Help
Book creator (disable)

User talk:Quentinv57

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Jump to: navigation, search
Hello !

If you want to tell me :


Archives
Archive

Contents


[edit] QuentinvBot

Hi Quentinv57. Your bot, QuentinvBot, is quiet since 17 February. Is there a reason for it? If so, could you solve it? Thanks in advance. Regards, Trijnstel (talk) 12:00, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

Hello. Yes, the server where it was hosted is down. I've launched it manually and will try to fix it soon. Thanks for reporting. Kind regards, -- Quentinv57 (talk) 14:34, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

[edit] IRC

Hi Quentinv57, and thanks for your kind words! I'm logging into IRC for #wikipedia-pl channel, and recently occasionally also to #wikimedia-steward-elections, since at the moment these are the channels I may be sought at. If you've visited them, surely you'd see me around (depending on the hour as well, of course, since at the moment I'm in CET-5 time zone). I indeed have not been a frequent visitor to en channel, mostly because I'm not an admin on any English speaking wiki. Perhaps I should. Should I become a steward, naturally I'd make it a habit to join the steward channel as well. Pundit (talk) 16:28, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your answer, and thanks for being present in the steward channel today. Regards, -- Quentinv57 (talk) 19:53, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

[edit] shanghairanking(.com)

I have removed \bshanghairanking\b from the blacklist. The log entry was a bit unclear, and there were serious concerns which we could not back up. Could you please comment on Talk:Spam blacklist#www.shanghairanking.com? Did you mean to block something else? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Beetstra (talk • contribs) .

Hello Beetstra. I added this link to the blacklist as it was spammed by the account Shanghairanking. Even if this name clearly referred to a spam-only account and I thought the lock was fine, I should have considered a little more the blacklisting.
I have clearly no objections for you removing this entry from the blacklist. But it would really help me if the anti-spam bot could make a report everytime before I add a new entry to the blacklist. Do you know how to query such a thing ? Somebody already pointed me to User:COIBot/Poke, but that seems not to be working.
Thanks for telling me. Kind regards, -- Quentinv57 (talk) 09:11, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Outil statistique

Salut Quentin,

Je n'ai pas eu l'occasion de chatter avec toi depuis que tu as enrichi ton outil statistique : http://toolserver.org/~quentinv57/tools/editcounter.php?username=Hsarrazin&project=frwikisource

Il est pas mal du tout, mais vu la présentation en graphe horizontal, il faudrait soit rétrécir les colonnes pour les mois, soit limiter l'affichage à 12 mois (quitte à permettre de naviguer sur plusieurs années), parce que le graphique ne tient pas dans une page écran :)

les "monthly edits by mamespace seraient sans doute plus lisibles dans l'autre sens" (des barres horizontales), ne serait-ce que pour permetttre de voir l'évolution dans le temps...

Sinon, je voulais te demander ce que mesure le dernier camembert "Operations", qui chez moi indique 100%, mais je ne sais pas de quoi...

Merci pour ton travail, qui permet d'avoir de nouveau un outil de mesure de l'activité, et de voir non seulement la quantité de tra vail, mais les domaines, de manière tout à fait intéressante... :))

A bientôt !

Bonjour Hélène. Je pense que ce problème d'affichage, qui a déjà été maintes fois signalé, ne dépend pas du nombre de mois affichés mais de la résolution de l'écran de celui qui regarde le graphe. Je vais essayer de régler ça un de ces quatre, mais je suis vraiment prit en ce moment.
Le camembert opérations mesure les opérations d'admin (protections, suppressions, blocages, etc.). Il est bien indiqué que les 100% correspondent chez toi à des deletions, ce qui veut dire en français des suppressions. Tu n'as sans doute jamais protégé de pages, bloqué d'utilisateurs, changé des droits utilisateurs, etc.
Voila voila. Je vais essayer de gérer tout ça un peu plus tard, quand mes concours seront passés :-) -- Quentinv57 (talk) 09:30, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Talk:Interwiki map

Salut Quentin. Je me demandais si tu pouvais me donner des conseils sur la bonne façon de demander qqch sur cette page ? --ArséniureDeGallium (talk) 19:35, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

Je pense que ce que tu as fait était parfait. J'y ai également donné mon avis. Bonne continuation. -- Quentinv57 (talk) 09:23, 10 March 2012 (UTC)
Parfait, ça m'étonnerait. :D --ArséniureDeGallium (talk) 17:23, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Synchbot wikis

Hi Quentinv57. I noticed your bot editing a few wikis that mine doesn't. I added a few to my configuration, but I'm not sure whether you intended to edit these:

—Pathoschild 02:33, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Hello and thanks for the info. Yes it's intentional, I don't know why these ones should be skipped... But you're true, I could probably skip chapters by default and only create pages there when the user explicitly mention it. What do you think about it ? -- Quentinv57 (talk) 08:48, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Import

Hi Quentinv57, I am admin on mr.wikisource and want the import rights to import dump from mr.books and mr.wiki which our community have collected over a period of time in the wait of source portal. Now being the portal is operational to transfer them it is needed. Please do the needful. Thanks Rahuldeshmukh101 (talk) 16:56, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

I've copied this request to m:SRP given Quentin's not around. Snowolf How can I help? 18:38, 11 March 2012 (UTC)
Done by Vituzzu. Request can be found here. -- Quentinv57 (talk) 07:42, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Manager is need for

hi.Manager is need for.I'm need for management tool/ What do.? [1] .--E THP (talk) 12:40, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Request can be found here. -- Quentinv57 (talk) 07:45, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

[edit] User script listings cleanup project

I'm leaving this message for all recent contributors to w:Wikipedia:WikiProject User scripts/Scripts.

This scripts listing page is in dire need of cleanup. To facilitate this, I've created a new draft listing at w:Wikipedia:WikiProject User scripts/Scripts cleanup. You're invited to list scripts you know to be currently working and relevant. Eventually this draft page can replace the current scripts listing.

If you'd like to comment or collaborate on this proposal, see the discussion I started here: w:Wikipedia talk:WikiProject User scripts#Scripts listing cleanup project. Thanks! Equazcion (talk) 00:19, 25 Mar 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Missing project

Hello Quentinv57, Using your tool I noticed that be.wikimedia.org is missing in the list, while I am sysop there and nlwikimedia is in the list. Can you add that project to your tool? Greetings - Romaine (talk) 02:51, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

Hello. I can hardly do something, as these databases have not been imported on the Toolserver. I gave a list to the Toolserver admins to know exactly what changes have to be made (see issue), but they did not have the time to do it for now. Sorry, -- Quentinv57 (talk) 07:53, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

[edit] sulinfo doesn't display correct enwiki edits

Hi Q, nothing really urgent, but when you have some spare time, please check why sulinfo doesn't update the edit count of English wikipedia ... Regards a×pdeHello! 08:20, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Hello axpde. I checked, and it seems to work right now. Is this still happening to you ? -- Quentinv57 (talk) 08:04, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Active Wiki

Hello, All the best for your studies. Just wanted to let you know that "orwiktionary" is active since last october. But still it is showing as "closed wiki" here. Can you correct it? thanks a lot :-) -- ɑηsuмaη ʈ ᶏ ɭ Ϟ 04:53, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

Hello. I can hardly do something, as these databases have not been imported on the Toolserver. I gave a list to the Toolserver admins to know exactly what changes have to be made (see issue), but they did not have the time to do it for now. Sorry, -- Quentinv57 (talk) 07:54, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Lezwiki

Hi, Quentinv57. Please add lezwiki to the list of Wikipedia too. Best regards, Vago tp 06:20, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

I'm not an admin of the Toolserver, so I cannot import new databases there. For more informations, please see above. Cordially, -- Quentinv57 (talk) 10:17, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Idea for SulUtil

Hello!

I have an idea for sulutil related to members of global groups. Now it is not easy to understand whether the some user (a member of some global group) has the technical rights in some wiki. And your tool is well suited for this.

I think that it is possible to make an additional checkbox (like "Display inactivity" or "Display blocks") by pushing of which the all wikis that are in corresponding set of wikis are marked with mark of related global group. For example, if someone is global sysop then it will be useful to mark all wikis from global sysop wikiset with "sysop" or "global sysop" for this person. In particular, it allow to understand where this person can use his global sysop rights and where not.

Wikisets for global groups can be found here.

With best regards, Emaus (talk) 14:33, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

[edit] sulinfo thought bubble

Not sure whether you had thought of an adapation (switch) to your tool, that enabled to turn on a link to the respective "Special:ListUsers/bureaucrat" links so users who have a wish for a rename can be pointed to it. Even better would be if the switch was aware of the context-sensitive to whether 'crat exist or not. It would help when those in wish of a rename could be pointed at such a link and send them on their way. billinghurst sDrewth 14:13, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

[edit] RFC Danny B.

Hi as you were somehow involved, let me point out you to this RFC.--Juandev (talk) 18:24, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Bulk username rename request

Hi,

I'd like to request the rename of these accounts that has had edits in 2011 & 2012. The last edits were to request the username rename. I'll then reassess whats left. :)

-- とある白い猫 chi? 07:22, 5 May 2012 (UTC) List is:

  1. Yes check.svg White Cat@anwiki (contribs)
    Please answer here.
  2. Red x.svg White Cat@azwiki (contribs)
    The user "とある白い猫" already exists.
  3. Yes check.svg White Cat@bswiki (contribs)
  4. Red x.svg White Cat@cywiki (contribs)
    The user "とある白い猫" already exists.
  5. Yes check.svg White Cat@dewikisource (contribs)
  6. Red x.svg White Cat@enwikiversity (contribs)
    Please put a local requets here.
    Posted to rename requests per your request. -- とある白い猫 chi? 05:52, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
  7. Red x.svg White Cat@euwiki (contribs)
    Please put a local requets here.
    That does not appear to be the correct page. My request remains unanswered since February. -- とある白い猫 chi? 05:52, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
  8. Red x.svg White Cat@gawiki (contribs)
    Posted to rename requests per your request. Process appears dead based on older unreplied posts by others. -- とある白い猫 chi? 05:52, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
    Please put a local requets here.
    Posted to rename requests per your request. Process appears dead based on older unreplied posts by others. -- とある白い猫 chi? 05:52, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
  9. Red x.svg White Cat@hrwiki (contribs)
    Local 'crats refused the renaming.
  10. Red x.svg White Cat@hrwikisource (contribs)
    Please answer here.
    Question was answered per your request. -- とある白い猫 chi? 05:52, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
  11. Red x.svg White Cat@idwiki (contribs)
    Please put a local requets here.
    Posted to rename requests per your request. -- とある白い猫 chi? 05:52, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
  12. White Cat@jawikibooks (contribs)
    Request waiting for a reply since February. -- とある白い猫 chi? 05:52, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
  13. White Cat@ltwiki (contribs)
    Request waiting for a reply since February. -- とある白い猫 chi? 05:52, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
  14. White Cat@mkwiki (contribs)
    Request waiting for a reply since February. -- とある白い猫 chi? 05:52, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
  15. White Cat@mrwiki (contribs)
    Request waiting for a reply since February. -- とある白い猫 chi? 05:52, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
  16. White Cat@nnwiki (contribs)
    Local B'crat seems to be having technical difficulties of some sort. Issue was archived before it could be resolved. -- とある白い猫 chi? 05:52, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
  17. White Cat@sahwiki (contribs)
    Local B'crat seems to be having technical difficulties of some sort. -- とある白い猫 chi? 05:52, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
  18. White Cat@scnwiki (contribs)
    Request waiting for a reply since February. -- とある白い猫 chi? 05:52, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
  19. White Cat@shwiktionary (contribs)
    Request waiting for a reply since February. -- とある白い猫 chi? 05:52, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
  20. White Cat@skwiki (contribs)
    As instructed request was put on local rename requests. -- とある白い猫 chi? 05:52, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
  21. White Cat@slwiki (contribs)
    Local B'crat seems to be having technical difficulties of some sort. -- とある白い猫 chi? 05:52, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
  22. White Cat@specieswiki (contribs)
    Local B'crat seems to be having technical difficulties of some sort. -- とある白い猫 chi? 05:52, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
  23. White Cat@srwikinews (contribs)
    Request waiting for a reply since February. -- とある白い猫 chi? 05:52, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
  24. White Cat@suwiki (contribs)
    Request waiting for a reply since February. -- とある白い猫 chi? 05:52, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
  25. White Cat@trwiktionary (contribs)
    Request waiting for a reply since February. -- とある白い猫 chi? 05:52, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
  26. White Cat@ukwiki (contribs)
    Request waiting for a reply since February. -- とある白い猫 chi? 05:52, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
  27. White Cat@wawiki (contribs)
    Request waiting for a reply since February. -- とある白い猫 chi? 05:52, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
  28. White Cat@zh_yuewiki (contribs)
    As instructed request was put on local rename requests. -- とある白い猫 chi? 05:52, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
  29. White Cat@zhwiki (contribs)
    Request waiting for a reply since March. -- とある白い猫 chi? 05:52, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

-- とある白い猫 chi? 08:10, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

Hello. I checked the 15 first ones, and for most of them you did not answer local 'crats, or even not ask them. Please check it and tell me if there are really some projects you need to be renamed on where 'crats are inactive or really not answering. Thanks for your understanding. -- Quentinv57 (talk) 10:20, 5 May 2012 (UTC)
In all cases I have asked the b'crats. I will check them like you asked but I am already seeing paages where rename requests has not been granted for anybody in years. -- とある白い猫 chi? 11:14, 5 May 2012 (UTC)
I reviewed all of the former requests I made, a good chunk got no reply from then-active (and perhaps still active) local b'crats. Of course they may simply not understand English. In some cases local b'crats do not know how to handle renames if an account already exists which are automatically created when I forget to log off before attempting to review the status. -- とある白い猫 chi? 05:52, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Bot on the multilingual Wikisource

Hello Quentin. If i want to run my bot on this Wikisource, what should i type in my user-config.py?

# -*- coding: utf-8 -*- #
family = '???'
mylang = '???'
 
usernames['???']['???'] = u'GedawyBot'

Thanks in advance.--M.Gedawy Talk 03:18, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

Hello. I don't know much about pywikimedia, but I can make a guess. I'm pretty sure you would have to put wikisource in family, but I'm not sure what you should put in the other box... If you put www there or to leave it empty, does it work ? -- Quentinv57 (talk) 05:15, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
No, it doesn't. Can you nominate someone for me who knows much about pywikimedia to ask him?--M.Gedawy Talk 20:20, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
I'm not really sure I could find somebody to help. Just try to put old in the lang. I think that the solution may be in the file family.py. Maybe this project is not defined and has to be defined there. -- Quentinv57 (talk) 21:05, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
I really try to find this out and asked Betacommand who confirmed me you should use the following line :
usernames['wikisource']['-'] = username
Best regards, -- Quentinv57 (talk) 21:17, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
Yes Quentin! it works! Many thanks for helping me. :)--M.Gedawy Talk 22:41, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

[edit] CheckUser request about LadyInGrey

The following comments are about this checkuser requets.

[edit] Messages from Gumr51

Dearest Quentin57, my user name is GUMR51 in Wikipedia, Wikisource, etc. But he question to you is: If that user account was only made three day ago, does that justify the issue at hand? It shows a very poor handling of issues.--Gumr510906 (talk) 15:22, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

Hello. So may I know why you created an other account to edit this request, which was already closed twice by different stewards ? If you have something to complain about the fact that this request has not been done, please see with the stewards who handle it. As you may see on the Steward requests/Checkuser page, I've not been involved in the discussion, and have taken no decision. If you need some more precision, feel free to ask me, I'm open to the discussion. Regards, -- Quentinv57 (talk) 15:30, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Messages from StephenDaedalus

Hey Quentin. It would be really nice if you could give a fresh look to the checkuser request. I can understand how busy you are. It doesn't matter how long it takes, but it's very important for es.wikisource that the issue is properly investigated. Thank you a lot in advance. --StephenDaedalus (talk) 20:38, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

Hello. I understand the importance you put on this issue. As I said on the CheckUser requests page, I'm reviewing it for now. I still don't know if a check is necessary, but what I'm sure about is that I'll do my best to solve it. Regards, -- Quentinv57 (talk) 12:29, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

Further evidence (overlaps)

There's is something you should take note of. **Romina** is publicly known to be LadyInGrey's daughter. Of course, there's nothing wrong with that. She has not been included in the list of users to be checked: they're expected to be doing legitimate use of the same IP. Now, if you check this part of the timeline:

  • March 23rd, 2012. 14:42-19:37 (LadyInGrey)
  • March 23rd, 2012. 19:18-19:24 (**Romina**)

They're using both accounts at the same time. Here is the exact numbers:

19:16 - LadyInGrey
19:17 - LadyInGrey
19:18 - LadyInGrey
19:18 - **Romina**
19:19 - LadyInGrey
19:21 - **Romina**
19:24 - **Romina**
19:25 - LadyInGrey

So they're using two different computers to work on wikisource at the same time. This evidence explains the very few overlap situations.

Now, this is an expanded version of this other evidence presented by Theornamentalist:

April 30th, 2012. 23:32-23:59 (Azalee) April 30th, 2012. 23:14-23:15 (**Romina**) April 30th, 2012. 23:10-23:10 (Azalee) to bash user StephenDaedalus April 30th, 2012. 21:20-22:53 (**Romina**)

-

21:20 to 22:53 (93 minutes)
Romina proofreads and votes. 29 edits.

22:54 to 23:09 (15 minutes)
Nothing

23:10 (1 edit)
Azalee logs in, attacks me for pointing something out to LadyInGrey in the vote discussion.

23:10 to 23:13 (3 minutes)
Nothing

23:14 to 23:15 (1 minute)
19 min. since her last edit, Romina comes back, proofreads 2 pages and then logs out.

23:16 to 23:31 (15 minutes)
Nothing

23:32 to 03.06 (214 minutes)
19 min. since his last edit, Azalee comes back, proofreads 17 pages and logs out.

-

Isn't that oddly timed? As it has been similarly pointed out, the overlap evidence can be divided in two categories: a) exact overlap that requires two computers, b) rough overlap that can be done by logging in/out from one account to the other. --StephenDaedalus (talk) 00:31, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

Hello StephenDaedalus. I know that **Romina** is official declared as being the sister of LadyInGrey. And what you showed me does not prove the contrary to me. It will really be crazy to be using too computers at the same time to try to prove you're someone different. Anyway, I wonder if it's technically possible that the same person would have done these two editions, unless we are completely paranoid. I did not say that this timeline is a 100% sure proof that they did not abuse multiple accounts, but it can no more be taken as an evidence to perform this check. -- Quentinv57 (talk) 16:02, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

Once we've proved that they've used two computers at the sime time before, using it a bunch of times over months of no overlaping to throw people off doesn't seem all that sophisticated. In fact, it's rather suprising that is all it takes to bypass a SPI. Anyway, it's ok if that's your call. Thanks for work, and get some rest. ^^ --StephenDaedalus (talk) 16:26, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Messages from DrkFrdric

Je ne crois pas que l'evidence donné par theornamentalist soit suffisant pour conduire le checkuser.

D'un côté, aprés sa discussion avec Magister Mathematicae, Il a dit que sa seule preocupation c'est que les utilisateurs aient participé dans des nombreauses votations mais il a inclu aussi des IPs, alors les IPs anonymes ne peuvent pas voter, les IPs devraient donc être remué de la liste au moins qu'il donne une autre raison pour le checkuser.

De l'autre côté, il n'y a aucune évidence pour penser que les autres utilisateurs soient en fait LadyInGrey. C'est vrai que LadyInGrey et Theornamentalist ont eu des discussions dans wikisource, mais si on voit la votation qui est en train d'avoir lieu, la liste que theornamentalist a donné est composé par tous les utilisateurs qui ont voté contre son option. Il n'y a aucune raison pour penser que Homero est LadyInGrey, il n'a jamais discuté avec theornamentalist avant, son seul "péché" a été avoir voté pour l'option que theornamentalist ne soutenient pas.

Theornamentalist a dit aussi que tous ces utilisateurs avaient des connaisances avancés des fonctions de la wiki, mais Lito WS par exemple, m'a demandé de lui aider à télécharger une DjVu avant de commencer à éditer, alors ce que theornamentalist a dit est faux. Pour la deuxieme fois, le péché de Lito WS c'est d'avoir voté pour l'option contraire.

Daecq, lui, alors il n'a pas voté, il n'a pas discuté avec lui non plus, il n'a rien fait; et il a édité des DjVus pas seulment de LadyInGrey, c'est completement ridicule d'accuser un utilisateur seulment parce qu'il a édité les pages d'un autre utilisateur.

Alors je ne trouve pas des raisons pour faire le checkuser, ces outils devraient être ulitilisé, à mon avis, seulment pour les cases dans lesquels il y a assez d'évidence, pas pour ceux dans lesquels le principal moteur est apparentment le résultat d'une votation. Et je soutient quelques des changes que Theornamentalist propose à wikisource, mais demander une checkuser seulment parce que des personnes ont voté en contre, je ne suis pas du tout d'accord avec ça.

Je suis s:es:Usuario:Freddy eduardo. Merci beaucoup --DrkFrdric (talk) 01:57, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

I answered you here. --DrkFrdric (talk) 11:19, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Overlaps

I did my own research and found that the users did overlap several times. I divided my findings into two categories: 1. instances of overlap that could be seen as ”not enough evidence to support the claim that they are different persons”, and 2. instances of overlap that ”inequivocably prove that they are different persons”.

First category

  • January 29th: Azalee edited from 1:29 to 3:29, LadyInGrey edited at 2:42 [2]

Second catogory

  • March 9th: Lito edited from 16:54 to 19:26, Romina started editing at 19:22 until 19:56. Someone could say that maybe the person signed out from the first account, sign in with the other account, edited with that account, signed out with that account, signed in with the first account, edited with the first account, signed out again, signed in with the second account, and then proceded editing; but this is impossible if you carefully check the edits, Romina was proofreading that books for days, and she always took between 5 and 6 minutes to proofread each page; her first edit was at 19:22 (as I said) but her next edit was at 19:27 (exactly 5 minutes); Lito's last edit was at 19:26 (that would have left Romina with only one minute to proofread a page that she usually does in 6!), as we can see, there's no way they could be the same person.
  • March 12nd: LadyInGrey edited from 18:23 to 19:36, Romina proofread 3 pages from 18:40 to 18:47, overlaping completely with LadyinGrey! Again, if we check the edits, we can conclude that the time that took both Romina and LadyinGrey the proofreading process is consistent with their other edits, so there wasn't any time for change accounts, proofread a page, and then return to the other account and proofread a new page in the same time it always took her to proofread a single page.
  • February 23th: Lito WS edited from 19:23 to 19:47, Homero edited 19:26 to 20:22. Its completely imposible here to say that they are the same person: from 19:23 to 19:47 lito had 13 edits, homero had 8 edits in the same period of time and they all overlap with lito's!; if this doesn't prove things, then nothing will.

I actually found two mores but I lost them, my point is that a checkuser is something extremely delicate to do, more if the only evidence are coincidences and the way they vote. --DrkFrdric (talk) 21:30, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for your input Freddy; I have never said it is impossible to have overlap, just that there should be much, much more. If I am logged in as "Theornamentalist" in Chrome, and I have opened up IE, I am not logged-in in IE, but remain logged-in in Chrome. I assume one could simply open a different browser as a workaround. I still stand by the evidence, and how the accounts are inexplicably related through editing, proofreading, voting, tasks, and lack of discussion for learning etc, etc. - Theornamentalist (talk) 21:52, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
Even if the case was that Lady or whoever opened two browsers, as I said, you just have to check their other edits, especifically the time it takes them to proofread a page, in all the cases they overlap they take the same amount of time to complete every page than when they don't overlap; the person couldn't proofread two different pages (from the two accounts) in the amount of time it took them to proofread a single page (and the case with Lito and Homero is even more clear, they made 13 and 8 editions respectively). But you could continue adding ad hoc hypothesis ad infinitum, Chris... --DrkFrdric (talk) 23:18, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Message from Theornamentalist

Hey Quentin,

I wanted to clarify some of the points Freddy made; I do not want to turn this into wiki-lawyering, nor to spend time focusing on the minutia of the request, but I feel I need to at least somewhat in order to remain fair in making the request.

For his first point, yes, it was Magister who claimed that the accounts in question were simply the ones who voted oppositely me. The fact that the ip's cannot vote, yet are included in the CU case is because they are highly suspect edits. The act on her behalf and carry out her tasks. This was never about targeting the opposition in the vote. If you cannot tell at this point, and you can ask the other users involved in this case, the vote is the least of my concerns. It is only evidence to support abuse. These ip edits are so narrowly focused in their edits that I find it impossible for them not to be related to her account. We get tons of ip edits every week, but nothing with such a unique knowledge set of our site, nor with such contempt for the users LadyInGrey has a history of being absolutely rude and unjust with.

On point with "Homero", yes, this account was listed as part of the collateral after we began investigating. I have requested a CU at en.wp once before, and it began just as this; finding accounts which are demonstratabley connected, and also listing the ones which show a significant relationship even if the edits are innocuous. Listing accounts that have wronged me would be terribly biased. I list accounts which show unexplainable behaviour when seen as a whole, ie, all these editors as one, and their superb ability to edit one after the other with no overlap on virtually the same unlisted books in the same style of editing.

I believe that Lito, Lito source, or Lito WS (I know the names were tossed around for days) is a carefully placed account. Magister points out, as Freddy reiterates, that because the user knows how to proofread, that is not proof that it is LadyInGrey. Of course that is true. If I thought otherwise, I would have listed literally dozens of accounts who came to our site a proofread a book. Obviously I did not. What is odd about Lito is that the account was new to *all* Wikimedia sites, had no experience with anything. Yes, the account was opened at es.ws, which is odd, but not a crime. Yes, they showed an exceptional amount of knowledge very quickly in proofreading and validation. Yes, they edited the same books as LadyInGrey right off the bat. But the most remarkable thing is that within the accounts first few days of working in the "wiki-world", it began to change all pages missing images marked "problematic" to "proofread", created a new category to support this, and was absolutely unmovable on the notion that this was the way to do this. This went against our standard of the last 8 months, and one which was done by various users (but not all) since the proofread page came about. This way of handling pages missing images was exactly how LadyInGrey wanted the pages to be marked. Both accounts refused to budge on the matter. I wondered, how is this new account making such radical changes? LadyInGrey must be smiling that this new user actually shares her preference! It didn't connect at first. A couple days later, after my attempts to revert them back to "problematic" were thwarted by either one account or both, she posted an official message in the Cafe, where she declared that this was the way which the pages would now be marked. In retrospect, it all seemed too well orchestrated. - Theornamentalist (talk) 11:38, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

As with the ip's, listing Daeqc should prove that this is not fishing for opposition in a vote. I happened to be watching recent changes that night, where I saw LadyInGrey edit for some time and then immediately after she stopped, a user pop up and begin editing one of her books not appearing in RC or collab. Then, I watched as the account finished validating, and then I watched as another account, Azalee, began editing right afterwards. This may be a harmless use of an account, but it is still related in my investigation, and that is why it is listed.

I do not like that Freddy has potentially intended to label this as users going against a vote. He acknowledges that some of the accounts and ip's obviously did not or could not vote. I find this as bad of a misdirection (whether intentional or not) as Magister gave in his reasons for closure. I have listed a ton of evidence that links these accounts together in an unexplainable way. That is why I believe a Checkuser is necessary. - Theornamentalist (talk) 12:14, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

Hello Theornemantalist. Don't worry, I don't think this is wiki-lawyering. There is a conflict at eswikisource, and your personal point of view is needed to solve it too.
About the IPs, I already decided that I won't check them. There were already some edits, and no abuse was made with it. Anyway, the checkuser policy prevents me from revealing her IP address, even more because as she's a regular member of the community. As far as I know, there is nothing that prevents LadyInGrey or anyone else to contribute without being identified, or with any other user account. What is forbidden is not to have multiple accounts, but is to abuse of multiple accounts. For example, using them to vote twice or thrice at a discussion, or using them in an edit war, or to harass somebody. I took a look to the contributions of these IPs and I did not see such actions. For the same reasons, I won't check the account Daeqc.
About Lito WS, it's clearly different as this account was used to vote. One more time, it's true that voting is clearly not sufficient to be suspected of abusing multiple accounts. But I have to admit I found your section "timeline" rather surprising. That may be a simple coincidence, it's true, but I agree with you on the fact that such coincidences may lead to a check to ensure that there is no abuse behind this.
If you have some time and could extend this timeline to the 2-3 last months, it would surely help to investigate. A link to the discussion where LadyInGrey said at the Café that the way Lito WS handled pages missing images is the right one would also help me. Thanks -- Quentinv57 (talk) 13:15, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
Not a problem; I can do this later in the day. - Theornamentalist (talk) 13:19, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
Lito WS began by creating the category on January 26th, and then began to fill the category that same day with edits like this. I inquire about the changes, shocked that the standard that nearly a dozen or so editors were doing for 6 or 7 months was suddenly being undone without so much as a word to any of us, or to anyone in the community. Only days after I welcomed the account, I was bombarded with rude comments, including calling the way which we were doing it "ridiculous" and my attempt at discussion to be "futile". Similarly, I ask them to open a discussion at the Cafe, where the whole community can discuss the practice before implementation. Our discussion lasts for a few days. On January 29th LadyInGrey makes an official post at Cafe, declaring that this is the proper way to do this, and I inquire politely, but receive no discussion on the matter from either of them again. - Theornamentalist (talk) 20:43, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
I don't want her ip address to be revealed or anything, but those ip's are so closely related to her editing that I wish they could remain as evidence. I believe they are exemplary examples of the abuse and shared tone between the various accounts.
Hello Theornamentalist. My investigation is about to end (after having worked two days on it). Based on the timeline you gave on the checkuser request, I was about to perform the check. But I worked on my side to see if edits really never overlap, and here's what I found :
  • on 23 March 2012, LadyInGrey and **Romina** clearly edited at the same time.
  • on 9 March 2012, it's the same for Lito WS and **Romina**.
  • on 23 February 2012, we've a proof that Homero can't be Lito WS.
  • on 29 January 2012, the edits of Azalee and LadyInGrey overlapped. It's not easy to find such an entry, but Azalee made a pause of 4 years. Plus Azalee and LadyInGrey did not much contribute at the same hours. Whereas LadyInGrey mostly contributed between 15h and 23h (which represents 74% of her edits), Azalee used to edit between 1h and 2h. Moreover, if you look on the long-term (and I guess that 7 years is), you should not see such a difference in the repartition of the hours the two users contributed if they were sockpuppets.
If we believe the results above, we see that LadyInGrey ≠ **Romina** ≠ Lito WS ≠ Azalee ≠ Homero. That's technically impossible unless there are at least two people behind this. For the user Daeqc and the IPs, it can be one of them or not, it does not matter much because they may not be related to an abuse (no participation to a vote, no direct conversation or edit war).
Do you agree with what I wrote above ? -- Quentinv57 (talk) 09:19, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

Hi Quentin. I think you've missed my message above. Give it a look, it's very relevant since it particularly addresses the issue of the overlaps. --StephenDaedalus (talk) 11:49, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

I've just replied. Thanks for the reminder. -- Quentinv57 (talk) 16:05, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

I think the biggest problem with an SPI case of this magnitude is that there is no infallible shred of evidence. There is only judgement, which from my understanding, is exactly how a Checkuser case runs. Individually, each "piece" of the evidence is I believe on all counts bizarre or unusual, tough to explain, and unlikely. Yes, it is true that the fact all of the accounts edit around the same time frame each day, this does not mean they are the same person, but it is evidence. Yes, it is true that the very active accounts editing in series for several months with only a few instances of minor overlap is explainable, this does not mean they are the same person, but it is evidence. Yes, all of the new accounts and the one which returned instantly had the level of expertise as LadyInGrey; this does not mean they are the same person, but it is evidence. Yes, the accounts all acquired this knowledge with virtually none of the usual questions to eachother, fellow collaborators, or the community in general, this does not mean they are the same person, but it is evidence. Yes, the accounts all quickly divulged into the proofreading books as opposed to editing plain text; certainly does not mean they are the same person, but it is evidence. Yes, they all began proofreading books that the other accounts, primarily LadyInGrey, had proofread or edited, books which were not listed in RC, collaboration, on the front of her user page, making locating these books out of thousands improbable, but not impossible so it may not be the same person, but it is evidence. Yes, when politely inquired on trivial or important matters, they all react identically to the way which LadyInGrey has reacted, and from my experience on the site for nearly a year, the only one who has reacted like that out of every user I've come across; this does not mean that multiple people can't have same personality, but it is evidence. Yes, the accounts which have voted vote identical to LadyInGrey on multiple fronts over the last 6 months, of course people have similar preference so it may not be one person, but it is evidence. Yes, their styles of proofreading, marking pages, templatisation, and combative ownership of the works are identical to LadyInGrey's, but this does not mean they are one person; but it is evidence. Yes, the ip's have carried out tasks for LadyInGrey and are from Buenos Aires, Argentina; but anyone could have potentially stopped by a coffee shop, happened to agree with her, knew how to edit and the more complex side of Wikisource, and decided to fix it, so it does not certainly mean it was one person, but it is evidence. Yes, the account Lito WS did some crazy, confident, knowledgable stuff right off the bat, which the account LadyInGrey happened to fully support, but does not mean that a brand-spanking new user can never have the same opinion as a seasoned crat who has been longing to force that point back into standardisation, but it is evidence. Yes, there are at any given time roughly 6 editors *worldwide* who are active at the site, so the idea that "Argentina is big" is almost a non-point, but it remains true; it is a big country and does not mean it was her, but it is evidence.

If the sum of all this "evidence" is not enough, I truly don't know what would be. - Theornamentalist (talk) 18:03, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

I don't know which game you are playing when repeating many times certainly does not mean they are the same person, but it is evidence. Please just remember already lost at least ten hours in this affair I have nothing to do with. I could have accepted not to review this, for the only reason that I have many other things to do right now. Plus it's not that easy to hear you, to hear LadyInGrey and the other people you ask to perform a check on, and to find a compromise to satisfy everyone without being unfair. -- Quentinv57 (talk) 18:11, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
I'm sorry if that came off poorly, I guess it sounded a little better in my head but I see how it can be read as off-putting. I only mean to clarify that I don't have an indisputable edit that proves she is the owner of these accounts; only many that suggest that she is.
I really appreciate that you have opted in this discussion; without you this would have been closed days ago, but I remain hopeful that the evidence still merits an investigation. - Theornamentalist (talk) 18:32, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Conclusion

Hello. I've just posted the result of my investigation here. Cordially, -- Quentinv57 (talk) 12:38, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

I'm disappointed with the outcome, yet really grateful for the work you've done on this investigation. Thank you a lot on behalf of es.ws. --StephenDaedalus (talk) 22:48, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
I too am disappointed, but share the same gratefulness as Stephen; thank you for hearing us out. - Theornamentalist (talk) 03:05, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
In your conclusion, you say that it may simply be family or friends working together; although I disagree with the conclusion, if that were the case, wouldn't that constitute meat-puppetry? - Theornamentalist (talk) 03:11, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
I looked over signs; and I think that all criterion are met. - Theornamentalist (talk) 03:17, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
I disagree, if they are working in the Page: ns then it clearly is not a meat puppet. I think that you need to take a more neutral point of view. — billinghurst sDrewth 12:13, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

[edit] hi

hello my friend. im want ask two question.

  1. when im see the contribution of robot in your account toolserver example this link the page is broken and the top of page SQL Errors has exist. The problem from my side or the problem has exist?
  2. It is possible to the contribution of robot has hidden? in the view history or my watchlist? if is began please see the link approved. thanks/Mahdi.hajiha (talk) 09:35, 12 May 2012 (UTC)
Hello Mahdi. I'm sorry, but I don't understand much the questions you're asking me... If I answer something which is not what you were waiting for, feel free to rephrase your question.
  1. Yes, there are SQL errors for some days. It does not come from you, it does not come from you, it comes from the Toolserver database. I think the best thing to do is to wait until it's fixed by a Toolserver administrator.
  2. It depends what you mean by "hiding" the contributions of the robot. Do you want just to hide it from your watchlist, or histories / watchlists of other contributors ? Do your bot have the botflag ?
Cordially, -- Quentinv57 (talk) 09:41, 12 May 2012 (UTC)
I'm sorry. the my English Language is not so good. I honestly is Terrible:))
2. I'm mean the hide the contribution of robot. i know botflag what this.
in my home wiki:fa.wikipedia.org, Based on the farsi(persian) Language. this language so hard and Words appearing in it is important. for the example in the enwiki some code only work on beautiful appearance of the words for the example standardiz_interwiki.py or another has not flaged. in the my home wiki this code (beautiful appearance of the words) has need. unfortunately when run this code a lot numbers of article has been edited. i want mostly hide the activity of robot in the view history. the next step if be can hide in the my watchlist(meaning the users has followed the article not seen it. if you not understand what im say please tell me:)/Mahdi.hajiha (talk) 10:05, 12 May 2012 (UTC)
I understood that, as the persian language is more complicated than languages based on the latin alphabet, and that's why you need to run the script standardiz_interwiki.py on thousands of pages. And because it is running very fast you can't read the recent changes anymore. Is this what you mean ? -- Quentinv57 (talk) 10:25, 12 May 2012 (UTC)
2.standardiz_interwiki.py Was a example. another code have be exist is better it. this code running fast and the a lot of number of article is edited. 3.when the bog flaged the activity of robot not show in recent changes. not like this? the example article X and Y has exist in fawiki. when the robot run the code, in the mywatchlist of many user followed this article disordered. and when many article has been edited the mywatchlist for many users has completely disordered. when the hide activity the robot hide its happens not occurred. Both not occurred in the userwatchlist and when the hide activity in the view history not happens in the view history of robot. Thank you for doing that with patience(answer me!):)/--Mahdi.hajiha (talk) 10:42, 12 May 2012 (UTC)
Do your bot have the botflag ? If he don't, you should request it. Then, in your watchlist, you just have to click on the hide bot link. You can set it by default in your preferences. Did I answer to your question ? -- Quentinv57 (talk) 10:59, 12 May 2012 (UTC)
ok. thanks my friend.according your last answer im have Answer my question!:)/--Mahdi.hajiha (talk) 11:27, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

[edit] E-mail

Did you receive my email related to this? Pmlineditor (t · c · l) 17:23, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Hello Pmlineditor. Yes, I received your email. I hope I will be able to begin this morning. Sorry for the time you had to wait. -- Quentinv57 (talk) 06:26, 17 May 2012 (UTC)
No problem, thanks a lot for the changes. :D Pmlineditor (t · c · l) 17:07, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Bot status@the multilingual Wikisource

Hello Quentin. I made a request for Bot status in the multilingual Wikisource since 7 May. I asked Zyephyrus (The only active bureaucrat there) to close my request, but he didn't answer me even after i asked him on his talk page at French Wikisource. Could you please ask him to deal with my request?--M.Gedawy Talk 05:53, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

Hello. I've contacted him, and he said me he's waiting a community consensus to answer. Regards, -- Quentinv57 (talk) 15:35, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

[edit] zh-wiki

It seems that you haven't take away the CU right in zh-wikipedia[3], when is it granted or it is just a mistake?Justincheng12345 (talk) 13:43, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

Hello Justincheng12345. I've temporarily kept the CheckUser status here, because I'm making a lot of efforts against spambots yet, and zhwiki is the source of these spammers. That's why I need to check a lot of spammer accounts there, and it's far easier for me to keep the status there for some days rather than granting then removing it everytime I have a user to check. I hope there is no problem with it. Cordially, -- Quentinv57 (talk) 15:35, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

[edit] stolen sphynx pix

Not happy to see you stole a photo of my Sphynx and Peterbald hairless cats from Facebook. Not to mention that photo in particular is copywrited. On top of that, ur page info is completely incorrect.

[edit] Feature request for Quentinv57 tool

I believe a number of wikis are ignored when the second URL (globalcontribs.php) is processed. I would like to see contribution on locked wikis as well. Also I would like to have statistics of how many deleted edits I have on each of those wikis. :)

-- とある白い猫 chi? 13:39, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Re. Makecab

HEY. According to these forms of user name, we can determine they are zh:User:李煌老师's puppets for damage or personal attacks. See also zh:维基百科:当前的破坏/存档/持续出没的破坏者/User:李煌老师. 乌拉跨氪 (talk) 04:19, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your help.乌拉跨氪 (talk) 06:36, 27 May 2012 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Quentinv57&oldid=3791602"
Personal tools
Namespaces

Variants
Actions
Navigation
Community
Beyond the Web
Print/export
Toolbox