This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Do you think the edits on Thomas & Friends (series 1) through Thomas & Friends (series 21) from various IPs over the last week or two could be at least in part an old friend of ours? Might it be worth requesting protection on all those pages for a few days to see what happens? --‖ Ebyabe ^talk - Repel All Boarders ‖ 07:20, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

It could be, I see you've opened an SPI. Sorry for the late reply, I haven't been ignoring you, life's just been hectic recently. Sro23 (talk) 02:38, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Tom_and_Jerry_Spotlight_Collection&oldid=prev&diff=818933796 - there is evidence to edited cartoons, look at the DVDs released, the Amazon reviews - 13jospin (talk) 11:12, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

Please see Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources. No, Amazon reviews are not reliable sources. Sro23 (talk) 14:28, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Chrissymad was:

This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability. Wikipedia requires significant coverage (not just mere mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject—see the guidelines on the notability of organizations and companies, the golden rule and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. Please improve the submission's referencing (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners and Help:Introduction to referencing/1), so that the information is verifiable, and there is clear evidence of why the subject is notable and worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia. If additional reliable sources cannot be found for the subject, then it may not be suitable for Wikipedia at this time.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Black Jaguar-White Tiger Foundation and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Black Jaguar-White Tiger Foundation, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "((db-self))" at the top of the draft text and save.
• If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
• You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

CHRISSYMAD ❯❯❯¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 19:20, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

Hello, Sro23! Having an article declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! CHRISSYMAD ❯❯❯¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 19:20, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

@Chrissymad: Look at the sources!! The foundation surely meets notability guidelines. Been causing lots of controversy and lots of media coverage. Sro23 (talk) 19:26, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

That was totally my bad. I was looking at an old revision when I was looking for a sock. CHRISSYMAD ❯❯❯¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 19:36, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for self-reverting. That's now the third time someone has either deleted or declined my draft without actually reading it. It's been difficult enough for me as an editor with some experience getting the dang thing published, I can't imagine how frustrating this process must be for complete newbies. Sro23 (talk) 20:14, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Black Jaguar-White Tiger Foundation. Thanks! ~ Winged Blades^Godric 08:10, 26 February 2018 (UTC)

@Winged Blades of Godric: Fair warning, you might need admin help with that. The mainspace title has been salted due to repeated recreation. Sro23 (talk) 08:13, 26 February 2018 (UTC)

Hope you don't mind me reverting you here but I thought it was best to keep that in the records. SmartSE (talk) 21:19, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

hello, why did you revert my Angie edit? i made it as a gift for her and she approved it, she said the old version which you reverted the page to hasn't been updated in years and it contains incorrect info. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gzbernini (talk • contribs) 16:19, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

Hi Gzbernini, I reverted your edit because the language you used was promotional in tone ("her popularity grew enormously internationally", "Ängie was much acclaimed for her soft, dreamy vocals, as well for the artsy music video..."). That's not appropriate for an encyclopedia where all content must be written in a neutral point of view. What info was incorrect? And could you explain what you mean when you say your edit was a "gift" and she "approved it?" Sro23 (talk) 17:32, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

Can you confirm that you meant to restore the stupidly long plot summary, here? Because it is stupidly long and choking on detail. DS (talk) 23:49, 12 March 2018 (UTC)

I actually shortened that plot summary. There's a certain IP-hopping vandal that has been messing with these sorts of pages lately. 2600:1010:B045:C9E6:9A67:7F6A:2B49:878D restored a years-old version of the article, there were a few subsequent edits but I decided it was best to revert to the last clean version. Sro23 (talk) 23:54, 12 March 2018 (UTC)

On my talkpagepics page, that is. Bsak was harassing me on WikiCommons, since they won't comment here for fear of blocking, I suppose. I had my talk page on Commons semi-protected for the next few months. I guess he'll have to sit and stew whilst I revert their Thomas & Friends edits here. At least I assume they are his, since they're all from the same general IP range. Anyhoo, cheers and happy editing! :) --‖ Ebyabe ^talk - General Health ‖ 04:27, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

Black Jaguar-White Tiger Foundation, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. If your account is more than four days old and you have made at least 10 edits you can create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

• If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
• If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

DGG ( talk ) 01:05, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

B/c, hello, fringe benefit. Check the posts from March 20, 2018 onward. In general, tho, I think you would make a great admin. Just don't physically abuse your power. Or something. --‖ Ebyabe ^talk - Health and Welfare ‖ 05:30, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

Hi Sro23, I have confirmed and blocked a new account that belongs to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Whaterss, should I start a new entry for the record and mark it closed for the archive, or can I possibly post straight to the archive? I remember the former is the likely procedure, but wanted to double check. Thanks! Alex Shih (talk) 01:08, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

Yeah, usually it's preferred to not edit the archive directly. Sro23 (talk) 01:09, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

Cool, thanks. Does this look okay? Alex Shih (talk) 01:15, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

Looks fine to me. Sro23 (talk) 01:17, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

Erin Entrada Kelly, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. If your account is more than four days old and you have made at least 10 edits you can create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

• If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
• If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Theroadislong (talk) 20:36, 4 April 2018 (UTC)

Hi, Regarding your decision at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Atlantic12, I wanted to ask: is behavioural investigation enough to judge whether a user is connected to technically-proved sockpuppets. Pahlevun (talk) 15:01, 13 April 2018 (UTC)

Of course. Because the technical evidence is now stale, a decision will be made based on behavioral evidence. Sro23 (talk) 03:13, 15 April 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply, I thought that technical evidence is always needed. Regards. Pahlevun (talk) 20:21, 15 April 2018 (UTC)

		Thank you for creating several articles on women and their works over the past few weeks. We have become aware of your contributions thanks to research undertaken by Bobo.03 at the University of Minnesota. We think you might be interested in becoming a member of our WikiProject Women in Red where we are actively trying to reduce Wikipedia's content gender gap. You can join by using the box at the top of the WiR page. But if you would like to receive news of our activities without becoming a member, you can simply add your name to our mailing list. In any case, thank you for actively contributing to the coverage of women (currently, 17.55% of English Wikipedia's biographies). Our priorities for April: April+Further with Art+Feminism Archaeology Military history (contest) Geofocus: Indian subcontinent Continuing: #1day1woman Global Initiative
		To subscribe: Women in Red/English language mailing list or Women in Red/international list. To unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list. Follow us on Twitter: @wikiwomeninred

--Ipigott (talk) 12:28, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

I realized my edits would probably be reverted but figured I'd take a shot airing grievances that keep coming up over and over again with different sockpuppet "users". Not sure where else to go and not convinced the amount of time it would take to find exact diffs and so on (when it's all obvious from the user's minuscule edit history) is worth it when this user (or some related meatpuppet or what have you) will just come back in another form to annoy and hinder me. Anyway, I apologize about not following protocol. This is a long-running frustration. I guess the best we can do is just to keep blocking the new sockpuppets. Wolfdog (talk) 22:49, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

@Wolfdog: I understand the frustration, but if you find it too time consuming to follow the instructions for opening an SPI, I recommend enabling Twinkle. It allows you to report sockpuppets and creates SPI's automatically, and it's easy to use. Sorry for the late reply. Sro23 (talk) 16:54, 9 May 2018 (UTC)

Hi, I'm referring to your edit here - https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3ASockpuppet_investigations%2FTomWatkins1970&type=revision&diff=841314109&oldid=840958970 . I think you are referring to the Bros page, which is temporarily semi-protected, but the The Time (Bros album) page is not currently protected, and another sockpuppet IP of this user has reverted my reverting of their edit (unverified and inflated worldwide sales claim). Could you please re-look at this case.Nqr9 (talk) 12:58, 15 May 2018 (UTC)

@Nqr9: Thanks for notifying me. I have requested protection at WP:RFPP. Sro23 (talk) 14:16, 15 May 2018 (UTC)

I edited an archived report. Should I undo these changes? Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 01:54, 30 May 2018 (UTC)

If you want to. Normally editing archives is discouraged, but it's not that huge of a deal. Sro23 (talk) 02:01, 30 May 2018 (UTC)

Looks like this report didn't make it to the archive page. Just FYI. Good day/night wherever you are! — JFG ^talk 23:24, 6 June 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know, fixed now. Sro23 (talk) 23:26, 6 June 2018 (UTC)

I want to apologise because I felt like I probably came off as unusually abrasive. Anyway, when are you going to run for RfA? You are so distinctively talented with SPI reports, and being able to see deleted contributions/removed logs would only help you to contribute even better. If you would allow me to nominate, I would do it in a heartbeat; although there are many other nominators waiting for you I think. Regards, Alex Shih (talk) 15:14, 8 June 2018 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Ditto —SerialNumber54129 ^{paranoia /cheap sh*t room} 15:23, 8 June 2018 (UTC)

No, no need for apologies! This entire situation is pretty unusual but it certainly didn't help when I misread the SPI. I needed you, Bbb, and the sockpupeteer explain it to me via email before I finally got it through my thick skull. That was embarrassing but I'm glad you understand where the confusion is coming from :). Sro23 (talk) 15:25, 8 June 2018 (UTC)

When you closed the poorly done SPI report I made on Chuckski4 you said if the disruptive editing by IPs continued, to request semi protection. It has, and I am. I figured I'd just ask you rather than go to RPP, as you know the background. There's BLP issues centering on Kendra Lust, who has been the subject of recent threads at both BLPN and COIN. Thanks. John from Idegon (talk) 17:34, 8 June 2018 (UTC)

I can't protect pages so I've made a request there. Sro23 (talk) 17:45, 8 June 2018 (UTC)

I forget you're not an administrator. As Alex said above, you really should be. Thanks for the help. John from Idegon (talk) 17:49, 8 June 2018 (UTC)

Hi, Thanks for your contributions. Please check and read the WP:Rollback rights again. It is only to be used in cases of CLEAR VANDALISM. this revert was clearly not for vandalism. This clearly needed an edit summary for the revert. Please understand that these actions lead to edit wars. Continued misuse of WP:Rollback rights will lead to revoke of the right. --DBigXray 09:31, 9 June 2018 (UTC)

That was a misclick, now corrected; Thanks for your diligence. Sorry for the late reply. Sro23 (talk) 03:35, 10 June 2018 (UTC)

• Thanks, the dummy edit was not required. Your confirmation and understanding is all that counts. --DBigXray 09:07, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
• Just as I predicted above we have an Edit war --DBigXray 09:13, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

Please un-close the SPI. Janagewen is still active, just using a different IP. I've added another report with some of the new IPs (one of them the same as in the original report), a diff, etc.

See also this diff at commons. Same IP block. Jeh (talk) 05:49, 20 June 2018 (UTC)

Sorry, I'm most certainly not the most knowledgeable person when it comes to rangeblocks - it looks like all recent edits on the range are from him, though I still don't know if that would justify a block of the particular range. Sro23 (talk) 07:37, 20 June 2018 (UTC)

It did before... Could the case be left open pending judgment by someone more familiar with rangeblocks? Jeh (talk) 07:47, 20 June 2018 (UTC)

re Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Sagatorium/Archive, the investigation was closed prior to receiving an answer to my question posed in the "admin comments" section. Full circle, I own the original mistake of flipping IP and Username in the original report, which caused the second report to be filed. This second report was "clean," but is now closed. Could you please answer my question posed in the "admin comments" section? UW Dawgs (talk) 00:28, 22 June 2018 (UTC)

@UW Dawgs: I was also confused at the closure of the first report you filed, so I asked Bbb23 (you can read our conversation here). Basically, since the IP was blocked for disruption several months ago, and blocks are supposed to be preventative, blocking the account now wouldn't be justified. So while that might technically be block evasion, blocking the user for sockpuppetry wouldn't be practical. Of course if the account is being disruptive, there are other venues available to report them aside from SPI. At least that's my understanding of what he meant, please feel free to talk to him directly. Sro23 (talk) 18:36, 22 June 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for the explanation and link, makes sense. Will purse via Talk and ultimately alternative venues if necessary. Cheers, UW Dawgs (talk) 04:00, 27 June 2018 (UTC)

Hello Sro23. I didn't see that you had already filed a report a couple weeks ago at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Euexperttime. IMO is editing of the recently unprotected article that is his prime target is the final giveaway. Since the two reports are about the same sock should they be merged? Whatever you think is the best thing to do is fine by me. Best regards. MarnetteD|Talk 16:37, 22 June 2018 (UTC)

Looks like this has been taken care of. Sro23 (talk) 18:36, 22 June 2018 (UTC)

You marked WP:Sockpuppet investigations/Renamed user 49274c4c204245204241434b#16 June 2018 as closed, due to being stale.

Could you explain what that means?

I keep getting administrators passing the buck, telling me, at semi-protection, and elsewhere, that I should not be asking them for help dealing with sockpuppets, but should be looking for help at SPI.

We really need better procedures for protecting productive good faith contributors from harassment from vandals. I would prefer administrators and other quality control volunteers presented an united front against vandals.

I've updated the file, since you marked it as closed.

What should I have done? Geo Swan (talk) 15:42, 27 June 2018 (UTC)

Geo Swan By "stale" I meant the IP addresses were no longer active, therefore making blocking the IP's pointless. The investigation was good when you first filed it, but there's a perpetual backlog at SPI. Cases can sit untouched for weeks, sometimes even months before being acted upon, that's just the unfortunate reality of the situation. The only thing I would have preferred you had done differently was when you added new IP socks to the already closed case - next time, please create a new report instead. Sro23 (talk) 01:37, 28 June 2018 (UTC)

Hello, Sro23. You have new messages at ApprenticeFan's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the ((Talkback)) or ((Tb)) template.

Hi. Is there a tool available for renaming SPI's (such as what you recently did with Fshy89 / BBN Chuck and Ervin111899 / Ervin1118)? Or did you do this all by hand? — Richwales (no relation to Jimbo) 03:39, 29 June 2018 (UTC)

No, not that I'm aware of. I've always had to move them by hand. Sro23 (talk) 17:16, 29 June 2018 (UTC)

Hmmm. OK, thanks. — Richwales (no relation to Jimbo) 02:55, 30 June 2018 (UTC)

Hello again. Does this seem like another Nsmutte? Or anyone else that you are aware of. Cheers and have a pleasant weekend. MarnetteD|Talk 22:58, 29 June 2018 (UTC)

Hmm, probably not a brand new user, but the English is too good to be Nsmutte. Sro23 (talk) 23:04, 29 June 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for taking a look. Much appreciated. MarnetteD|Talk 23:05, 29 June 2018 (UTC)

		The Userpage Shield
		For having my back and reverting the vandalism on my user page. Thank you for watching me! Ira Leviton (talk) 18:20, 1 July 2018 (UTC)

Next GAB? I hope you can. Best wishes in RfA. Hhkohh (talk) 05:24, 3 July 2018 (UTC)

• Seconding this. I really hope you make it. I suspect WP:SPI will be running a lot more smoothly for the rest of this year with you mopping it. :) Mz7 (talk) 08:22, 3 July 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the kind words. Sro23 (talk) 12:13, 3 July 2018 (UTC)

I have to say your handling of the RfA so far has been excellent; you've certainly changed my opinion from "not sure" to "definitely", and I'm not the only one. Without wishing to jinx things, I don't think I've ever seen a self-nom get 100% support after 24 hours, and if this doesn't pass I will go to Moss Bros and buy an expensive top hat just so I can eat it. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 13:18, 4 July 2018 (UTC)

Now I want to change my vote just so we can make Ritchie eat a nice hat. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 12:48, 5 July 2018 (UTC)

Heh  :) I'm very tempted to set you up such a question...just so you can ignore it!!! :D —SerialNumber54129 ^{paranoia /cheap sh*t room} 11:54, 3 July 2018 (UTC)

Please do, it's not a real rfa without one of those. :) Sro23 (talk) 12:13, 3 July 2018 (UTC)

I saw over at your RfA that you're embarked on a personal project that dovetails nicely with my own personal project. I hope you continue your efforts after your RfA and if I can help collaborate please let me know. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 15:57, 3 July 2018 (UTC)

I believe we've run into each other before, you seem to be one of the few regulars at WP:YA. Keep up the good work and thanks. Sro23 (talk) 19:25, 3 July 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for you're um 'new project' on Coretta Scott King Award recipients :) Alanscottwalker (talk) 15:59, 3 July 2018 (UTC)

Challenge accepted. :D Sro23 (talk) 19:25, 3 July 2018 (UTC)

"trying to keep articles free from misinformation"

Thank you for quality articles such as Run Wrake and Max Gilardi, for welcoming new users, and warning others with precise messages, for clerking sockpuppet investigations and offering admin services, for "Please do, it's not a real rfa without one of those. :)" - you are an awesome Wikipedian!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:18, 3 July 2018 (UTC)

Wow, thanks a lot! Sro23 (talk) 23:04, 3 July 2018 (UTC)

Hey man! Just wanted to provide you with a live table of how your RFA is going, and ohhhhhhhh..... that sucks..... looks like it's not going so great (lol). Well, if it makes you feel better, your RFA is still going better than mine did..... ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 06:33, 5 July 2018 (UTC)

Have this fr your diligence Buzzy anslem (talk) 16:22, 5 July 2018 (UTC)

Sorry, I was unaware. The page was set up incorrectly though. @IanDBeacon: and I intended to create a page for Lovemankind83. I think that's what he intended as well. Since Harrchurch was the suspected sockpuppet of the formerly mentioned user. R9tgokunks ⯃ 05:43, 9 July 2018 (UTC)

Lovemankind83 would be the suspected sockpuppet of Harrchurch, since Harrchurch is the older account of the two. Since these accounts ended up being unrelated, was it your intention to create a new SPI with Lovemankind83 as the master for the IPsock? If so, please follow the instructions listed under "How to open an investigation" located at WP:SPI. Sro23 (talk) 14:54, 9 July 2018 (UTC)

	The Admin's Barnstar
	I won't be online in 5 hours (Crats won't be either, dinner before duty apparently :) but congrats in advance on your RfA, thanks for all the work you do, and the best to you with the mop. Thanks, L3X1 ◊distænt write◊ 21:04, 9 July 2018 (UTC)

I too will be sleeping when your RfA closes, so I'll jump the gun and congratulate you. This was as close as Wikipedia gets to Acclamation. Favonian (talk) 21:37, 9 July 2018 (UTC)

Boo hiss, I was hoping to be the first to swing by here and congratulate you early. In a few hours, this is going to become a better place. Home Lander (talk) 22:54, 9 July 2018 (UTC)

I'm in the right time zone to say congrats 'after' the time expired :-) Well done Sro you deserve it. The tools are in good hands!!! Best regards. MarnetteD|Talk 02:05, 10 July 2018 (UTC)

Congratulations on the adminship, Sro23! Very well deserved. -- Dane ^talk 02:45, 10 July 2018 (UTC)

Thanks to you all, this means a lot to me. Sro23 (talk) 03:37, 10 July 2018 (UTC)

Sro23, I came across this SPI filing through a recent RFPP request and noticed that though the SPI case was filed almost two hours back it doesn't appear in the Cases currently listed at SPI table. Can you please check if the case was filed properly, and if you agree with my admin-note, add a checkuser request? Thanks. Abecedare (talk) 01:30, 10 July 2018 (UTC)

(watching)@Abecedare: Just bot down Hhkohh (talk) 01:46, 10 July 2018 (UTC)

Got it. Thanks for the quick check. Abecedare (talk) 01:48, 10 July 2018 (UTC)

(edit conflict) The case was filed correctly. I think the reason it's not showing up at SPI might have something to do with the SPI clerk bot being down currently. As for the SPI, my best guess is some sort of class project. Sro23 (talk) 01:48, 10 July 2018 (UTC)

The bot being down explains it.

I thought of this being a class project with students proof-reading the article but all the suggested edits that I had enough knowledge to check turned out be be introducing factual errors (eg, [1]), being contradictory suggestions ([2] and [3] are inconsistent), or just non-sensical ([4]). So to my eyes this does appear as some inexplicable form of trolling, rather then good faith effort to improve the article.

Anyway, this is best discussed at the article-talk page by regular editors with more knowledge of the subject. And I assume you have other matters on your mind ;-) Abecedare (talk) 02:10, 10 July 2018 (UTC)

Hello Sro23! I am pleased to report that I have closed your request for adminship as successful. You are now an administrator. Good luck with your new tools, and if you have any questions about them, feel free to drop by my talk page and ask. Cheers, 28bytes (talk) 02:47, 10 July 2018 (UTC)

Also, I helped you change [5] Hhkohh (talk) 02:49, 10 July 2018 (UTC)

• Congratulations! Was wondering when this was going to happen. I'm sorry I completely missed your RfA. Ian.thomson (talk) 02:51, 10 July 2018 (UTC)

Congratulations! And good luck. :) - BilCat (talk) 03:02, 10 July 2018 (UTC)

Thanks all! Sro23 (talk) 03:38, 10 July 2018 (UTC)

Congratulations on becoming an administrator; you really deserve it! :-) MBlaze Lightning talk 02:53, 10 July 2018 (UTC)

Since I don't drink, I offer up this toast to you. No longer will you have to hear people say, "Oh, you aren't?" You deserve it, and the numbers show it. John from Idegon (talk) 03:07, 10 July 2018 (UTC)

Congratulations on your new mop David.moreno72 03:10, 10 July 2018 (UTC)

on your RfA. -Ad Orientem (talk) 03:31, 10 July 2018 (UTC)

Are those chocolate? If so, yummmm. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 07:37, 10 July 2018 (UTC)

No. Chocolate really isn't good for you. -Ad Orientem (talk) 15:37, 10 July 2018 (UTC)

Congratulations on the passing of your RfA! Have a shirt As always, I and other admins are always around if you have any questions ;) Are you on IRC? --TheSandDoctor ^Talk 03:35, 10 July 2018 (UTC)

No, I'm not on IRC, but thank you. Sro23 (talk) 03:39, 10 July 2018 (UTC)

Congratulations on your successful RfA! lavender|(formerly HMSSolent)|lambast 03:46, 10 July 2018 (UTC)

I knew you would do it one day. And you’ve broken this year’s record for most supporters. Best of luck! Linguist^unEins^uno (Linguist111) 04:00, 10 July 2018 (UTC)

Thanks so much :) Sro23 (talk) 04:26, 10 July 2018 (UTC)

• Congrats from me too. When you get bored of scrabbling down the back of the sofa for the right block template have a look at the scripts some kind person put in my monobook.js. ϢereSpielChequers 11:38, 10 July 2018 (UTC)

• Congratulations Sro! Long time coming - start slowly, don't feel like you need to Do It All in your first month and ask for help if you're ever unsure! - TNT ^💖 11:54, 10 July 2018 (UTC)

• Good luck. Use the bit well for us all. · · · Peter (Southwood) ^(talk): 13:38, 10 July 2018 (UTC)
• Now I don't have to complain to Bbb23 anymore on why Sro23 is not an admin. As someone also affected by depression and anxiety, I hope the stress doesn't get to you. Good luck! Alex Shih (talk) 15:46, 10 July 2018 (UTC)
• Congratulations on an excellent RFA! clpo13_(talk) 15:50, 10 July 2018 (UTC)
• You're going to do great. Whodaman?!  :) --Ebyabe (talk) 16:28, 10 July 2018 (UTC)
• Seeing the mop topicon finally on your userpage is one of the better things I've seen on this site.💵Money💵emoji💵^💸 16:52, 10 July 2018 (UTC)
• Congratulations for adminship !! CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 17:42, 10 July 2018 (UTC)

Thank you everyone for the kind words, much appreciated :) Sro23 (talk) 21:34, 10 July 2018 (UTC)

• Congrats man, you're going to do great! PCHS-NJROTC ^{(Messages)Have a blessed day.} 19:40, 11 July 2018 (UTC)
• Congratulations and welcome to the club... ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 02:56, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

Thank you! I was honestly surprised by the number of names I didn't recognize in the support section. Sro23 (talk) 04:25, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

• My condolences on receiving the mop! Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) 05:10, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
• Congratulations! I'll do my very best to make sure you keep a close watch on me! Cheers Jim1138 (talk) 05:56, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
• Well crap ... better late than never! :), Anyway congratulations Sro23! :). –Davey2010^Talk 00:49, 17 July 2018 (UTC)

So glad to see you gain the bit. Cheers! Binksternet (talk) 04:09, 10 July 2018 (UTC)

Welcome to the administrator's crowd. You have done very well. Congratulations! Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 07:36, 10 July 2018 (UTC)

Yunshui ^雲_水 has given you a WikiCake! WikiCakes promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cake, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Bon appetit!

Spread the tastiness of cakes by adding ((subst:GiveCake)) to their talk page with a friendly message.

	The Admin's Barnstar
	For your being a new admin! Your RfA has been very successful! SemiHypercube ✎ 10:07, 10 July 2018 (UTC)

Congrats on passing RfA. You will make an excellent admin. — MRD2014 Talk 23:03, 10 July 2018 (UTC)

Felicitations and congratulations on your successful RfA! Here's to being a great or awesome trouble-cleaner-upper! You know, a goat! (Yeah, that one was a stretch, I admit.)

—Javert2113 (Siarad.|¤) 00:28, 11 July 2018 (UTC)

...that I am not a part of. But congratulations, nonetheless! Amaury (talk | contribs) 01:44, 11 July 2018 (UTC)

This seems as good a place as any to add my congratulations and best wishes. Donner60 (talk) 04:14, 11 July 2018 (UTC)

Cheers! —PaleoNeonate – 08:40, 11 July 2018 (UTC)

Quite the margin, I'll say. Glad to see it! GAB^gab 01:49, 7 August 2018 (UTC)

I see from your recent RfA (congratulations!) that you are interested in sockpuppetry. I wondered if you would be interested in investigating the apparently new editor Kiwoy whose first definitive edit was to place a copy of an article Nicholas Beames in his sandbox, an article which had been deleted in 2014 as the creation of a banned or blocked user. Where did he get it from, I wonder? Perhaps I am being overly suspicious. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 09:16, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) There are websites that keep deleted versions of Wikipedia articles. He/she probably got it from one of them, or has a copy of the article offline somewhere. - BilCat (talk) 07:33, 13 July 2018 (UTC)

Cwmhiraeth The deleted article and the one in the user's sandbox are substantially different, with the deleted one being a bit more professional and clean. These may both be paid editors but I doubt this is the same person. Sro23 (talk) 09:08, 13 July 2018 (UTC)

any idea what that was about just now? John from Idegon (talk) 02:09, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

Nope, your guess is as good as mine. Sro23 (talk) 02:11, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

You got it faster than I could read it, but my email notification was enough to know the jist....just not the cause. My "fan club" isn't as extensive as yours. John from Idegon (talk) 02:29, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

It's a constant irritant. I can probably do a very workable range block once the new blocking features are implemented. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 04:36, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

Guess I've made the bigs....I gots haters. John from Idegon (talk) 04:55, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

Hi is it possible for you to delete the IP's edit summary? Aiken D 21:40, 22 July 2018 (UTC)

Hello, Sro23. 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.

PCHS-NJROTC ^{(Messages)Have a blessed day.} 02:33, 24 July 2018 (UTC)

This user was blocked

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Tobywilliams

Now came back with new account

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/TimPreston

Same behavioural evidence so please check. Both received edit warring warnings — Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.134.9.158 (talk) 08:11, 26 July 2018 (UTC)

•  Blocked and tagged. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 09:38, 26 July 2018 (UTC)

I saw your talk page being protected on my watchlist, and looking through the edits noticed you had become admin. Congratulations! I missed out on so much on wikiepdia lately, but had I known sooner, you would have had my support no questions asked. Again, congrats and hope you enjoy your time (: Callmemirela 🍁 ^talk 18:34, 26 July 2018 (UTC)

Thanks! Sro23 (talk) 02:42, 27 July 2018 (UTC)

I've been out cruising the Bras d'Or Lakes of Cape Breton, NS Canada for a couple of months and managed to miss your RfA. Congratulations on being handed the mop. Well done!   Aloha27  talk  11:20, 31 July 2018 (UTC)

• Hey congrats from me too. Sorry I missed the party. Drmies (talk) 21:44, 2 August 2018 (UTC)

I missed your RfA, but you would have had my wholehearted support if I'd seen it. Congratulations indeed. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 01:38, 5 August 2018 (UTC)

Me too. Belated congrats. Toddst1 (talk) 04:55, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

Sro23, I've got just a technical question regarding a SPI I've opened. When I look at the SPI list I see HughD as second from top and it shows you having checked the CU request on 7/31. However, the open report was filed Aug 2nd. I did put in a SPI on July 30th (the master left a lot of socks around) but I'm not sure if this indicates or just confuses the actions related to my more recent request. Am I just reading things incorrectly? Thanks! Springee (talk) 16:00, 3 August 2018 (UTC)

Forgive me, but I can't follow what you're saying. I can say that the two reports, one closed and one with CU requested, look normal.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:56, 3 August 2018 (UTC)

So, I was just confused because when I looked at the PSI request it showed a last checked date of July 31 but I posted the most recent request Aug 2nd. However, I think it's addressed now since the check is in process. I was just concerned that somehow the back to back checks might have confused the system. Thanks! Springee (talk) 17:03, 3 August 2018 (UTC)

My name is (was) listed as the last clerk to edit the case at WP:SPI because I closed the 30 July case. I think that's where the confusion is coming from. Sro23 (talk) 17:10, 3 August 2018 (UTC)

Hello, Sro23. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 21:52, 8 August 2018 (UTC). 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.

—Compassionate727 ^(T·C) 21:52, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

This may be the return of an old friend. --Ebyabe (talk) 01:27, 12 August 2018 (UTC)

Blocked. Sro23 (talk) 01:35, 12 August 2018 (UTC)

I put in a request for page protection due to this. --Ebyabe (talk) 02:00, 12 August 2018 (UTC)

I see that you have filed a number of cases at SPI to identify AndresHerutJaim sockpuppets, so I assume you have some familiarity with this individual's characteristics.

There is currently a report at AE (here). The reported user resembles an AndresHerutJaim sock in my view. The account was created after the blocking of the account you reported (an account that also employed the Hebrew alphabet), and there haven't been any reports since then.

Anyone willing to spare their time could compile abundant evidence of commonalities between the reported user and the numerous AndresHerutJaim socks in terms of edit summaries and articles/areas of interest. There are even improbable commonalities between the last blocked sock (despite it having made very few edits) and the account reported at AE in terms of articles of interest and edit summaries ([6]). Perhaps you could have a look at this to see whether it merits action so that users and admins don't need to waste their time dealing this user. Sean.hoyland - talk 09:13, 18 August 2018 (UTC)

@Sean.hoyland: Sorry for the late reply. I agree with your analysis and have indeffed the puppet. Sro23 (talk) 12:25, 27 August 2018 (UTC)

Resolved

Hi Sro23: A week has passed since I opened a move discussion for James Addison Baker the elder to retitle as James A. Baker (born 1821). All of the editors who are familiar with this are involved either with this article or a related move discussion WP:RMCLOSE. Would you be able to help me out at Talk:James_Addison_Baker_the_elder#Requested_move_17_August_2018, or refer me to someone else who is familiar with moving articles? Thank you, Oldsanfelipe (talk) 14:33, 24 August 2018 (UTC)

Please refer me to the sockpuppet investigation which led you to block User:יניב הורון. I found him mentioned in two investigations (1, 2) in which he was ruled to be unrelated, but did not find where he was decided to be a sockpuppet. Debresser (talk) 18:01, 27 August 2018 (UTC)

Debresser I blocked the user as a sock based on behavioral evidence made aware to me as seen two sections above. Opening a sockpuppet investigation isn't required. Sro23 (talk) 02:48, 28 August 2018 (UTC)

Based on a Hebrew user name? Overlap on 3 articles? (which is the evidence presented by Sean Hoyland, whose post here was their sole edit since March 2017!). The 3 overlapped articles are 2 fellows in Category:Counter-jihad activists and the Rothschild family - all topics that an editor interesting Zionist and Jewish topics would reasonably be interested in.Icewhiz (talk) 03:05, 28 August 2018 (UTC)

3? More like over a hundred pages. Sro23 (talk) 03:10, 28 August 2018 (UTC)

There being no SPI page, I was looking at the link Sean Hoyland provided - to נעם חדד - which had 3. I've been following Yaniv's edits (on article we intersect on, and I looked a bit more after various AE reports - the I/P arena being such that users often end up at AE) - he's edited some 1,725 pages and much of what he's does is reverting vandalism (he has his false-positives as well (good edits by established editors) - which has landed him in AE - but much of what he is reverting is really poor stuff). It seems to me that he has opened up a very wide watchlist (and some such lists are pre-available) - possibly by category - and that he's monitoring edits for vandalism and POV. Looking at the intersection with DarkKing Rayleigh - it seems to be mainly to be just general Jewish/Zionist articles with a bent to items in the News (e.g. Corbyn or Kushner).Icewhiz (talk) 03:59, 28 August 2018 (UTC)

Yes, that's precisely what the AndresHerutJaim sockfarm would do. The majority of the edits were reverts. The difference this time is he seems to be sticking to just one account instead of dozens at a time. Sro23 (talk) 04:09, 28 August 2018 (UTC)

But if all this is based on is reverting (and much of what he is reverting is questionable - I don't agree with all of Yaniv's edits, he's had bad ones (and starting out he had 1RR and 500/30 issues - but he's learned and improved (e.g. he's no longer getting into trouble for 1RR), and the rules in ARBPIA really are arcane), but much of it is positive) on Jewish/Zionist topics - that's a very wide behavioral net that would catch people of a certain background that revert alot.Icewhiz (talk) 04:15, 28 August 2018 (UTC)

I am not impressed by the evidence, or the procedure. Perhaps a more formal inquiry should be started. After all, an indef block is a serious thing, and this editor has already done a fair amount of work on this project to have earned a serious investigation into these allegations. Debresser (talk) 23:17, 28 August 2018 (UTC)

Sorry, I just now noticed that this block was undone. IMHO rightfully so. I am not an expert in the field, but this block seemed a bit hasty. Debresser (talk) 23:29, 28 August 2018 (UTC)

@Debresser: No, you're not an expert and many of the things you've said have been way offbase. There is absolutely no reason for an SPI clerk administrator to file a report at SPI before indefinitely blocking a sock. Indeed, any administrator can do that. If a report had been filed, Sro23 could still have done the same "serious investigation" they did outside of the SPI. That's a clerk's job. In this instance, the technical evidence did not support Sro23's conclusion, so the editor was unblocked. However, all of us can be "wrong" on occasion, and Sro23's behavioral analyses are absolutely right maybe 95% of the time, if not more. I think you should really drop the stick.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:04, 29 August 2018 (UTC)

I had already drop it, if you hadn't noticed. But since you commented, my reply to your comment is that all I said is that this specific block was made a bit too hasty, IMHO, and I don't think that saying so is being harsh, because as you rightfully said, we all make mistakes. The rest, I knew, I have been around some 10 years, you know. Debresser (talk) 17:36, 29 August 2018 (UTC)

No, that's not all you said, and I never said you were inexperienced, which makes your comments that much more unacceptable. I'm not going to continue because I doubt Sro23 appreciates this; you're welcome to have the last word if you like.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:04, 29 August 2018 (UTC)

I'm going through LTA and reviewing to see if some of the users are still active; You seemed to have thought he was back in 2016, but also didn't seem 100% sure. Is he still active, or should the case be archived?💵Money💵emoji💵^💸 18:34, 27 August 2018 (UTC)

Over time I've come to realize that the majority of these LTA pages are unhelpful and counterproductive to the spirit of WP:DENY. Sure, please archive the page, or even better, see if you can get it deleted. Sro23 (talk) 02:48, 28 August 2018 (UTC)

	The Admin's Barnstar
	For expertly using your tools to improve the encyclopedia, particularly at WP:SPI and WP:RPP. You were handed a mop a little over a month ago, and you immediately became the administrator we all hoped you would be. Thank you. MelanieN (talk) 17:06, 29 August 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the barnstar! Sro23 (talk) 17:26, 29 August 2018 (UTC)

For taking care of the obvious sock

EvergreenFir (talk) 04:41, 30 August 2018 (UTC)

		The Original Barnstar
		Thanks for helping me out! Beasting123 (talk) 23:22, 30 August 2018 (UTC)

First of all, thank you for blocking the Marquis de la Eirron's recent sockpuppets, FinalXFantasy and IP address 194.176.105.138. The socks were disrupting several articles.

However, since you blocked those two socks on August 27 and archived the discussion, the "Marquis" started using a new IP address, 82.29.185.75, and this new sock has continued where his two prior socks left off in List of African-American United States Representatives, making exactly the same types of changes (down to reposting photographs and mistakenly labeling each of them as "Sen. Bouligny": https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_African-American_United_States_Representatives&action=history. The new sock also has made multiple edits to old favorite "List of American federal politicians convicted of crimes," and had edited photographs and made other changes to pages for at least a half dozen politicians, all since August 30 (three days after his two prior socks were banned): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/82.29.185.75. And, in order to remove all doubt that it is the same person, the user of the new IP address is continuing the Marquis Sock tradition of delting comments from talk pages regarding his rules violations and responding aggressively when called on it.

It seems to me that keeping that sockpuppet investigation page live would facilitate sharing information on this most unrepentant repeat violator of the prohibition on sockpuppetry. I leave it to your discretion, since you know best how to deal with sockpuppets, but please note that tactics that are sufficient to countertact typical abusers of the sockpuppet prohibition do not appear to work with this particular serial violator. AuH2ORepublican (talk) 23:16, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

IP blocked for one week. Feel free to file a new SPI next time, you don't need to ask for my permission first. Sro23 (talk) 00:51, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

Thank you. AuH2ORepublican (talk) 02:08, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

FYI, I had to file another SPI for two IP addresses that I strongly suspect are Marquis de la Eirron sock puppets (and which he didn't even bother denying in his response): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Marquis_de_la_Eirron. The guy is relentless. AuH2ORepublican (talk) 15:28, 22 October 2018 (UTC)