Brown-related articles, much like Giubbotto non ortodosso did. In particular, they frequently edit the article on "Back to Love." Although it's just a gut feeling and I could be mistaken, I wanted to get your thoughts on this. Btspurplegalaxy 💬 🖊️ 11:06, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I take it that was who you were talking about? Found a sleeper too. Girth Summit (blether) 11:18, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That's correct. Btspurplegalaxy 💬 🖊️ 11:28, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I regret to bring this up again, but it appears that the editor:[1] is almost certainly Giubbotto non ortodosso. After the other account was blocked, they immediately began editing the article Hmmm. Btspurplegalaxy 💬 🖊️ 12:23, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yep. Girth Summit (blether) 12:31, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I apologize if this is exhausting for you. They certainly do come back quickly. Btspurplegalaxy 💬 🖊️ 12:34, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It's no big deal. I just peeked at their block log, since I wasn't sure why they were blocked in the first place - it was just a case of a temporary block for edit warring, and then block evasion. If they'd just waited out or appealed that block, they might still be editing legitimately. People make strange choices. Girth Summit (blether) 12:39, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I discovered Giubbotto non ortodosso because the sock puppet Justinaintime mentioned that DollysOnMyMind was another alias for Giubbotto non ortodosso. This prompted me to investigate further, and I found that Giubbotto non ortodosso consistently identified MariaJaydHicky in various articles. My curiosity about Giubbotto non ortodosso grew, and my suspicions were ultimately confirmed. Btspurplegalaxy 💬 🖊️ 12:51, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That's right, I'm doing the dirty job instead of you (who were caught helping them get their vandalisms into protected pages). You're welcome. I'm blocked because I'm catching people that are actually vandalizing the encyclopedia, while I'm also adding legitimate content. I find this more strange than "not appealing the block" to people who don't even care to actually look (instead of just quick-peek) at the contributions, but rather spend time bragging about being mentioned in small Nigerian articles nobody reads. I just want to ask you one question - in what way your today's contributions improved Wikipedia? What kind of harm did you just prevent? (talk) 13:09, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"You better catch that block-evading user that is doing his edits the right way, or he's going to warn us about another block-evading user that's actually vandalizing Wikipedia!! This absolutely must not happen!!" (talk) 13:13, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If you look a bit deeper than my userboxes, you'll see various ways I've improved the encyclopedia - I've written quite a few featured and good articles. Recently, admittedly, I've spent more of my time enforcing blocks than writing content, but I expect I'll bash out another couple of GAs this summer, and have been thinking about improving Second English Civil War and taking it to FAC.
Now, why do I enforce blocks? Because without them, this place would simply not work. There would be constant edit warring, constant abuse hurled back and forth, copyright violations galore, and an infinite number of crap articles about school football teams, web comics and people's mates' bands. If administrators block someone, other administrators need to be willing to enforce those blocks - which is what I do.
If you are willing to abide by your block and wait it out for six months, email arbcom and apply for an unblock under the WP:SO. Don't come complaining to me because I'm not willing to turn a blind eye to it. Girth Summit (blether) 13:18, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

GS, I'm pretty sure that User:Clapham Crew (CC) is another instance of MariaJaydHicky. Can you check/confirm? I think you know them better than me. Thanks! Drmies (talk) 16:45, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yep. Girth Summit (blether) 17:51, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. How sad. Drmies (talk) 19:18, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yep. Girth Summit (blether) 19:52, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Block evasion[edit]

Hello. After you blocked a sockpuppet Miagarciacs, an IP editor, 2A02:1406:57:D889:406F:55D7:5514:3C58 (talk · contribs · WHOIS), returned to the article to make the same edits.



Another IP address this person used, (talk · contribs · WHOIS), is currently blocked for 3 months. NICHOLAS NEEDLEHAM (talk) 10:30, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've blocked the /64 and protected the page for a bit - ought to slow them down somewhat. Girth Summit (blether) 13:03, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

DantheWikipedian socks[edit]

... are so obvious that I'm loathe to actually present evidence at SPI because I don't want to give them the opportunity to get any better at socking. Would it be alright if I just dropped a quick note on your talk page whenever I see said socks in action? Callitropsis🌲[talk · contribs] 00:28, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'd prefer the case be raised at SPI - in terms of actually investigating, it's much easier for a CU or clerk to have recent cases available in the archive to compare against. Don't feel the need to go into enormous detail (and, as you say, train them in how not to be spotted) - you can be a bit vague, something like 'Same pattern of behaviour as X, Y and Z', or 'same as report in the archive from October 2023 or whatever. Cheers Girth Summit (blether) 06:02, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Will do, thanks. Callitropsis🌲[talk · contribs] 13:57, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Manually reported sock[edit]

I was told to do it a way so it wouldn't be complicated, so I did it manually under the Sockpuppet investigations/MariaJaydHicky page, how would I go about reporting it on TW just in case for next time? Btspurplegalaxy 💬 🖊️ 06:07, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If you use Twinkle, you should see 'ARV' as an option in the Twinkle drop down when you are on an account's userpage, talk page or contribs page. Amongst the options it gives you is Sockpuppet (SPI), or Sockpuppeteer (SPI). Choose the appropriate one, fill in the form, and Twinkle will to the rest. Girth Summit (blether) 07:26, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I used Twinkle for the previous report of Justinaintime sock, I selected the Sockpuppet (SPI). So when I fill out the user for it, would I put the OG sock username? Btspurplegalaxy 💬 🖊️ 07:36, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There are two ways you can do it. If you go to the sock's userpage/contribs, choose the 'Sockpuppet' option, and enter the Sockmaster's username into the form. Alternatively, go to the sockmaster's userpage/contribs, and choose 'sockpuppeteer', and then you need to enter the the usernames of the account/s you suspect of being socks. I normally do it the latter way, but it really doesn't matter which you choose. Make sure you type the names correctly though, there isn't any room for error - I usually copy/paste to be on the safe side. Girth Summit (blether) 08:29, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I see. Thanks for telling me. Btspurplegalaxy 💬 🖊️ 08:51, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Hello! It seems there’s a copy of the same nonsense article on a different language Wikipedia page:

also, the sock came back, it seems this nonsense isn’t going to go away anytime soon. Warrenᚋᚐᚊᚔ 17:23, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing I can do about other language Wikis. Are you saying the sock is back on enwiki somewhere? Girth Summit (blether) 17:43, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
He is, but I tagged it on the sock investigation page at it seems he's already been blocked again, but I imagine it's not over yet. Warrenᚋᚐᚊᚔ 18:24, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

LTA Orchomen[edit]

Thanks for the CU block of Mizzion earlier. Unsurprisingly for this sock, they are having a strop and have been trolling my edits, reverting with a range of their usual IPs:

It is clearly Orchomen, and perhaps trickier to block the IPs as they seem to have various dynamic ranges to choose from. I'll just play wackamole for now, but it's a heads up in case there's anything you can do. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 19:06, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm on mobile at the moment - please can you stick this in an AIV report? I haven't looked at your diffs, so no official comment on the IPs, but I probably shouldn't be the one to do any IP blocks given that I've publicly made comments about the accounts. Girth Summit (blether) 20:56, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A funny thing happened on the way to the RfA[edit]

I noticed that Novem Linguae, one of our new RfA clerks, properly struck Svampesky's vote because S wasn't an EC editor. Their account was created on May 4 (satisfying the 30 days requirement) but were a bit shy of 500 edits. Then in a conversation on the article Talk page about a related issue, Svampesky commented, at which point I took the opportunity to inform them that they are now EC, so they could reinstate their vote.

Meanwhile, I was suspicious of such a new account voting at RfA, and I reviewed their edits, which seem to involve a rather obscure agenda of de-orphaning articles. They added themself to the orphanage project on their 3rd live edit (their first was to create a Talk page). Other edits are unusual: (1) fairly early on they nominated an article for deletion (and it was deleted); (2) by May 13, they were Welcoming users; (3) warning users of COIs; (4) adding entries to Wikipedia:Notable people who have edited Wikipedia with an edit summary in which they cite WP:SELFOUT (personally, I was unaware of article and unaware of the selfout link); and (5) that's enough for now.

They were renamed from User:BlueSharkLagoon, and it's quite interesting to look at early iterations of their userpage where they discuss other accounts and their shared IP addresses (VPNs).

IMO, there is enough oddness here to warrant a check. What do you think?--Bbb23 (talk) 15:25, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds odd, but I'd want to take a look through their contribs to be confident that a check was warranted. Anything suspicious that you noticed - are there any other recently blocked orphanage project (I didn't know that was a thing) members? Or overlap with any blocked accounts on the articles they're editing? I'd be hesitant to run a check if I don't have someone to compare against, and I can't put my finger on what it is I think they're up to. Girth Summit (blether) 12:46, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If I had another account to check against, I would have said so. I just took another look at the user's contributions, and the oddness, for me, sticks out even more, but I don't think further analysis of why would change your mind, so I'll let it go. Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:09, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not saying no, I'm just saying I'll need to do a review myself to satisfy myself that there's cause (and inviting any pointers as to which rocks to look under). Will try to get a chance shortly. Girth Summit (blether) 14:24, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know how helpful it will be, but all I can do is highlight more areas of editing that are unusual for a new editor:

--Bbb23 (talk) 14:46, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Help in this case[edit]

Have a look at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/BantikumarWiki case. Thank you. Agent 007 (talk) 19:39, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You’ve Got Mail[edit]

Hello, Girth Summit. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the ((You've got mail)) or ((ygm)) template.

Pahunkat (talk) 10:45, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Yorkshire Newsletter - July 2024[edit]

Delivered July 2024 by MediaWiki message delivery.
If you do not wish to receive the newsletter, please add an N to the column against your username on the Project Mainpage.

19:32, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – July 2024[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2024).

Administrator changes


Technical news


Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:58, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]