User talk:ScottishFinnishRadish/Archive 37

Archive 30

←

Archive 35

Archive 36

Archive 37

Repeat sock

Two weeks ago you blocked 2.96.227.72 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) for block evasion. As soon as your two week block expired he was back editing. Any chance of you taking a look? (Also at WP:AIV) 10mmsocket (talk) 13:13, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

Blocked for a month. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 13:16, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

Thanks. 10mmsocket (talk) 13:41, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

Response to your question

Hello ScottishFinnishRadish! I just wanted to let you know I responded to your question regarding my topic ban appeal. I am not sure if I responded in the right place so I wanted to leave a message here just to let you know. Thank you! Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 16:35, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

I saw it, and I'm waiting for other admins to weigh in. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 20:25, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

An apology and a request

Dear ScottishFinnishRadish, I apologize for breaking the rules of Wikipedia, that wasn't my intention. I hope I am not breaking any rule by writing to you here. I deliberately didn't want to edit the article itself but rather make a contribution to the talk page. However, I probably shouldn't have edited the section headline as I did in my attempt to clarify the topic. I also apologize for that. As you can see from my detailed comment (now deleted), there is clear evidence that part of the article is incorrect. It is the same problem mentioned by user Ketil. I only noticed the article today, but I followed the events very closely as they happened in November and saved the links for the posts on X/Twitter with the relevant pictures and video. As you can see from the evidence, it is quite clear that the story of an ambulance struck by a missile in front of Al-Shifa hospital is based on a misunderstanding, or most likely a mix-up between two ambulances, one clearly hit by a missile, another clearly not. Since the aim of Wikipedia it to get as close to the truth as possible, don't you think my documentation is worth including in the article's talk page? If I am going about this in the wrong way, can you please point me in the right direction? HarderD (talk) 19:16, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

Due to the extended-confirmed restriction placed on the topic you can only make WP:Edit requests. You'll need to provide reliable sources, rather than tweets, to support the change you'd like to make. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 20:24, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply. As Ketil mentioned in the talk page, all the international media (i.e. reliable sources) showed pictures of the not very damaged ambulance and incredibly concluded that it was hit by a missile. And, as you can see in the Wiki article, the only "evidence" is that IDF said that it had hit "an" ambulance, most likely the one on the coastal road. But OK, I accept that we're stuck with the official media version of the story, even though there is no evidence. In November I contacted both CNN and Times of Israel to see if they were interested in looking into the story, but never received an answer. And I understand that the work of the Twitter OSINTs can be seen as original research and therefore can't be used on Wikipedia. I suppose Ketil is right (again) on the talk page when he writes that getting to the truth is probably a lost cause at this point ;) All the best and thank you for your time! HarderD (talk) 20:36, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

We can't use WP:Original research, such as interpreting photos. If it hasn't been discussed in reliable secondary sources our hands are tied. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 20:53, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

Thanks again. I understand. You might, however, consider leaving my comment (reply to Ketil) on the talk page. Then maybe someone will look into it one day if/when such secondary sources turn up. Just an idea. HarderD (talk) 21:01, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

That is prohibited by WP:ECR. It's likely that the talk page watchers saw both your talk page message and this discussion, so if any extended-confirmed editors find that it has merit they can bring it up at the article talk page. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 21:15, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

Thoughts?

What do you think of me possibly throwing this appeal over to AN for review? It's been sitting for about 3 weeks without action, and I'm sure many admins have reviewed it but didn't feel confident acting on it either way. Oh, and hi.-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 20:04, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

I didn't remember placing the block, which surprised me, because it looked recent, them I noticed it was a year ago. Yeah, AN is probably the right call.

Hello to you, also. Long time no chat. I haven't had to bother you for a CU in a while. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 20:22, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

We live in different wiki worlds now, you're all wrapped up in the world of AE and closing contentious discussions, while I'm a sock-blocking one-trick-ponyo. -- Ponyo^{bons mots} 20:52, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

Wanna trade? Seems that your world might be slightly less stressful. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 20:54, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

No way, Jose. I guarantee it's less stressful, and also: I'm lazy. I generally only have socks and ne're-do-wells wielding pitchforks, which works fine for me. -- Ponyo^{bons mots} 20:59, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

Well shucks. I'm other news, I raise ducks now. I think I have it backwards, as I'm raising mammals for white meat and poultry for red. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 21:16, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

To close the loop: I did the thing.-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 22:00, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for that, and working the unblock queue. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 22:09, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

JohnR1Roberts

I see you blocked him for an ECR violation earlier. See his latest edit today.[1]. I am not sure what exactly to do. Maybe an indefinite topic ban? And a block or not? Doug Weller talk 07:51, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

They're already essentially topic banned, so I go with escalating blocks. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 11:03, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

Expired RfC

What is the correct way to proceed with this RfC? Was it correct to restore the expired RfC template as I did here [2]? IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 18:08, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

You can leave the RFC template removed. If discussion is pretty much wrapped up and consensus isn't obvious you can place a request at WP:CR for closure. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 18:10, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

Possible violation of WP:RGW on a user talk page

Hello @ScottishFinnishRadish I am reaching out in part to gather expertise on whether a user page I found violates WP:RGW, WP:POLEMIC, or any other guidlines. The user in question is BangladeshiEditorInSylhet. Their user page contains language such as "We can also remove Pro-Zionist statements on Wikipedia" and "The Pro-Zionist editing lowers the credibility of Wikipedia and makes it less reliable." This is concerning because, if followed by the user, would lead to biased and unproductive edits in an area that is highly divisive. This editor has been prolific since joining in November 2023, with over 4000 edits in that timeframe largely focused on Bangladesh. However, many edits related to the Middle East and conflict in Israel and Palestine have been reverted, such as as on the Battle of Bint Jbeil, the Second Intifada, the Palestine Liberation Organization, etc. The reason for these revisions was the addition of biased language.

I am fairly unfamiliar with the protocols here. Thus, I am reaching out to hear what you have to say. I also know that you previously edited this user's page to remove certain content that you viewed did violate some Wikipedia protocols. Thanks, Debartolo2917 (talk) 17:14, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Do you have any diffs of recent disruption or bias? I warned them back in late June, so preferably after that. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 17:49, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

You've got mail

Hello, ScottishFinnishRadish. 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 at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.Vanderwaalforces (talk) 18:20, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Catalonia

Hi ScottishFinnishRadish, just fyi in case you didn't notice: A registered user Charles Albert Noble is also involved in deleting "from Catalonia" so that could also be block evasion from IP addresses you've blocked, maybe? In my knowledge I don't know if there is a sock master behind the continual removal after someone else continues to revert and gets blocked for socking etc.. Iggy (Swan) (Contribs) 20:17, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Blocked, thanks for the heads up. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 21:08, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Question

Would it be ok to email you? --Kansas Bear (talk) 16:17, 19 August 2024 (UTC)

Sure. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 16:19, 19 August 2024 (UTC)

IP sock ECR violations

This Buenos Aires based IP violating ECR is probably AndresHerutJaim judging from this comment. Sean.hoyland (talk) 14:44, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

Blocked and placed some protections. Thanks for the heads up. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 15:30, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

an award

	a duckling for you
	thanks for dealing with that vandal Daisytheduck quack quack 03:16, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

Thanks you kindly. I'm glad, as always, to help. I also have 21 ducks! ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 11:17, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

Feedback requests from the Feedback Request Service

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Martin Van Buren on a "Biographies" request for comment, and at Talk:Libertarian Party (United States) on a "Society, sports, and culture" request for comment, and at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject UK Parliament constituencies on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment, and at Talk:Fred Trump on a "Biographies" request for comment, and at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard on a "Media, the arts, and architecture" request for comment, and at Talk:Genocide of indigenous peoples on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 12:50, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

Most likely a IP socking

[3] [4] [5] and this one shot id [6] of [7]. Can the article be protected? There are other IP ranges that have been doing the same for months. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 16:33, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

I gave it a month. In the future you can make your request at WP:RFPP. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 16:34, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

Thanks. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 16:35, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

Let him decide

Let @Makeandtoss decide on what to remove from his talk page. When he said "no more talk page messages here", doesn't have to be 100% and that I can't apologize for misunderstanding WP:BRD. You seem to have a very black and white view on words. Alexysun (talk) 18:38, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

They already asked you not to post on their talk page. Please do not post on their talk page again. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 18:42, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

@ScottishFinnishRadish Please read my statement again. Thanks. Alexysun (talk) 04:38, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

You were asked multiple times to stay off their talk page, which was clarified further after I reverted you. Stay off their talk page. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 12:18, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

Unblock my ip address, please

I've used credible sources to backup my edits and will continue to do so. I can do back and see my edits and show the links to all of the sources I used. 68.234.69.24 (talk) 20:30, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

This IP address is a callback proxy and is running IPIDEA_PROXY, LUMINATI_PROXY, OXYLABS_PROXY and should be blocked from all editing as such. --Yamla (talk) 20:31, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

Done. --Yamla (talk) 20:33, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

Unblock request

I have filed an unblock request on my talk page. You didn't bother to respond. My appeal was rejected on procedural ground saying that only the blocking administrator can unblock. Will you engage my concern? Or will I have to appeal your block at WP:AE? The Mountain of Eden (talk) 02:29, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

Since you have refused to respond, I have filed an appeal at WP:AE. The Mountain of Eden (talk) 04:04, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

Feedback request: History and geography request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Kuči (tribe) on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 03:31, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

Question regarding ECR

Question: is it still an ECR violation if a a 30+-day-old account with 500+ contribs edits in ARBPIA, but a large part of their first 500 contribs were themselves ECR violations and a large part of their first 30 days were spent blocked for said violations?

Bajaria has gone right back to their prior Israel-Hezbollah conflict edits (including one before they actually hit 500), but they've now technically hit the 500 contribs/30 day marks, so I'm unsure if they can be reported at AE or not. The problem lies in the question I've posed above - while they've hit those marks, a large part of hitting them was violating ECR and waiting out blocks as a result.

It really is a shame, because they seem somewhat productive - it's just that they appear to flagrantly disregard/ignore ECR. The Kip ^(contribs) 06:57, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

Aaaaand nevermind on Bajaria themselves, as they've been blocked for disruptive editing by Graham87. Might be worth answering the question anyhow, though, as a guideline for the future. The Kip ^(contribs) 07:52, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

I would pull EC or block for that. A bunch of ECR violations that contribute greatly to gaining EC is gaming or just disruptive in book. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 10:08, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

Struck part of my comment upon seeing the nasty rant against Graham following their ban. Yikes… The Kip ^(contribs) 21:53, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

Suspicious account is WP:QUACKing, but I'm not sure what the duck is.

This user registered their account in 2009, made just three edits in 15 years (one of which was an ECR violation in March it appears Starship.paint warned them about), and has suddenly become very interested in Talk:Kidnapping and killing of Hersh Goldberg-Polin. I ran it by Sean.hoyland, given his experience with socks/sleepers, and his guess was it could be a sock of long-term-abuser NoCal - however, I disagreed with that assessment, given NoCal's LTA page describes him as a fervently pro-Israel and/or virulently Islamophobic editor, while this account in question is complaining of anti-Hamas/pro-Israeli bias, specifically arguing that Biden's statement on Goldberg-Polin's death should be removed. I'm not sure if NoCal's ever tried to pull a false flag before.

As they've gone past the initial edit request into a full-on debate, it would seemingly violate ECR, but I'm also unsure if simply disputing the denial of their edit request goes beyond the bounds allowed by ECR (especially given the user who denied the ER hasn't exactly been well-behaved in the area - you pblocked them just a few days ago). They've also seemingly got a heavily flawed understanding of WP:DUE, WP:BIASED, and WP:ATTRIBUTEPOV.

TL;DR the age of the account, prior lack of edits, and sudden interest in this topic sound sock/WP:SLEEPER/WP:COMPROMISED alarm bells for me, but I'm not sure if they're technically violating ECR, and the poor understanding of policy means either they're genuinely inexperienced or putting on a good show. I also have no hard evidence for said alarm bells - I'm purely going off connecting the various dots.

Thoughts? The Kip ^(contribs) 07:56, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

Convenience link to the discussion on my talk page.

I mean, this is a remarkable coincidence.

• if you look at the timeline in the NoCal100 -> Fistook period there is a proliferation of socks, or at least detected socks (the time step might suggest lots of missed socks). Fistook registered on 2009-03-27. Mozumder registered the next day.

Sean.hoyland (talk) 09:19, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

Again, unless he’s putting on an extremely well-acted facade I highly doubt it’s him - Occam’s razor applies here. The Kip ^(contribs) 16:48, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

You could easily be right. What I can say with confidence is that you are far less cynical than me. As for Occam, they didn't have the benefit of reference material like The Wisdom of Psychopaths and Clerkley's Mask of Sanity. I have a heuristic for trying to understand and predict the behavior of people who may be using deception here for "the greater good" or however they rationalize their dishonesty (I have no idea). Not "What would Jesus do?", rather "What would a sociopath/pathologically dishonest person do?". This opens up a whole world of possibilities of theater including making perceived foes look bad and perceived comrades in arms look good. Also, I've noticed that several recidivists seem to think they are in Shin Bet, which frankly I find adorable. It is their only endearing characteristic. Sean.hoyland (talk) 12:04, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

Another couple of thoughts before I forget. If it is a pro-Palestinian sock, we have less data about them. I don't know whether this is because they are rarer than pro-Israel socks or whether we are not as good at detecting them. Either way, I would expect to see an increase in pro-Palestinian socks because using disposable accounts a better strategy for the organized advocate, and maybe that increase has already started. The other thing I wonder about sometimes is breaching experiments and content generation, I mean partisan content creators/people who have online profiles doing breeching experiments to generate things they can whine about. Sean.hoyland (talk) 12:15, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

Feedback request: Politics, government, and law request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Indian National Congress on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 04:30, 4 September 2024 (UTC)