Wikipedia talk:Sockpuppet investigations/SPI/Clerks/Archive 5

Archive 1

←

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Can I request an SPI / Hacked account request of myself?

I am planning to come back to editing after an extended hiatus, historically I do not avoid editing pages where emotions can run high and misunderstandings are not as infrequent as we may like. I am also moving to another country in the immediate future, which might complicate SPI / hacked account investigations later. As such I am requesting confirmation that there is evidence that the person making this edit is likely the same person as who has made the previous edits connected to my account. Sorry for the OS change, I will make amends some time in the future ;) un☯mi 11:14, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

Realized I had VPN on originally. un☯mi 11:36, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

No. Spicy (talk) 13:28, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

This should do, thanks and have a fantastic day! un☯mi 16:20, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

Cross-wiki collaboration

Hello, users from Japanese Wikipedia will report あすぺるがあすぺしゃりすと (talk · contribs)'s sockpuppets (Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/あすぺるがあすぺしゃりすと) on ja:Wikipedia:管理者伝言板/投稿ブロック/ソックパペット#ASPE, which made it possible for a cross-wiki collaboration on that case instead of catching them one by one, by ourselves. Is there anyone who are interesting in linking these two pages? -Lemonaka‎ 04:03, 14 February 2024 (UTC)

I thought the main problem with this case is that Meta admins aren't fast enough to lock accounts that we encounter, or that Japanese Wikipedia admins don't report them to Meta. Not sure what we should be doing to collaborate more here. 0xDeadbeef→∞ (talk to me) 12:27, 14 February 2024 (UTC)

Very🤔. Sysops from Japanese Wikipedia don't like distinguishing one LTA from another, they usually mark all of them as "sockpuppet", while requesting global lock for an account needs they are blocked on more than two projects or at least confirmed as a specific LTA. That's something need to be improved due to bureaucratic system, or we will have to check them again and again. -Lemonaka‎ 05:24, 15 February 2024 (UTC)

One of the major gap of the current system is that CU from different languages and sister projects often don't talk to one another. This leads to piecemeal blocks on confirmed sockpuppets even if the evidence is 100% confirmed. You may have a sock blocked on Commons but same account continues to edit here or Wikidata. OhanaUnited^{Talk page} 06:21, 16 February 2024 (UTC)

And global lock requirements for such socks are unclear, mostly depend on the stewards who dealt with cases. E.g. isechika case and risto hot sir case.
What about a GHBH sock of a long term user? E.g. planespotterA320 case
Will write something on meta after I ended my internship... -Lemonaka‎ 08:48, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

Archive filter

I trust that whoever maintains Special:AbuseFilter/1170 (archive actions by non-CU/non-clerk editors) watches this page. Could you please add my mobile alt, User:Sir Sputnik (mobile), to the ignore list for that filter? Thanks. Sir Sputnik (talk) 22:44, 21 March 2024 (UTC)

@Sir Sputnik and Sir Sputnik (mobile): done. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 22:49, 21 March 2024 (UTC)

Case merging request

Greetings everybody, I come here from recommendation of Spicy, as he told me this is the right place to request the complex case merging that is required [1]. The story goes like this: back in december I opened a SPI [2] that became fairly extense and on it I found out direct evidence (mostly usernames and editing behavior) that two sockpuppeters: Ghumen[3] and HipHopVisionary[4] are actually the same person (the bulk of the evidence can be found on this diff [5]), as can be seen by reading the complete case this is a very persistent and nocive vandal, with VPN usage being 100% confirmed[6][7], for which I think to merge both cases is necessary as it would make future SPI's on this editor smoothier and faster for checkusers/administrators, who tend to be very bussy and have no time to look carefully each implicated account. Pob3qu3 (talk) 21:48, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

Clerks needed?

I read about SPI clerks and am interested in becoming a trainee if they are needed. Anyone willing to train me? If you reply here, please ping me. — thetechie@enwiki: ~/talk/ $ 00:29, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

Follow the instructions at the top of the page.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:45, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

TheTechie

TheTechie (talk · message · contribs · global contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · user creation · block user · block log · count · total · logs · summary · email | lu · rfa · rfb · arb · rfc · lta · checkuser · spi · socks | rfar · rfc · rfcu · ssp | current rights · rights log (local) · rights log (global/meta) | rights · renames · blocks · protects · deletions · rollback · admin · logs | UHx · AfD · UtHx · UtE)

This was copied from the malformed request above: I read about SPI clerks and am interested in becoming a trainee if they are needed. Anyone willing to train me? If you reply here, please ping me. — thetechie@enwiki: ~/talk/ $ 00:48, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

Help!

The SPIHelper just barfed while I was merging Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Justinaintime into Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/MariaJaydHicky. I got a 'failed to undelete Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/MariaJaydHicky', then two 'Edit failed on Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/MariaJaydHicky: internal_api_error_DBQueryError' messages. The reported account is confirmed to the master, and I've blocked them, and the script has created a new case for MariaJaydHicky, but all the history is gone. Can someone better than me a merges/undeletions etc recover the situation please? I'll then finish off the paperwork and request lock, don't want to edit the new case until it's tidied up. Girth Summit _(blether) 10:09, 15 June 2024 (UTC)

I think I've fixed this. I had to undelete the history in chunks as I got a server error otherwise... Spicy (talk) 10:34, 15 June 2024 (UTC)

Thanks Spicy - much appreciated. Girth Summit _(blether) 10:37, 15 June 2024 (UTC)

Case merging request

Please merge WP:Sockpuppet investigations/Honey Honey Bee Honey into WP:Sockpuppet investigations/BMX On WheeIs, as a user on there confirmed the accounts to be BMX. --Leonidlednev (T, C, L) 15:57, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

Please tag the BMX SPI as crosswiki as well. --Leonidlednev (T, C, L) 16:17, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

Malformed SPI submission

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/SPI/User:ZipthatChop looks malformed. Also, it's transcluded on the main SPI page under Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations § Quick CheckUser requests, despite that section being for non-sock checks only. I'm not sure how to fix it, or if I'm even allowed to, so notifying the SPI clerks seems like the next step. jlwoodwa (talk) 01:17, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

I've deleted the SPI as hopelessly messy. The Quick CheckUser request should be declined, but only a CU can do that - maybe a clerk, but certainly not a "patrolling admin" (me).--Bbb23 (talk) 01:35, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

I've removed the request from the "Quick CheckUser requests" section and left a clarifying note on the user's talk page. Dreamy Jazz ^{talk to me | my contributions} 10:19, 20 July 2024 (UTC)

spihelper development

With GeneralNotability inactive for quite a while now, I'm wondering if anyone else has commit access to the Github repository for the spihelper script? Obviously we can just move the whole thing somewhere else if GN is gone for good (I hope not), but it would be a shame to lose the infrastructure (issues, PR's, etc) that we've built up around that repo over the past few years. Sir Sputnik (talk) 00:30, 20 July 2024 (UTC)

I am not sure. We will need to consider that stewards can now globally block accounts, and as such soon we may need to add a button that allows spihelper to request global blocks. In the future global locks may be removed and replaced with global blocks, so we might also need to remove the global locks feature too. Dreamy Jazz ^{talk to me | my contributions} 10:01, 20 July 2024 (UTC)

There is also the bullseye tool - https://github.com/GeneralNotability/bullseye Dreamy Jazz ^{talk to me | my contributions} 10:02, 20 July 2024 (UTC)

I've found this commit: https://github.com/GeneralNotability/spihelper/commit/fabc06720b774698d5d5e7dc67f15f7204dc4f24

That suggests that @TheresNoTime has access to merge commits on that repository. Do you still have that access / know what level of access you have? Dreamy Jazz ^{talk to me | my contributions} 10:05, 20 July 2024 (UTC)

It appears I do still have commit access to that repo, yes — TheresNoTime (talk • they/them) 10:08, 20 July 2024 (UTC)

@TheresNoTime: In that case, could please review the pending pull requests? I've got two right now, one is some misc fixes, the other adds support for the mobile theme. Sir Sputnik (talk) 00:15, 21 July 2024 (UTC)

Note that even though the repo can be updated, the script itself cannot be updated by non-interface admins: User:GeneralNotability/spihelper.js is under their own userpage.

I've said in the Discord or somewhere else that we'd do well with an infrastructure that links repos to scripts on-wiki (through a bot that automates deployments), and this is one of the cases where it would be really helpful. 0xDeadbeef→∞ (talk to me) 03:14, 17 August 2024 (UTC)

well, apparently, there is automated deployments happening on User:GeneralNotability/spihelper-dev.js. I might personally just switch to that for the up-to-date version. 0xDeadbeef→∞ (talk to me) 03:16, 17 August 2024 (UTC)

Oh wow, it's all there. There's a workflow for deploying to the main script as well. Just need to pull commits from the develop branch to the main branch. 0xDeadbeef→∞ (talk to me) 03:17, 17 August 2024 (UTC)

I've said in the Discord or somewhere else that we'd do well with an infrastructure that links repos to scripts on-wiki (through a bot that automates deployments). I think AmandaNP tried to BRFA a bot to do this but the BRFA got stuck with too many concerns (Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/DeltaQuadBot 9). There is also a phab ticket about it somewhere (phab:T187749). See also User:Novem Linguae/Essays/Linking GitHub to MediaWiki. I'd be very interested in seeing this problem get solved long-term, as it would create some very nice efficiencies for user script and gadget programmers. –Novem Linguae (talk) 14:50, 17 August 2024 (UTC)

Some interesting points on that BRFA. I'm thinking of a different way to configure. Each entry that requires updating a userspace script (say User:0xDeadbeef/foo.js) requires that js file to be linked into a standard json under the same user (say User:0xDeadbeef/fileLink.json), where that json is then linked somewhere centrally.

Legoktm brought up the point about auditibility. I think by linking each edit on-wiki to a commit on the Git repo in the edit summary this would help, and the configuration I proposed above should be secure. If there are more concerns on that, we could also require all repos to be Wikimedia GitLab.

The original bot proposal was also with concerns because it linked the raw url. I'm thinking a link based on a branch in a repo would allow great flexibility. 0xDeadbeef→∞ (talk to me) 02:53, 18 August 2024 (UTC)

I'd prefer it also have GitHub support since all of my stuff is on GitHub, and who knows if GitLab is going to last or get deprecated. And I think most repos use a master branch only, and adding additional branches would add complexity. However if you want to BRFA something I'd support it. Something is better than nothing! –Novem Linguae (talk) 03:57, 18 August 2024 (UTC)

Well, I'm not an interface admin.. 0xDeadbeef→∞ (talk to me) 04:07, 18 August 2024 (UTC)

That sounds like an easily fixable problem :) –Novem Linguae (talk) 05:15, 18 August 2024 (UTC)