Stewards' noticeboard/Archive 33

__NOINDEX__

CheckUser request for a suspected sockpuppet
Hi, I'd like a check on these three users for the Mental Block Wiki:
 * Sterkers
 * Male-Sleeper
 * Skgght

They've already been blocked by a fellow moderator (their edits were suspiciously similar, and I believe some vandalism happened after their first account got blocked); with that said, it would be nice to check, just to be sure, and, if these are sockpuppets, to block this IP range if possible.

Thank you! Dissentrix (talk) 23:32, 26 September 2022 (UTC)


 * They are indeed sockpuppets. I have ✅ them and have ✅ their IP range. Let us know if they return. Agent Isai  Talk to me! 04:09, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much! Dissentrix (talk) 07:35, 27 September 2022 (UTC)

Question (3)
How do I request something from system administrators? FatBurn0000 (sandbox | CentralAuth) 03:35, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Depends. What are you wanting to request? Agent Isai  Talk to me! 03:56, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
 * I would like to request imports of pages from Qualitipedia wikis into the New Reception Wiki. FatBurn0000 (sandbox | CentralAuth) 21:58, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
 * That will not be done as direct forks of other wikis are not allowed per the Content Policy. Reception123 (talk) ( C ) 06:11, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
 * That may change soon. Blubabluba9990 (talk) 21:05, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

Global Lock Request
I know I could have made a request to unlock either of my previous accounts. However, since I wanted to make my life easier, I decided to create a new one just so that I can cast my vote on the RFC regarding Qualitipedia's closure. But now that the closure has been done, I would politely request to have my account locked once again because I no longer have a use for it. Thanks. Skias (talk) 07:29, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
 * ✅ Reception123 (talk) ( C ) 06:11, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

Could you guys move my pages over to the New Reception Wiki
With the wikis closed, I need a easier way to archive them, without having to copy and paste the source code. And there is not a way to move the pages over with all revisions copied and all edits assigned to users if they exist locally. So could it be possible for the Stewards to do it? I want my work saved on there. Nidoking (talk) 11:08, 27 September 2022 (UTC)


 * What pages? Agent Isai  Talk to me! 12:09, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
 * I am going to link some from my special logs from the reception wikis, here  and a few here
 * I will let you know if there are a few more I would want to archive. Nidoking (talk) 12:17, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
 * This is out of scope for this noticeboard. You can export pages via Special:Export. Agent Isai  Talk to me! 12:19, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
 * But it gives me an error when I try to import them or request them to be imported. Nidoking (talk) 12:20, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
 * And also I need the database name for The New Reception WIki in order to request a import. Nidoking (talk) 12:25, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
 * As a general rule for database names: the wiki's url, + wiki at the end. So,  (yes it is redundant, due to how the wiki name works). --Raidarr (talk) 13:33, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Weird how the wiki is closed even though edits have been made there recently. Bawitdaba (talk) 22:48, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

Vanish Request
Hello, I'm planning to permanently retire my Miraheze account, because I've recently lost interest and I wanted to move on to other ventures. I may have contributed well, but it's time for me to go and never come back again. Thank you, Miraheze. XxxRazorbackxxx (talk) 11:19, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
 * ✅ Reception123 (talk) ( C ) 06:11, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

Request to globally lock account
I'd like to have my account globally locked since I no longer wish to be on Miraheze. TheShinyLucarioMaster (talk) 19:06, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
 * ✅ Reception123 (talk) ( C ) 06:11, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

Local election proccess completed to recover bureaucrat rights on sucessor account
Hi, as most people are already aware I'm the successor account to the founder of the https://geass.miraheze.org/wiki/. So I created the page for the local election process here: https://geass.miraheze.org/wiki/Talk:Main_Page. Since there wasn't any opposition in over 2 months I hope I can get the my bureaucrat rights back ASAP. Thanks in advance! Balofo2 (talk) 13:53, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

CheckUser request for several sockpuppeteers
The AVID Wiki has several recent sockpuppeteers, both old and new, some of which were previously IP banned somehow were able to create new accounts. These include: The user is a sock of Jackson, if you compare his edits to his other accounts; he edits "vanity card" articles. I would like to request an IP ban on this user, considering he has a long history of sockpuppetry on the site. Given the pattern of his account creations, he could be creating a new one this or next week. Sockpuppet of Ngozikal, who was IP banned from the site back in late July. Taking a look at her real name, it matches with her other sockpuppet accounts (Jordan K Ene).
 * Jack The Young Man
 * Rachelle249535

As for the newer ones: Above are sockpuppets of Erichomi/Logo Archive Collection Company. Notice how his edits relate to logos from the 1900's to 1920's, as well as their real names matching.
 * Erichom
 * Logos
 * Hub
 * MyLogo18
 * 400Logos

The above listed are sockpuppets of AngryGrandpaFanatic2007. Their real names match (they at least read "Amadaeus-Jeffrey") and edits are identical, replacing info on some pages with false ones. Camenati (talk) 15:48, 29 September 2022 (UTC)
 * AngryGrandpaFan2001
 * ChildishDadFanatic2000
 * CharlieBrownandCaillouYesBongoNo


 * @Camenati Do you want these users to be blocked globally indefinitely? If you really think that these users are puppets, you can block the wiki where they are puppeteers, I wish you a healthy day. (if the user is puppeteering on more than 1 wiki, they can go up to the global ban)  Hey Türkiye  message? 17:54, 29 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Considering sockpuppet accounts on the AVID wiki have been globally locked, yes. Additionally, I am seeking a lock on Jackson's IP address on said wiki as well as Ngozikal's new address. As for the other two, I think they should be warned since they are relatively new to Miraheze. Camenati (talk) 18:22, 29 September 2022 (UTC)
 * @HeyTürkiye As I was expecting, Jackson made another account today: Jackson's Way. Also, simply blocking the sockpuppet accounts will not solve the situation if the sockpuppeteers will continue to make newer ones in the foreseeable future. Camenati (talk) 20:08, 30 September 2022 (UTC)
 * @Agent Isai Pardon my interruption and massive list of requests, but I would like to alert you and other stewards about the site's wave of new sockpuppet accounts from old and new sockpuppeteers. I not only have the above alt accounts I requested for CheckUser, but there are a lot more that abused accounts on the AVID Wiki today. These include:
 * Fijiandadog35787‎
 * 3FijisAndADoggy
 * 3FijisAndADoggyChochi
 * IchiFijisADoggy331
 * FijiIchiAVIDDoggy331
 * The users listed are sockpuppet accounts of FijiAxe3AndADog. They obviously have similar names, plus their real names include "Malachi". If you take a look at their edits, they typically insert false information. Also here are:
 * LogoUrban (sockpuppet of Erichomi, one of the sockpuppeteers I reported above).
 * Jayden Quenano Time (sockpuppet of Chuck Quenano, who was previously IP banned on the site 3 months ago. It recently ended.)
 * Thank you for your investigation. Camenati (talk) 01:22, 1 October 2022 (UTC)
 * @Camenati Of course, this global blocking will not be resolved, but if the ip address range (I'm guessing from X.X.X.X/16) blocks the respected miraheze stewards, I guess this solution will be comfortable, don't worry too much about them as they will appear again even if we block them.  Hey Türkiye  message? 08:03, 1 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the report. The accounts have been investigated and ✅ accordingly either based on technical evidence, clear behavioral evidence or both. Reception123 (talk) ( C ) 16:40, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

Finished local election with no active bureaucrat
Good evening Stewards,

I have started a local election last Friday (post on the Talk page from September 23th), I added a notification on the main page too (here). I have nominated my self for bureaucrat, there has been no reaction from anyone. In fact there have been no activity from any registered users but me (Special:RecentChanges).

Is this the proper process to gain bureaucrat rights? There are no local bureaucrats active that i know of. Gregor0 (talk) 00:19, 1 October 2022 (UTC)


 * This is indeed the correct way to gain bureaucrat rights. ZeusDeeGoose (talk) 00:30, 1 October 2022 (UTC)
 * I've assigned the rights for 3 months temporarily due to the fact that there were no votes in favour but also no opposition. Reception123 (talk) ( C ) 16:59, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

Dormancy Policy Exemption for Dívasa Wiki
I'd like to request a Dormancy Policy exemption for Dívasa Wiki (thenationstate.miraheze.org).

The wiki was made to serve a roleplay / worldbuilding community that has since shuttered. There is plenty of information to be preserved, yet not much more to add.

Please consider this request for archival purposes. Many in the community see lessons from it (content is read by people) and have gone on to participate in other communities of similar nature. MLastCelebration (talk) 18:07, 1 October 2022 (UTC)
 * ✅ Reception123 (talk) ( C ) 16:59, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

Vanish request
Hello, I would like to permanently close my account since I don't really use Miraheze anymore SuperStario89 (talk) 20:50, 1 October 2022 (UTC)


 * Please request this at reports.miraheze.org. Thanks, ZeusDeeGoose (talk) 22:14, 1 October 2022 (UTC)
 * is absolutely correct in this case. Do use the TSPortal in the future to request your account to be vanished. DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 17:46, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

Dormancy Policy Exemption for Sagan 4 wikis
Hello, I am an administrator on both Sagan 4 wikis (sagan4.miraheze.org and sagan4alpha.miraheze.org) and I would like to request a dormancy policy exemption. Sagan 4 has a history of going through dead periods lasting months or even years and of narrowly avoiding becoming lost media, and the ability to edit the wiki is only granted on an approval basis due to a 15 year history of abuse, so we don't really get a lot of edits to keep it bumped up. As the wikis serve as an information archive with a lot of content, they should not be subject to the threat of deletion as a result of these periods of inactivity. Disgustedorite (talk) 07:23, 2 October 2022 (UTC)
 * ✅ Reception123 (talk) ( C ) 16:59, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

Delete my wiki please
I won't be using it anymore. Miraheze is unfortunately too slow for my needs. I'm going to use another host. The wiki in question is wimm.miraheze.org Azurescapegoat (talk) 14:39, 2 October 2022 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry that you decided to leave, the slowness would have likely been temporarily and is (at least for me) resolved now. Wiki deleted. Reception123 (talk) ( C ) 16:59, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

Question about changing my username
Does this free uo the original name for use? For example, if I would like to change my name from ZeusDeeGoose to Blad, does this allow users to make a new user with the name ZeusDeeGoose? The Goose Named Zeus  (talk|contribs|accounts|uploads|email) 21:41, 2 October 2022 (UTC)
 * I think so. Tali64³ (talk) 21:54, 2 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Yes, it would. Reception123 (talk) ( C ) 16:47, 4 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Yes, to be perfectly blunt. When you request a username change, it does take a while for the change to occur. --DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 17:44, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

mh:wretchedyoutubevideos:Wretched YouTube Videos Wiki
I am an administrator on this wiki, but closed the wiki because he thought that DarkMatterMan4500 (a bureaucrat on the wiki) had closed the wiki and made a new wiki. While this did indeed happen, as closed the wiki on June 1, 2021 and created a new wiki. However, DarkMatterMan reopened the wiki on November 14, 2021, and later imported pages from the wiki. As a result, I feel this closure should be undone. I have tried contacting Duchess about this but they have not yet responded so I will post this to see if I can get it done faster. FatBurn0000 (sandbox | CentralAuth) 10:44, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
 * See also this topic for reference. FatBurn0000 (sandbox | CentralAuth) 00:04, 15 September 2022 (UTC)
 * DarkMatterMan4500 is also a local bureaucrat, why not ask him to reopen? Reception123 (talk) ( C ) 05:08, 15 September 2022 (UTC)
 * I already contacted him a few days ago about reopening some other wikis and he still hasn't replied, so I doubt that would work. FatBurn0000 (sandbox | CentralAuth) 06:54, 15 September 2022 (UTC)
 * I think you should be patient. It doesn't seem appropriate for Stewards to rush to reopen a wiki that was closed for a reason by a local bureaucrat. I am pinging DarkMatterMan4500 for a response here. Reception123 (talk) ( C ) 08:47, 15 September 2022 (UTC)
 * It's been 10 days now. FatBurn0000 (sandbox | CentralAuth) 22:39, 24 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Hello? Money12123 (contribs | sandbox | CentralAuth) 21:06, 6 October 2022 (UTC)

Reopen The New Reception Wiki, so i could handle it.
Hi. I have one question. Can you reopen this wiki called The New Reception Wiki? This is the wiki: https://thenewreceptionwiki.miraheze.org/wiki/Main_Page

It was closed for Content Policy Violation but i want to reopen it because I want to make sure this page will not violate the Content Policy. This includes the deletion of forks, creating pages from scratch than importing them. Another reason why I want to get the control of the wiki is because the bureaucrat has shown to be incompetent. CJWorldGame32125 (talk) 17:21, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Hello. Please request this at Requests for reopening wikis. Have a good day LovingHaydeL (talk) 19:53, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
 * This is incorrect, the OP has been directed here by a Steward from that exact page. RfR is not for wikis manually closed for particular reasons. As to this request, I'm unconvinced by the unsubstantiated claim of incompetence (frankly I've seen no evidence that the person making the request is any more competent) and tbh this doesn't solve the issue that the wiki barely has any idea of what it really wants to be in the first place. But this is not a final call, which must be made by an active Steward. --Raidarr (talk) 20:34, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Did you have to do this? I was already dealing with this myself. Money12123 (contribs | sandbox | CentralAuth) 03:48, 6 October 2022 (UTC)
 * FatBurn, i did this because i saw no edits from you. Do you have evidence of you dealing this? CJWorldGame32125 (talk) 05:02, 6 October 2022 (UTC)
 * It's also funny that you say that WE (average users) should delete the forks, not you. You, along with the admins, have the ability to delete the forks, not us. CJWorldGame32125 (talk) 05:04, 6 October 2022 (UTC)
 * The admins are the ones who imported the pages. Also, I was talking to Agent Isai about it on their talk page. Money12123 (contribs | sandbox | CentralAuth) 06:44, 6 October 2022 (UTC)
 * I could delete them as soon the wiki reopens. Nidoking (talk) 12:03, 6 October 2022 (UTC)

Can I rename my wiki?
Hello,

Can my wiki be renamed (from Book River(Könyv folyó) to Book Magic(Könyv-varázs))? This name sounds nicer, no other changes. Thanks. Lois (talk) 08:12, 7 October 2022 (UTC)


 * Please request this at Miraheze Phabricator. --Zeus  (talk|contribs|accounts|email) 10:11, 7 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Okay, done :) Lois (talk) 16:23, 7 October 2022 (UTC)

Requesting assessment for local election and granting bureaucrat authority
Hi stewards, we held an election on LibertyBook wiki for new bureaucrats because the existing bureaucrat has no longer active. For the detail of this election, please visit the link to the election. 1 chocotree_forest (talk) 04:25, 3 October 2022 (UTC)


 * ✅, as requested. Happy editing! Agent Isai  Talk to me! 23:54, 7 October 2022 (UTC)

Cancel my Global rename
I would like to cancel my first global rename, as I have thought of a better name. Thank you. --Zeus  (talk|contribs|accounts|email) 11:59, 6 October 2022 (UTC)


 * ✅ Agent Isai  Talk to me! 23:55, 7 October 2022 (UTC)

Requests for Comment/ApexAgunomu global ban appeal
As has been explained two times before: The global ban RFC did not contain an appeal system. The RFC was created before Miraheze had a local policy on global bans, and only de-facto existed. I structured mine based on existing precedents elsewhere, and remembering that each is unique as it is a custom RFC. For mine, I used the Wikimedia system which states: A global ban's purpose is to prevent harm to [Miraheze] projects when a problem cannot be addressed by the community through less restrictive means, and consequently is usually permanent. A global ban is not [...] meant to provide a “cool down” period. I did this because the user has already received far too many chances already and exhausting them all immediately. As explained by user Sario528, Apex refuses to change their behavior. Apex has been given more warnings and more second chances than anyone I've ever seen on any wiki project, and every time they go right back to trolling. It is far past time to stop giving Apex special treatment and just ban them.. ApexAgunomu had been doing this for two and a half year and in addition this was clearly on purpose with intent to harm, as seen in the original RFC. The purpose of the global ban was to be the final nail in the coffin, because it was clear there would be no change and this issue could not be addressed through any lesser means. (Note that ApexAgunomu is Bugambilia and Skiyomi)

Remember, part of the reason that this global ban happened in the first place was because "power-users" kept trying to give them infinite chances with the user never changing their behavior, ever. This continues to be the repeated pattern of that. Nobody discusses "appeals" for PlavorSeol or Lawrence-Prairies. While this initially may have been because users thought that the behavioral concerns were not as serious, as new information arose it became clear it was just as bad if not worse, and this was not merely a case of "disruptive editing" or similar, which also led to them being banned from IRC (which of course they continue evading). I'm very concerned that this continues to be a pattern of giving ApexAgunomu infinite chances.

Remember that Dmehus lost Steward permissions for doing this, so I would not recommend that other Stewards start trying it as well.

In addition, the closer wrote, writing No further appeal may be considered until 3 months pass. Given the extremely serious things laid out in the original global ban RFC including intentional malicious behavior and harassment that had been going on for two and a half years, an appeal in 3 months would be completely absurd. Nothing would have changed then. This especially applies when the behavior has been going on for over ten times as long as the suggested appeal period.

In summary:
 * Each global ban is different, and in this case there was no "appeal" doctrine in the global ban which de-facto existed at the time and is intended as a permanent status, including other users adapting the global ban as a permanent status
 * These "appeals" might be being used to give leniency/more chances in violation of the community's requests as outlined above (which is what the global ban was supposed to stop in the first place - you're undermining the entire RFC)
 * Even if there was an appeal, 3 months would be an absolutely ridiculously short time especially given the relative concern. If there was an appeal (which there isn't), it would be in at minimum 3-5 years if not longer, not just a few months when nothing will have changed

As such, I find that the Stewards are going against the RFC here and this RFC closure needs to be changed. In addition, any further "appeal" RFCs can and should be speedily closed as procedurally invalid. Naleksuh (talk) 15:03, 7 October 2022 (UTC)


 * Honestly, I could see where you're going with this, but in my opinion, I'd prefer for the user in question to not come back, EVER! It's just how I'm feeling about this. DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 15:12, 7 October 2022 (UTC)
 * People can change. It's like saying that a 21-year-old should be fired for something they did as a 9-year-old; it's a matter of the time between what they did and if they grew up and matured from the time off. -- Bukkit  [ cetacean needed ] 18:53, 7 October 2022 (UTC)
 * It's not like saying that at all. In this case, it's a continued pattern of misbehavior for years which is still completely recent. It's not one single thing and it's nowhere near 12 years ago. Naleksuh (talk) 20:05, 7 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Hey, thank you for raising this, I'm going to respond to each of the concerns you've raised in detail here.
 * "The RFC was created before Miraheze had a local policy on global bans, and only de-facto existed" is true - though when policy is absent, the community has the final say on what happens. In this instance, the community did vote to apply the new global ban policy to all existing community bans. Could you provide some proof that the community explicitly voted that this ban was unappealable and that future policy could not be backdated either?
 * "consequently is usually permanent" - usually is the keyword here. It's not always permanent.
 * "because "power-users" kept trying to give them infinite chances with the user never changing their behavior, ever. This continues to be the repeated pattern of that." - could you advise me how following global policy which states a ban is appealable after 3 months and Stewards should forward these appeals onto the community where possible, an infinite chance and a repeat of a situation where a steward continually used their powers to prevent action being taken against the user?
 * "Nobody discusses "appeals" for PlavorSeol or Lawrence-Prairies" - Stewards are unable to pass on appeals for discussion if we do not receive them.
 * "so I would not recommend that other Stewards start trying it as well." - You would not recommend Stewards trying to follow community policy because Dmehus had his revoked for not following community policy? This seems contradictory and leaves me to question what stewards should be doing if its to both not follow community policy and not ignore community policy.
 * "an appeal in 3 months would be completely absurd." - Global ban policy as voted for by the community states... 'the minimum time before an appeal can be considered will be of 3 months'. This is therefore the minimum period of time, not the absolute "you can appeal in 3 months and we'll discuss it again". In fact Stewards have advised the user concerned not to appeal for at least 12 months, despite 3 months being the minimum in policy.
 * "in this case there was no "appeal" doctrine in the global ban which de-facto existed at the time" - Policy was voted to apply retrospectively in instances where global bans were done before the policy came into force - and one of the provisions was an appeal clause to formalise the process to ensure consistency. There being no appeal clause in non-existent policy only means the community have entire say over what happens with regards to an appeal - which the community indeed exercised.
 * "These "appeals" might be being used to give leniency/more chances in violation of the community's requests" - the community wants to hear appeals as they voted to hear such appeals. I am unsure how it is a violation of the communities requests, to follow the communities requests to hear appeals after a minimum 3 month period.
 * "you're undermining the entire RFC" - which part? Is the user still banned? Yes. Did Stewards pass on an appeal that the community requested to hear? Yes. Seems like both RfCs have been enacted in full force and not undermined.
 * "I find that the Stewards are going against the RFC here and this RFC closure needs to be changed" - having reviewed all three RfCs, I feel the closure is in line with current policy as explained above, therefore I am not going to change the closure at all.
 * "any further "appeal" RFCs can and should be speedily closed as procedurally invalid" - they seem procedurally correct..
 * John (talk) 18:46, 7 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Could you provide some proof that the community explicitly voted that this ban was unappealable The original RFC outlines this as a last resort and does not include the ability for the user to appeal. While global bans can be overturned, this would not be for "change of heart" or similar.
 * olicy was voted to apply retrospectively in instances where global bans were done before the policy came into force If this did happen, I wasn't aware of it, but I don't think it has nor should it. It came after the user appealing sanctions and immediately going back to the behavior, being stuck in an infinite loop of this going on forever and ever. The global ban was essentially to put an end to it; the final nail in the coffin. "Appealing" it would defeat the purpose of it and have the exact same situation we were in, and essentially meaning there is no way to have a user banned. If this is the case, I need to amend the RFC. As explained by Sario528, Apex has been given more warnings and more second chances than anyone I've ever seen on any wiki project, and every time they go right back to trolling.. There is no reason it will be differently, especially not when the appeal time is 3 months. Naleksuh (talk) 20:04, 7 October 2022 (UTC)
 * "and does not include the ability for the user to appeal." - Indeed it appears to do so, I don't think this is being disputed.
 * "While global bans can be overturned, this would not be for "change of heart" or similar." - Correct, it would be overturned based on community consensus - likely following an appeal, likely as outlined in policy.
 * "but I don't think it has nor should it." - Here is the discussion.
 * "The global ban was essentially to put an end to it" - I believe the global ban has achieved this, as disruption has severely been limited.
 * ""Appealing" it would defeat the purpose of it and have the exact same situation we were in, and essentially meaning there is no way to have a user banned." - If a user is not banned, how can they appeal the ban? The user is banned, an appeal of the ban is a request to re-review the level of sanctions in place. An appeal is not automatically granted, and the decision of an appeal can be "you remain banned" - therefore a user would remain banned if the appeal is rejected. This sounds like a system where a user is banned, until the community decide they are no longer banned. Similar to how the community decide a user is a steward, until they decide they are no longer a steward. If the basis of "actions can never be appealed", would that then not mean all decisions are permanent - including the RfC that was closed here - meaning you can't appeal it or request it be overturned/reviewed as you have done.
 * "If this is the case, I need to amend the RFC" - You are free to open up further discussions as necessary.
 * John (talk) 20:52, 7 October 2022 (UTC)

Global lock
Requesting global lock since I don't use this account anymore. Squid76 (talk) 15:14, 7 October 2022 (UTC)


 * I'm sorry to see you go like this. DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 15:15, 7 October 2022 (UTC)
 * ✅, as requested. Agent Isai  Talk to me! 23:45, 7 October 2022 (UTC)

Another CheckUser request for some sockpuppeteers
I am back with more sockpuppet accounts to report on the AVID Wiki. These include: All listed above are sockpuppets of Erichomi as indicated by their real name "Logo Archive Collection Company". The accounts in question are sockpuppets of Prodigy012. Compare their edits to Prodigy's both on the AVID Wiki and Wikipedia through his Nottie Productions and Hottie Productions accounts and you will see some patterns: one of them have behavioral matches (ending requests with "very please" or "pretty please") and they frequently add categories to other articles (most notably ones relating to the UK and categories related to companies such as Beyond International). Other socks include: Thanks for your intervention. Camenati (talk) 20:33, 7 October 2022 (UTC)
 * UnUsableLogo
 * SilentLogo
 * PrintLogo
 * ReCAPTCHA
 * CurrentLogo
 * Ninpleawe
 * Dumbworm22
 * 9BobNew
 * NinaFan493544855933 (sock of Ngozikal, who was IP banned on the site for a year since July and for some reason still managed to make a few accounts this and last month)
 * Feg56 and Feg54 (socks of Feg55, as evident by their similar usernames)


 * Thank you for your reports! All users in this report are confirmed socks and I have ✅ and ✅ their IP ranges so they shouldn't be back for a while. Please let us know if they return, thanks! Agent Isai  Talk to me! 23:42, 7 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Just when you were issuing these locks, Chuck Quenano, a sockpuppeteer you locked last summer, created another account, Jayden Quenano Time Again. While I appreciate your investigation, I think you forgot to check the last three socks I have listed in this report, specifically those relating to Ngozikal and Feg55 respectively. Thanks! Camenati (talk) 23:50, 7 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Locked. Agent Isai  Talk to me! 00:07, 8 October 2022 (UTC)

Both of the Websites wikis
Can someone please reopen both Rotten and Fresh websites wikis please? Boo aaaaahhh (talk) 21:31, 7 October 2022 (UTC)


 * This cannot be overturned as bureaucrats closed the wiki in a community vote. --Zeus  (talk|contribs|accounts|email) 22:59, 7 October 2022 (UTC)

Request to lock my account
Stewards, can lock my account? I have been inactive on Miraheze. HarukiZach (talk) 22:56, 7 October 2022 (UTC)


 * ✅, as requested. Agent Isai  Talk to me! 23:41, 7 October 2022 (UTC)

CheckUser request
Hello, please check the IP of these users for the Russian Polandball Wiki:
 * Kosovo
 * Италия
 * Швейцария
 * Мистер Сферический
 * Дерево
 * Кокосовые Острова
 * Республика Минерва

Edits and behaviour of the aforementioned users are extremely similar, and due to that many contributors suspect that both accounts belong to the same person which is causing regular conflicts. Please compare their IP addresses so we can sort out this problem.

Thank you! Aphrodite (talk) 16:13, 8 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your report! For future reference, it would be advisable for you to provide us with diff links to the editing patterns which you think overlap and show that a user is a sock. While another CheckUser may have declined, I accepted this request as I've been keeping my out on four users within that list for suspicious behavior. Following a thorough sweep, I can confirm Kosovo is behind the following:


 * Анти-Украина
 * Новый Хомчик
 * Дерево
 * Республика Минерва
 * Великое Княжество Лагонское
 * Синий Экран Смерти
 * Azerbaijani Fan
 * Ремув Пицца!
 * Республика Острова Роз
 * Силенд
 * Мышка Катюша
 * КНС1234554321
 * KisluhinVsevolod
 * Великое Княжество Лагонское
 * Синий Экран Смерти
 * Фанат Мистера Европы Три

I have globally locked these accounts so you don't have to block them. I have warned Kosovo to stop doing that or that they will face a global lock and I locally blocked their IPs. If socks return, please let us know.

Additionally, Италия and Швейцария are the same person but are not related to Kosovo. Thank you! Agent Isai Talk to me! 05:25, 9 October 2022 (UTC)

Global ban for Blubabluba9990
Blubabluba9990 has obsessively attempted to keep a certain set of wikis up, and has hoped it will return, per this, this, this, and this. (Unrelated to the whole reception wiki mess, this user has also screeched in all caps before.) Whistler98 (talk) 21:13, 8 October 2022 (UTC)


 * The user in question has been the subject of two global ban RfCs, both of which have failed. The disruption he's caused is out of incompetence, which shouldn't be handled by sanctions. Tali64³ (talk) 21:46, 8 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Your account is ineligible for initiating such a RfC. Per Global bans, on top of you lacking 1K global edits, your account is less than 6 months old. --Zeus  (talk|contribs|accounts|email) 21:49, 8 October 2022 (UTC)
 * yep knew that. Anyways, I would like to withdraw this. Whistler98 (talk) 22:12, 8 October 2022 (UTC)
 * we tried two times, both of these have failed. This also resulted in a user being unable to connect with them anymore. LovingHaydeL (talk) 00:36, 9 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Blubabluba9990, while perhaps rather insistent, has broken no global policy. Stewards do not have the power to globally ban a user as that would constitute an abuse of our own power. If the community wishes to initiate a global ban RfC, an eligible user may do so. The previous global ban RfC did not fail but rather was closed as invalid because the nominator was ineligible to start the RfC. Agent Isai  Talk to me! 03:48, 9 October 2022 (UTC)
 * I don't think yelling is grounds for Complete Excommunication, is it Chantolove (talk) 19:47, 9 October 2022 (UTC)