Topic on User talk:Slowking4

You have been blocked indefinitely for violations of WD:SOCK: editing Wikidata with 15 undeclared alternate accounts. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest it by editing this page and adding the following template with a suitable reason: {{unblock|1=<the reason for your unblock request>}}. If you are logged in, and the option has not been disabled, you may also email the blocking administrator (or any administrator from this list) by using this form.

⁠

This is false: multiple sockpuppets I blocked made nontrivial edits here, and you are required to disclose alternate accounts or they are not considered legitimate.

In reply to your email: I have filed phabricator:T232696 about the talk page issue.

In regards to the sockpuppetry issue, what I said isn't wrong: every account I blocked made non-automated edits here. Since it is rather deceptive for you to do so without declaring these alternate accounts, and because the policy explicitly requires that you declare them, I have blocked the accounts.

I will refuse to unblock, and will oppose an unblock by others, unless you demonstrate that you understand this.

Sorry, the policy is explicit that you must declare those alternate accounts, and there is no room for interpretation. You tried to hide these accounts from the community, making your operating of them deceptive.

Requiring you to understand the policy which you violated before unblocking you is perfectly reasonable.

I specifically need you to declare any and all alternate accounts you have and to convince another admin that you will refrain from further misuse of multiple accounts. Considering that you have an outstanding investigation open on the English Wikipedia, you are going to have to be very upfront about all of them.

You may declare all the accounts on this page (Topic:V73q4742vi3wb49x), or if you can't even reply below, email them and I will post them here.

However, please do not insinuate that I am "importing drama". Note that I have blocked you on the sole basis of a local policy for your sockpuppets that made local edits here. If you do not understand that, then you are not welcome to continue editing the project.

Thank you for declaring all of your alternate accounts. I will leave the unblock request to the admin above.

I still oppose unblocking you because you think I blocked you because you were blocked on the English Wikipedia. That I got aware of this via the English Wikipedia is irrelevant (i.e. a red herring (Q572959)): you still committed a gross violation of Wikidata:Alternate accounts, a local policy, and are blocked for that.

@Jasper Deng: I found a new sock with edits after the block: Special:Contributions/Langston-lemon. Maybe a CU should look into (haven't compared all his enwiki CU confirmed accounts with wikidata). Just FYI.

@Jasper_Deng: it's hard to understand from reading the notice what Slowking4 did with those 15 undeclared alternate accounts. When making bans like that I would prefer it if you explicitely list the socks, so that it's possible for other users and admins to see how those socks behave.

Category:Wikidata sockpuppets of Slowking4. At the time I was not a CU and it would've been cumbersome to list all the accounts. Also, they do not dispute operating those accounts.

Is there any way to tag whenever an account blocked for being a sockpuppet on ENWP are editing on WD? Perhaps in the abuse filter?

No. This would have to be a bot task. Also, not all socking on Wikipedia is socking here.

Do you know the reasoning for his sockpuppeting?

press coverage here

https://www.wired.com/story/socked-into-the-puppet-hole-on-wikipedia/

see also

https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Slowking4/english_wikipedia_has_cancer

https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Slowking4/Not_compatable_with_an_authoritarian_project

If you are not actually going to request an unblock here, then I will turn off your talk page access. I know you were using email earlier but now that bug has been fixed. Making another unblock request here on your talk page is okay. Posting anything else is not.

that would contrary to policy: "where a pattern of local abuse has been established." Wikidata:Blocking policy

produce evidence of local abuse, or everyone will know that your abuse of admin tools is the problem here. locking talk pages is a vindictive practice, not founded on consensus. you have stated that you will never support an unblock, under any circumstances, so why would anyone request what you will never do?

you would agree this is a reasonable answer to "the reasoning for his sockpuppeting?"

Trying to mislead the community with numerous socks is pretty clearly "local abuse" (and also, socking is explicitly a reason for blocking).

I was not joking. Your talk page access is disabled. Do not contact me via email either, or I will also disable that.