User talk:PhilKnight

Archives
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119
edit

Adding a case to the SPI archives

Hi, please see [1], pretty sure adding a case to the archives is not allowed. I tried to revert it but it was disallowed by an edit filter. - Ratnahastin (talk) 06:28, 8 February 2025 (UTC)

Thanks Ratnahastin, I undid his report and left him a message. PhilKnight (talk) 08:27, 9 February 2025 (UTC)

Autoblock adjust to anon-only?

Hey there @PhilKnight, I noticed you added a block to this account (and with good reason). I've reached out to the editor to remedy this as soon as possible.

But one thing we've encountered is that the autoblock covers Wiki Ed's dashboard IP address which we use to communicate with enrolled Wiki Ed student editors. I'd like to request for the block to be adjusted to anon-only in order for us to continue to use the dashboard. Brianda (Wiki Ed) (talk) 20:24, 11 February 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. I have lifted the block. PhilKnight (talk) 20:32, 11 February 2025 (UTC)

Thank you! Brianda (Wiki Ed) (talk) 20:34, 11 February 2025 (UTC)

User:Magichero1234

Dear User:PhilKnight, as you closed Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Magichero1234 one week ago (and the case has now reopened), would you be able to kindly protect Deccani language after the new report is actioned? This will deter future sockpuppets from being created by User:Magichero1234. I appreciate your help. With regards, Anupam^Talk 03:12, 12 February 2025 (UTC)

Hi Anupam, I am not convinced about semi-protection for Deccani language as the amount of disruption is limited. You could request at WP:RFPP to see if another admin thinks it's worthwhile. PhilKnight (talk) 06:34, 12 February 2025 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism

Hi, why did you revert my edit? Smatteo499 (talk) 14:47, 12 February 2025 (UTC)

Sorry, I should have left an edit summary. Your edit removed the instructions to post at WP:AIV. I have blocked the vandal you reported. PhilKnight (talk) 14:49, 12 February 2025 (UTC)

Sorry, I'm an it.wiki user, so I don't know very well how to edit en.wiki! Thank you. Regards Smatteo499 (talk) 14:51, 12 February 2025 (UTC)

Similar users

Hi PhilKnight. Could you please check whether Srf123 is related to ಮಲ್ನಾಡಾಚ್ ಕೊಂಕ್ಣೊ? This is based on editor interaction and several shared behaviors. Thanks! Daniel Quinlan (talk) 20:39, 12 February 2025 (UTC)

Hi Daniel, ಮಲ್ನಾಡಾಚ್ ಕೊಂಕ್ಣೊ is  Stale so a comparison won't work. Also, I would need more detailed evidence to justify the check. PhilKnight (talk) 20:47, 12 February 2025 (UTC)

I sent you an email. Daniel Quinlan (talk) 23:19, 12 February 2025 (UTC)

You've got mail

Hello, PhilKnight. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template. Gaismagorm (talk) 14:05, 13 February 2025 (UTC)

looks like you are already on the case, Thanks! Gaismagorm (talk) 14:06, 13 February 2025 (UTC)

IP user 204.155.8.232 vandalizing again

User 204.155.8.232 returned to posting nonsense shortly after block was lifted. I reported to AIV, but they did not look at content closely enough. See this edit. "Children's pool was Universal Studios Japan"? And this edit: "Raging Waters Sydney debuted with immediate predecessor, Disney California Adventure"? This is all nonsense and these pages have been getting vandalized for years.—JlACEer (talk) 14:52, 14 February 2025 (UTC)

Blocked for 3 months. Thanks. PhilKnight (talk) 14:58, 14 February 2025 (UTC)

This guy

Three week old account, ~500 edits, and about 400 of them removing postnominals, as well as accusations of vandalism in the edit summary?! What gives? This is well dodgy! Serial (speculates here) 20:59, 14 February 2025 (UTC)

@Serial Number 54129: There was another editor recently doing exactly the same thing, removing post-nominals at a great rate, either using no edit summary or using "rvv" when it wasn't rvving, not communicating on talk page. I think it got raised at AN or ANI, but our search facility is not the best for finding threads like that. DuncanHill (talk) 00:14, 15 February 2025 (UTC)

Request

I recognize you as an esteemed member of the Wikipedia community so I am requesting an unblock per the blocking admin's instructions.

Page block: 2025 Canadian federal election
Admin's Conditions: 21:21, 26 January 2025 Beeblebrox talk contribs blocked ErrorCorrection1 talk contribs from the page 2025 Canadian federal election with an expiration time of indefinite (edit warring/disruptive editing Any admin is free to unblock if/when the election date is firmed up and/or this user shows a willingness to respect consensus-based decision-making)

Conditions met: I hereby show a willingness to respect consensus-based decision-making. I am making this request more than 3 weeks later, intentionally, to allow me to reflect. This shows excellent impulse control and good Wikipedia behaviour.

Admin does not deny my request outright but states "Another admin will review any request you may make and can act as they see fit. Beeblebrox Beebletalks 23:19, 4 February 2025 (UTC)"

Condensed background: I believed the article's lede was too generic and appears like it was written several years ago. It did not reflect reliable news sources' reports over the past several months. The election must take place by October but no news reports say this is likely, rather point to recent developments. GoodDay (who was been blocked multiple times) and Ivanvector reverted these changes without discussion. I eventually stopped trying and withdrew from the article (04:27, 21 January 2025 (UTC). Eventually, other editors followed my suggestions and did change the lede a few days later.

Before the lede was changed, I abandoned the effort but did make similar changes to the body of the article, which was an effort to WP:BRD (which is different from changing the lede, which was the first effort). GoodDay and Ivanvector immediately reverted it without discussion. I withdrew (23:13, 25 January 2025)

GoodDay and Ivanvector are edit warriors and took this to ANI despite ANI saying that it's for emergencies. They did not even do a RFC. There, they got me page blocked about 24 hours later.

Reasons for un-page block:

• 1. Realized that fighting is not good so I not only stopped BEFORE the block but am even more aware not to do it (this, I confess)
• 2. Fulfill the conditions by stating that I hereby show a willingness to respect consensus-based decision making.
• 3. My behaviour is attested by the blocking admin, who wrote...

you going away for over a week.

Now, I will grant that this was a wise thing to do. You were obviously very agitated during the incident that led to the block and walking away when it was issued actually surprised me, as I assumed you'd throw a fit, and it is to your credit that you did not.

(23:53, 4 February 2025 (UTC) Beeblebrox)

This is very significant because it shows that I have a calm demeanor and work for a better Wikipedia, not a fighting mood.

• 4. Unblock would meet WP:AGF Assume Good Faith
• 5. Unblock would meet WP:UBCHEAP Unblock is cheap and bad behaviour can easily be punished
• 6. Unblock would meet WP:LASTCHANCE. It's not at that point but I would treat it as a "last chance"
• 7. Blocking is not supposed to be punishment.
• 8. I have demonstrated in an even more controversial article, Gaza Strip, that I present useful ideas in the talk page and not be a party to any edit wars. Less controversial article edits and talk page edits have also been done.

The 2 opposing editors, GoodDay and Ivanvector, behave badly and don't know how to drop the stick and walk away from the dead horse. Even as recent as a few days ago, they followed me around and tried to convince the blocking admin to punish me MORE, but he did not comply with them. I realize that those two are aggressive and bad, but I pledge to either ignore that and work with them or stay away from them. That shows a maturity that they do not display.

If you page unblock me, I will be mindful as to maintain your good reputation and will not embarrass you by making the unblock look like a bad call. Thank you for your kind consideration.
Respectfully submitted, ErrorCorrection1 (talk) 20:55, 16 February 2025 (UTC)

(talk page watcher)@ErrorCorrection1: Please see the block notice on your talk page that indicates how to request an unblock. - UtherSRG (talk) 21:05, 16 February 2025 (UTC)

Question about special:redirect/logid/166806835

Hello, I have noticed that you have unblocked a user with an one account restriction. Do you think this restriction is still valid? I have noticed that the user in question has made a new account. Please see w:simple:Wikipedia:Requests_for_checkuser/Archives/2025-02#Users_at_Adama_Joseph_Adama for related simplewiki CU results, and w:simple:Special:Diff/10083627 for the latest relevant CU request. I hope this helps you. MathXplore (talk) 15:32, 17 February 2025 (UTC)

Hi MathXplore, they haven't actually edited with the new accounts on this site as far as I can tell. If they do, they would be blocked. But, I won't block just yet. Thanks. PhilKnight (talk) 15:40, 17 February 2025 (UTC)

Block evasion?

Hi. Sorry to bother you ... I don't understand how this works but, looking on it with no knowledge, it appears to me that Iyaanadam24, whom you blocked, may be back and continuing to edit Maldivian (airline) from an IP address – please see its history where the IP is making very similar edits (and errors) to those of the blocked user. What do you advise? I could request page protection perhaps, but how long would it keep the IP off? Comments gratefully received, thanks DBaK (talk) 10:51, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

The User talk:46.153.113.144 IP was blocked by another admin today. PhilKnight (talk) 12:26, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

Ah, great, thanks. Best wishes DBaK (talk) 12:42, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

Revoke TPA for User:The Face Clinic

Hi there,

Are you able to revoke talk page access for the user above as they are using it for advertising after being blocked by you over a year ago?

Thanks :) Aydoh8^[contribs] 12:17, 25 February 2025 (UTC)

 Done. Thanks. PhilKnight (talk) 12:18, 25 February 2025 (UTC)

Removing one character vandal

These are all residential proxies, many of which already have proxy blocks from back when we had a bot to do that. I've been doing 3 month blocked proxy blocks. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 15:03, 25 February 2025 (UTC)

Thanks - I'll modify the block. PhilKnight (talk) 15:06, 25 February 2025 (UTC)

Thanks. I wasn't sure if you'd seen the 20 or so I had just blocked, and the several Widr had taken care of as well so I figured I'd drop a note. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 15:08, 25 February 2025 (UTC)

Another Sock of Smita Patil PSP

User PavitraRisht is attempting to add the same information of non-notable children/grandchildren that Smita Patil was adding. VViking_TalkEdits 16:15, 25 February 2025 (UTC)

Thanks.  Confirmed.  Blocked and tagged. PhilKnight (talk) 16:22, 25 February 2025 (UTC)

Immediately after ...

this came this; should I just open another SPI? Thanks, JBL (talk) 18:29, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

Hi JBL, thanks,  Blocked and tagged. PhilKnight (talk) 18:43, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

Thank you -- it seems to be continuing, unfortunately: [2]. --JBL (talk) 21:00, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

Hi JBL, thanks, again blocked. PhilKnight (talk) 21:05, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

Thank you. As soon as protection dropped: [3]. --JBL (talk) 00:07, 4 March 2025 (UTC)

Thanks. Protected for a month this time. PhilKnight (talk) 01:17, 4 March 2025 (UTC)

Thank you; there's another one at SPI if you have a free moment. Sorry for the bother. --JBL (talk) 20:12, 4 March 2025 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

		The Admin's Barnstar
		For dealing with the vandalism here. I had no idea this was an LTA case, thank you for your swift action. JeffSpaceman (talk) 13:53, 28 February 2025 (UTC)

Thanks, I think this is a new LTA rapidly vandalizing from proxies. PhilKnight (talk) 13:54, 28 February 2025 (UTC)

Yes, they're back at User:85.115.108.110. Might be worth it to block that one too. JeffSpaceman (talk) 13:58, 28 February 2025 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – March 2025

News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2025).

Administrator changes

• Jarry1250
• Lethe

CheckUser changes

• AmandaNP
• Drmies

Oversighter changes

AmandaNP

Guideline and policy news

• A request for comment is open to discuss whether AI-generated images (meaning those wholly created by generative AI, not human-created images modified with AI tools) should be banned from use in articles.
• A series of 22 mini-RFCs that double-checked consensus on some aspects and improved certain parts of the administrator elections process has been closed (see the summary of the changes).
• A request for comment is open to gain consensus on whether future administrator elections should be held.

Technical news

• A new filter has been added to the Special:Nuke tool, which allows administrators to filter for pages in a range of page sizes (in bytes). This allows, for example, deleting pages only of a certain size or below. T378488
• Non-administrators can now check which pages are able to be deleted using the Special:Nuke tool. T376378

Miscellaneous

• The 2025 appointees for the Ombuds commission are だ＊ぜ, Arcticocean, Ameisenigel, Emufarmers, Faendalimas, Galahad, Nehaoua, Renvoy, Revi C., RoySmith, Teles and Zafer as members, with Vermont serving as steward-observer.
• Following the 2025 Steward Elections, the following editors have been appointed as stewards: 1234qwer1234qwer4, AramilFeraxa, Daniuu, KonstantinaG07, MdsShakil and XXBlackburnXx.

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:38, 4 March 2025 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The No Spam Barnstar
	For being so timely in finding and blocking Retlinth in under 20 minutes. TheTechnician27 (Talk page) 17:24, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

Thanks. PhilKnight (talk) 17:28, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

I need your help

Hi I need your help? 2600:1004:A032:64B0:DE4:D974:A61D:2B9B (talk) 17:47, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

How can I help? PhilKnight (talk) 17:51, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

I was Blocked from editing since 2017 my account Bobby232332 I learned my lesson I would love to come back to edit. If you can look into this that would be very great. I did. Submit an unblock request if you can help me out that would be very great. I would very appreciate it big time. Thank you very much.2600:1004:A032:64B0:DE4:D974:A61D:2B9B (talk) 2600:1004:A032:64B0:DE4:D974:A61D:2B9B (talk) 17:58, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

Technically, you shouldn't be editing as an IP - it counts as block evasion. You should make a request to WP:UTRS to get your talk page access restored, and then an unblock request to be unblocked. PhilKnight (talk) 18:03, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

Hi Phil

New user with a user page stating they are an admin. I'm sure this smells like a sock? AnomieRichardDick. Knitsey (talk) 21:44, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

I have removed the admin top icon. I will keep an eye on him. Thanks. PhilKnight (talk) 21:46, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

Thank you! Knitsey (talk) 21:47, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

He was reported at WP:UAA, and Secretlondon commented his edits on Commons and Meta were vandalism. PhilKnight (talk) 02:42, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

Two rangeblock requests

Hello PhilKnight, I just wanted to bring attention to a number of problematic IP ranges which had been reported to AN/I several days ago, but like often happens over there, the reports got 'overshadowed' by several complex user conduct disputes above and below it, and so got no admin response. All meanwhile the disruption from the ranges is still ongoing today.

First up is 2A02:C7C:5079:A200:0:0:0:0/64. This is the relevant report, and the issue with this editor is long-term addition of original research to articles, as well as failures to communicate when other editors disagree with their edits.

The second one is 2603:6010:AB00:0:0:0:0:0/40. Relevant report here. A bit of a less easy one due to the range being much larger. There are a number of non-reverted recent edits in the contribs history, however they appear to be the same person to me, given they are within the same topic areas as the reverted edits. This one's definitely going, and with disruptive edits that have edit summaries like "That's it, Magitroopa! you will regret what you did! STOP! REVERTING! EDITS! HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!" and "restore last bad version. I got revenge on you, Magitroopa! HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!", I think blocking this range is a bit of a good idea.

There's also 82.112.90.0/24 which has been sitting around at AN/I in the same fashion too, but I decided to give that one to User:Daniel Case to "share the workload" for your comfort.

Thanks! And kind regards, — AP 499D25 (talk) 12:43, 14 March 2025 (UTC)

AP 499D25 - I have partially blocked the ranges from article space. Hope this is okay. PhilKnight (talk) 15:19, 14 March 2025 (UTC)

Appreciated. Given that the vast majority of the disruptive edits from these IP ranges have been in article space, a partial block would definitely work here. In fact for the first range I suggested an article space block at AN/I due to a part of the problem being lack of communication. — AP 499D25 (talk) 11:09, 15 March 2025 (UTC)

Block evasion

Hello, I added someone who does a lot of sock making to the investigation. Can you look at the file? Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Tishreen07. Kajmer05 (talk) 17:17, 14 March 2025 (UTC)

 Done. PhilKnight (talk) 18:08, 14 March 2025 (UTC)

Thank you very much, I wanted to inform you immediately because they were spamming other users' talk pages. Also thank you again for archiving the files! Kajmer05 (talk) 18:10, 14 March 2025 (UTC)

Some help?

Phil, could you please check Trollersz and Donutsff? I've already blocked both, but what concerns me is Donutsff's comment after their block "Oh honey, I have ten other accounts ready :) This time, I'll go slow." I'm thinking that this may be an LTA, maybe even Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/BuickCenturyDriver, although it's not quite like the rash of BCD accounts that have been created recently. In Trollersz's edits they went after The Bushranger, and Bushranger has been active at the SPI. Of course, there are other LTAs who attack admins. Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:45, 15 March 2025 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) on it -- two to add so far:

• • 89S (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
  • C809 (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)

--Blablubbs (talk) 16:52, 15 March 2025 (UTC)

Also:

• FireCavern (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
• HiddenLocksmith (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)

I'll file an SPI. --Blablubbs (talk) 16:57, 15 March 2025 (UTC)

Thanks Blablubbs. PhilKnight (talk) 17:05, 15 March 2025 (UTC)

Ditto.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:09, 15 March 2025 (UTC)

Any time. I've filed at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/HiddenLocksmith. For the record, I see nothing that would suggest a connection to BCD, or any other known master for that matter, though I also wouldn't be surprised to learn that this wasn't their first go. --Blablubbs (talk) 17:13, 15 March 2025 (UTC)

Delete offensive edit summaries

Revision 1280713989 and 1278487720 -- Least Action (talk) 01:28, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

Special:Diff/1280713989 has been revision deleted, but Special:Diff/1278487720 looks okay. PhilKnight (talk) 01:36, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

Sorry, but it was a mistake. Should have been 1280713311. -- Least Action (talk) 01:39, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

 Done. PhilKnight (talk) 01:41, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for blocking this user

Hello PhilKnight,

Thank you for blocking Pooeyman9374 for vandalism. I appreciate you preventing vandalism from happening on Wikipedia. I sent you a thanks because of this. Hikingboii (talk) 01:34, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

Thanks. PhilKnight (talk) 01:37, 16 March 2025 (UTC)