User talk:ScottishFinnishRadish

This user is a farmer in real life and may not respond swiftly to queries.

bunny

Archive 1	Archive 2	Archive 3
Archive 4	Archive 5	Archive 6
Archive 7	Archive 8	Archive 9
Archive 10	Archive 11	Archive 12
Archive 13	Archive 14	Archive 15
Archive 16	Archive 17	Archive 18
Archive 19	Archive 20	Archive 21
Archive 22	Archive 23	Archive 24
Archive 25	Archive 26	Archive 27
Archive 28	Archive 29	Archive 30
Archive 31	Archive 32	Archive 33
Archive 34	Archive 35	Archive 36
Archive 37	Archive 38	Archive 39
Archive 40	Archive 41	Archive 42
Archive 43	Archive 44	Archive 45
Archive 46	Archive 47	Archive 48

This page has archives. Sections older than 15 days may be automatically archived by .

Undiscussed move of Nicktoons (American TV channel) to NickSpongebob

Sussywidget has moved Nicktoons (American TV channel) to NickSpongebob without discussing it first - I see no discussion about the move anywhere on the article's talk page, nor elsewhere on Wikipedia. Do you think you can reverse this move? The Grand Delusion^{(Send a message)} 20:30, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This looks like a content dispute, so you should use the normal dispute resolution avenues. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 13:07, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Advice needed

When I was logging in today, I received an email with a verification code I had to enter to access my account. The email said that "it looks like you are trying to log in from a new device on Wikipedia" which wasn’t the case. Seems like some sort malfunction somewhere but I don’t know whether I should inform WP technical support or who that is. I only added an email address to my account about six months ago; without it, would I have lost access to my account? Space4TCatHerder 🖖 14:36, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think that without it you would just have lost the additional layer of security. I believe this is one of the security measures instituted after the huge amount of compromised accounts were found a while back. I've gotten the same emails from time to time logging in, even on devices/IPs I've used recently, so it could still be a bit buggy. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 14:39, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks — "just a little hiccup in our usually wonderful system" (quote, unknown origin). Space4TCatHerder 🖖 16:45, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have a question

Sorry to bother you, don't know if this is trivial/unimportant. I don't have an Email associated with my account. Nor do I, if possible, have an inclination to have an Email. I wanted to request Oversight, but it seems like, without an Email, there's nothing I can do. How ought I to proceed? Pibx (talk) 16:32, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That is a bit of a pickle, since you really don't want to make it more visible. I'm pretty sure you can report via IRC, but failing that you'll need to let an oversighter know on their talk page. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 16:44, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Well, letting Oversighters know on their Talk Page, hopefully won't create more visibility. I won't mention any diffs, so may be, it will be ok. Pibx (talk) 16:47, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The user in question, seems to be spam only. Pibx (talk) 16:47, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hope this is not inappropriate. User named Shreebajarangsena. Pibx (talk) 18:09, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

They are already blocked, I'm unsure what would need oversighting. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 18:16, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Their edits. Semms to be spam. Why is it showing up in the Edit History? Pibx (talk) 18:19, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

We don't remove things from the history except in rare circumstances. See WP:CRD and WP:OSPOL for details. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 18:21, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think I will be posting any more things related to this topic, at least related to this user. Just wanted to say that if the edit history is checked and one of the earlier revisions are clicked, there are links to a Website whose Domain Name is the same/similar to the Username. Ditto Social Media. Pibx (talk) 18:28, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

User: Rtyss

Hi there. It may be early days, but this new user seems to be making changes which may be test, vandalism or just disruptive. I have given a welcome, and a level 1 warning, but of course they may not notice that. Tony Holkham (Talk) 11:10, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

They haven't done anything to call down more action than that, so we'll just have to keep an eye on them and help them if they are acting in good faith. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 12:21, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Understood. Thank you. Tony Holkham (Talk) 12:24, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Demi-Herculean tasks

Hi ScottishFinnishRadio; Nice of you to do the help edit on the Trump article during the last week. There is a long RfC now overdue which has been listed for RfC help on the Donald Trump talk page, now going on 60-90 days in the waiting period window; since you are not a participant in that RfC then might you consider looking at it sometime over the next week or two if time allows? ErnestKrause (talk) 14:47, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

All set. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 15:08, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Aiah

Hello! Thanks for rving that nasty edit. Do you mind if I ask for rd-ing some related residue there? I think they had an IP sock to modify it after the initial edit. Borgenland (talk) 15:17, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think the modified version quite meets the threshold to revdel as it's more run-of-the-mill vandalism. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 15:24, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

2409:40d4::/34

Hi ScottishFinnishRadish, I saw you made a two-week hard block on 2409:40d4::/34 (block range · block log (global) · WHOIS (partial)). This is a really wide range for a hard block, and I think it may cause a significant amount of collateral damage (saw one appeal at UTRS so far). Any chance we could downgrade it to a soft block? Mz7 (talk) 03:17, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

We can, but then it will be far less effective. If you'd like to downgrade I won't object, though. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 09:18, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Mz7, I did end up softening this block. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 15:23, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

May music

Reasons to look at Bach (and listen): it's a recent GA (not by me), he assumed the position of Thomaskantor OTD in 1723, he's up for PR, and several of his cantatas for GA, and his Easter Oratorio for FAC. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:52, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I've always been more of a fan of Hildegard von Blingin. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 15:19, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I took Graham87 to a statue of her ;) - The OTD section is not for her, or would you know anything about her music by a certain date? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:22, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

B****r. I missed that hoax

Thank you. 🇵🇸‍🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦‍🇵🇸 20:21, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No worries, happens to all of us. I only noticed because I had that IP page watchlisted from blocking them. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 20:29, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I felt it to be a decent hoax. They put some effort into it. Out of interest, did you recognise the article title (or similarity with prior abuse)? 🇵🇸‍🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦‍🇵🇸 21:19, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I took a closer look because I'd blocked the IP. The article had the feel of LLM output, so I looked closer at the sources. One was specifically about 1300-1600, which was suspicious, as was a single source for each paragraph with no overlap between sources. Deciding to look deeper, I was able to access a few of the sources and they didn't mention this person. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 21:29, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ping ping ping

Who is that child again, pinging nice people stupidly? I'd ask Materialscientist but they rarely answer. Drmies (talk) 16:29, 4 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's the evolution of the adding-one-character vandalbot. Luckily, we'll have IP masking soon and the community will vote to disable IP editing. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 16:30, 4 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You've got mail!

Hello, ScottishFinnishRadish. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 17:11, 5 June 2025 (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.

Tarlby ^{(t) (c)} 17:11, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Request

It seems clear to me that 61.101.80.201 is evading the block on 58.99.101.165. Asking for your help here since in addition to 58.99.101.165 you also blocked at least two other sock IPs previously. Same targeted pages, same complaints about too many references [1] [2], honestly the editing history speaks for itself. Previous activity suggest they have a sizeable pool of IPs available, and given that at least one of them was previously blocked by a bot for being a proxy they may well be using some kind of high-end VPN/proxy service. However even though I don't expect blocks to stop them it should help keep the rate down a bit. Anyway if you would do the needful here I'd appreciate it. 184.152.65.118 (talk) 23:22, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sure looks like them. Blocked for a week. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 23:30, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, 184.152.65.118 (talk) 23:34, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ironland stuff, again

Hi SFR. Yeah, so some related blocks came up in the Bbb23 AN thread. I know you where within policy to declare these editors as socks and block on site. However, considering the community seems to view the very similar blocks of Zheeh and Elephant7812 as... okay, really BITEy and horrible, if I'm reading consensus correctly, I was wondering if maybe you'd reconsider your block of 7goldfishglory? And maybe leaving a note on CG52110's talkpage saying that you don't believe they were in control of nine plus accounts so they actually have a chance of being unblocked? Honestly, this far along, I don't think either editor is coming back, so the risk of any disruption is pretty much nothing if you do unblock them. Of course, if they do and start spamming Ironland stuff again, then you can punt them back into the sun and it'll take like 30 seconds of your time. But it's looking like the community doesn't like it when admins no warning blocks fans of something for making a few overenthusiastic edits. Thanks for considering this, and you don't mind me bringing this up on your talkpage instead of the AN thread. GreenLipstickLesbian 💌🦋 06:15, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

In case you're wondering, my interest in this is mostly stemming from the fact that I got my Wiki-start as a kid by making a few pretty crappy edits to a (now deleted) article about a video game I liked. If I'd been no-warning blocked for them, or banned, I'd probably never have returned. I mean, I hope by saying that I suddenly haven't turned you forever off the idea of unblocking them ;0) but anyways. Just letting you know why I've taken an interest, so you don't have to go all CYA mode again. GreenLipstickLesbian 💌🦋 06:37, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

CG52110 kinda screwed the pooch by not answering Yamla's pretty basic question about what accounts they had been using. At this point they're well into SO territory, so a request saying "I haven't been socking, and won't use additional accounts" would probably zip through. As for 7goldfishglory, they could just request an unblock at all, or any admin could unblock if they felt so inclined. I just don't see a lot of utility in unblocking someone after a year when there's no indication they're interested. Again, any admin that disagrees can just unblock. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 15:39, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, not answering isn't a great look...but I mean they kinda sorta gave that answer in the first place, and nobody believed them. Why on earth would they try again? You're probably right that they aren't coming back, and who could blame them? And I suppose you don't see the utility in unblocking them, and I still don't see the utility in blocking a good faith editor just because they try to write a draft on a trending pop culture thing, when they've already promised to leave the area alone. Practically, however, there are three possible benefits - if they have their email turned on or check back, they realize that they can come back, it allows them to have a clean start in a few years when they're more older and more mature without evading a block (because there's no guarantee they they'll even remember their password to this one then), and it means nobody can bring it up as an example of a terrible SFR block. Or, they can, but you undoing it kind of stops that in its tracks. GreenLipstickLesbian 💌🦋 16:09, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

but I mean they kinda sorta gave that answer in the first place, and nobody believed them. They had unblock requests declined by multiple checkusers, so I'm going to AGF that their investigations didn't match what was being said by the editor. I also understand concerns that this was a number of different editors independently creating the draft, but that doesn't hold up when you can review the deleted contribs.

Here are textdiffs across multiple creations of the draft by different editors at the time of creation. Now I suppose it's possible that there were a bunch of editors showing up recreating a draft with the exact same prose by coincidence, but it seems more likely there was either socking or meatpuppetry at play. If someone wants to be unblocked after taking part in that, though, I don't think requiring an unblock request that says I understand what was wrong about how I was handling that. I wont (create multiple accounts/coordinate off-wiki to bypass deletion policies) in the future. is a wild ask. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 11:04, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Median income

My source is the OECD (its literally linked) and median equivalized income by country is median income, ergo relevant to the median income page. Also I was not ban evading, you literally just made it up (however i'm using a different device currently) 98.150.89.19 (talk) 22:30, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest you create an account, because your editing is functionally identical to Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/Demographics vandal and you will likely continue to be blocked. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 10:39, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Revdel request

These versions contain a real mobile telephone number. Someone claiming to be an article subject left it on the talkpage for "confirmation". Please and thank you! JFHJr (㊟) 02:23, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

All set. Please use email next time if you can. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 10:39, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! Will do. JFHJr (㊟) 16:12, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]