User talk:NinjaRobotPirate

Note: I rarely check my email, so if you send me something important, you should probably let me know.

Bored? Check out User:NinjaRobotPirate/Games for a list of video games that are probably notable. I listed most of the sources, so you don't even have to find them.

News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2025).

Administrator changes

• DDima
• Gimmetrow
• Huon
• Johan Elisson
• Spangineer
• The Land

Interface administrator changes

0xDeadbeef

CheckUser changes

L235

Oversight changes

L235

Guideline and policy news

• An RfC is open to determine whether the English Wikipedia community should adopt a position on AI development by the WMF and its affiliates.

Technical news

• A new feature called Multiblocks will be deployed on English Wikipedia on the week of June 2. See the relevant announcement on the administrators' noticeboard.
• History merges performed using the mergehistory special page are now logged at both the source and destination, rather than just the source as previously, after this RFC and the resolution of T118132.

Arbitration

• An arbitration case named Indian military history has been opened. Evidence submissions for this case close on 8 June.

Miscellaneous

• Voting for the Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) election is open until 17 June 2025. Read the voting page on Meta-Wiki and cast your vote here!
• An Articles for Creation backlog drive is happening in June 2025, with over 1,600 drafts awaiting review from the past two months. In addition to AfC participants, all administrators and new page patrollers can help review using the Yet Another AFC Helper Script, which can be enabled in the Gadgets settings. Sign up here to participate!
• The Unreferenced articles backlog drive is happening in June 2025 to reduce the backlog of articles tagged with {{Unreferenced}}. You can help reduce the backlog by adding citations to these articles. Sign up to participate!

Hi NinjaRobotPirate, it's been well over four years since you placed the Vietnam article under extended-confirmed protection due to sockpuppetry. Do you really think the current protection level is still necessary to this day? The Mexico article was also extended-confirmed protected in 2019 for the same reason, but had since been downgraded to semi-protection on December last year. Perhaps it's time to downgrade the protection level of this article to semi as a trial, considering the fact that it has gained just slightly less views than Mexico in the past year (see here)? If you still think extended-confirmed protection is needed specifically for this article, then why aren't the other Southeast Asian country articles seeing the blue lock? For example, Singapore has gained nearly twice as more daily views than Vietnam in the past year (see here), but is only fine with semi-protection. How come Laos completely lacks edit protection altogether? I'm still okay if the blue lock is still necessary here, given the fact the Vietnamese edition of this article is also under its form of extended-confirmed protection. BriDash9000 (talk) 08:00, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like there have been some blanking sprees in Laos, too. It looks like other people are aware of it, so maybe they'll protect the article if it starts up again. Vietnam has been troublesome because blanking sprees happen in it when the protection expires. Thus, it's set to not expire. People can still request edits at Talk:Vietnam. It looks like activity is picking up somewhat on the talk page since the last time I looked, but it's still sparse, and I don't think it would be a good idea to unprotect the article while sock puppets are still active. The last edit to the talk page was reverted for block evasion. Admins who are curious why it's protected can look at my userpage on the private CheckUser Wiki. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 14:05, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I saw you blocked Special:Contributions/2605:BA00:4138:596:0:0:0:0/64 while looking though edits of Special:Contributions/2605:BA00:4138:233:0:0:0:0/64, who I subsequent blocked. I was wondering if there's an SPI you could point me to so I can maybe reference it in the future if I see more from this user? EvergreenFir (talk) 04:29, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, I couldn't tell you even if there were one. I'm pretty sure that'd run afoul of the privacy policy since that's a CU block. And because of a somewhat recent Ombuds Committee proclamation, I can't even connect IP ranges to each other. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 14:30, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Okay thank you. I appreciate the explanation EvergreenFir (talk) 14:55, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, NinjaRobotPirate. I am rather bewildered by your message about muting. Obviously you don't have to clarify it if you don't wish to, but I would very much like to understand. It must be something to do with my mention of the limitations of CheckUser, but I'm at a loss to understand why that would lead to your choosing not to ever accept pings from me. If you are willing to explain I shall be grateful. JBW (talk) 17:43, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

OK. Seeing as how an SPI clerk pinged me and pointed me to an SPI case, I posted my thoughts. Seeing the potential for wikidrama, I specifically said that I was not in the mood for that, and I didn't want to debate the results of my CheckUser findings. To support this, I said I would leave the whole thing alone and let other people handle the situation. I was careful to leave no reason for someone to ping me and start up an argument.

I was then pinged by someone who has not seen the CheckUser findings for the sole purpose of starting up drama with me. I don't understand why people who have not seen the CU data feel this overwhelming urge to pick a fight with me and argue that I interpreted the data incorrectly.

The fact that this wasn't enough, and you felt that it was appropriate to explain to me what the CU tool is undeniably ruffled my feathers. I've been a CU for eight years, and you know what I get for that? Nothing but wikidrama started by argumentative drama-mongers, non-CheckUsers pinging me to explain how the CU tool works, death threats in my email, and a load of pings from blocked sock puppets who say "my little brother did it". I'm getting tired of it all. I would copy-paste the most recent email that I received from a Wikipedia user, but it's highly offensive. Suffice to say that it consists mostly of about a hundred uses of a racial slur that would probably start a fistfight if you used it in real life. My mother died recently. My father is getting medical tests. My dog just fell out of a second story window somehow.

I've got enough going on in my life that I don't need shit from random people who want to fuck with me on Wikipedia. If you want to ping some CU and lecture them about how the CU tool works, pick someone else. I'm bipolar, and I think I've hidden it pretty well for the past 10 or 15 years that I've pretty active on Wikipedia. The one fucking time that I request that people just leave me alone and don't start shit with me, you just have ignore it. Because everyone knows that what CUs like most in life is not getting a "thank you" once every 5 years for their service, it's having their interpretation of the CU data challenged for no fucking reason.

Maybe, after 8 years, I've developed an intuition about interpreting CU data. Maybe I've learned to notice patterns that indicate people are editing from a workplace vs editing from their own fucking house using a fucking residential broadband connection. Maybe I can differentiate between two people using the same exact mobile device from the same exact cellular tower vs people editing from a coworking space. Or maybe it's like you've implied, and I'm just some monkey clicking buttons that could be easily replaced by AI.

At least I feel better now. What a crappy day. At least my dog is okay. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 00:35, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for explaining your reasons, which make things much clearer. Unfortunately I have miscommunicated. I was certainly not trying to stir up drama or pick a fight, as you thought. I thought, rightly or wrongly, that there was a limit to CheckUser data, and it couldn't distinguish between two people editing on, for example, the same computer. I thought I was clarifying that fact for people who might be reading the thread who didn't know that. I also thought that, since what I was saying referred to what you had said, it would be a courtesy to let you know what I was saying. I saw your statement that you didn't wish to "feel like debating the CU results or getting involved in block-drama", and wondered about pinging you, but I thought that that I was just letting you know what I said as a courtesy, and you might very well he happy to just see it and leave it. Evidently I was mistaken in one or more of those thoughts, maybe all of them, and misjudged the situation. Possibly my biggest mistake was thinking that what I was saying about the nature of CheckUser was uncontroversial; I thought, evidently completely mistakenly, that what I said was something that any CheckUser would agree with, and, as I said above, my intention was to clarify a point for other people, not to lecture you about how the CU tool works.

I offer you my apology for having seriously misjudged the situation, particularly since it evidently came at a time when you had more than enough to deal with already. What you are going through must be absolutely terrible to endure, and I certainly would not have wished to add to it. JBW (talk) 09:10, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nobody can know what any of us are going through internally. Yes, the CU tool is very limited, and it's generally useless in establishing anything except that one account is on the same IP address as another. That doesn't mean that CheckUsers are incapable of analyzing data, comparing that to users' explanations, and coming to (possibly incorrect) conclusions on their own, though. It's not video evidence of them engaging in sock puppetry, but that's an ideal that just doesn't exist. Pretty much everything related to sock puppetry is based on a mixture of technical and behavioral evidence. I frequently find many people on the same IP address. If people don't tell me exactly what to look for (eg: "the sock puppeteer always misspells 'millennium' as 'milenium'"), I have to just shrug my shoulders and say, "Can't help you." The reason evidence is required for sock puppetry investigations is not just to rule out spurious cases. It's to make my job possible in the first place. Ten people on the same IP address is expected behavior on some ISPs, and they might not be distinguishable from each other. You either work with good data, spend an hour (minimum, in my case) doing an investigation from scratch yourself, or just give up in annoyance. I take the last option more often than people would probably guess. There are always a few sock puppeteers floating around that I already CUed, but I gave up when the mountain of data returned by the CU tool was impenetrable. I don't actually enjoy going through hundreds of IP address, trying to figure out who's doing what, and which of the guys using an iPhone is making the same exact edits as someone else using the same model iPhone. I don't just click "run a CU on this person", and the tool says, "Okey dokey, that's a confirmed one!" It can take me the better part of an entire evening just for one case. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 22:29, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Well, that gives me more insight into what CheckUser work is like than anything else I've seen in my 19 years on Wikipedia. Thank you for taking the trouble to explain it to me. JBW (talk) 00:36, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2025).

Administrator changes

NuclearWarfare

Interface administrator changes

L235

Guideline and policy news

• Following a talk page discussion, speedy deletion criterion G13 has been amended to remove "Userspace with no content except the article wizard placeholder text."
• WP:Manual of Style/Superscripts and subscripts was upgraded to a guideline following a RfC discussion.

Miscellaneous

• The 2025 Developing Countries WikiContest will run from 1 July to 30 September. Sign up now!
• Administrator elections will take place this month. Administrator elections are an alternative to RFA that is a gentler process for candidates due to secret voting and multiple people running together. The call for candidates is July 9–15, the discussion phase is July 18–22, and the voting phase is July 23–29. Get ready to submit your candidacy, or (with their consent) to nominate a talented candidate!

Annyomus cat (talk · contribs)

Keep unsourced content in the article, Faith [1] [2] [3]. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 18:29, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Annyomus cat: Talk to me here, not on my talk page. Where is the source that says that Faith is Pop Smoke's final album? Right now, all I seeing you adding unsourced content. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 19:27, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think this user is using multiple accounts to restore their unsourced edits [4] [5] [6]. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 17:11, 26 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That statement is untrue and you have no proof . I only have one account and you have been adding a lot of unsourced content onto pages especially the pop smoke faith album page where you added unsourced information about a third posthumous album that did not even exist . Annyomus cat (talk) 08:04, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, NinjaRobotPirate. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 03:11, 19 July 2025 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

An editor by the name Muscovy.iii has posted an appeal at UTRS appeal #104892 for a block that you placed. The editor had been making numerous trivial edits to a sandbox in order to get autonconfirmed. They have now acknowledged that doing so was "stupid", and said that they will not do the same again. I have looked at their editing history, and before they started that nonsense their editing, as far as I can see, was OK. I would like to unblock. Do you wish to express any opinion? (Incidentally, I see that Asilvering has given the account the Extended Confirmed right, and then immediately removed it. I guess that the idea is that if an admin has removed it then it won't be automatically granted when the 500 edits have been done, though I don't actually know whether it works that way.) JBW (talk) 20:12, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If they're not going to make any more useless edits, and their permissions have been appropriated adjusted (it sounds like it would work that way to me, too), unblocking seems fine. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 20:22, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I'll go ahead. (Concerning "If they're not going to make any more useless edits", of course I'll watch them for a while.) JBW (talk) 21:10, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

TheOmgNoway6494 (talk · contribs)

You have warned this editor about unsourced content back in April. They are still adding unsourced content in articles [7] [8]. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 02:17, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think this user would even notice a 24 hour block. Blocked 1 week. I can always unblock early if they promise to provide citations. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 12:08, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

After the protection has been removed, genre warring by MariaJaydHicky continues [9] [10]. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 03:29, 6 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not very familiar with MariaJaydHicky. I blocked some IP addresses, though, and it looks like someone else semiprotected the article. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 12:32, 6 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (July 2025).

Administrator changes

• CoconutOctopus
• Curbon7
• Hinnk
• Jlwoodwa
• Kj cheetham
• KylieTastic
• Ser!
• Smasongarrison
• UndercoverClassicist

• Bbb23
• Beeblebrox
• David Gerard
• Oleg Alexandrov
• Satori Son

CheckUser changes

• Alison
• Bradv
• Joe Roe
• RickinBaltimore
• ST47

Oversight changes

• Bradv
• RickinBaltimore

Guideline and policy news

• Following a request for comment, a new speedy deletion criterion, G15, has been enacted. It applies to pages generated by a large language model (LLM) without human review.
• Following a request for comment, there is a new policy outlining the granting of permissions to view the IP addresses of temporary accounts. Temporary account deployment on the English Wikipedia is currently scheduled for September 2025, and editors can request access to the permission ahead of time. Admins are encouraged to keep an eye on the request page; there will likely be a flood of editors requesting the permission when they realize they can no longer see IP addresses.

Technical news

• Administrators can now restrict the "Add a Link" feature to newcomers. The "Add a Link" Structured Task helps new account holders get started with editing. Administrators can configure this setting in the Community Configuration page.

Arbitration

• The arbitration case Indian military history has been closed.
  • South Asia (WP:CT/SA) is designated a contentious topic. The topic area is specifically defined as All pages related to the region of South Asia (India, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh and Nepal), broadly construed, including but not limited to history, politics, ethnicity, and social groups.
  • The contentious topic designations for Sri Lanka (SL) and India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan (IPA) are folded into this new contentious topic.
  • The community-authorized general sanctions regarding South Asian social groups (GS/CASTE) are rescinded and folded into this new contentious topic.
• The arbitration case Article titles and capitalisation 2 has been opened. Evidence submissions in this case closed on 31 July.
• The arbitration case Transgender healthcare and people has been opened. Evidence submissions in this case will close on 11 August.

Miscellaneous

• Wikimania 2025 is happening in Nairobi, Kenya, and online from August 6 to August 9. This year marks 20 years of Wikimania. Interested users can join the online event. Registration for the virtual event is free and will remain open throughout Wikimania. You can register here now.

I would like you to unblock me the topic ban, I think I've become fairly aware of the policies, you can ask me questions to make sure I know جودت (talk) 18:17, 16 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Dude, you just got unblocked. How about spending a bit time learning Wikipedia? By site policy, you can't even edit the Arab–Israeli conflict – even if your topic ban were lifted – until you made at least 500 useful edits. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 13:56, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@NinjaRobotPirate Can you give me Extended confirmed group? I have exceeded 500 edits جودت (talk) 12:21, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I very strongly oppose this request and suggest جودت not make another request for this for six months. --Yamla (talk) 12:23, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Yamla I will wait for 6 months, but will I be granted the permission in return? جودت (talk) 16:17, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

and Topic ban جودت (talk) 16:18, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not a vandal and I don't plan to vandalize. I'm just a user interested in a topic that I can't mention by the way. There was a discussion and I wanted to participate and express my opinion. Why are you afraid to give me permission? I know the privacy of these topics and that any modification to controversial articles usually requires discussion. جودت (talk) 16:28, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There's no guarantee you'll be granted the permission in six months, given your abuse. --Yamla (talk) 18:38, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like you made a lot of edits removing potential spam written in Arabic. That's pretty useful, though editing someone else's user page is usually discouraged. Instead, tagging pages for speedy deletion might have been better in some cases. This is the sort of thing that people are supposed to be learning in their time editing Wikipedia. You can't just become informed of how English Wikipedia works overnight. English Wikipedia is bureaucratic and has a lot of rules. Restricting access these articles is done, in part, to force people to get enough experience that we don't need to supervise them. If you're mostly editing user space – your own and other people's – it's hard to tell whether you truly understand our core content policies. If you think on what Yamla and I have said, and you believe that you've satisfied the spirit of the law, you should post a request to Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard. Keep in mind that if you ignore everything that Yamla and I have said, and you just plow ahead regardless, the community will probably decline your request. Plus, topic bans don't usually get lifted days later. This is something that you'd know if you had experience editing English Wikipedia. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 20:23, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see blanking talk pages that have sat unexamined for 17 years as constructive, especially when it doesn't appear to be spam or anything other than a newbie's attempt at an article from almost two decades ago. This is just further gaming. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 12:34, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

We have some socks or meatpuppets, ie the red linked accounts here[11].Doug Weller talk 07:56, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'll take a look. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 11:51, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Doug Weller talk 12:08, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for picking up the email block, he's been sending nastygrams and trying to log into accounts. Acroterion (talk) 13:19, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sure he'll get bored shortly. If not, I could try doing range blocks. I'm not sure how much that would help, but I think blocks do limit your ability to engage in pointless shenanigans like that. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 13:30, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

As a recipient of a nastygram, I echo A's thanks. -- Nat Gertler (talk) 14:05, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

And I should note that someone tried to reset my password today from 173.173.114.108 -- no other major contretemps going on at the moment, so it seems likely the same individual. -- Nat Gertler (talk) 19:02, 18 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sadly, I think policy restricts me from commenting on this in any meaningful way. But if you come upon any other IP editors who are engaging in related disruption, you can let me know. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 19:55, 18 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I just saw your block for 191.118.32.0/19- quite obviously Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Agustin Sepulveda Venegas 2004 Fan. I've just spotted two recent (last week) IPs that appears to be Agustin as well, not within that range. Dunno if there's any other range(s) they've been at, but if you want to check it out, it's 191.118.2.69 and 191.118.21.22.

Also not sure if they should be requested to be deleted or not, but they created (via WP:AFC/R) Final Space season 1, Final Space season 2, and Final Space season 3. Thanks again. Magitroopa (talk) 20:58, 28 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like that's also a /19, I guess. The redirects seem harmless to me. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 23:31, 28 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have something to say about LegoCityDude61892, whose talk page you posted on a little over a month ago. Since May 2021 (he has a second account: LegoCityDude92), I've been in mostly silent but tedious disagreement with this stubborn user who won't stop editing the pages of voice actors Michael and Paul Dobson, and removing information I added myself with the proper citations. He won't stop insisting that Paul is older than Michael when our best sources say otherwise (I used interviews with the actors themselves as my sources). Not only does he reject the actors' own words, but he also insists that the flawed Dubbing Wiki (and other related wikis) is reliable, despite he himself utterly dismissing IMDb.

I'm tired of correcting his constant disruptive edits. Could you please help me revert when he edits the pages again and I'm not around? Thank you.

I've already notified Ser Amantio di Nicolao about the user's return. AtlantisBabylon123 (talk) 16:29, 2 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Biographies of living persons are a contentious topic. I posted an alert. I can block them or something next time they're disruptive in a biography. I would block them now, given all the warnings, but they haven't actually done anything disruptive today yet, and I'm listening to comparatively mellow music. Maybe when my playlist gets back to death metal. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 22:44, 2 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (August 2025).

Administrator changes

Euryalus

• Admrboltz
• FloNight
• Floquenbeam
• Ganeshk
• JesseW
• Night Gyr
• Nixdorf

Interface administrator changes

Ragesoss

CheckUser changes

AmandaNP

SQL

Oversight changes

AmandaNP

Guideline and policy news

• An RfC is open on whether use of emojis with no encyclopedic value in mainspace and draftspace (e.g., at the start of paragraphs or in place of bullet points) should be added as a criterion under G15.

Technical news

• Administrators can now access the Special:BlockedExternalDomains page from the Special:CommunityConfiguration list page. This makes it easier to find. T393240

Arbitration

• The arbitration case Article titles and capitalisation 2 has been closed.
• An RfC is in progress to amend the structure, rules, and procedures of the Arbitration Committee election and resolve any issues not covered by existing rules.

Please block these users taht reverted my edits!!! 2001:448A:1071:DAB:3950:742D:8F8E:A063 (talk) 13:48, 13 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Revo Uninstaller is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Revo Uninstaller until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

11WB (talk) 15:21, 25 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @NinjaRobotPirate. I felt compelled to write this because our interaction at the AfD has left me feeling not very good. I am still new to Wikipedia, about 6-7 months of proper active participation. I'm still getting used to different communication styles, and I realise that you're direct, which is okay. The mistake I made was not good and I genuinely wish to rectify this. I should also make you aware, in case we interact in the future, that I struggle to communicate with editors who are direct and to the point, as I don't know what is the right thing to say or the reverse. Our interaction has left me feeling anxious and I don't think I want to participate in that particular AfD anymore. This is a personal problem that I will need to deal with however. I did apologise and try to rectify my mistake at the AfD, but just to make absolutely sure, I will extend my apology again here. The AfD was put together in a sloppy way and does not reflect the high standard I usually expect of myself.

Thank you for the work you do on the project and I hope that this hasn't left a permanently negative impression on you... 11WB (talk) 01:08, 26 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@11wallisb: I do come from somewhere known for a rather direct communication style. But I don't think that's the real issue. I'm bipolar and come on way too strongly sometimes. Sorry. Don't be too quick to judge yourself. Look at it this way: if you can survive a conversation with a bipolar New Yorker who's having a bad day, you can probably handle conversation with anyone. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 17:07, 26 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I really appreciate the context, I'm assuming you are okay with sharing that on a publicly viewable page, as I understand this is a very personal detail to share with somebody you don't know. I definitely respect that you're open about this, I think I can share that when it comes to social situations I personally suffer from a higher level of anxiety (it is diagnosed—so anyone reading this can probably decode that without trouble).

Bipolar is something I'm aware of to a certain extent, but of course, not having it, I cannot say at all that I know how it affects people day to day. I can only imagine the difficulty. I haven't shared this before on Wikipedia, but strangely, I'm less opposed to sharing that I'm actually T1D (since the age of 8, I'm in my mid-twenties now). Whilst not the same as bipolar in any way, the daily challenge of having to manage something that takes over so much of your life is something I can empathise with.

We don't know eachother at all, but I want you to know that the work you do here is appreciated by a lot of people! We're all gears in a much larger machine, without those gears the machine won't run! 11WB (talk) 17:32, 26 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Just to quickly add on, you never needed to apologise! I messed up yesterday and I'm actually glad you were direct with me! Sometimes it takes being told something firmly so the same mistakes aren't made on the future. I'm definitely going to be more alert when doing things on Wikipedia now, as I know that sloppiness is generally not welcomed by those who have been here longer! 11WB (talk) 17:36, 26 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Well, bipolar disorder can be bad, but there are many other things that are worse. And, no, I don't really care who knows that I'm bipolar – I don't consider it something that needs to be hidden. But sometimes my reactions are too harsh. I usually have it under control, but Wikipedia can cause stress. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 00:24, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm still quite new myself, I've only become stressed a handful of times. This recent AfD is a good example of that. Sometimes it's good to step back and evaluate, knowing that everything I post is publicly viewable means that (even though I try to be anyway) I've always got to be respectful and polite. I noticed you are a CheckUser, I'm not too familiar with that side of the project, but I'm aware it can be a less pleasant thing to do, especially if you receive nasty messages from angry people. That is definitely something I would never be able to do, it would be far too overwhelming!

You're reaction at the AfD was a bit more intense than I'm used to, but with the added context, I understood immediately that it wasn't personal, nor did I consider it to be really, even before we spoke here. I've seen other editors post about SPI related stuff here, so if it's okay, I'll keep you in mind if I come across sock-puppetry or IP related vandalism/abuse in the future! 11WB (talk) 01:50, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It's not personal. I just have to be more aware of my emotions in the future. And keep the intensity meter down a bit lower. It's frustrating to deal with sock puppets, and you can report them here to me if you see something. SPI is a bit backlogged and bureaucratic. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 18:30, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (September 2025).

Administrator changes

• Billinghurst
• Crisco 1492
• DarkFalls
• Spike Wilbury
• Valereee
• Ergo Sum

CheckUser changes

Vanamonde93

Arbitration

• After a motion, arbitration enforcement page protections no longer need to be logged in the AELOG. A bot now automatically posts protections at WP:AELOG/P. To facilitate this bot, protection summaries must include a link to the relevant CT page (e.g. [[WP:CT/BLP]]), and you will receive talk page reminders if you forget to specify the contentious topic but otherwise indicate it is an AE action.

Hey, hope you're doing well these days. I saw yet another gobbledygook edit at Talk:XXX (film series) that had to get reverted. Seems like this happens every month. I also saw here that you've protected it in the past but never indefinitely. Is indefinite semi-protection not feasible to do? Erik (talk | contrib) 21:55, 14 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"Indefinite" can turn into "permanent" on out of the way articles, which usually isn't a good thing. It's also awkward to protect talk pages because then it's impossible for IP editors and new accounts to discuss anything or request edits when they finally have something legit to suggest. Not that any of this happens a lot. I think the vast majority of the edits there are coming from kids typing in "xxx" and hoping to see something titillating. I can protect it again for a while. I'm reluctant to make it indefinite, but I can go a few months this time. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 22:17, 14 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi NinjaRobotPirate,

I wanted to ask if it would be alright for me to create pages for the singles from Ye’s Bully. I previously asked Wackistan about it, but they said I shouldn’t for now. I just wanted to get a second opinion or clarification on whether these pages would meet notability and sourcing standards if done properly.

Thanks for your time! TheOmgNoway6494 (talk) 00:38, 15 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know much about music released in the past 10 years. Or maybe even 20 years. Time flies. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 16:33, 15 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

They released in June. TheOmgNoway6494 (talk) 20:26, 15 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Try checking Google News to see if there's coverage, I guess? I don't know. If I were going to look for sources to establish notability, that's what I'd probably do. My firsthand knowledge of new music ends somewhere around 2010 or 2015. I have no idea what's popular today. If the singles are charting and gaining awards, it's likely there's enough coverage to survive deletion. If you just like the song, and there's no real coverage in reliable sources, it'd probably get merged or deleted. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 23:55, 15 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Emily Neves § Basic info: Middle name, date of birth, etc. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 02:30, 21 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I've also opened a discussion at Talk:Emily Neves#B-class/GA-class efforts, if you are interested in helping out. sjones23 (talk - contributions) 23:36, 22 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I’m writing to alert you that someone is attempting to remove the Wikipedia page for Wheels Fall Off by Ty Dolla Sign. They are claiming the page is invalid due to Reddit and TikTok sources.

I’m concerned that the page is being targeted unfairly. Could you please review this situation and prevent the page from being removed while I update and improve the sourcing to fully comply with Wikipedia guidelines?

Thank you for your attention. TheOmgNoway6494 (talk) 00:58, 22 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Well, there are a few things going on here. I find it difficult to keep track of articles that I've expanded from redirects, so what I usually do these days is overwrite the redirect with a new article by moving a draft page on top it. You may need an admin to delete the redirect first before that's possible. As a side-effect, this makes it impossible to blank and redirect the article by simply pressing "undo", though I'm not sure that matters at all because someone can still manually do it. I guess the culture around it is just different, that's all – people generally feel more free to keep mashing the undo button if they see an edit, but if they see a brand new article appear, and the undo button isn't available, they're more likely to nominate it for deletion.

That takes us to our second issue, the edit warring. Neither of you should have been edit warring over this. That said, the article is sourced to Reddit and Tiktok, so it never had a chance to survive. Those sources are user-generated content and thus unusable on Wikipedia. If you wanted to try to work on the article without fear of having it deleted, redirected, or moved somewhere else, you'd have to edit a draft. Draft articles aren't subject to the same strict rules as other articles. If you create an article in your own userspace, or use Articles for creation, you can work on it as much you like, and it will be broadly protected from deletion. Once you make an article "live" and readable by the public, it has to satisfy all of our policies and guidelines.

Help:Your first article may be useful to read or at least skim over if you haven't already. It's got some good advice. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 12:35, 22 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, do you figure you could lift the rangeblock that's affecting UTRS appeal #107682? Looks to me like it's probably done the job, but I don't recognize the specific behaviour. -- asilvering (talk) 02:13, 27 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No, that's stopping a globally banned Nazi troll from going on a harassment spree. The user can reset their password from practically anywhere: a library, a store, a restaurant, their smartphone, their work PC, etc. If somehow none of those options are available, can't someone just click on Special:PasswordReset, stick their username in the username field, and reset their password for them? NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 03:16, 27 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

As you can see, JBW already did that for them. -- asilvering (talk) 03:21, 27 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Anime and manga § Voice actor GA/FA drive?. sjones23 (talk - contributions) 13:42, 29 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

2A00:23C8:F11A:7801:84A:9956:A079:DAFC (talk · contribs)

This user is using multiple accounts for disruptive editing and edit warring with Binksternet, such as in the article Lux [12] [13] [14] [15] [16]. I don't know if this an blocked user or not but it's looks like be the case. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 12:18, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

And another thing, their behavior in "Ready '24" [17] [18] [19] after they been warned is unacceptable. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 12:40, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The user in question hasn't been blocked in the past year, as far as I can tell. But they have a habit of adding original research, or misrepresenting the cited source. They often add an unreferenced "fact" and a fact tag at the same time.[20] They often act too quickly to insert partial new information based on poor sourcing.[21]

Right now they are using the IP range Special:Contributions/2A00:23C8:F11A:7801:0:0:0:0/64. Previously they were active as Special:Contributions/2A00:23C8:F118:9301:0:0:0:0/64, Special:Contributions/81.110.160.137 and Special:Contributions/81.105.71.37.

They are not trying to hide from their past edits, seen in this disclosure. They actually created the page Man's Best Friend (Sabrina Carpenter album) as a draft which was accepted and moved to mainspace.

Even though this person can be combative, I don't think we should be trying to ban them from the wiki. Unless, of course, they can be connected to indefinite blocks, which I have not been able to do. I looked at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Newpicarchive/Archive and came away empty. Binksternet (talk) 15:50, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

What in the everliving Christ is this? Is this even the correct way to get someone banned from Wikipedia - just going onto a random admin's talk page and asking for it? Are you embarrassed because your semi-edit protection got denied so you're gonna make it your mission to "win" against me? Get over it, dude. And Google dynamic IP addresses. I would prefer if it didn't keep changing - would be so much easier to keep track of edits on articles 2A00:23C8:F11A:7801:684A:D356:201:BED2 (talk) 16:04, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I skimmed over the article histories, but I don't really get what's going on. I just see a bunch of people reverting each other for unclear reasons. It doesn't look like anyone has violated the three revert rule yet. It'd be best if everyone just stopped reverting and instead started posting on the article talk pages. It looks like the IP editor has agreed to do that, so I guess that's a start. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 21:47, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Here is a timeline:

• One of the artists on the song starting suing the other over the song, alleging a violation of contractual agreement
• I wrote a Legal action section and, while I was at it, added a Personnel section, did some minor copyediting on punctuation, and put "June 2022 (Cam'ron's vocals)" in the Recorded parameter of the infobox, because that was one of the details in the lawsuit
• Binksternet, a user who I have had a history with recently, reverted all of it without an edit summary
• I added it back
• Binksternet reverted it all again, citing No Original Research
• I started a talk page discussion asking for an explanation
• Binksternet said that "June 2022 (Cam'ron's vocals)" was unsourced, so he "lost faith" in my editing and reverted everything I did without reading the rest
• The talk page discussion continues
• I add back my edits except the Recorded parameter, because that's what Binksternet actually read and was objecting to
• TheAmazingPeanuts, who I had never interacted with but had reverted my edits on a different article earlier that same day, started reverting my edits too
• I go to his talk page and explain to him that the content he is removing isn't being contested by Binksternet
• He reports me for "edit warring" and using "multiple accounts" (he thinks IPs are accounts)

2A00:23C8:F11A:7801:684A:D356:201:BED2 (talk) 03:07, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, NinjaRobotPirate. This message is being sent to remind you of significant upcoming changes regarding logged-out editing.

Starting 4 November, logged-out editors will no longer have their IP address publicly displayed. Instead, they will have a temporary account (TA) associated with their edits. Users with some extended rights like administrators and CheckUsers, as well as users with the temporary account IP viewer (TAIV) user right will still be able to reveal temporary users' IP addresses and all contributions made by temporary accounts from a specific IP address or range.

How do temporary accounts work?

• When a logged-out user completes an edit or a logged action for the first time, a cookie will be set in this user's browser and a temporary account tied with this cookie will be automatically created for them. This account's name will follow the pattern: ~2025-12345-67 (a tilde, year of creation, a number split into units of 5).
• All subsequent actions by the temporary account user will be attributed to this username. The cookie will expire 90 days after its creation. As long as it exists, all edits made from this device will be attributed to this temporary account. It will be the same account even if the IP address changes, unless the user clears their cookies or uses a different device or web browser.
• A record of the IP address used at the time of each edit will be stored for 90 days after the edit. Users with the temporary account IP viewer (TAIV) user right will be able to see the underlying IP addresses.
• As a measure against vandalism, there are two limitations on the creation of temporary accounts:
  • There has to be a minimum of 10 minutes between subsequent temporary account creations from the same IP (or /64 range in case of IPv6).
  • There can be a maximum of 6 temporary accounts created from an IP (or /64 range) within a period of 24 hours.

Temporary account IP viewer user right

• Administrators may grant the temporary account IP viewer (TAIV) user right to non-administrators who meet the criteria for granting. Importantly, an editor must make an explicit request for the permission (e.g. at WP:PERM/TAIV)—administrators are not permitted to assign the right without a request.
• Administrators will automatically be able to see temporary account IP information once they have accepted the Access to Temporary Account IP Addresses Policy via Special:Preferences or via the onboarding dialog which comes up after temporary accounts are deployed.

Impact for administrators

• It will be possible to block many abusers by just blocking their temporary accounts. A blocked person won't be able to create new temporary accounts quickly if the admin selects the autoblock option.
• It will still be possible to block an IP address or IP range.
• Temporary accounts will not be retroactively applied to contributions made before the deployment. On Special:Contributions, you will be able to see existing IP user contributions, but not new contributions made by temporary accounts on that IP address. Instead, you should use Special:IPContributions for this (see a video about IPContributions in a gallery below).

Rules about IP information disclosure

• Publicizing an IP address gained through TAIV access is generally not allowed (e.g. ~2025-12345-67 previously edited as 192.0.2.1 or ~2025-12345-67's IP address is 192.0.2.1).
• Publicly linking a TA to another TA is allowed if "reasonably believed to be necessary". (e.g. ~2025-12345-67 and ~2025-12345-68 are likely the same person, so I am counting their reverts together toward 3RR, but not Hey ~2025-12345-68, you did some good editing as ~2025-12345-67)
• See Wikipedia:Temporary account IP viewer § What can and can't be said for more detailed guidelines.

Useful tools for patrollers

• It is possible to view if a user has opted-in to view temporary account IPs via the User Info card, available in Preferences → Appearance → Advanced options → Enable the user info card
  • This feature also makes it possible for anyone to see the approximate count of temporary accounts active on the same IP address range.
• Special:IPContributions allows viewing all edits and temporary accounts connected to a specific IP address or IP range.
• Similarly, Special:GlobalContributions supports global search for a given temporary account's activity.
• The auto-reveal feature (see video below) allows users with the right permissions to automatically reveal all IP addresses for a limited time window.

Videos

• How to use Special:IPContributions
• How automatic IP reveal works
• How to use IP Info
• How to use User Info

Further information and discussion

• For more information and discussion regarding this change, please see the announcement from the Wikimedia Foundation at Wikipedia:Village pump (WMF) § Temporary accounts rollout.

Most of this message was written by Mz7 (source). Thanks, 🎃 SGrabarczuk (WMF) (talk) 02:48, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

So basically, i wanted to edit the new BFDI page that just now got approved, but when i wanted to make an account, i saw my entire IP was completely blocked for no reason, plus I haven’t been on Wikipedia in like 5 years. I only just got into my new house, and I was already blocked. Can you give me an explanation please? Hat Activist (talk) 17:24, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Not really, no, because you haven't told me know what IP address you tried to use. I can't reasonably be expected to know what random IP address you happened to be using when you tried to create an account. I could check your current IP address, but you're posting here from an account now, so you evidently moved on to a different IP address. I don't really see the point in looking at your current IP address if it's not going to give me any useful information about your question. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 20:43, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (October 2025).

Administrator changes

Toadspike

• Elahrairah
• Juliancolton
• Magnus Manske

CheckUser changes

asilvering

Guideline and policy news

• The speedy deletion criteria U5 has been repealed, with U6 and U7 replacing it. See the FAQ for more clarifications.
• Community-designated contentious topics may now be enforced and appealed at the arbitration enforcement noticeboard (AE) as a result of an RfC.

Technical news

• You can enable a handy user info card next to usernames, which when clicked displays edit count, blocks, thanks, and other information. To enable this feature, visit Preferences → Appearance → Advanced options → Enable the user info card

Arbitration

• The arbitration case Transgender healthcare and people has been closed
  • Uninvolved administrators may impose an AE participation restriction on any thread at the Arbitration Enforcement noticeboard.

Miscellaneous

• An unreferenced articles backlog drive is happening in November 2025 to reduce the backlog of articles tagged with {{Unreferenced}}. You can help reduce the backlog by adding citations to these articles. Sign up to participate!

Hello! Voting in the 2025 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 1 December 2025. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2025 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:30, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe I can find a way to vote to disband Arbcom. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 04:42, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This user is adding a lot of unsourced content onto pages and are making false reports on users after they have corrected them . I like anyone else were correcting the user due to an unsourced edit they made about the pop smoke faith album and they started accusing me of using multiple accounts to edit which weren’t true . This issue was over 3 months ago but I just thought I’d bring it to your attention . Annyomus cat (talk) 08:06, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (November 2025).

Administrator changes

• Chaotic Enby
• Rjjiii

Valereee

• Fathoms Below
• Tamzin

CheckUser changes

Spicy

Technical news

• Starting on November 4, the IP addresses of logged-out editors are no longer being publicly displayed. Instead, they will have a temporary account associated with their edits.
• Administrators will now find that Special:MergeHistory is now significantly more flexible about what it can merge. It can now merge sections taken from the middle of the history of the source (rather than only the start) and insert revisions anywhere in the history of the destination page (rather than only the start). T382958

Miscellaneous

• The December 2025 administrator elections are scheduled from Nov 25 – Dec 15.
• An Articles for Creation backlog drive is happening in December 2025, with over 1,000 drafts awaiting review from the past two months. In addition to AfC participants, all administrators and new page patrollers can help review using the Yet Another AFC Helper Script, which can be enabled in the Gadgets settings. Sign up here to participate!