User talk:Rsjaffe

This user's talk page is monitored by talk page watchers. Some of them even talk back. Their input is welcome, and their help with messages that I cannot reply to quickly is appreciated.

Archives (Index)

2021 1 2022 1 2023 1 2024 1 2025 1 2026 1

This page is archived by ClueBot III.

This person is also apparently telling other people they can find my IP address on that Wikipedia page, along with other places.

		The Admin's Barnstar
		For taking out the trash here. Thank you for your help! JeffSpaceman (talk) 10:36, 14 April 2026 (UTC)Reply

I just want to let you know that you recently closed an ANI discussion about revoking TPA and email, but the only change in the block settings was disabling their email, and the user still has talk page access. Beta Beta Beta - talk 21:40, 19 May 2026 (UTC)Reply

Thanks. I fixed that. The blocking administrator was managing two blocks, and the one they altered didn't have the talk page option, so I blocked it on the other one. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 22:39, 19 May 2026 (UTC)Reply

Thank you. Another question though, since the user in question has written a significant amount of disruptive material on their talk page, would blanking suffice or will the material be kept anyways? Beta Beta Beta - talk 22:43, 19 May 2026 (UTC)Reply

I can take a look. I am one of those that doesn't remove a lot of stuff from user talk pages unless it was offensive. The disruption is local, and I think ignoring trolls is often the best course of action when we can do so. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 22:45, 19 May 2026 (UTC)Reply

Wikipedia:Revert, block, ignore gives you the idea. I'd obviously revert if it were not on the vandal's talk page, but I'm going to try to ignore those edits. Other admins may differ, and someone might remove it. One or two of the comments do get close to crossing the line. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 22:54, 19 May 2026 (UTC)Reply

I joined in wikipedia for 2 years and i did more than 10 edits and i want to know why i am not autoconfirmed ? Banbloku i dukagjinit (talk) 14:41, 21 May 2026 (UTC)Reply

You are autoconfirmed. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 22:08, 21 May 2026 (UTC)Reply

I checked their user rights and it doesn't appear they are autoconfirmed. I think Wikipedia may of changed how autoconfirmed works. --Prothe1st (leave me a message)-- 22:12, 21 May 2026 (UTC)Reply

Ok I have read WP:AUTOC and it appears autoconfirmed is now given 4 days after the first edit and not 4 days after the account was created. See phab:T418484. Seems like a good update as some vandals create sleepers and make 10 dummy edits to get autoconfirmed and vandalise semi-protected articles. --Prothe1st (leave me a message)-- 22:19, 21 May 2026 (UTC)Reply

They made edits in 2024, but the page was deleted. I'm going to look into the technical issue a bit more. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 22:22, 21 May 2026 (UTC)Reply

Seems odd. Maybe it's counting the "first edit" as the first one made after the new autoconfirmed system was implemented. I'm not sure on the technical details. --Prothe1st (leave me a message)-- 22:24, 21 May 2026 (UTC)Reply

I'm asking WMF folks about this now (on Discord--don't know if you use it, but conversation is at [1]. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 22:26, 21 May 2026 (UTC)Reply

It's not listed there, but XTools says they're autoconfirmed. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 22:21, 21 May 2026 (UTC)Reply

Turns out XTools is just guessing, and it's wrong in this case. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 12:05, 22 May 2026 (UTC)Reply

It'll be four days after your first edit this year. The deleted edits were ignored for gaining this status. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 12:06, 22 May 2026 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for picking up my slack on the Muboshgu/Baron Trump rev-dels. I blocked and was circling back but had to put out a figuritive fire IRL and got distracted.-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 21:30, 25 May 2026 (UTC)Reply

No worries. That was a thoroughly unpleasant editor. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 21:34, 25 May 2026 (UTC)Reply

Hi, I kindly request access to edit this page (Kurumba Gounder). I found that the article relies on single source and would like to improve this article. I am a scholar and I have relevant expertise to help edit the content. Please let me know if any futher information is required. Thank you! Cosmicdusts (talk) 22:10, 28 May 2026 (UTC)Reply

You can make a non-controversial edit request on the talk page. Non-controversial requests are either uncontroversial improvements (correcting typos, grammar, or reference formatting; improving the reliability or efficiency of template code, adding an image, straightforward updates) or are already supported by a consensus of editors, usually on the protected page's talk page. Otherwise, you can't touch the castes subject until you have reached the minimum experience level (500 edits, account over 30 days old). — rsjaffe 🗣️ 23:37, 28 May 2026 (UTC)Reply

Thank you so much for your prompt response and clarification! Its very helpful. Cosmicdusts (talk) 19:00, 1 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2026).

Administrator changes

• Asukite
• Bobby Cohn
• Bonadea
• Ca
• Drm310
• Reconrabbit
• Sammi Brie

• Tamzin
• TonyBallioni

• Ezhiki
• Queen of Hearts

Bureaucrat changes

• WereSpielChequers

Guideline and policy news

• Following an RfC, the "persistent usage of large language models" has been included as a common reason for a block.

Technical news

• Mandatory 2FA for bureaucrats: Bureaucrats without two-factor authentication (2FA) enabled have already lost access to their advanced rights on 26 May. Those who do not enable 2FA may be automatically removed from the groups in mid-June 2026, and from that point onward, new members must have 2FA enabled before they can be added. (T423119, T423120)

Arbitration

• The arbitration case SchroCat has been closed.
• The arbitration case Michael Jackson has opened. Evidence submissions in this case closes on 1 June.

Miscellaneous

• Voting for the 2026 Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) election closes on 1 June.

Hi, can you please revoke the TPA for the blocked user ~2026-32651-96? They're abusing their talk page. Malgosha 15:19, 1 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

Nevermind, looks like their TPA already got disabled. Malgosha 15:21, 1 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

You are involved in a recently filed request for clarification or amendment from the Arbitration Committee. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Clarification and Amendment#Clarification request: Palestine-Israel articles 5 and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. Additionally, the Wikipedia:Arbitration guide may be of use.

Thanks, Staraction (talk · contribs) 18:49, 2 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

I think you worded your request incorrectly, @Staraction. See my comment on that page. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 19:28, 2 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for the ping, and yeah, looks like I did. Just added another a comment; apologies for any inconvenience this might've caused. Best, Staraction (talk · contribs) 19:32, 2 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

Hi, reaching out to you because you accepted my most recent WP:G4 deletion. These three articles were deleted via WP:LLMPROD and were recreated by the same user: Restlezz, Tomi Folayan, Zeeno Foster. From what I remember, they look exactly the same as they were before deletion. Could you confirm this? Thanks! InfernoHues (talk) 00:38, 3 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

They're similar but slightly reworded. Overall structure and details are the same. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 01:12, 3 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

Thank you :) InfernoHues (talk) 01:30, 3 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

Hey you Rsjaffe! Why you locked me!? RojasDawson (talk) 17:41, 3 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

Please read Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive1224#Long term disprutive edits by User:RojasDawson and all the messages on your talk page. Blue Sonnet has given you advice on how to apply for an unblock. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 17:45, 3 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

Question for you and Black Kite, as involved admins in Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Report_personal_attack, does the behavior of Least Action (intentionally not linked) strike you as odd? user with under 600 edits who is SUPER well versed in Wiki procedure and ardently pushing a proposal they are writing for a block? I may be off the mark here, but this to me smells of a far more experienced user who has either been banned and then created a sock, or someone who is using multiple undeclared accounts... Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 16:52, 7 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

My impression is that this is a new user who just discovered AN/I and is a bit too enthusiastic. Hopefully they'll cool down with experience. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 19:56, 7 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

100% defer to your judgement but just wanted to raise the concern. Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 19:57, 7 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

I think this is consistent with my view of the situation. You can see that they have needed intervention, both by Black Kite and myself, which is not great, but not enough to do anything special about yet. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 20:03, 7 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

One of many reasons I'm not an admin. Appreciate your insight! Keep up the good work and thanks for the response. Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 20:04, 7 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

Who knows? Maybe you'll change your mind and be ready for it some day. We need more victims volunteers. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 20:07, 7 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

HAHA!!!! Maybe.... Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 20:08, 7 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

Perhaps this range should be blocked, like how 2600:382:37F8:2671:F1D2:C7E3:CCC8:8BC6/64 was blocked? 45dogs (they/them) (talk page) (contributions) 23:10, 7 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

yep. done. thanks for the notification. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 23:17, 7 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

This range could probably use a block. - UtherSRG (talk) 18:32, 8 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

I'll keep a lookout. The blocked editor only transiently used that range on a single date, unlike the rest of their edits, so it's not clear that a block would be beneficial there. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 20:13, 9 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

sorry to bother i'm new to wikipedia, sorry if this is the wrong place to ask questions. But on your user page your userboxes are formatted to be in collums next to eachother and i was wondering how i could do that on my own page cuz it looks really nice. AUBSTRAWBS (talk) 18:33, 8 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

I did that so long ago I don't remember exactly how, but Template:Babel helped a lot. See the documentation there. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 22:28, 8 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

thank you very much AUBSTRAWBS (talk) 22:43, 8 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

Hi rsjaffe. NormalguyfromUK is evading his block via TAs. [2] [3]

The page should be placed on semi-protection for a while as they inevitably keep coming back to it constantly, as you can see from the revision history. Thank you. Griboski (talk) 21:15, 8 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

They found an open proxy. I've blocked that, the TAs, and reverted those edits I could. Protected the article, too, though that's not the only NormalguyfromUK target, so it's best to keep on knocking down the socks when they show up. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 22:25, 8 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

You have deleted my professional page. What is the specific reason? Cortalane (talk) 15:24, 9 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

The page was created by an account that was banned for undeclared paid editing. We don't allow those edits to stand. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 16:34, 9 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

Am I allowed to attempt to reconstruct the same page with my own personal account? All of the information was accurate. Cortalane (talk) 18:01, 9 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

You can write an article about yourself de novo. Using some of the blocked paid editor's text would be problematic, since there is no appropriate disclosure from the paid editor, and it could trigger disclosure requirements for you, too.

A basic hurdle to having an article is that the subject must be notable, according to how Wikipedia defines it. For people, read WP:BIO. If an article doesn't include information establishing notability, it is much less likely to survive the review process.

There are lots of potential problems with writing an autobiography: please carefully read Wikipedia:Autobiographies, which will provide advice. Also, note that there will probably be extra scrutiny of the article since it was formerly written by a undeclared paid editor who was part of a cluster of editors who probably work together or are fake identities concealing a few individuals controlling all the accounts. This raises people's suspicions about subsequent attempts, so care should be taken to follow the recommendations at Wikipedia:Autobiographies. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 20:11, 9 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

If, after reading that material, you still want to create an article, you may find Wikipedia:Article_wizard useful. Most editors do better if, before writing their first article, they become familiar with writing in Wikipedia by contributing edits to articles already there. You could, for example, improve articles that fit your interests. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 20:44, 9 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

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.

Regards, Endofworld123 (talk) 03:50, 10 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

I don’t think there’s anything in place to prevent you from creating it. I deleted it because of who wrote it, not because of what the subject was. You might want to start it as a draft and have it go through articles for creation review, just to make observers more comfortable about the article, given its troubled history. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 04:07, 10 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

I would most humbly like to state that I am doing this purely as an Editor of Wikipedia.

At the same time, I would also respectfully state that I am directly creating the page, instead of creating the draft, because there is certainly a need for such a page, which can be created by me.

I hope you would agree to me after having seen the final page.

Regards, Endofworld123 (talk) 08:15, 10 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

Dear sir,

I have tried to make the page Teesri Begum as informative as possible, though there is certainly a scope for betterment and additions to the given page.

Hope to get your approval to it please.

Regards Endofworld123 (talk) 10:00, 10 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

	The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
	Hello Rsjaffe, Thanks a million for dealing with the currently-absurd number of AIV reports, tirelessly! Best regards, ~ ToBeFree (talk) 20:15, 10 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

May i know why undo my edit? EdwardA78 (talk) 04:38, 11 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

Clicked wrong button. I’ve already restored it. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 04:38, 11 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

Yeah i see thanks EdwardA78 (talk) 04:39, 11 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

I don't think we usually tag temporary accounts, similar to how tags were not added to IP user pages. I always see tags not being applied to TAs reported at SPI. --Prothe1st (leave me a message)-- 22:25, 11 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

I don't tag many socks, usually leaving it for the closer, but do tag when I'm sure there's not going to be a checkuser evaluation. I tag TAs because, unlike IPs, a TA represents an individual. Tagging an IP would harm the next person the IP address rotates to. On the other hand, I can see not tagging a TA as they are sort of throw-away accounts.

In response to your question, I reviewed the administrators' instructions for SPI. Turns out they have instructions for registered accounts and for IPs, but not for TAs. That's odd. So I went asking around.

When the TA accounts first started up, there was no consensus about whether to tag or not, so the instructions have not been updated. Now there appears to be a consensus. The consensus is not to tag, unless it's one that you want to be able to look back at in the future (e.g., for developing an edit filter or because there's a lot of edits by the TA that might be good to review later looking at another account).

So, thanks for the question. I learned something, and now the administrators' instructions are going to be updated. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 02:47, 12 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

hello! ive been lurking thru ANI and just have a question out of genuine curiosity about a comment from Least Action referring to "the hexagrams". this isn't terribly important and im sure you have better things to do, but i just wanted to know 1. what the comment means and 2. why it was inappropriate in context. thanks in advance!

happy editing, InRRainbows Lets chat! 12:22, 13 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

REVDEL needed. AIV history, and history of the Talk Page of that User Enćenćecasïdća (talk) 04:32, 15 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

The three edits before the three most recent ones, may there be REVDEL there, too? Enćenćecasïdća (talk) 04:38, 15 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

Make that the four before the last three of that user. Enćenćecasïdća (talk) 04:39, 15 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

I don’t think those are at the level needing rev-del. Just obscenity. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 04:43, 15 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

Only confused a little. I thought, though, maybe I'm interpreting it too broadly, that obscenities ought to simply not exist on Wikipedia. If somebody looks at the history of one of those pages, there's a chance they'll run into it. That's all. Enćenćecasïdća (talk) 04:45, 15 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

Here’s the discussion on overuse: Wikipedia:Revision deletion#Misuse. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 04:47, 15 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

OK. I understand. Maybe, it was a little broad. Since its introduction in 2010, there's been a concern that Misuse/Abuse of REVDEL may occur. So, I'll keep that in mind when I request REVDEL in the future. It's got to be really clear that Admins dissenting is not too probable (my words, based on what I read). Mere unwise language, for example, is usually not enough. Thanks for bringing that to my attention. And thanks for the REVDEL you did, as well as for blocking them and revoking TPA. Enćenćecasïdća (talk) 04:53, 15 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

In the 2026 FIFA World Cup page, there is a flag in front of Lionel Messi, then why shouldn't there be a flag in front of Virat Kohli in cricket? Rudraaac (talk) 16:27, 18 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

An uninvolved administrator handles unblock requests. Since I am the one who blocked you, I won’t handle the request. Discuss this on your own talk page. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 16:35, 18 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

I am discussing, but first you answer my question Rudraaac (talk) 16:41, 18 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

A clarification request in which you were a party has been closed and archived. This is only a notification, and no action is needed on your part. EggRoll97 ^(talk) 03:04, 19 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

Hello. As I was looking at WP:AIV, I noticed that you have blocked HarryNP (talk · contribs) for "Cleaning up vandalism". I simply curious as to why the block happened quickly. Is this Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/NPierce100102? Justjourney (talk | contribs) 16:54, 20 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

It was an LTA doing very bad things. I used a plugin called vandal cleaner that does everything at once, unfortunately using a single message, so it’s not necessarily the clearest, but it does the job nice, quick, and clean. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 18:01, 20 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

Greetings. If I am not mistaken, you had a hand in editing the Skibidi Toilet wiki and or locking it due to vandalism?

I do not know exactly where to begin to ask, thus I'm starting here, but on behalf of the Skibidi Toilet community at large, I would like to overhaul the existing page to reflect a broader and more informative perspective on the series than it currently offers.

As you may or may not know, Skibidi Toilet has garnered a fairly unreasonable amount of hatred from those who haven't watched the series, often devaluing it and its creator as an online work and human being respectively. The "haters" do not see the series as a science fiction action indie series that started from a shitpost, but rather as a content farm like the ones that do indeed surround that community like any other popular thing these days (The Amazing Digital Circus, Murder Drones, the works of Trever Henderson... Things like that. If you are familiar with the Elsagate scandal, you know what content farms are all too well, things that pray on the vulnerable impressionable minds of toddlers for clicks with disgusting and inappropriate thumbnails and all that.

Skibidi Toilet is not like that at all, as I said it is an indie series, and it has a large community around it of aspiring teenager (Usually) 3D animators, who from my experience are typically not Americans, who make their own fanverses and "What if" alternate timeline videos based on the original series (See: "What if Titan TVman was with Astro Upgrades in Skibidi Toilet 77" or "What if there was a big battle in episode 47?" for examples. Two of my favourites)

I think "This series is degrading people's minds" is far from true when we have an ocean of projects like these popping up of teens making things in an old program that sucks to work with, no?

Anyway enough of trying to convince you it is something worthy of your attention, but it IS worthy of MY attention. In these trying times where the fans are trying to reach out to anyone willing to help us fight the company who seemingly stole the rights from the creator and silenced him, we need to make sure there is an accurate representation of what it is we are fighting to protect, and eliminate all ammunition that "haters" use to dismiss our pleas for help. We should be on the same side but they don't realize it.

If you are not the person I need to communicate with, I'd gladly accept any redirecting to whoever might be capable of lending the pen to me. If you are, i'd be happy to partake in a little online background check of sorts to prove I am not malicious or an alt account of a past vandal.

Would love to hear back!

-PullaWheel PullaWheel (talk) 22:14, 20 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

The page is not locked. It is just protected from editing by new accounts (of less than 4 days of age and fewer than 10 edits) and by unregistered users. This is because of chronic vandalism. This has nothing to do with a value judgment about the topic or the page. I don't think it is wise to unprotect the page, as it would merely get vandalized again, which is certainly not your goal.

If you want an edit there before you get to that level of experience, you can make an edit request using Wikipedia:Edit_Request_Wizard/Protected. You could also request unprotection at Wikipedia:Requests_for_page_protection/Decrease but it is very unlikely that a request will be approved.

Simplest thing is to not do either of the above: just edit some other articles that you have knowledge about and that interest you then edit Skibidi Toilet when you are eligible to do so. That will also help you gain experience in editing, which would be useful. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 22:25, 20 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for uploading File:Fremont-rideout logo.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of non-free use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:12, 24 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

Do you have any social media for contacting you ? Please ita very important for me because if i say that here they will call me a sock puppet without evidence and they would think that im the Normalguyfromuk which is not true so i think is better to discuss in whatever social media you want just i need this thank you ! ~2026-36962-53 (talk) 18:24, 26 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

Hi rsjaffe! I've sent you a message using Discord; please take a look at your earliest convenience . Thanks, Staraction (talk · contribs) 07:18, 30 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2026).

Administrator changes

• Chipmunkdavis
• TechnoSquirrel69

• Mlaffs
• SpuriousQ
• Lectonar
• Dennis Brown
• Hog Farm

CheckUser changes

• Giraffer
• TonyBallioni

• Dbeef
• EdJohnston

Oversight changes

• Giraffer
• TonyBallioni

L235

Guideline and policy news

• A request for comment asks whether the criteria for autoconfirmed and extended confirmed should be modified.
• A request for comment proposes an addendum for the Real name section of the Username policy.

Technical news

• The special page Special:RangeCalculator has been created for any users to use to find an IP range. (phab:T268429)
• The "indefinitely" button in Special:Block for temporary accounts can be replaced with a preferred block duration stated on MediaWiki:ipb-indefinite-expiry-temporary-account. (phab:T427125)

Arbitration

• Following a series of motions, changes to the contentious topics procedure to restructure awareness have been implemented.
• The arbitration case Michael Jackson has been closed.

Miscellaneous

• The 2026 Developing Countries WikiContest will run from 1 July to 30 September. Sign up now!
• 10 candidates have been appointed to the U4C.

−

Request Access Maheshputtapaka.venkateshwari (talk) 05:28, 4 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

Hi Rsjaffe, the contents of Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/~2026-37883-91 should be merged into Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Mongies. Could you please handle the merge so the case is consolidated under the sockmaster Mongies? Thank you. AriuCH (talk) 23:13, 5 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

Looks like it has been done. In the future, the request should be done on the sockpuppet investigation page or, if the investigation is closed, by contacting one of the SPI clerks. I wouldn't be the one to do the merge, as I'm neither a clerk nor a checkuser. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 01:46, 6 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

Rsjaffe, Thank you for the note and response. AriuCH (talk) 18:00, 6 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

Please revoke TPA. This is Salebot1. --Prothe1st (leave me a message)-- 14:59, 7 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

Hello, you blocked this user, perhaps the edit summary of the edit above can be deleted as it is so spammy. Jonteemil (talk) 18:40, 7 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

We don't rev-del spam, generally. See, for example, WP:RD3. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 20:16, 7 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

Ok, thanks. Jonteemil (talk) 20:32, 7 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

i,m request rollback rights can u help me? Botempa (talk) 06:22, 13 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

STRONGLY object. This user has an active ANI against them which they have ignored. Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 14:36, 13 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

Their request for TAIV was also AI-generated: Permalink/1363666931. I am not entirely convinced that this editor has a sufficient level of english to understand the WP:TAIV requirements and restrictions on the data. After giving them some advice in their last ANI thread, I also gave some on my talk page in User talk:gurkubondinn § Draft:Harsh Roshan. I thought that they had understood that they needed to improve their English before doing more advanced things on enwiki, and that they should not rely on LLMs and I thought that they understood why. They seem to have completely ignored this a few days later though, because they've apparently been requesting more advanced permissions. ‑‑gurkubondinn 15:03, 13 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

To me, TAIV depends more upon editor behavior than editing proficiency. However, the two ANI threads cause me enough concerns to revoke it. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 15:44, 13 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

Pending changes reviewer is traditionally a very easy privilege to obtain, but does require the ability to understand the edits, so I’ve revoked that for now as well. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 15:47, 13 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

If I see Wikipedia articles being vandalized, I correct them. There was nothing wrong with that; however, what was done revoking my privileges was unfair. Botempa (talk) 01:07, 14 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

@Rsjaffe I have not misused the privileges granted to me. So, an injustice has been done to me. If the powers vested in me had been misused, I would have no objection to them being revoked. Botempa (talk) 01:13, 14 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

See my reply at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#User:Botempa's behaviour on the Sandun Perera (singer) article. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 04:11, 14 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

Agreed, but I was mostly concerned with their ability to understand the restrictions on TAIV data than anything else. I do think that this editor genuinely wants to contribute positively to the project, so I'm not worried about any intentional malice or disruption -- just the ability to understand the requirements (and edits, in the case of PCR). ‑‑gurkubondinn 16:00, 13 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

Hello, Rsjaffe. 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. Wburrow (talk) 03:15, 15 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

Taken care of. Thanks. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 03:21, 15 July 2026 (UTC)Reply