Block on nl-wiki and urgent request
Dear Brox (lt - admin) / Dendrolo (de - editor) / Catbot (nl - sockpuppet) / Dendroloo (nl - sockpuppet) / Redagavimas (ltwikiquote/ltwikisource - admin) / SZLT (lt - sockpuppet) / Logos (lt - sockpuppet) / Savvour (lt - sockpuppet), I am sad to have to report to you that you can no longer edit on nl-wikipedia due to repeated mis-use of sockpuppets to do detrimental and wrong legal categorisations and edits on our version. Several editors (amongst which knowledgeable Dutch lawyers) and admins amongst which me have repeatedly tried to inform you, help you and ask you to stop, but it did not work out. We then blocked your sockpuppets and told you if you wished to continue contribution you should clean up your act first. This did not help either since you reactivated a next sockpuppet account you held and continued. You were informed on all the talk pages of the socks you used on nl-wiki here. I also understood with some of your socks you ran into similar problems on other wikiversions. On nl-wiki three checkusers had to be performed to get matters into the open. Also on meta level now a checkuser has been done since the problems were expanding. The additional results can be read here. I do seriously hope you can clean up your habits cross wiki, avoid further mis use of sockpuppets and perhaps constrain yourself cross wiki to one account only to avoid confusion and problems in the future. I do hope you can do this and contact me about this as all the problems you caused harm the wikimedia projects cross wiki and should come to an end either by your choice to change now or otherwise. I do hope to hear from you soon. I have informed you on your homewiki's of your most used accounts of this. Kind regards, MoiraMoira 14:46, 21. Jul. 2011 (CEST)
- The above comment by MoiraMoira appears to have been based on an incorrect identification of socks on nl.wiki. The accounts Brox, Dendrolo, and Redagavimas are declared alternate accounts. No other socks have been conclusively identified with Brox. No cross-wiki disruption appeared in my investigation, beyond the placing of many notices by MoiraMoira, and the meta checkuser report referenced above has been corrected, with a clearing of Brox of socking charges, see . --meta user Abd
- @Abd, could you please stop accusing MoiraMoira of wrongdoing and continue with the discussion when she's back? This isn't quite fair... Trijnstel 21:52, 15 August 2011 (UTC)
- Sorry, Trijnstel, what I'm finding, researching this, is that MoiraMoira took a relatively minor disruption on nl.wiki, where Brox, as Dendrolo (and very briefly as Regadavimas) didn't listen to warnings, and inflamed and exaggerated it, and then she went around to many wikis accusing Brox of various harmful actions, and she threatened Brox with dire consequences here if he didn't comply with her demands, started a global lock discussion here for several active administrator accounts, started a completely inappropriate RfC here, and then left for vacation. Meanwhile probably innocent users not connected with Brox (such as Logos, probably) are being blocked, as well as legitimate accounts of Brox as well. It's too much. I'm hoping she comes back, sees what she's done, and apologizes. If not, well, it's up to nl.wiki what it wants to permit there, but it's up to the rest of us what is permitted here and cross-wiki. You have a situation on your hands. I'm not the cause of it.
- Look at the above statement, to which you are objecting. What does it say about MoiraMoira? It says she placed many notices. She placed many notices on many wikis, without any meta consensus. Do you doubt that? By the way, so did I, but it was purely to negate the effect of her misleading notices that depended on faulty checkuser data. --Abd 02:48, 16 August 2011 (UTC)
editors (amongst which knowledgeable Dutch lawyers)...
? Who is "which knowledgeable Dutch lawyers"? --Brox 13:15, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
- Sigh - you find some on the talk page of one of your sockpuppets with us here: nl:Overleg_gebruiker:Dendrolo. Can you please please promise to stop the misuse of sockpuppets cross wiki and please stop doing wrong or contested categorisations cross wiki now? MoiraMoira 17:43, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
- It is false ("editors (amongst which knowledgeable Dutch lawyers'"). There is n't lawyer in WP NL. --Brox 18:10, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
- OK then let me be absolutely clear here then: If you wish to risk to loose the adminships you hold and risk locking of all accounts you'd better stop all this nonsense cross wiki abusing socks in the process as well right now. I expect you to reply here so I know what must be done. MoiraMoira 18:56, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
Threat? It is not nice from your side... --Brox 06:58, 22 July 2011 (UTC)
- Can you abide by wikipolicies or not? You provenly misused sockpuppets cross wiki to do wrong edits, to redo wrong edits and do obviously not understand *what* you did wrong and by continuing to do so you harmed the build up of the wikimedia projects. Are you willing to change your habits or not? MoiraMoira 07:22, 22 July 2011 (UTC)
abide by wikipolicies? You write the wrong information: editors (amongst which knowledgeable Dutch lawyers)... Who is "which knowledgeable Dutch lawyers"? You provenly misused Metawiki! --Brox 07:41, 22 July 2011 (UTC)
nl:Categorie:Jurist: Advocaat, Rechter etc.
Why did you do that: ?
Why did you do that: 
- Can I now at least conclude from these weird edits above you indeed do not have any understanding what you did wrong cross wiki and thus it is impossible for you to abide by wikipolicies? Can I also now conclude you do not intend to stop your mis use of sockpuppets to get your compulsively driven edits across crosswiki? I am still trying to give you a way out you see and do my utmost best to help you see the light. Just answer me below whether you can stop yourself or not. A simple "yes I will stop" or "no I won't stop" suffices here. MoiraMoira 08:07, 22 July 2011 (UTC)
wrong crosswiki? You not have any understanding what you did wrong with admin-rights in WP NL (with legal categorisation). --Brox 08:52, 22 July 2011 (UTC)
- As I tried to explain to you - this has not particularily to do with nl-wiki (where several admins were involved cleaning up matters you did wrong and blocked all your socks you misused for continuation) but with cross wiki problems who are similar everywhere like on nl-wiki. I take this is the answer "no I won't stop" so this leaves me no other choice than to take matters else where alas. Kind regards, MoiraMoira 10:58, 22 July 2011 (UTC)
- This a threat! ::A propos, You make mistakes and confuse (legal categorisation in WP NL). --Brox 11:56, 22 July 2011 (UTC)
- I have asked for input on your case here. Kind regards,MoiraMoira 08:10, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
Brox, I've been looking into the socking allegations, and see that they appear to be obsessive sock-hunting, as if having alternate accounts was Truly Bad in Itself. Your real and acknowledged socks on LT.wiki were blocked, in spite of a complete absence of disruption involving them.
It may be legitimate to have undisclosed socks, sometimes, but, especially for administrators, it's a Bad Idea, especially if they have any behaviors that cross over. To avoid future problems, I strongly suggest that you identify any socks you have with edits on any of the WMF wikis, if you have more than one account with edits, and explicitly connect them. It probably doesn't matter, though, if an account has no edits for years and especially if you have no other active account there. If you do, consider connecting them.
If an old account was blocked -- many users misbehaved in their early editing days -- it would be wise to communicate with 'crats on the wiki involved.(On en.wiki this would be ArbComm.) A wiki is foolish if it tosses away an editor who learned to be fully cooperative with the community, to the extent of being an administrator with the huge number of edits you have. But you'll have to make this decision, if it applies.
Meanwhile, there is no way to prove that you are *not* the users who were just blocked on lt.wiki. Checkuser can never do this. What happened with the meta CU is that Peter Symonds stated the basis for his conclusion, and described it as "likely." That judgment actually depends on the nature of the wiki. Since this was LT, it is utterly unremarkable that one might find users with the same "geolocation" in Lithuania! One of the NL wiki CUs said something quite similar: "Probable. Same Lithuanian mobile operator." I strongly suspect that the other CU reports there were similar in basis. They just didn't state the basis, though one of them implied it.
I'm astonished that NL issued blocks based on that, but it made a little more sense for NL wiki. Not much, since, if I'm correct, the articles involved had some Lithuanian connection. NL wiki seems to me like it's on a rampage, with lengthy IP blocks for no disruption, or only a couple of edits at worst. That's known to be damaging and next to useless.
Good luck. --Abd 17:38, 8 August 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks for Your Comments and Suggestion.
- Yes, socks (for administrators) it's a Bad Idea.
- P.S. I'm lt:q:user:Redagavimas (sysop WQ LT), lt:s:user:Redagavimas (sysop WS LT), lt:user:Brox (sysop WP LT), de:w:user:Dendrolo (Sichter WP DE), ru:w:user:Brox (autoeditor WP RU). In WP DE I was (and I want to be) de:Benutzer:Brox, but this hinder the de:Benutzernamensraum-Konventionen (rules of WP DE). If you can, please incorporate ("mergers") this all accounts to -> user:Magister iuris (not exist) (WP DE, WP LT, WQ LT and WS LT; if you can - do so global - in all wikis). Thank you. --Brox 08:11, 9 August 2011 (UTC)
- I have admin privileges only on en.wikiversity, so I can't help you with that. Seems you have a "situation" on LT wiki. Please think in terms of healing the rift, resolving disputes. Steady on. It's not always easier, but sometimes it's easier than we think. Good luck.
- Oh, and what you can do is to create a global account for Magister iuris, assuming there is no other user, or only a possible usurpation or two needed, for very inactive old accounts, and explicitly link to it from all your other accounts, then, where you have privileges, retire the other accounts -- except possibly for actions while you are waiting -- and request local 'crats -- or a steward here if there is no local 'crat -- that privileges be assigned to the new account. You may want the old Talk page moved. Just be sure that whatever you do is open and transparent, it's not just about being "right," it's about bringing the community with you! --Abd 15:23, 9 August 2011 (UTC)
- Or just ask for renamings with 'crats on the wikis or stewards here. That will pull in the contributions. Whatever works best. I'm suggesting you reserve the global account name ASAP. Crat's can easily handle the issue if the Magister iuris account is auto-created, if it has no edits or only an edit identifying it as your other account there, confirmed by your own edit to the new user page from that other account. I like this best. Create the page on any wiki, globally link it for SUL, create a user page with the name of your other account(s) on that wiki, then confirm this with an edit from the other account(s). When you go to the crat to request renaming, it will all be in place, ready to go, identity proven, simple and easy and no obstacles. Unless they object to the username! Whatever, your choice. --Abd 15:38, 9 August 2011 (UTC)
The RfC you started is inappropriate
. I'm reverting that, I hope you will consent to this. (You have a perfect right to revert me, but I don't recommend it.) It's inappropriate to use RfC, which solicits comment from the entire meta community, just to ask for additional checkuser examination. I know it's frustrating that this matter hasn't been clarified, but it almost certainly will be. I've made it plain in numerous places that the ID of those socks as yours is very weak, and you won't really get much better than that, I've asked PeterSymonds to confirm what I've written.
Going about and asking many stewards to look at this is disruptive. One at a time is enough, even more than enough, since I've also asked some involved. Please stop. Thanks. --Abd 12:59, 10 August 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks. --Brox 16:20, 10 August 2011 (UTC)
- I went around to the places where MoiraMoira had posted allegations of cross-wiki abuse to your talk pages and posted corrections. I may have missed some. I did not post on nl.wiki. Fr33kman indicated that he'd fixed things there, but I don't see it. You are still blocked there, for no abuse of this account. Dendrolo was blocked there based on one day of a problem, we've mentioned that. Very odd to see an indef block based on one day of mistake. The indef block was by MoiraMoira, who seems to have gotten a bit overheated here, based on some rather careless checkuser reports. I.e., Dendrolo was obviously your account, but the rest probably were not (Except Redagavimas! -- see below). If you care about nl.wiki, you'll have to work that out there. I'm not terribly comfortable working in Dutch! I did ask for unblock of Dendrolo on Commons, on the blocking admin Talk page.
- However, I notice that you did edit nl.wiki as Redagavimas on 11 July. Since Dendrolo was blocked on 9 July, that was technically block evasion. I highly recommend that you clean up the SUL situation so that you don't accidentally evade a block or do something else that socks are not supposed to do. I think SUL makes this easy: you could have been logged in globally as Redagavimas and then saw something on nl.wiki, and didn't even see the Dendrolo block message. Or whatever.
- Please do tag all your accounts with a reference to whatever you want to be your main account. Thanks. --Abd 22:09, 15 August 2011 (UTC)
- One more point: Redagavimas is blocked on bat-smg.wikipedia. No edits since 2007! This obviously wasn't for any local abuse! You might want to clear that up. --Abd 22:16, 15 August 2011 (UTC)