User talk:Izno

Archives

concerning the Doors and Robby Krieger

I don't feel like you had rhe right to delete my edits.Ronby Krieger is credited for thise songs. Plus the Doors yelp site its oll legit you at Wikipedia are just avoiding Jim Morrison Jr for some reason you just refuse to recognize him ~2026-31386 (talk) 00:46, 3 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I have no opinion on the topic of Morrison Jr. I reverted your edits because they introduced external links in the body of the article, which you are not supposed to do (see WP:EL). Izno (talk) 00:55, 3 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Concerning the closure of Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2025_November_24#Template:Sanitize_HTML_attribute

Hello!

I'm here on User:Grufo's behalf to request you re-open the discussion of the deletion of {{Sanitize HTML attribute}}, for two reasons:

One of the participants, The Banner, was recently brought up at ANI and indeff'ed for a pattern of continued antagonism against Grufo. Their !vote to delete was likely in bad faith, and thus should not have contributed to consensus. See this ANI thread: Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Continued_antagonism_by_The_Banner_towards_Grufo.
Grufo had argued for the usefulness of the template well, both at the deletion discussion itself and at the ANI thread. I feel it would have been more appropriate to relist rather than delete.

Have a lovely day! MEN KISSING (she/they) T - C - Email me! 05:01, 5 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

It's been over a month since the discussion was closed. I do not intend to revisit it. Izno (talk) 06:09, 5 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, I see. Do you think that there are sufficient grounds for me to start a deletion review instead? MEN KISSING (she/they) T - C - Email me! 06:28, 5 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Going by the list items you've presented, no. You are, of course, free to pursue it despite my suggestion otherwise. Izno (talk) 06:48, 5 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@MEN KISSING: Thank you for this. However Izno might be right. If you look at several comments at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2025 December 18#Template:List with serial comma, it is likely that it will be argued to you that there is no ground to review the deletion, because there are no mistakes from Izno, the closer. It is true that point #3 of Wikipedia:Deletion review § Purpose mentions “substantial procedural errors in the deletion discussion”, but if we remove The Banner, it is likely that it will be argued to you, as it has been done already in the review of {{List with serial comma}}, that the errors here are substantive and not procedural. @Izno: Do you think there are sufficient grounds for WP:RFU instead? --Grufo (talk) 13:15, 5 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, banner blindness. This page is not for challenging the outcome of deletion discussions or to address the pending deletion of any page. Izno (talk) 18:13, 5 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Izno, good point. Then I guess a hypothetical deletion review will have to rely on “substantial procedural errors in the deletion discussion”. If we remove The Banner (for procedural reasons), that discussion saw only the participation of the nominator, me, and another user; if I am not wrong, such a scarce participation would be easily followed by a relist; and if we add that the template is currently needed elsewhere, there should be enough ground to re-open it. Would you be willing to give it a chance and relist it without going through deletion review? Under this light, the significant period should be the time since the The Banner's ANI was closed (and the month passed since the TfD discussion was closed should not matter much). --Grufo (talk) 02:35, 6 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I already gave an opinion on whether I would revisit the discussion. Izno (talk) 03:31, 6 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Alright. Thank you for clarifying. I don't know if I will have the time to open a WP:DRV right now, but if I will, I will make sure to clarify that I believe that there were no errors from you. --Grufo (talk) 03:51, 6 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Temp accounts and SPI's

I was under the impression that the change from exposed IP's to temp accounts would overcome the checkuser issue in that area. Can you explain why that isn't the case? Also, as this is not a short term issue, are you able to soft block the underlying IP of both temp accounts anyway for the same reason? If you want other temp accounts listed let me know. Addicted4517 (talk) 06:57, 6 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Addicted4517 There is a user group, WP:TAIVs, who can see the IPs of temp accounts. (Admins and CUs can also.) These users do not have sufficient permission for checkusers to disclose IPs to (and will not have generally signed the ANPDP on top of not having the correct roles/social groups associated), which is what a checkuser would do if they connected a TA to a named account. Izno (talk) 08:24, 6 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

And as for the question of whether I can block the underlying IPs, yes, any admin can. I can disclose that I have blocked specific IPs in certain places but it's just a little messy to do so so what you'll probably hear is "it's been taken care of" or "no comment on underlying IPs" etc.

If there are other temp accounts feel free, but I suspect the ones that matter will already have been blocked by IP. Izno (talk) 08:27, 6 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Ah okay. I understand. I didn't know the change had spread the IP viewing underneath. A bit of a pest, but that's the way it is. Thanks for the note about blocking the underlying IP. Hopefully that will take care of this for now at least. Addicted4517 (talk) 04:29, 8 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Happy First Edit Anniversary Izno 🎉

Hey @Izno. Your wiki edit anniversary is today, marking 19 years of dedicated contributions to English Wikipedia. Your passion for sharing knowledge and your remarkable contributions have not only enriched the project, but also inspired countless others to contribute. Thank you for your amazing contributions. Wishing you many more wonderful years ahead in the Wiki journey and a blessed New Year. :) -❙❚❚❙❙ GnOeee ❚❙❚❙❙ ✉ 16:53, 7 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Wikimedia Hackathon Northwestern Europe 2026

Hello! I noticed you're a bot operator, so I thought you might be interested in a hackathon we're organizing: the Wikimedia Hackathon Northwestern Europe 2026, on 13–14 March in Arnhem, Netherlands.

It's a two-day, technically oriented hackathon bringing together Wikimedians from the region. Whether you want to work on bot frameworks, tools, or other technical projects, this could be a great opportunity to collaborate with fellow developers. Registration closes mid-January or when full. Let me know if there are any questions. Hope to see you there! Daanvr (talk) 10:15, 12 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

RAIFKISLAI

Hi there, IP hopping socks of RAIFKISLAI are active again at Indomania and Great Game. Mutt Lunker (talk) 11:35, 15 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Strange styling question

Hey, I noticed that some pages like Wikipedia:Requests for comment and Wikipedia:Requests for comment/All have an additional space between the namespace and the page title, while most don't. When inspecting I can see that the span class with mw-page-title-separator is different but I don't know why or where it gets this additional styling from. Do you happen to know? Gonnym (talk) 19:26, 16 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

phab:T315893. Izno (talk) 20:19, 16 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

If I read that correctly, it was only enabled for talk pages, right? If that is correct, then where does WP:RFC inherit that style from? Gonnym (talk) 20:49, 16 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I have no idea. I know there was discussion about broadening where this is happening but I was also not under the impression that it was going to. Izno (talk) 21:03, 16 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, was hoping you'll know. I'll ask in the VP/T then. Thanks for pointing me to that phab ticket. Gonnym (talk) 21:04, 16 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

It's an inconsistent mess. I have added some examples to the Phab ticket. – Jonesey95 (talk) 21:39, 16 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Dinesh Sudarshan Soi (3rd nomination)

Can we also revert the IP vote? It is solid WP:DUCK as they also edited Draft:Shreya Kulkarni in their few edits, the same draft user:Priya Kumar Khan was working on prior to being blocked. CNMall41 (talk) 20:34, 17 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Liz Pelly

Hello, can you please undelete Liz Pelly? I added material to the article and had nominated it to appear on Did You Know. Thriley (talk) 00:53, 22 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Izno (talk) 01:11, 22 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Josias Wenitte Apiou

Seeing as Josias Wenitte Apiou (aka Wenitte Apiou) has already been recreated from a draft yet again (which I already rejected), I'm suspecting Joshleefan (talk · contribs) is a sockpuppet of 65sugg (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). Can you please look into this? Thanks, sjones23 (talk - contributions) 10:07, 22 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Please file an SPI. Izno (talk) 16:43, 22 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Just did. sjones23 (talk - contributions) 21:20, 22 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Charmed redirects

Hello, just letting you know about this RFD, because I linked your edit there. Graham87 (talk) 06:53, 27 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

CTOP mess

I'm sure you're correct that Wikipedia:Contentious topics is transcluded, but if you take a look at the page (click on WP:STANDARDSET), I think you'll also find that the formatting is broken. WhatamIdoing (talk) 19:15, 30 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like the devs left a note about this at Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee#Markup issue on Wikipedia:Contentious topics last week. WhatamIdoing (talk) 19:16, 30 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

If you are using Parsoid, it is broken. If you are not, it is not. Izno (talk) 19:39, 30 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a way to make it work for everyone? WhatamIdoing (talk) 19:46, 30 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Reporting a UPE

Hi @Izno, could you please let me know if I'm required to file a separate request for suspected UPEs, I've already mentioned the user on a SPI.

Thanks. Retro music11 (talk) 20:11, 30 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

UPE/paid editing, where there isn't a strong sock concern, is best reported to WP:COIN or WP:ANI. There isn't a guarantee that a patrolling admin will process a block at SPI for UPE/paid editing. Izno (talk) 20:19, 30 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Izno : Thank you for responding. I recently added a suspected sock to a SPInvestigation. It seemed like a strong sock concern based on behavioural evidence. Additionally, that particular contribution also seems to be an outcome of an undisclosed paid editing activity. In this case, should the user be reported to WP:COIN or is it recommended to wait? Retro music11 (talk) 21:02, 30 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The technical conclusion is effectively that it is not a strong sock concern. If you want something done sooner than who knows when, you should report elsewhere. (See also User:Tamzin/SPI is expensive.) Izno (talk) 21:04, 30 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you @Izno. I read through User:Tamzin/SPI is expensive and it helped! Retro music11 (talk) 21:15, 30 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Izno, I had not seen SPICOST either. If the SPI that I filed (and you just commented on, which is how I ended up here and seeing the essay) is too "costly" to be "worth" the time investment, please feel free to just close it. Like I said, this has just grated me and I mostly just wanted to have done my part. --Gurkubondinn (talk) 22:03, 30 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's important to report to SPI when you have a suspicion someone is editing outside the rules by having multiple accounts. We can tell you when it would have been faster for a specific sockmaster to go another way, if you don't already know.

Regarding the essay, I think it's wise to treat that essay in the way the author treats the conclusion: SPI is slow because it's optimized for accuracy (well, optimized is a strong word) and more for issuing blocks when there is foul play from prior editors than it is for users that aren't already blocked for another reason. I have to come to a separate conclusion that one of the editors merits a block for disruption that isn't socking, and the separate conclusion that there is abuse of multiple (or logged out) accounts.

I'm generally less concerned about the amount of time I spend there (which is probably too much but that's a me problem :) and more concerned that you (general) will or won't get relief Soon or Immediately from the problem you think is occurring. Which is perhaps something that essay doesn't say quite loud enough: it's not written to put people off reporting at SPI, it's written to tell people that they may have to request other assistance to get something done on a timeline they prefer.

In the specific case you filed, I moved it to Open because another patrolling clerk or admin may come to a conclusion about what should be done and action it. Izno (talk) 22:15, 30 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Izno, that was both informative and interesting. I have spent a lot of time in various administrative and support roles, with varying degrees of "authority" given to me, so I have a somewhat deeply instilled respect for the time of other people in roles like that (in particular on Wikipedia). I don't come here to argue or to waste peoples time, though it all too often feels like that is all you get back. (I am here to contribute to what sometimes feels like one of the last corners of the internet that hasn't been enshittified or commodified, in no small thanks to people like you.) So thanks again for taking the time (here, and on SPI). --Gurkubondinn (talk) 22:26, 30 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Page move cleanup

I think I know what I did wrong - I must have copied and pasted the text "Wikipedia talk:Sockpuppet investigations/Thcsphuninh2025" while reporting a sockpuppet instead of "Thcsphuninh2025" which would be the more sensible location. Initially I didn't realise the error until I noticed you moved the page recently. I've managed to spot something odd while keeping an eye on the Wikipedia talk: edits recently. Iggy (Swan) (Contribs) 08:28, 31 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

		The Admin's Barnstar
		For blocking that TA sock of Andrew5. I appreciate your help! JeffSpaceman (talk) 18:20, 1 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Help me please

Hi could you help me please? In 1 January 2026 you moved John Gallacher (politician) to John Gallacher, Baron Gallacher which is the correct way.

Could you do the following please:

George Darling (politician) to , Baron Darling of Hillsborough as a peer
George Brown (British Labour politician) to George Brown, Baron George-Brown as a peer
Michael Spicer (politician) to Michael Spicer, Baron Spicer as a peer
Jane Fellowes, Baroness Fellowes to Lady Jane Fellowes as a daughter of an Earl she should be styled this was as Lady Joan Zuckerman, Lady Pamela Smith, Lady Jane Lacey and Lady Susan Hussey are daughters of earls (Lady Joan Zuckerman daughter of Gerald Isaacs, 2nd Marquess of Reading) and have husbands who were Life Peers.
Maie Casey, Baroness Casey to Maie Casey, Lady Casey as a wife of a Life Peer she should not be called Baroness as she was.t one in her own right.

RugbyFan88 (talk) 15:06, 4 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

You may request renames using WP:Move requests. Izno (talk) 17:25, 4 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Could you did on my behalf please? RugbyFan88 (talk) 11:59, 5 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Question about TTT24

I'm not familiar with this user but I see you blocked The Ladies' Journal as a sock of theirs and then nuked them. Would you mind undeleting Star Legend? I don't think it was eligible for G5 since they created a redirect which I had since converted to a dab. (You also deleted the page but left the talk page.) I'm not familiar with TTT24, so I don't know how essential it is to nuke everything they do. lp0 on fire () 18:56, 4 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I am happy to restore it. Izno (talk) 18:58, 4 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I don't feel strongly either way so you can consider it G7 if you like, but in that case you'll need to delete the talk page as well. lp0 on fire () 19:00, 4 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Antennae

[1] is causing quiet twitching at AFC/R. Can't put my finger on it 🇵🇸‍🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦‍🇵🇸 23:17, 4 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not familiar with that one if so. Izno (talk) 23:37, 4 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I may have oversensitive antennae. 🇵🇸‍🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦‍🇵🇸 00:00, 5 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Similar-sounding username, now inactive

I'm sure this is not an ALTACCOUNT, but I thought maybe you would want to know about WhyIzno? (talk · contribs · logs). He was an HDI stats gnome for five days in November 2025; inactive since. Cheers, Mathglot (talk) 01:14, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Odds are a sock but I couldn't say of who. I haven't intersected with the specific account. We have about half a dozen socks that find themselves on these pages. Izno (talk) 01:19, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Just for fun: you appear to have three star-crossed admirers, one stalker, one legal beagle, and two copycats (search results). Cheers, Mathglot (talk) 01:29, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Quickest gunslinger, North, South, East, aaaaaaaand West of the Pecos!

Damn, you're quick! I doth my cap, Tex. :D Halbared (talk) 20:50, 10 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hiya Izno, I'm currently creating a sock report. It is OK to refer to temporary accounts that are under the one IP? Also, if I believe a sock is using different providers, can I say that, or just refer to the fact that the posting behaviour connects different IPs/providers? Halbared (talk) 16:31, 13 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

"Same IP as previous" is fine. "Different providers" isn't a ton of value because it's not something in common, and because it's common (phone versus home computer regularly has a different provider at least in the US). Izno (talk) 16:38, 13 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, I'll use that terminology. The provider thing, well it seems to be a VPN type company. I'll phrase that appropriately too. Halbared (talk) 16:42, 13 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hiya, no sure if this is worthy of a log taking up volume in the sock report. This edit by ~2026-10765-29 has the feel of Nik jumping right back in. In going through the logs I actually missed this edit by ~2026-55144-8 which is Nik. You can see the info behind the curtain. Should I make a new log? Halbared (talk) 09:34, 18 February 2026 (UTC).[reply]

If you want those actioned you should file an SPI showing how you think they're similar. Izno (talk) 21:59, 18 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

IPA common

Can you bring {{IPA navigation}} to its previous state? The vowels are no longer centered, and the notes and navigation links should appear inside the horizontal edges of the table above them. IIRC that's the primary reason it used table. Nardog (talk) 05:02, 13 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Rv'd for now. Nardog (talk) 16:53, 14 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Nardog This was the fix. What was still an issue? Izno (talk) 17:12, 14 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Oh sorry, I didn't realize that. This edit to IPA consonant chart with audio indicates something was still an issue, but we could investigate that. Re-rv'd. Nardog (talk) 14:44, 17 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Ah ok, I can fix that. That was probably occurring before my change since floating items can fall out of their containers even if those containers are tables IIRC. Izno (talk) 17:39, 17 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Talk page protection

Given that Andrew5 is now thanking you for not wanting your talk page protected, I think page protection is appropriate now. SuperPianoMan9167 (talk) 18:50, 15 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

CT question

If a user has been warned against editing in a ECR topic because they do not meet 500/30 and they then go and ask an extended-confirmed account to make edits on that topic to bypass the restriction, would that be a violation warranting arbitration enforcement? EvergreenFir (talk) 17:47, 16 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I'd treat that as a violation, yes. Izno (talk) 18:07, 16 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Now, whether you just want to, as a singular admin, tell them to stop, issue an actual remedy yourself, or report to AE, is up to you. Izno (talk) 18:14, 16 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, thank you! They were told to stop a few times before the proxy editing but I'm on the fence about an appropriate remedy. I might post at AE instead. EvergreenFir (talk) 18:16, 16 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion review for Template:PRC provinces big imagemap alt

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Template:PRC provinces big imagemap alt. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 22:15, 16 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Basically, we object to your closure because I feel it did not receive enough participation and it is a large template with intricate syntax. It contains over twice as much code as {{Infobox neon}}. –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 18:56, 17 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Sock requesting moves, LeandroTelesRocha1983?

Hi Izno, I think this this TA you blocked is back in January is LeandroTelesRocha1983 (and I think there was another TA or two you blocked at the same time who also intiated RMs) but not 100% sure. It appears they are back as Mariana de moraes silveira and this TA and probably more. I don't mind filing an SPI but can you tell me if I am in ballpark? S0091 (talk) 21:39, 17 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, those all hit the mark. [2] feel free to go revert those if you want. Izno (talk) 21:59, 17 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I'll check the account in a bit to see if there's anything else. Izno (talk) 21:59, 17 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I think even with the blocks I might still file an SPI as their MO as shifted from AFC/R and Requested articles to now RMs which is even more of a time-suck for the community, unless you suggest otherwise. S0091 (talk) 22:24, 17 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The block beneath Special:Contributions/~2026-63897-7 is intended to stop the problematic behaviors, so it's more that they made an account and also Special:Contributions/~2026-96034-9 which is on a different network. Izno (talk) 22:57, 17 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

And no, please don't file a new SPI until we have new accounts named or otherwise to go with it. Izno (talk) 23:03, 17 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Side note @S0091, all changes to RA. The subpageof filter was added recently but hasn't been advertised because it has no GUI yet. I picked off a few more issues there. Izno (talk) 01:40, 18 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Izno! I'll bookmark that filter and keep my paws off the SPI unless there's a new account. :) S0091 (talk) 17:11, 18 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Another CarlFritz1938/Will Fritz 12

[3] Acroterion (talk) 01:10, 18 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

'tis indeed. Izno (talk) 01:17, 18 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

FYI

[4]. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:03, 18 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I was alerted to that elsewise, I wasn't convinced that was the same user (the TA or rather its /64 may still merit a block - but a brief review of the /64 indicates no prior blocks). Anyone else can take a crack at it. Izno (talk) 22:00, 18 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Stroup editor you just CU blocked

I have just sent off wiki evidence to paid-en-wpwikipedia.org 🇵🇸‍🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦‍🇵🇸 21:03, 19 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Pinging @331dot to have a look if they have time. S0091 (talk) 21:12, 19 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Acknowledged, thanks. 331dot (talk) 21:22, 19 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Your off-wiki evidence got sent to a few other users too, which is why I looked. Izno (talk) 21:23, 19 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

It's certainly....interesting. 331dot (talk) 21:26, 19 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I guessed I might not be the only one. I despise items like the one I was sent. I apologise for accepting the draft in 2014. I will not raise any objection if a valid reason is found to remove it and salt it, plus the other one referred to, 🇵🇸‍🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦‍🇵🇸 22:53, 19 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@S0091 and 331dot: and hi Izno. I have just been through Andrew Stroup, removed much unsourced clutter and checked all the references I am able to check, flagging many as failing verification. A couple I am prevented from seeing because of the GDPR. Stroup appears to me today to be a run of the mill self promoting business person, borderline notable.

The blocked account only displays self interest. 🇵🇸‍🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦‍🇵🇸 10:15, 20 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

S0091 and 331dot and hi Izno. Please see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Andrew Stroup. I've stripped out all I have found to be unverified and puffery. If I have revealed more than I should please will one of you organise redaction and suppression of the relevant parts of the nomination, replacing them if able with better words.

There it relatively little point that I can see in troubling SPI with a report. User:LeverageAI is also blocked. And the creating editor of the autobiography was in 2014 and was an SPA, not editing since. 🇵🇸‍🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦‍🇵🇸 12:49, 21 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Stroup's article and his picture are now deleted. Oh dear, what a pity, never mind. Just goes to show that he got the reverse of what he wished for. His personal website now links to his non existent article on Wikipedia.

Is there any wisdom in applying salt, or shall we just see if anyone else arrives? 🇵🇸‍🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦‍🇵🇸 15:34, 28 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

No, I do not anticipate post-deletion disruption. Izno (talk) 17:42, 28 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

		The Teamwork Barnstar
		Thanks for your important contributions in finding resolutions to the challenges presented in the Archive Today discussion. It's a pleasure to watch you working to problem-solve. Risker (talk) 04:02, 20 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Request for userfication (TFD 'amendment')

Hello. There was a recent December 2025 TFD about a bunch of COVID-19 templates in which I wasn't notified and, as such, wasn't able to cast my "userfy" vote. In a newer TFD, I asked Primefac (who actually made the deletions) to userfy those for me, however, it appears we need your approval to do so. Are you alright with it? I believe there were no graph-based templates in that December batch, therefore the userfication request would be for all 28 pages. Alexis Coutinho (talk) 16:59, 20 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I have no issue with userfication of those. Undeletion and userfication is just a pain to do, however, at mass, so I might implore you to ask another admin for that part. Izno (talk) 19:25, 20 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Rosolio

One more block, eh? ~2026-11664-60 (talk · contribs) --Altenmann >talk 17:53, 21 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Dangerous Romance wikipedia page

Hello. I wanted to create a page for the 2023 Thai Boys' Love TV series Dangerous Romance, however, a warning message popped up telling me that a similar page has already been created before but was deleted due to a ban/block violation by the page creator..

Is it okay now to recreate the page anew? Thank you! Acepitcher20181 (talk) 07:01, 25 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see any reason why you shouldn't. Izno (talk) 06:18, 26 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Sock

Hello,
I suspect the new user Prime1996 is a sock of 271rpm, in write only on the article Average human height by country (some vandalisms he made on the Italian featured article "Statura" yesterday). Thank you --Walther16 (talk) 11:42, 27 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

There are few users who intend to delete studies without proper reasoning. I try to combat vandalism and keep the article at a scientific level. Prime1996 (talk) 11:59, 27 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

No, you are not discussing following wikipedian rules and you are trolling. You have no any idea of the subject, your interventions demonstrate you are far from any scientific level of contribution. We have already warned you on it.wiki where you yesterday did vandalisms inside the featured article "Statura", so please stop this trolling. It is probably you are a sock of 271rpm & C. due to your style --Walther16 (talk) 14:02, 27 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

There is a disussion on the talk page of its article. You lack basic understanding which I have already prooven. Prime1996 (talk) 15:46, 27 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

You did not discuss. You made your edits as you preferred without a real wikipedian discussion and consensus. Again, stop trolling --Walther16 (talk) 16:53, 27 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Distinction beetween - and – as well as roundings to full centimetres is as far from vandalism as it gets. Prime1996 (talk) 15:49, 27 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Stop trolling, please --Walther16 (talk) 16:51, 27 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Please report to SPI in the future, not my talk page. Izno (talk) 17:03, 27 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

And also Saladino873 (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki · SI). Izno (talk) 17:07, 27 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Could you please send me the linkt to "SPI"? Concerning the page Average human height by country, could you revert the edits to the last version by Quantum Mechanical Engineer? Thank you --Walther16 (talk) 17:46, 27 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/PenultimateStride. Izno (talk) 01:02, 28 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I am not sure if you have seen the new SPI I filed for PenultimateStride. You might have missed it, as it is below the one that has already closed. If you have already seen it but are waiting to make a decision, then that is fine as well. Just wanted to bring it to your attention if not.

Another user, who although has an older account, made the same edit as the confirmed sock, using the same language about the previous edit (vandalism), and has a user page that shows general layout and interests to be identical to the sock master. Details in the SPI below. Thank you.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/PenultimateStride Quantum Mechanical Engineer (talk) 02:13, 4 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I was aware of the case being filed before you left it on my talk page. Recent evidence is clearly thin as is the technical evidence which I have already reviewed, so I'm letting it cook for a day or three. Izno (talk) 04:41, 4 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, that sounds fair. Evidence is mostly circumstantial due to the timing of it and the very specific edit. I find the user page similarities, specifically the interests in both human height and track and field events, as well as the layout itself listing the height of the user, those interests, country of origin, and native language(while different it looks like the same pattern of page creation) to be more than just explained by coincidence.

I'll respect your decision either way.

If you decide against deciding this user is a sock, due to thin evidence, and more evidence emerges that it is a sock later, can I still report the same account later, or would this look bad on my part?

Thank you for your help. Quantum Mechanical Engineer (talk) 15:22, 4 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I would have closed the case directly if I thought it was meritless at this time, likely with a "not enough evidence presently". The fact the single edit restored the sock edit is enough behaviorally to have stayed my hand.

We will tell you directly when you shouldn't re-report. Izno (talk) 16:45, 4 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Keep in mind that this user, Penultimatestride, has been caught using different IP addresses with different accounts, I'd have to dig through to find the mention of this, but have seen it in the messages of one of his previous accounts, so don't just base a ban of off the ip alone. Also let me know if you want me to file a sock puppet report, because it is very obvious that it's the same account regardless due to editing the same edits on the same pages and forming the account the same day the sock master account was banned. Quantum Mechanical Engineer (talk) 00:16, 28 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Help solve blank line issue

Hello Izno. I wonder if you could help me figure out why there is a blank line on the WP:GA page. The blank line is seen near the top, between the called templates Wikipedia:Good article nominations/Tab header and Wikipedia:Good articles/Summary. Is it the stylesheets? You're smarter than me so maybe you will figure it out. Thanks. Prhartcom (talk) 19:57, 2 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

New lines are generally significant. Should be fixed now. Izno (talk) 20:20, 2 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I see it now [5] Wow. Great catch. Prhartcom (talk) 21:05, 2 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion at Talk:Wallace Shawn § Nickname in infobox and concerns about banned user

You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Wallace Shawn § Nickname in infobox and concerns about banned user. sjones23 (talk - contributions) 23:16, 3 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Help setting a stylesheet

Hello again, Izno. Good to meet you, by the way, and yes, I am back. I wonder if you could kindly help change the content model of the new page Wikipedia:Good topics/styles.css to a stylesheet. Wikipedia:Good topics should have its own sheet, and so I created it and plan to rename the classes to match renamed selectors in this new sheet that will pretty much be a clone of Wikipedia:Good articles/Summary/styles.css. I wonder if we should incorporate Wikipedia:Good articles/styles.css? Thanks! Prhartcom (talk) 03:06, 4 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like it is already using the GA sheet via Wikipedia:Good topics/header. Personally I don't see a need to duplicate the effort, as it were, to maintain a consistent style between the two spaces, which would be required by adding another sheet to the mix. The class names are "wrong" but those are metadata at best anyway. Izno (talk) 03:10, 4 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I now see what you mean. We do want consistency and we don't need autonomy. We can share the same template for both domains. The class names are fine after all (BTW I had converted to use those classes just the other day). I don't think I will update this stylesheet page after all; we can save it for future needs. Thanks for the objective point of view, Izno. Cheers. Prhartcom (talk) 22:10, 7 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Another one I can't figure out

View this page and section on your mobile phone browser: Wikipedia:Good_article_reassessment#Articles_needing_possible_reassessment, and when it calls this next page that prints a box: Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/notices given, it is causing whatever is to be printed next (in this case, a "see also") to be crammed into a teeny-weeny area to the left side of the box, instead of following the box. We need to display whatever is to be printed next, to be following after the box. What do you think. Prhartcom (talk) 22:55, 7 March 2026 (UTC) BTW, I haven't self-reverted this that I attempted to fix it, put it back if needed. Prhartcom (talk) 23:02, 7 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Prhartcom The box of interest is not set up to be responsive. The easiest way to fix that is to convert it to a {{sidebar}}, which will coincidentally totally remove it from display at mobile resolution in Minerva and Timeless (but not Vector 2022 or Monobook afaik). The other way is to convert it to TemplateStyles. Izno (talk) 23:20, 7 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Set to stylesheet

This one: Wikipedia:Vital articles/styles.css for sure needs a stylesheet, to start, I plan to include a box around the new page Wikipedia:Vital articles/Level/header to be transcluded in the other pages at this domain. If you agree, can you kindly make the stylesheet settings change to this one, too? I'm checking the sidebar. Thanks! Prhartcom (talk) 23:49, 7 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Update: I just cleaned up these pages and we may not need a stylesheet. Prhartcom (talk) 01:04, 8 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

More sock activity?

Hey Izno, I'm not sure if it doesn't show for you since I reported on a sock master twice in the same day, but it appears that they have already made another account and have continued. I've been dealing with a lot of socks on Peruvian topics, so thank you for the quick action earlier. WMrapids (talk) 04:27, 4 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Need to Change Infobox photo

Hello Izno . I would like to request to update the current image in the infobox of Garhwali people because the existing photo is outdated, and a newer, more accurate image is available. Since the page is under extended confirmed protection, I am unable to make this change myself. The edit would only involve replacing the old photo with the updated one that better reflects the subject’s current appearance. I would appreciate it if an editor could either lower the protection level or update the image accordingly. If you give permission i will share new image with U Thank you. Lbfs (talk) 09:00, 5 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

As you have been told elsewhere, you may make a request on the talk page of the article. Izno (talk) 17:23, 5 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Socks active at 2025 Bondi Beach shooting

Hi Izno, I’m a complete novice at SPI stuff. There’s an account that was made roughly at the same time as the blocked socks and is reinstating the same material as the blocked socks. I don’t even know enough to know if I’m allowed to say that out loud. How would a user proceed in a situation like this? Mikewem (talk) 20:20, 5 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

That was also a 1R vio. Checking if I have this part right: ctop restriction vios can only be presented at AE? Mikewem (talk) 20:27, 5 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Mikewem yes, that's the same sock. When you go to WP:SPI there is a form. Put in the name of the master's account, which can usually be gotten from the user page when tagged and the block log when not, and put that name in there, and then fill in the resulting preload that displays.

Feel free to revert by WP:BANREVERT. Izno (talk) 22:15, 5 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Oh I see and then that tool populates a new entry at the User’s spi case page. And I can look at those pages for examples of what types of evidence get presented.

Ok that’s really helpful, thank you for explaining. And thank for taking care of this latest one. If I happen to come across something like that again that seems very straightforward, I’ll try the form next time. Mikewem (talk) 22:35, 5 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked for someone else’s edits

my phone IP is currently blocked for edits made by someone else ~2026-14363-31 (talk) 04:25, 6 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

You may use {{request edit}} on the talk pages of the pages you wish to edit or you may create an account and log in to edit. Izno (talk) 04:35, 6 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Footnote on TrendingChina socks

I don't know if it's worth any action, but I think the sock farm you flagged at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/TrendingChina/Archive might be User:NotLessOrEqual, who was also uploading a lot of DeviantArtwashed AI upscaled gun copyvios (and PD military/nuclear videos) in 2024.

I've raised a thread at commons:Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/Blocks and protections#Sock_farm, washed uploads to get the accounts blocked over there, with some context for similarities. Belbury (talk) 12:17, 8 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Belbury CU data supports a connection. Nice. Izno (talk) 15:59, 8 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Re: SheryOfficial socks

Moved from User talk:Izno/Archive 12 § CU this, behavioral match: Wazir Pakhteen, 154.57.223.114

(Actually just a continuation from same IP)

Discretionary check for Stanik Afghani (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki · SI)

Also a few TAs on the same possible range on the page history of Baloch nationalism–previous sock edits or which resemble this pattern are [6]-[7].

Again, as HistoryofIran noted, it seems to be a Afghani or Persian (cf. this name: Wazir Pakhteen) demonym that he chooses, which is obviously not what he is, in an attempt to masquerade as another nationality. ~2026-15288-64 (talk) 02:14, 11 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Please use WP:SPI for reports. See also bus factor. Izno (talk) 17:12, 11 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Sure Izno, will do in future. For now, I suppose there's no harm in me filing a pro forma? That's what ToBeFree advised me to as well. To be clear, I didn't because of the fact that shortly after I made a note of this on their talk page (and before ToBeFree replied), they admitted it with this before reverting. ~2026-15449-06 (talk) 18:31, 11 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

No pro forma should be necessary, main socks IDd are tagged and should be locked shortly.

That kind of diff is precisely the kind of diff that is good to report. Izno (talk) 18:33, 11 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

this edit

I don't think that was a particularly good idea, as people might be confused and think the user got blocked for something else. Do you think it should be removed? TheTechie^[she/they] | talk? 04:03, 11 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I am quite cognizant of the tradeoffs in reposting a block message.

Please consider whether your continued involvement with or interest in that specific blocked user is desirable. Izno (talk) 17:16, 11 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Concerning the block against Deluth and our IP Address

Hello User:Izno. One of our assignments for our class, Composition 2, requires us to vet a Wikipedia page. Since our entire IP has been blocked because of ONE misuser who has since graduated, we are unable to complete this assignment, costing us our grade. Note: This class is a college-level course and will be listed on our college transcripts. Even if you are able to unblock us until the end of March (when the assignment is due), that would be greatly appreciated. Either way, the misuser has graduated, and we haven't had anyone do anything harmful. In fact, one of my friends has been trying to improve Wikipedia by providing factual information, even before we started this assignment. Please unblock this IP so we can do our assignment. Roughly 40 students are depending on this to help their grades. ~2026-15518-84 (talk) 13:05, 11 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The data available to me does not support the story presented. Izno (talk) 17:14, 11 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion

Hi Izno, You recently blocked User:PushpaKhan indefinitely for sockpuppetry. As you are aware, he has been using AI to edit Wikipedia articles. He has also created two articles that display clear and strong indications of AI-generation, which I would like to request that you/moderators delete. Thanks a lot. Muydivertido (talk) 00:32, 13 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Please consult WP:Deletion process for appropriate ways to request deletion. Izno (talk) 01:04, 13 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Goof on the Linguist sock report

Did I goof somewhere? I can't figure out what I did wrong or how to fix it. Did I create Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/~2026-16203-16 by accident? I was trying to report the latest Ronald89798 guise to the Linguist sock page. Largoplazo (talk) 02:32, 15 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, you made that page rather than the obvious location, whence I moved your section. Izno (talk) 02:33, 15 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, OK, I didn't see the other end of the move. So, anyway, I've submitted the page I inadvertently created for speedy deletion (G7)—unless there's some reason I shouldn't. Largoplazo (talk) 02:35, 15 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I see you deleted it, thanks. Sorry for the extra work. Largoplazo (talk) 02:37, 15 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

RFA

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Gasgas11 aesurias (ping me in your reply, or I won't see it) (talk) 04:37, 15 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the assist

Hi Izno, I just wanted to say thank you for helping out at the Windows 11 version history article! I had not requested administrator attention on this, so I didn't expect to see you stepping in.

My big challenge with the content dispute on that article has been trying to get the involved parties in the dispute discussing the issue on the talk page. The temp account(s) especially wouldn't say anything on the talk page thread that I posted at all, while restoring the previous state of the article multiple times. I tried an invitation message on a TA's talk page once (here), but it seemed as if either there were so many different editors editing the article with TAs, or one person always making edits under a new TA each day. Needless to say, it almost didn't work, until at some point a TA did (barely) get the memo, as evident by them blanking the entire talk page thread once (diff).

I was thinking of maybe requesting page protection at some point, as well as starting an RfC due to the lack of participants and collaboration on the talk page, until I noticed that you had already semi-protected the page a few days later.

Hopefully it will bring more editors to the talk page rather than them edit-warring. On the talk page there is now a suggestion to do a compromise solution (tables with limited selection of info) which I have agreed with, but once again, the lack of collaboration / "working together" from other people has been a bit of a hindrance to being able to form a consensus. And this is after having sent invitation messages at the computing and software Wikiprojects, two weeks ago. — AP 499D25 (talk) 12:05, 15 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please give me a copy of source of Db-a5

give me the copy ~2026-17169-94 (talk) 13:17, 19 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

TelnetNa60

Hi Izno—can you go respond to this SPI case? Thebigolpizza (talk) 19:56, 20 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Huang

Considering that you've recently blocked the account, in case it would be relevant for tagging, checking for sleepers, or so: [8], [9] ~2026-10830-00 (talk) 20:20, 20 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

RD trolling/timewasting

This one looks quite a bit like trolls you've been WP:DENYing. Well worth a CU double check. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 21:38, 21 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The RD block I issued came via AIV I think, maybe there was one SPI. Either way, clearly abusive behavior under the hood. I am happy to block. Izno (talk) 21:58, 21 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I suspect Huang as above... Thanks for your interventions, ~2026-10830-00 (talk) 08:16, 22 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Respond to SPI case

There is currently a sockpuppet investigations case awaiting a CU here. ~2026-17833-09 (talk) 23:03, 21 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

My talk page is not WP:Sockpuppet investigations/SPI/Cases and doesn't need to be. Izno (talk) 23:05, 21 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
	Thanks for all your CU/SPI work. You seem to be on a roll right now, haha. Drmies (talk) 21:44, 23 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

O template guru

Izno, can you help me figure out why the default value of the template parameters are not being set. For example, when the template code is {{{page|1}}} and the template is called with a null value passed like this: "page=", we are not seeing the value 1 being set. However, when the template is called without any parameters, we are seeing the value 1 being set. Why wouldn't it be set the first way? Here: Template:GA nominee/testcases (Look for text "testcases/GA" that should say "testcases/GA1"). Thank you for your knowledge. Prhartcom (talk) 02:30, 24 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

That's how MediaWiki works. |page= is sent to the system as the empty string, which is a value. If you want to treat the empty string the same as the null string, you need to use the {{#if: parser function. Izno (talk) 02:36, 24 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I changed a critical {{{page|1}}} to {{#if:{{{page|}}}|{{{page}}}|1}} and it works better now and I understand what you mean now. Blessings. Prhartcom (talk) 00:52, 25 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Izno, I implemented my changes to Template:GA nominee and it looks good. However, tried something that didn't work: For error paths, I coded <includeonly>[[Category:GAN error]]</includeonly> at the end of the error message hoping pages with an error would be added to Category:GAN error. Instead, all 900 GAN pages were added. What have I done? What should I have done? Prhartcom (talk) 11:39, 28 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like you placed one cat in the wrong spot. Izno (talk) 16:30, 28 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

How do I handle this situation

Hi. You gave your input on Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Confluencerist and there has been more recent drama with a new user by him vouching for Melons account on Talk:Germany–Iran relations. How do I deal with this? How do I get more moderator attention to this discussion page because IMO this user seems pretty determined to interfere with any due process. Im exasperated. Is there another admin board I could use? Thx M.S. Asher (talk) 15:44, 24 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

If there is a new account, you go to WP:SPI, plug in the master's name, and make a second filing. Izno (talk) 16:25, 24 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thx but LordSer8000/KingofEdits/Confluencer openly identifies as this new account. Its just this new account advocates for the legitimacy of the Melons account and that it should he counted as a separate opinion, and Melons is already a user on the sock-puppet investigations. How could I address that appropriately? Thx for answering and sorry to bother you I’m just confused as to how to deal with it (I believe he is being dishonest). Is there going to he further action on the Melons account? M.S. Asher (talk) 19:33, 24 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

If they have "openly identified" as it you can report the account to WP:AIV. Izno (talk) 19:34, 24 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Or provide the diff of interest here. Izno (talk) 19:34, 24 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

As for their "support", that is reasonable to have left at the SPI as you did. Izno (talk) 19:36, 24 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Ok thank you its just difficult because he keeps trying to put the finger back at me when evidence is brought forward to him, saying im trying to discredit his argument with it (im not, I just dont accept manufacturing consensus thru manipulation, his original argument stands and he should have not tried to add another account to pose as a third opinion). Do you think his actions are substantial enough for vandalism? If so I might take that approach. There was however a ban placed on even creating new accounts indefinitely on his account as user:Confluencerist by another user in 2024, is that still binding? And is he right I shouldnt have said anything until the investigation was closed? Again thx for your patience. M.S. Asher (talk) 19:40, 24 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The diff btw [10], were technical logs able to confirm anything about melons being a sock puppet? M.S. Asher (talk) 19:43, 24 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I did not review any other data than for the user name of interest. Izno (talk) 23:20, 24 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Would it be appropriate now to ask for a checkuser on Melons again? He is active again and insisting he’s not a puppet on the investigation, this was after another user pointed out how strange it was that he never responded to the investigation. M.S. Asher (talk) 00:11, 5 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Not really, no. IznoPublic (talk) 01:38, 5 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

OK thx I was just wondering because Melons was listed by me as one of the possible sock puppets in the investigation. Thx for all the help! M.S. Asher (talk) 23:29, 24 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Please revoke TPA from CookieJarThief and any related accounts

Socks of Astrawiki3203. SuperPianoMan9167 (talk) 00:38, 31 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@SuperPianoMan9167 Global locks are already requested, the old accounts aren't being used. – LuniZunie_(talk) 00:39, 31 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, neither account has used their talk page after the initial rejection. I don't see a need to nix TPA of the ones I've collected this afternoon. Izno (talk) 00:39, 31 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. Just checking. =) SuperPianoMan9167 (talk) 00:40, 31 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Whacked!

Whack!

You've been whacked with a wet trout.

Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know that you did something silly.

- Happy April Fool's Day! - SimpleObjects-9 ei ❄️/☃️/🥶 13:53, 1 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

CloudsAndOvercast block

[11] Just checking, this is a sock of Landpin, aka Dotcoder, yes? (Also, less relevant in terms of SPI, but very relevant in terms of cleanup - they're well and truly at 3x now, right?) GreenLipstickLesbian 💌🧸 07:33, 2 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

WP:BANREVERT applies to both blocked and banned users, so whether they can be cleaned up summarily doesn't matter.

As for the other question, I was able to link them to the one. If they can daisychain to the other, neat. Izno (talk) 16:48, 2 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Awesome.

And in response to point one -- yes, but people get less grumpy and "omg precious content, won't you think of the ~~children~~ readers" when you do it with a banned editor. GreenLipstickLesbian 💌🧸 16:53, 2 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Help with user warn template

What would be the most suitable warning template for this kind of vandalism? 8rz (talk) 20:31, 3 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I would be thinking one of the spam/promotion UWs. Izno (talk) 20:57, 3 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Please delete the revision of the vandalism to stifle the spam. 8rz (talk) 01:29, 4 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The "spam" in that specific diff is a link to Wikimedia's own URL shortener (it happens to go nowhere). And, we do not commonly delete revisions of spam. Izno (talk) 01:37, 4 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I was wondering something. When I warned the user using {{subst:Uw-advert2{{!}}{{no redirect{{!}}H:S}}}} to suppress the redirection to Help:Substitution which rendered as [[:H:S]] instead of H:S in the warning message for the page name. Can an optional param be added to display the first positional param as a normal page name instead of in [[ ]] brackets? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 8rz (talk • contribs)

That is a question you may ask on the template talk page. Izno (talk) 14:54, 4 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Jaam Sahab

im not entirely sure if this isn't permitted, but the user removed the block notice . i know declined unblocks are not permitted to be removed, but it doesn't say about the original block notice. thought you should know. -- Aunva6^{talk - contribs} 19:50, 4 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked users are permitted to remove block notices. What they are not generally permitted to remove are declined unblock requests. IznoPublic (talk) 01:36, 5 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

New sock account of JaierRT

Hi, I wanted to warn you that JavierRT is now back editing with a new sock account.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User%3Aabatsuki&preload=Template%3ACheckuser%2FPreload&preloadparams%5B%5D=%3C%21--JavierNF--%3E&action=edit

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

RakowCze (talk) 03:49, 5 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Please report it to SPI. IznoPublic (talk) 15:34, 5 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Sock admission

See UTRS appeal #111947; they are claiming to be a sock of an account your blocked, but they are not currently blocked (though it appears the underlying IP was been blocked by User:HouseBlaster). Could be Joe Job, wanted to bring it to your attention first. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 20:44, 5 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

They are indeed the same sock. I've blocked. @Ohnoitsjamie Now you can decide whether to accept their preemptive appeal for how very blocked they are. Izno (talk) 23:25, 5 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

And I did realize this was somewhat a confused comment. I've blocked the account. The relevant IP in UTRS I could not say if that is or is not them. Izno (talk) 23:36, 5 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect IP socks

This TA sock seems to be back, on the other TAs you can see associated with it (as far as I can tell without being able to see the deleted history of Talk:Lethoto). CMD (talk) 04:28, 6 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Athletics reverts

Hi, was a bit surprised to see a series of reverts of Dorsalflexion edits (section renaming of "Season's bests" to "World leading marks/times") in my watchlist this morning. The prologue to that was this edit pointing to the World Athletics term, which I reverted due to inconsistency with all other event articles. But to me the terms are synonyms so when Dorsalflexion applied it consistently on all athletics events with such a section, I had no problem with it. So why were those reasonable edits reverted? And the same edits on e.g. 60 metres, 200 metres and 800 metres weren't? (I don't follow the world of sock puppeteering at all, so don't know the rules in such cases, btw.)

Moreover, this revert also took down four of my edits (part of an ongoing project across all athletics events to present the SB/WL sections consistently). What was the problem with those? Could you undo that, or can I re-apply them without penalty? --Xymph (talk) 09:08, 7 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

You can reapply any of these edits, the reversions of which were made under WP:BANREVERT. The catch is that you take ownership of them away from the banned editor, whether they're good or bad. (Yours were not reverted that way, you can safely reinstate as your own edits.) Izno (talk) 15:26, 7 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Is Lockdown Louis Catcreekcitycouncil?

You blocked 3 Lockdown Louis socks at 21:19. Do you know an LTA with nearly identical behavior called Catcreekcitycouncil? The reason I am asking this is that Chinatownyo made this disruptive edit to Agoura High School 10 years ago. After a user reverted that edit, they tagged it as a suspected Catcreekcitycouncil sockpuppet. Catcreekcitycouncil is known to take large breaks before becoming active again. Why wasn't this account blocked after making that Agoura High School edit? If that account was blocked, the vandalism would have been prevented. ~2026-71744-3 (talk) 04:18, 8 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't carry on discussions in WP:MULTIple places. User talk:Asilvering is quite enough of a discussion. Izno (talk) 05:20, 8 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Is it worth the time filing?

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/JamesOredan/Archive#31 December 2024

Is it worth filing this or can we just realize it's a duck [12]. I've always wondered if we can install edit filters for specific type of edits on specific pages. Moxy🍁 00:12, 11 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

oops forgot to put interaction link [13]. So odd after so many years they're still doing the same thing to the same articles.Moxy🍁 00:23, 11 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Moxy I think it's always good to file if you can't make the block yourself and aren't confident enough to send it to AIV as ducky. I prefer it under bus factor principle. IznoPublic (talk) 00:38, 11 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

sounds good I'll deal with this in a few days when I have more time.Moxy🍁 00:41, 11 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of noticeboard discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is JeanClaudeN1 and Daniel Case. I am notifying you due to your involvement at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Urabura or Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/PJK 1993. Toadspike [Talk] 14:17, 12 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Why do you support false information?

The correction of information about Thailand by Cambodians forces Thais to correct it with the truth. But you, on the other hand, posted a page about Loy Krathong with blatant false information. How angry will you make Thai people? ~2026-23016-67 (talk) 19:00, 14 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

You may discuss the edits that you or another were trying to make on Talk:Loy Krathong. Edit warring is not an acceptable path to conflict resolution. Izno (talk) 19:07, 14 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

SPI on Thai topic users

I've opened a SPI on the users on the Thai topics and would like you to review it to see if I've missed anything Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Realsource_1991. Thanks! Realtent (talk) 19:04, 14 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism?

This block you made citing vandalism seems a little unfair. I only saw it because I was going to paste a template about IP article restrictions to their talk page. Their edits restoring present tense to Al-Khiam were entirely valid. Tiamut (talk) 20:43, 14 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I will reduce to a temp edit warring block. I think what they were editing about was indeed a fair question. Izno (talk) 20:50, 14 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Tiamut (talk) 20:53, 14 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Sock Puppet Vandalism

Hello, I have submitted a sock puppet investigation for the user PenultimateStride. Out of nowhere today and yesterday two accounts have dog piled the average human height by country talk page attacking myself and user:Walther16 and the edits we have made on the main page. Today, in the middle of the chaos on the talk page, a user has been editing the main page with the same style of edits as PenultimateStride, and with a similar editing history, with edits to 200m dash, and presidential heights. I have reported all three accounts and I believe the evidence is high enough to ban all three as socks, as the two accounts on the talk page are newly created and appear to be created to create artificial consensus with the edits being made by the account that is beyond a shadow of a doubt PenultimateStride. The reason I ask you to take a look is because the pages have been very chaotic and nobody has taken action yet. Here is the link. Thank you and I apologize if this is too forward. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/PenultimateStride Quantum Mechanical Engineer (talk) 20:14, 15 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Izno, thank you for removing the sock accounts. Is there any way you would be able to revert the talk page on human height? It is a bit too chaotic with how they left with, and user:Walther16 was also wondering about this on my talk page.

Thank you again, it is appreciated. Quantum Mechanical Engineer (talk) 21:35, 15 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

On another note, I noticed user:Cola172657 is attempting to undo the ban for sock puppetry. I would like to point out that user:PenultimateStride had been caught before using multiple IP addresses, and it would not be unfeasible for the user to use a legitimate IP address that is not a VPN that is still different than their main IP, ie. at their workplace, or a restaurant, hotel, etc.

I believe the dog piling tactic, which is a common tactic used by sock puppets, and the timing of the changes to the main page while two accounts were dog piling, is sufficient proof that this account is a sock. Quantum Mechanical Engineer (talk) 23:09, 15 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Request for guidance on recreating Draft:Rokas Bernatonis

Hello Izno

I'm writing regarding the prior deletion of Draft:Rokas Bernatonis (April 11,2025) under G5 (created by a banned or blocked user).

I've prepared a completely new draft for Bernatonis, written from scratch. Could you please advise on the best way to proceed so this draft is handled appropriately and not speedily deleted due to the previous G5 history?

Thanks! LidiaHicks (talk) 06:00, 16 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

If you are not a sock, G5 is not a concern for you, and you may edit as you wish. Izno (talk) 16:31, 16 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, thank you @Izno. All the best. LidiaHicks (talk) 23:32, 16 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

About your block of CPITUFODIAZ

You might want to change that to indefinite seeing as how they put the desired content in their sandbox and a draft. –Skywatcher68 (talk) 13:21, 16 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I blocked for edit warring. Users are allowed to use a sandbox or draft to prepare versions they would prefer. If you want a promotion block, pick another venue. Izno (talk) 16:28, 16 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Request to review

Hi

I am Advik.S, My account shows

18:59, 15 April 2026 Izno talk contribs blocked Advik.s talk contribs from the namespace (Article) with an expiration time of indefinite (account creation blocked) (unsourced editing) Tag: Twinkle

I believe i have been blocked as i did not mention the references .. I apologise for my mistake. I am a teenager who is interested in the study of evolution.

Pls revoke my block. I promise to always mention the references in the future. Advik.s (talk) 09:29, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

You may appeal your block using the process described in the message on your talk page. Izno (talk) 16:33, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Incorrect signature

You attributed a message to me here. It was added here. I am unable to fix the edit without triggering edit filters. Could you please fix the error? Thanks. Unstirredshading23 (talk) 09:19, 18 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

No longer required (see here) Unstirredshading23 (talk) 09:40, 18 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Unstirredshading23. I've corrected it. Izno mistook you for another editor. I apologize on behalf of Izno for the mistake. Annh07 (talk) 09:41, 18 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the edit and no worries at all. Unstirredshading23 (talk) 09:44, 18 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Please look at off-Wiki evidence sent to Arbcom

Hi @Izno, hope you're doing well. There is a post currently at ANI which related off-Wiki evidence could solve. I've mentioned that I've sent the relevant evidence involved [14]. Would you be able to take a look at it soon? Thanks. PresentlySuraye3 (talk) 00:22, 20 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Edit war

Hello, I ask you kindly how to stop the vandalisms and edit war by the user Theonewithreason on the page we are working on—Heights distribution (a difficult work based on strictly academic sources)—with @Quantum Mechanical Engineer. I am not used on it.wiki to this kind of behaviour and I am not prepared. Thank you in advance --Walther16 (talk) 18:22, 21 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

First of all, like I explained on talk page you do not WP:own that page, you are definetly not going to call me vandal if you are not able to provide WP:RS for your claims, second you are obviously attempting to WP:TAGTEAM with other editor which is against wikipedia rules [[15]], a third the more I look the less am I able to find connection between the sources and your article editions. Theonewithreason (talk) 18:26, 21 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

You can read my answer with permalink to the source in the page Heights distribution. Hope you will stop your edit war and vandalism soon, restoring the exactly quoted people. Thank you --Walther16 (talk) 19:05, 21 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Socks investigation

Can you please check whether User:1990ASH is a sock of sock-blocked User:Computeracct and User:Films2026. Reason: 1990ASH account was created on 15 April 2026 after the block of Films2026 on 13 April 2026.

Some of similar editing in Draft:Hai Jawani Toh Ishq Hona Hai:

By User:Computeracct: [16] [17]

By User:1990ASH: [18] [19]

Same usage of first names, by both accounts: [20], [21]

In Talk:Dacoit: A Love Story:

By TA ~2026-22285-92:

Interested to update box office [22]

By User:1990ASH adding about box office [23]. Later removed the edit [24] since they want to do this edit from another TA [25].

~2026-24937-50 (talk) 08:52, 24 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Good connection. Also Abmk tennis (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki · SI). Izno (talk) 16:56, 24 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

April 29: WikiWednesday NYC Salon

April 29: WikiWednesday @ Prime Produce

You are invited to join the Wikimedia NYC community for our WikiWednesday Salon at Prime Produce in Hell's Kitchen, Manhattan, with an online-based participation option also available. No experience of anything at all is required. All are welcome!

Featuring this salon, a facilitated discussion on Wikidata, notability, and GLAM!

All attendees are subject to Wikimedia NYC's Code of Conduct and Photography Policy.

Meeting info:

Wednesday, April 29 WikiWednesday @ Prime Produce (optional RSVP on-wiki).
6:00 pm – 7:00 pm (Open Hour)

7:00 pm – 9:00 pm (Wiki Salon)

(Prime Produce, Hell's Kitchen, Manhattan)

Also online via Zoom

(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

--Wikimedia New York City Team via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:15, 24 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Refining MassMessage lists

My apologies about the mistakes in the MassMessage list. We've been trying to filter them out, but obviously didn't succeed entirely. Thanks for cleaning up, perhaps you could chime in on https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T420847 ? Pharos (talk) 21:47, 24 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Pharos Ignoring my own removal, I just removed the users who are locked or blocked. You might want to talk to RAdimer-WMF/Vermont about eligibility checking though. Izno (talk) 22:12, 24 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

User:Pakistan cricket match today

Almost certainly a sock of User:Mian Muhammad Shehbaz Sharif which is why I reported them, which you subsequently removed. Activity consistent with other socks. Aydo h8^{[what have I done now?]} 08:15, 25 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Aydoh8 Admins aren't going to block if you don't tell them that when you report the account. "VOA" is simply insufficient. Izno (talk) 16:05, 25 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Elden Ring vandals

Hey! As you dealt with a disruptive IP, ~2026-24914-49 (talk · contribs · IP contribs · WHOIS), going after Elden Ring (film), I figured I'd inform you about them hopping to a few more since--

~2026-25058-20 (talk · contribs · IP contribs · WHOIS)
~2026-25260-66 (talk · contribs · IP contribs · WHOIS)
~2026-25277-27 (talk · contribs · IP contribs · WHOIS) - This one especially. Jesus Christ.

BOTTO_(T•C)

Now ~2026-25126-21 (talk · contribs · IP contribs · WHOIS)... BOTTO_(T•C) 15:38, 25 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Edit filter

I was told that an editfilter is not a good fit for the Chase1068 SPI, is there something else we should do to detect this? It is wasting a bunch of time. I am not sure how stuff like this gets handled. Thanks, Polygnotus (talk) 06:14, 27 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

What seems to be the problem that you want remedied? (I wouldn't know what you said to the edit filter types.) Izno (talk) 06:16, 27 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it would be cool if, the next time that person runs that script from another IP/username, we can more easily detect and deal with it. Something like "if editsummary contains string 1, 2 or 3 then...". But I was told that this is a limitation for such things. Polygnotus (talk) 06:19, 27 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that would be a problem. Welcome to edit filters. :( Izno (talk) 06:21, 27 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Well the "something else" we could do is follow the EventStream. Maybe that is a better fit? I was even thinking of making a poor mans editfilter, see idea #2 "edit filters without edit filters" on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Polygnotus/Todoes Polygnotus (talk) 06:23, 27 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

You could absolutely set up some sort of offwiki system for it (and I know there are a few that operate on IRC, likely by watching the event stream). You just have to get someone to use them, or set up a bot to report them at AIV or similar. Izno (talk) 06:25, 27 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

My uneducated guess would be that there are reasonable requests from people that cannot be fulfilled because of those edit filter limitations. If so, an alternative service like I describe, that can't actually block edits from going through (like an edit filter) but can warn people when an edit matches certain characteristics, or list edits that match certain characteristics, could meet a real need.

But since I am no edit filter manager this is just my hunch. What do you think about this idea? Ideally I wouldn't have to get people to use it because any reasonable edit filter request that was denied because of technical limitations could just be forwarded to this new system. Polygnotus (talk) 06:35, 27 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

As I said above, I know there are others who use similar systems. You would "just" need to connect the dots. Izno (talk) 06:45, 27 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I blocked on you declined at TB2

This one is block evading. That HTML attempt from that country pops up on TB2 pretty often. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 15:42, 28 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Is it? It does show up often, but are there details that make you think that's one specific user (bot, probably)? Izno (talk) 15:42, 28 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The attempts at animation and the location, mostly. Not sure if it's a bot because they don't often try a lot, but it could be. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 15:45, 28 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Looking through recent hits of the flavor on pages related to computing:

Special:Contributions/~2026-20045-44: Some DJ spam
Special:Contributions/~2026-22557-21: Some music software spam
Special:Contributions/~2026-22538-98: Some different music software spam
Special:Contributions/~2026-22799-20: Happy birthday!
Special:Contributions/~2026-22970-85: Game spam
Special:Contributions/~2026-23829-77: Different game spam
Special:Contributions/~2026-24923-31: 3rd game spam
Special:Contributions/~2026-25830-56: AI spam

None appear to be related to each other. The structures of the HTML dropped are also pretty different to each other. Like, you can block for spam I guess, but this isn't block evasion. Izno (talk) 15:56, 28 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

-85 and -21 show up in the same place, but that's about the only connection trivially established. Several Jio as ISP, but we already knew that network should be blocked *sigh*. Izno (talk) 15:58, 28 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I'll try to keep an eye on the ones I block to see if I'm just mentally filling in details that aren't there. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 16:49, 28 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Courtesy ping on adding to block

FYI. I've added a to the block on User:Gabriel Paredes was taken - a temporary block from editing his/her own talk page due to incivility. I would take no exception if you disagree — ERcheck (talk) — ERcheck (talk) 02:25, 29 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Oh neat, that's one way to use multiblocks I guess. Izno (talk) 04:25, 29 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Izno - As soon as temporary block expired, editor began uncivil remarks on his/her talk page. Updated to 1 yr talk page block. Again, if you feel this needs modification, I take no exception. — ERcheck (talk) 19:54, 30 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@ERcheck You do not have to let me (or most people) know if you strengthen a block. Izno (talk) 19:01, 1 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

User:Peabodee

...the return of User:StrangestBrew a/k/a Blunderpass. Drmies (talk) 15:56, 30 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Question

Is this by any chance Eastmain? Happy to elaborate if needed. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 18:49, 1 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Extraordinary Writ Yes, and.

Tankvoy (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki · SI)
Mirtip (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki · SI)
Quillpen Editor (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki · SI)
DowntownUgarit (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki · SI)
Lakenheath Warren (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki · SI)
Weedperson (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki · SI)

No obvious sleepers. Izno (talk) 18:59, 1 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe KW-victim too? Extraordinary Writ (talk) 22:23, 11 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Likely to Eastmain. Izno (talk) 22:26, 11 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Extraordinary Writ continuing to bug me on my talk page to successful end is a good way to get told to ask ArbCom for the button. >:( Izno (talk) 22:30, 11 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Injustice

Hello Izno,

I am إبراهيم جبر 1996, the guy that R Prazeres blocked and deleted over 20 articles I’ve created and made like a 1000 manual reverts to delete everything I did in more than 4 months of writing. I am sure that more than 70% of my edits were helpful for the readers. This wasn’t what I thought was the main purpose of Wikipedia.

I’ve never used any machine to write it was disgraceful and unjust what happened. This guy needs professional help, he even wrote bad things to himself from another account so he can block me. I don’t really know why all that? It is a volunteer work. Maybe I am always editing Egyptian pages, what’s the problem in that, really?

And I am not related to this something called sock, this was my only account on English Wikipedia. Please check my edits with yourself, maybe I deserve to be banned, I am not an administrator. No need for a reply, I am sure what I wrote now won’t change a thing, and it’s already a lost cause. I was just doing something that became a hobby, which doesn’t need all that fighting and abnormal behavior. I felt it’s just my right to express myself to someone in Wikipedia. Thank you.

Note: I’ve sent the same message to Zackmann08, and he told me to write to you. I will leave this message here as I am not even logged it with an account. Thanks again. ~2026-26781-30 (talk) 19:42, 3 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

he told me to write to you was in fact NOT what I said. What I said (and is clearly see in this post) is that you should follow the instructions left on your talk page in this post. Mass pinging other users for help and ignoring the instructions given is disruptive and not likely to help your cause. Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 19:45, 3 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

It is also worth noting that R Prazeres is not an admin and as such could not possibly be responsible for blocking this user nor for deleting their pages. Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 19:47, 3 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

SPI

Hi, this sockpuppet is back (or appears to be). Is the editing behaviour similar to you? aesurias (ping me in your reply, or I won't see it) (talk) 06:17, 5 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Additionally, (and I will ask @PhilKnight as well who helped), what do you think about this? Re-creating the rather obscure (now-deleted) Cleveland Police Patrolmen's Association as a redirect a day later. Weird coincidence. aesurias (ping me in your reply, or I won't see it) (talk) 07:18, 6 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Oh and.. the page is redirected to Police unions in the United States, which a sockpuppet was on a few days ago. aesurias (ping me in your reply, or I won't see it) (talk) 07:19, 6 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Guardchange (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki · SI)
Cochange (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki · SI)
Beyond3Years (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki · SI)
Cga12 (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki · SI)
12correct (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki · SI)
Animeshallbeforgood (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki · SI)

Please report future cases on the relevant SPI. Izno (talk) 17:34, 6 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Wooooof. aesurias (ping me in your reply, or I won't see it) (talk) 23:06, 6 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Request my own check user

per discussion on my talk page and on ani I think it would be in my best interest to request my own check user Amapenguin (talk) 04:42, 13 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Sky Meme

Hi, it seems Sky Meme is back and is restoring their previous edits by reverting mine, yours, and other editors' edits. Could please you take a look? Thx. Ckfasdf (talk) 14:40, 14 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

thank you... but now he is ~2026-29127-47 (talk · contribs), should I open new SPI case? Ckfasdf (talk) 21:58, 14 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

again thanks. And now, he is ~2026-29185-57 (talk · contribs). Ckfasdf (talk) 04:45, 15 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

and ~2026-29147-63 (talk · contribs). Ckfasdf (talk) 06:05, 15 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

and ~2026-29311-01 (talk · contribs). new SPI also have been opened. Ckfasdf (talk) 12:14, 15 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

he's back as ~2026-29368-57 (talk · contribs), ~2026-29347-54 (talk · contribs), and ~2026-29321-30. It's really whack-a-mole situation, should I request mass page protection? Ckfasdf (talk) 04:07, 16 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

User:Nadejda-Joleva8790

Izno, I see that the above user has been blocked as a sock.

An editor named User:NadejdaJoleva721 has repeated one of Nadejda-Joleva8790's edits to Dragonfly, so it looks as if further intervention is needed. All the best, Chiswick Chap (talk) 07:53, 15 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

From tjcw01

You reverted a change I made (I think either a change to my user page or my sandbox) . I only have one page in my sanbox and I would like it published in the main wikipedia site. As far as I am concerned all the changes I made were rather slow and deliberate and I intend the result for publication. This is the first Wikipedia page I have written so please forgive me if I have not got it quite right. Edits to fix whatever the problem is are welcome.

Chris Ward — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tjcw01 (talk • contribs) 05:49, 17 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Java

I just noticed the origin of the RM at Talk:Java (disambiguation) (sadly, after posting a reply I had prepared earlier today). Should we continue that discussion, or is there a WP:DENY procedure? Certes (talk) 21:25, 19 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Certes There are already some comments. I think it would be fine to close it speedily and let someone who really wants to rename it file the request. I also think it would be fine just to leave a SOCKSTRIKE indication. Izno (talk) 22:48, 19 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

You may be eligible to vote in the U4C election

I am contacting you because you previously voted in elections related to the Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C). You may be eligible to vote in the current U4C election, which is open now and closes on 2 June 2026. You can find out more about the candidates and the election on the election page on Meta, and from there you can access the vote itself. Your participation in these elections is important to the governance of Wikimedia communities, and your time spent learning about the candidates and voting is appreciated.

-- In cooperation with the U4C, Keegan (WMF) (talk)

Keegan (WMF) (talk) 16:14, 20 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Are you updating the Stats table totals now?

Why are deleting other people's hard work, please do not delete scripts which were updating totals Hamilton36 (talk) 23:18, 21 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

WP:SPI/Bartman82

Hello, Izno. As you would remember, I opened a Sockpuppet investigation on Bartman82 a few days back. Everyone involved agreed that it will await further action. I'm just pinging you to let you know that Superb Owl has added a fourth TA who appears to be a sockpuppet since. Should this case be reopened? AZenit3 (talk) 01:34, 22 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I'm still not sure and it's plausible he thought he was logged in - mostly just wanted it documented for any future investigations Superb Owl (talk) 03:58, 22 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I'm feeling less likely about it @Superb Owl, @Izno. You can check out my talk page. Absolute chaos since I reopened the SPI case. I owe a massive kudos to Blue Sonnet and Staraction for reverting these. AZenit3 (talk) 08:07, 22 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

(Non-Izno comment) @AZenit3, it's late for me so I haven't looked at the merits of your SPI case. But at this point, I think the best thing you can do is to take a break. You've obviously been pretty emotionally affected by everything that's been happening, which is okay. It happens to all of us sometimes. But take a break, reboot your brain, and come back, maybe in a few days if you need to; Wikipedia (probably) isn't going to go anywhere in the time being. In the meantime, those with the buttons to do so will do their best to stop the disruption you've been facing. Best, Staraction (talk · contribs) 08:13, 22 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Staraction, I've come back just to check something. I've noticed Favonian has semi-protected the page, as I requested. I'm back now. I've taken a few precautionary measures (i.e: remove all user talk pages from my watchlist), but I'm feeling better now. AZenit3 (talk) 08:29, 22 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

IP sock

Hi Inzo. You issued checkuser blocks on the TAs ~2026-27360-10 and ~2026-27454-73 for edits to Police unions in the United States. Looks like the same thing happening again with these edits from ~2026-30626-27. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 17:36, 22 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Vzno0000

Turns out all those accounts that were harassing you since the past week were socks of Vzno0000. I thought this sockmaster moved on as I haven't seen an account from them since at least December but unfortunately it looks like they returned. --Prothe1st (leave me a message)-- 17:52, 22 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

TPA for ~2026-30588-40

Can you please remove TPA for ~2026-30588-40? They are making personal attacks, see the talk page history. Random Person 238 02:10, 23 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Pyrrhic victor, it is best usually just to leave the user talk page alone and let an admin know (possibly the blocking admin) rather than to continue reverting talk page abuse. Izno (talk) 03:01, 23 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I know, I reverted it twice (I think) before I realized and stopped. Pyrrhic victor (talk) 03:03, 23 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Lake Gistova/Gramozit/ Gramoz wrongful editing Lake's Geographical location on the Albanian page

Greetings Izno, Please forgive me but I would like to add that certain people are starting again the same revisionism concerning the location of lake Gistova or Garmozit or Gramoz or Gistove as it is widely known. Regardless its the same Glacier Alpine lake. The new revisionism now takes place in the Albanian page using unidentified bots. I edited, again the article but they have my edit on review as pending? Is that real? I Cite Primary Albanian Governmental sources on my discussion but they (unidentified bots) just change the page again and again. The person who accepted the un identified review on April 24, 26 and changed the content on the Albanian page of Wikipedia on Lake Gistova/Gramos/ Gramozit is called Mr. Klein Meci. Please, I need assistance on this matter from any administrator that can help on this matter. They cannot use revisionism when facts exist and the matter of Lake Gistova/Gramozit/Gramoz has been already adjudicated. Thank you for your attention, Aetolia. (PS I already notified the Albanian editor Mr. Klein Meci who accepted the change concerning the location of lake Gistova by an un identified bot?)

Greetings Mr. Klein Meci Lake Gistova or Gramoz or Gramozit which happens to be the same Lake under different Albanian names happens to be part of the Hellenic Republic. It is not shared with Albania and has already been adjudicated in Wikipedia as Lake Gistove/Garmozit/Gramos just by using Albanian Primary and Official Sources only which are also under the Jurisdiction of the Albanian Prime Ministry. Lately, have seen bots or unidentified person changing the border reality on this matter on the Albanian version of Wikipedia. Actually you have reviewed a change like that on April 24 , 2026 and was approved by you? If it was not approved by you I apologize in advance. Please redress this matter quickly as it was original sighted in the Albanian Wikipedia page. Additionally, I have already informed and reported this matter on Wikipedia on as well and I am looking an answer on this topic. Border revisionism should not be allowed. Clearly the Albanian Military Topographic Institute and the National Territorial Planning Agency of Albania both confirm the lake is not in Albania. Thank you for your attention, Mr. Klein Meci and I am Looking for an answer on this matter. Facts are Sacred Comments are Free

ALBANIAN Governmental Agency https://akpt.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=ff270e99f5be45f19c7b7a1e3e618b27 Here as well the official Albanian map shows clearly where the Lake Gistova lies. Institutin Topografik të Ushtrisë Official Albanian Military Topographical maps: You can zoom in, very easy https://shop.geospatial.com/publication/38PCREFVGPMH4RPD0MSAVZHMV6/Albania-1-to-100000-Scale-Topographic-Maps see also https://shop.geospatial.com/publication/0K48DGWKGBQ44E21WWYBAJKMS7/Albania-1-to-50000-Scale-Topographic-Maps The State Authority for Geospatial Information (ASIG) (Albanian: Autoriteti Shtetëror për Informacionin Gjeohapësinor) The agency is under the supervision of the Prime Minister's Office. https://geoportal.asig.gov.al/map/?auto=true Official Albanian geospatial primary sources confirm this placement unequivocally. The Agency for the State Cadastre and Geospatial Information (ASIG) Geoportal, when viewing the 2007 20 cm resolution orthophoto layer (selectable in the left/bottom panel as "2007 20 CM" or similar under Orthoimagery/Historical Maps), clearly shows the lake at high zoom levels near projected coordinates 567362.404 E, 4470179.392 N (in the Albanian national projection system). The high-resolution 2007 aerial imagery—produced and hosted by Albania's official geospatial agency—depicts the lake entirely south of the border ridge/watershed, with no Albanian boundary line crossing the water body or including it within Albanian territory. This visual evidence aligns with publications from the Albanian Military Topographic Institute and the National Territorial Planning Agency (AKPT), which exclude Lake Gistova from Albanian border delimitations. Mapping errors on some commercial platforms (e.g., historical inaccuracies on Google Maps placing the border across the lake) have led to online discussions and occasional media reports, but these stem from technical glitches, not official claims or disputes. Primary sources from both countries, including ASIG's 2007 orthophoto, support the lake's full location in Greece. • Neutrality: Removes unsubstantiated "Albanian perspectives" of overlap, as no official Albanian government or geospatial data supports this; it avoids amplifying fringe media narratives (e.g., from Albanian outlets like Pamfleti). • Clarity and Enhancements: Adds precise coordinates and historical context for verifiability. Includes elevation and size for better reader context without altering the article's encyclopedic tone. Aetolia (talk) 20:13, 23 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

ALSO THEY ADDED ONCE MORE TIME LAKE GRAMOZIT IN GATEGORY OF LAKES OF ALBANIA https://sq.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kategoria:Liqene_n%C3%AB_Shqip%C3%ABri — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aetolia (talk • contribs) 20:20, 23 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

You will need to talk to the other editor. If you cannot come to an agreement you will need to seek a form of dispute resolution. cc @Daniel Case Izno (talk) 01:02, 24 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

This is the person/bot (1) who makes the changes on lake Gistova/Gramozit on the Albanian page. As far as the Administrator Klein Muçi (2) has not replied yet on my question of review of allowing changes without facts. Please I am looking for a dispute resolution on this matter. It is not fair a bot or someone else playing for time to allow this happening even as we talking. Personally, I don’t think that is a coincidence, therefore I am looking for a resolution on this matter.Thank you for your attention on this matter, sincerely Aetolia

1) This user account is a bot that uses PHP, operated by Cyberpower678 (talk) and Harej (talk). It is not a sock puppet, but rather an automated or semi-automated account for making repetitive edits that would be extremely tedious to do manually.

This bot runs on Wikimedia Toolforge.

2)https://sq.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=P%C3%ABrdoruesi_diskutim:Klein_Mu%C3%A7i&oldid=2983331#c-Aetolia-20260523190800-Lake_Gramozit/_Gramoz/Lake_Gistova Aetolia (talk) 16:15, 24 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I will wait for the other editor to reply first. But what happens if he does not reply at all? Therefore if I dont hear anything in about a week please tell me how do I proceed for a dispute resolution? But what about the bot that constantly changes the facts in this case as well? Thank you Aetolia. Aetolia (talk) 18:21, 24 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

~2026-31755-08

I don't think it was actually vandalism, just not knowing how to edit. You beat me to a block, but I was going to go with a pblock on the article. Pete Morton bringing ‘Sailor Swift: 400 Years of Song’ to Cambridge Folk Club. Apparently he roleplays as if he were possessed by a ghost of an old sailor. Everyone needs an angle, I guess? ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 18:41, 28 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, you're right after a review. Reduced to your suggestion. Izno (talk) 18:44, 28 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, and lest my description of his new act seem snarky, I would 100% go to that show. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 18:45, 28 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

55belgianbeerfan

Hello, rather than going through the faff of opening an SPI, I thought I'd direct you to this user, who has twice restored edits made by 55belgianbeerfan, a sock puppet you blocked a couple of weeks ago. Seems like a WP:QUACK case to me. — Czello ^(music) 21:08, 28 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Czello for this master, please open an SPI. Lots of socks and sleepers are routine. Izno (talk) 21:14, 28 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Q...

Hi,

Could this b Freeatlastforever? They seem to have an immediate knowledge of political endorsement guidelines. aesurias (ping me in your reply, or I won't see it) (talk) 01:32, 31 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I couldn't say. Izno (talk) 01:42, 31 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Apology for edit warring

Dear Izno, I am writing to address the block placed on my account regarding edit warring. I understand that my recent actions were disruptive and violated Wikipedia’s edit warring policy. I apologize for failing to utilize the talk page to resolve these disagreements, and for repeatedly reverting edits rather than seeking consensus. I have reviewed the [WP:BRD] guidelines, and I understand that I should have stopped and engaged in discussion once challenged, rather than continuing to edit. If/When my editing privileges are restored, I intend to follow these guidelines strictly and will prioritize talk page discussion over reverting content. Thank you for your time and for maintaining the standards of the project. Maco567 (talk) 15:26, 1 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Maco567 you may submit this appeal on your user talk page following the instructions in the block message. Izno (talk) 16:12, 1 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Obvious sock

Hey Izno, this user you blocked for 72 hours (User:Fourgamer2057Tester) made another very obvious sock (User:Fourgamer2057) and is vandalizing the same redirect page. I feel like something should be done about that, thank you — Yelps ᘛ⁠⁐̤⁠ᕐ⁠ᐷ critique me 04:42, 2 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Teesri Begum

Hello Izno I noticed that Teesri Begum was deleted. The article originally existed in draft space and I moved it to mainspace because I believed the subject may meet notability guidelines and intended to continue improving it with additional sourcing.Would it be possible to restore the page to draft space so that it can be further developed and reviewed through the normal AfC process? I would appreciate any guidance WhiteKettle (talk) 19:24, 2 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with the response at WP:REFUND. Izno (talk) 21:28, 3 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Admin's Barnstar
	Saw you revert the mess and block the spirited and highly aggressive temp account. I'm not normally in favor of swift ban hammers, but this case was exceptionally bad. Good job. GeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 06:12, 6 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

June 2026

You added these protections to a draft I declined [26]. Do these policies apply to all drafts under the relevant subject areas? I will flag future drafts at AfC for protection if so. Drew Stanley (talk) 23:32, 7 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

No. Izno (talk) 23:55, 7 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

About Teesri Begum

This page Teesri Begum has been deleted twice, including once by you with following details-

17:46, 9 June 2026 Rsjaffe talk contribs deleted page Teesri Begum (G5: Created by a banned or blocked user (Alakmarsaify) in violation of ban or block) Tag: Twinkle (thank)

19:09, 31 May 2026 Izno talk contribs deleted page Teesri Begum (G5: Created by a banned or blocked user (Shubuam chak) in violation of ban or block) Tag: Twinkle (thank)

This page seems to be relevant and important a it deals with a Hindi film recently released, which also garnered attention because of the "Jai Sri Ram" controversy.

The page was deleted possibly because of being created by a banned account.

Kindly allow/permit me to create this page once again. I have requested to the other Administrator as well. Endofworld123 (talk) 03:52, 10 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

If you are not a sock, you may of course recreate the page. I would recommend creating it as a draft. Izno (talk) 04:47, 10 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]