Have a question about a situation I've run across and would like guidance. Not sure if its a "Take to AN for clarification from two accounts, report both users for possible meat or possible noncontributing behavior, or an ignore it for odd but not actionable behavior at this time" situation.

Person A created their account in November, made 6 edits to their userpage, and has since made 388 edits to Person B's sandbox. Person B (created Dec 2022) is still actively editing, made 20 or so edits to mainspace a year or two ago, but has made 5900+ edits to their own sandbox. When I asked Person A last month if there was any connection between the two accounts or that was also their account, I received no response. I have not asked Person B anything since they haven't done anything questionable other than the predominate sandbox editing.

Your, or any TPS thoughts on this situation? Thanks, happy holidays! Zinnober9 (talk) 18:02, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

My immediate thoughts are that it is/was two students working on a school project. I would probably ask B what their intentions are, especially if they're not actually editing other than their userspace. Primefac (talk) 18:53, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, their sandbox content didn't give me the impression of student project since it was a Big Brother reality show type of page in Spanish with contestant details and tables with elimination status by week. I've run into a fair number of student assignments here and I can typically identify those by their language, focus, and the not infrequent "In Conclusion" section. I'll ask Person B to clarify their intent and connection to Person A and see if I get any response. Thank you. Zinnober9 (talk) 21:32, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What up Primefac! So thankful you responded to my question a while back about switching my name on my Wiki page. Can you {{help me}} with a {{subst:Requested move ...}} for my page Rawsrvnt to now be Eddy Puyol as I’m no longer rockin under Rawsrvnt? Thanks! Rawsrvnt (talk) 13:30, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Answered at User_talk:Rawsrvnt#Help_me! (and fixed wikilinks). Primefac (talk) 13:46, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Primefac, I noticed you declined the history merge, but now that lists me as the page creator when the creation should rightfully be attributed to @Assadzadeh. I draftified the article as it was an unreferenced BLP and then requested the cross-namespace redirect be deleted. Is there any way to fix this? WP:IAR? Svampesky (talk) 20:46, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Meh... who creates an article isn't always who edits the page first, but sure, I'll go back to your R2 and delete those. Primefac (talk) 20:53, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! You have called me out for reverting edits on pages like Talk:Legality of conversion therapy. Although that one looks benign, it's part of a pattern of disruptive editing by 2603:7000:B500:5D4:0:0:0:0/64 which led to them being blocked for three months. Their use of talk pages does not line up well with WP:TALK. For example, see Talk:List_of_countries_by_age_at_first_marriage#Large_table_on_talk_page. Currently they are evading their three month block by using a mobile address range: 2600:1017:B800:0:0:0:0:0/40. I can stop reverting borderline talk page edits, but I thought you might like some of the context. Ttwaring (talk) 14:38, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, if you are reverting socking/block evasion, please make sure to use that in your edit summary; otherwise, it looks like you are simply removing talk page sections that might not be perfectly formatted. Thank you for the explanation. Primefac (talk) 14:41, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Will do. Thanks for the very quick reply! Ttwaring (talk) 14:48, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I saw you fulfill my CSD G8-requests regarding these. I've filed a Twinkle ticket so these are deleted automatically from now on, but if you want to, you can go through the list. NotAGenious (talk) 17:18, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorted, thanks. Primefac (talk) 17:29, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Can I review article at WP:AFC being in "Probation", where you just added me? Taabii (talk) 16:12, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) Yes, you can. Being on probation only means that during the probation timeframe, you can be removed from the list of reviewers without discussion or warnings. NotAGenious (talk) 12:16, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Primefac, your BRFA at Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/PrimeBOT 46 was approved. Best regards, — xaosflux 12:17, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Primefac (talk) 12:31, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2024).

Guideline and policy news

• Following an RFC, Wikipedia:Notability (species) was adopted as a subject-specific notability guideline.
• A request for comment is open to discuss whether admins should be advised to warn users rather than issue no-warning blocks to those who have posted promotional content outside of article space.

Technical news

• The Nuke feature also now provides links to the userpage of the user whose pages were deleted, and to the pages which were not selected for deletion, after page deletions are queued. This enables easier follow-up admin-actions.

Arbitration

• Following the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections, the following editors have been elected to the Arbitration Committee: CaptainEek, Daniel, Elli, KrakatoaKatie, Liz, Primefac, ScottishFinnishRadish, Theleekycauldron, Worm That Turned.

Miscellaneous

• A New Pages Patrol backlog drive is happening in January 2025 to reduce the number of unreviewed articles and redirects in the new pages feed. Sign up here to participate!

---

I don't think you intended this outcome (bot edit) with SNE.

And your change to Template:Redirect category shell yesterday has a few articles and a few templates complaining (just those with "Redirect category shell" or "Rcat shell" mentioned, a few others that show in the searches are unrelated). Given how widely used the template is, I suspect these are just a "quirk, fix at end page" type of issue rather than something in the main template, but that's just based on quantity. I can't identify the specific issue and hope that you know what the issue is. Zinnober9 (talk) 06:10, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The first was a quirk of AWB subst'ing a template, thought I caught all of them but clearly not (thanks).

I am not seeing any lint errors related to rcat shell on that page, nor when I search for the template. Where should I be looking to find them? Primefac (talk) 07:31, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]