Wikiversity:Request custodian action

Custodians' tool New request Please sign with -- ~~~~

Welcome Wikiversity support staff are trusted users who have access to technical features (such as protecting and deleting pages, blocking users, and undoing these actions) that help with maintenance of Wikiversity. Request deletion of a page Request import of a page (e.g., from Meta or Wikibooks): Request a CheckUser Comment on custodian actions Other types of custodian requests Old requests (archive) See also: Notices for custodians

Administering Wikiversity Action required The open task template Maintenance Requests for deletion Requests for speedy deletion Requests for unblock Copyright violations Proposed deletions Pending deletions Requests for custodian action Notices for custodians Templates Introduction to templates Guide to templates Welcome templates Page flag templates Navigation templates Admin templates Template taskforce Development Developing Wikiversity Wikiversity logos Service community Metadata MediaWiki Project MediaWiki Technical needs Reference Policies Custodians Custodianship (policy) How to be a Wikimedia sysop Mission Managing vandalism MediaWiki Handbook Parser functions Logs Bots Consensus Statistics Events and news Announcements Wikimania

Custodian requests	Entries
Purge cache
Edit protected page	0
Speedy deletion	8
Expired prods	0
Unblock requests	0
Possible copyvio	0
History merge	0

82.21.88.44

• 82.21.88.44 (talk • email • contribs • stats • logs • global account) LTA, attack SPA, continuing disruptive attack on me and my work. See list of IP socks of this user and that page is also a documentation of long-term abuse, many socks blocked and locked. I will revert edits as LTA, but I am obviously involved, so please review. Please block IP and consider range block(s). Thanks. --Abd (discuss • contribs) 17:58, 17 December 2017 (UTC)

Update: Canvassing found for RfD now in process. Only delete votes so far are from the nominator or users clearly responding to the nominator's canvassing. Timeline:

• 11:36, 17 December 2017‎ RfD initially filed by IP 82.
• 18:02, 17 December 2017 RfD removed by me with notice above for review (because of personal conflict of interest).
• 07:09, 21 December 2017 IP reverts without discussion, restoring RfD
• 07:12, 21 December 2017 "Cold fusion at Wikiversity" Canvassing. Unsigned by 82.21.88.44. Not a neutral notice and not in a neutral location (the Fringe Theories Noticeboard), this invited Wikipedians with no understanding of, or opposition to, Wikiversity, to vote. Full discussion as of 04:53, 22 December 2017.
• 12:58, 21 December 2017 82.132.226.145 (Wikipedia contributions) comments on "Cold fusion at Wikiversity." (See this users other recent Wikipedia edits.)
• 13:53, 21 December 2017 74.175.117.2 votes delete. While deliberately editing IP to avoid responsibility is disruptive, this may indeed be an independent user, with common anti-fringe opinion as may be expected from those following the Fringe Theories Noticeboard, canvassed by the IP notice there.
• 14:06, 21 December 2017‎ JzG (Contributions) (SUL) votes Delete in the RfD giving no relevant arguments.
• 14:11, 21 December 2017 JzG comments on "Cold fusion at Wikiversity."
• 16:33, 21 December 2017‎ Deacon Vorbis (contributions) ((SUL)) reverts my removal of the RfD notice from the Cold fusion resource, as first Wikiversity edit. 16:46, 21 December 2017‎ Atcovi rolls this back. 16:51, 21 December 2017‎ Deacon Vorbis reverts Atcovi. Deacon Vorbis' actions -- not unreasonable -- probably resulted from the canvassing. He has not voted in the RfD.
• 00:47, 22 December 2017 82.132.238.67 votes in RfD, giving very familiar arguments, see the 82.132.226.145 comments on Wikipedia, and also the RationalWiki article on me, created by an AP sock there (I have conclusive technical evidence). See also the Rational Wiki article on Ben Steigmann, just created. This is all an attack on Wikiversity users and Wikiversity academic freedom, Steigmann to start, then on me for blowing the scheme up by having the Steigmann impersonation socks (and the SPA complainant here) checkusered, and studying the LTA on meta. I was threatened with retaliation, here and on meta. So this is no surprise.
• 22:53, 21 December 2017‎ ජපස (contributions) (SUL) votes in RfD. This user has a long history of conflict with regard to fringe topics, and is a frequent flyer on the Fringe Theories Noticeboard. Obviously canvassed, then. No relevant arguments, refers instead to alleged harassment. (If any user has concerns about my behavior, my talk page is open.) My attempt to cooperate with this user obviously was not taken well.
• "Virgin Media" IP, geolocating where these do in England, is common with Anglo Pyramidologist socks and I have conclusively identified some of these. There is some evidence in the meta study, but there is more that is private technical evidence. This is widely known from web administrators who have exposed these socks. WMF checkusers avoid connecting IPs with accounts because of privacy policy. However, IPs are commonly included in Sock Puppet Investigations on Wikipedia.

• REQUESTED ACTIONS

• Close RfD ASAP as hopelessly compromised through canvassing by nominator as well as voting from SPAs. The Cold fusion resource has been here for many years (I did not start it), and has participation from many. If it is improperly biased, that can readily be fixed, but in spite of years of opportunity, the anti-fringe faction has ignored it. They remain welcome to help improve Wikiversity resources, the mainspace page must be neutral -- but it can link to essays or signed studies, or to seminars where a group discusses -- or is invited to discuss -- some subtopic.
• Block the disruptive IP users, as obvious socks of blocked users (or meat puppets, but straight socking is more likely). Or, at least, socks of users who do not want to take responsibility for their comments. See this edit, where the nominator claims to be "a user in good standing on multiple Wikimedia projects" (As with Michaelskater on Wikipedia, claiming a Wikiversity account but not wanting to be "harassed" because of using it. While he was harassing the hell out of Ben Steigmann, as checkuser showed).
• Warn the canvassed users who voted. User talk:JzG and User talk:ජපස The warning should cover disclosure of canvassing, if canvassed, and as well, the use of personal attack in deletion arguments. As well, those users should be informed that Wikiversity allows alleged "fringe," because fringe topics may be studied. Wikiversity has a neutrality policy, but it is an inclusive neutrality, not exclusive as is often the case on Wikipedia. Wikiversity has no notability requirement, anything may be studied. I would warn, but with these two users especially, my warnings would do no good. Thanks. --Abd (discuss • contribs) 19:47, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

82.21.88.44 said he is emailing the Wikimedia Foundation to confirm his identity, so you are not being patient, wait til he does that. You seem to have a history of accusing people of being the same person without evidence. Calling him an attack SPA is clearly libellous. You have no evidence socking is happening here. The IPS are from different countries. I am on 02. I am not a sock or 'SPA', I posted on the Wikipedia fringe board because I noticed you have been attacking Wikipedia admins on your website. The Wikimedia foundation are reviewing your behaviour and I believe you will be globally blocked for this abuse you are doing. You just linked to a rational article about yourself. It describes you as an Internet harasser, you do not have a good online reputation. Please be more calm and refrain from attacking users or making false statements about them. 82.132.223.81 (discuss) 20:49, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

That claim about the Foundation is totally irrelevant. Wikipedia does not stop Sock Puppet Investigations because a user claims this or that, and an investigation is based only on suspicion, proof is not required. I have not actually accused the "same person," literally. There can be meat puppetry (and .44 clearly canvassed, which is inviting meat puppetry). The same family of socks created the RationalWiki article as revenge (one might notice in RW history that that the creator did some work and then disappeared, and then others, the same, and now more, again, all with the same agenda and making the same arguments. I have conclusive technical evidence connecting these, but it doesn't matter. There may be "innocent users" who can be suspected. Nobody should be blocked merely because of suspicion, but the "duck test" is how most socks are tagged and blocked on Wikipedia, especially after the original account is stale. --Abd (discuss • contribs) 23:39, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

• Abd's paranoia is getting the better of him. he has requested a global block of my IP at Meta. I am in contact witht he stewards there. This IP does not belong to any of the people Abd includes in his purported "long term abuse". I am a user in good standing on multiple WMF projects, my home project is enWP. This is not associated in any way with the O2 mobile IPs he is trying to have banned. 82.21.88.44 (discuss) 00:10, 23 December 2017 (UTC)