I have just logged in for the first time in a couple of weeks and I see that Damolisher attacked me judging by what was available to be seen in my user space history. It would appear as though he is not letting it all go to the degree that maybe I should consider real life action. Anyway, if you could watch not just my user space but also the New Zealand Wide Pro Wrestling space it would be appreciated. I assume you soft blocked the underlying IP's, and if you did I recommend that be expanded to a range soft block. Addicted4517 (talk) 01:53, 28 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Addicted4517, and no problem. I will keep an eye on both areas. However, I see that one of the pages targeted by the blocked user's temporary accounts is User:Addicted4517/Statement 1. Statements like that about blocked users are not constructive and tend to attract further disruption. Because of this, I highly recommend deleting that page. You can have that done by requesting speedy deletion with {{Db-u1}}, or by redirecting the page to your main user page. I am unable to specifically comment on any related IP address blocks due to the restrictions in WP:TAIVDISCLOSE, but for sockpuppetry cases involving temporary accounts, I will always examine the available technical data. — Newslinger talk 05:36, 28 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I'd rather leave it there for now, although I am aware of the "Long Term Abuse" section on WP and I have been thinking about creating an article there. I'm just not sure about the format. But I can move a lot of what's on the statement there (not everything of course) that relates to his posting style. Once that's done, then yes I would be looking at deleting the statement. Any guidance on said format would be appreciated. Addicted4517 (talk) 02:26, 24 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The template provided in the reporting form, accessible from the filing instructions, contains comments that explain what to write in each section. It would be helpful to reference other LTA pages that describe similar behaviors; you can adapt the language from those pages for a new LTA entry.​ — Newslinger talk 02:52, 24 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I'm not on here often but I'll give that a look. The protection of the article that he usually targets will expire on March 9 if I remember and I'm not sure I'll get anything done before then. The page is New Zealand Wide Pro Wrestling. Addicted4517 (talk) 02:56, 24 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, just a quick heads up because I noticed I didn't ping you in the review and, as an admin, I figure you may have a large watchlist - I reviewed the OpenDesk DYK nom. First time doing a review, so if there's any problems you notice you may want to request a re-review. ScalarFactor (talk) 23:32, 5 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi ScalarFactor, thank you for reviewing my DYK nomination. I have no objections to your review, and I'm glad to see that you have submitted several nominations of your own. — Newslinger talk 18:21, 6 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Based on their editing pattern, I can say with some confidence, User:XylonZaire is likely a paid editor. Almost every edit is to an entertainer bios. Also, their editing pattern matches User:Denonia, including their edit summaries ("tweaking x" - unless that is a default option in some editors). Note Denonia is indefinitely blocked for running sock farm. Longewal (talk) 04:30, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Longewal, thank you for bringing this to my attention. Because Denonia is a CheckUser-confirmed sockpuppet and there is a high chance of there being additional sockpuppet accounts that have yet to be discovered (sleeper accounts), I have opened an SPI case at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Fairyspit § 08 February 2026 and requested a CheckUser scan. — Newslinger talk 07:04, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I do not really consider anti-immigration to be a political party so it should be removed ~2026-81618-8 (talk) 06:01, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, you are welcome to discuss this content dispute on Talk:Progress Party (Norway). The text "Ideology" in the infobox on the Progress Party (Norway) article links to List of political ideologies, which lists Anti-immigration twice, so I disagree with your opinion. — Newslinger talk 06:51, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Here is the discussion.

Talk:Progress Party (Norway) - Wikipedia ~2026-81618-8 (talk) 02:30, 9 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I've just declined UTRS appeal #110605. Since you commented there in significant detail, you may like to see what I wrote there. JBW (talk) 22:51, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, JBW, I'm going to take your advice. — Newslinger talk 07:27, 9 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I'm concerned there may be more socking going on there but I'm not sure if the account I suspect has the same sock master. Still following the outcome of that current SPI with interest. Lardlegwarmers / Manuductive was quite frustrating at WP:RS/N throughout their brief tenure. Simonm223 (talk) 13:38, 23 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Simonm223, the behavioral cases at SPI are quite backlogged, so it might take some time for a reviewing administrator to get to this one. I've been processing the oldest "Open" ones because editors should ideally not be waiting months for an SPI case to be properly reviewed. — Newslinger talk 14:34, 23 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, behavioural backlog is same as it ever was I'm afraid. Needless to say there's at least one editor active in that discussion whose early history looks a LOT like gaming extended confirmed but, absent a sock master, I don't think it's worth wasting peoples time about at SPI just yet. Simonm223 (talk) 14:37, 23 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I see that you have indefinitely blocked MTLNORG for use of artificial intelligence including a phony reference to the DRN archives. So both of the principal editors in that dispute have now been blocked, one as a sockpuppet and the other as a chatbot. That is a mess. My question at this point is whether I should close the split discussion. My first thought is that I should close it, but my second thought is that I should ask for another opinion. Also, thank you for blocking another AI user. Robert McClenon (talk) 04:10, 1 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Robert McClenon, and no problem. The rationale at Talk:Mount Kenya region § Split Discussion is based on two LLM-generated userspace pages (User:MTLNORG/Mount Kenya region and User:MTLNORG/MKAREB), and the only response in the discussion that counts towards consensus is in opposition to the split, so I believe the split discussion can be closed with no issue. Additionally, the majority of the comments on Talk:Mount Kenya region are excluded from consensus for either block evasion or being LLM-generated, so that talk page might benefit from having many of those discussions archived. — Newslinger talk 08:41, 1 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

On 1 March 2026, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article OpenDesk, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the German government spends barely a thousandth of previous expenses for office suites after switching to the free and open-source OpenDesk? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/OpenDesk. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, OpenDesk), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to nominate it.

♠PMC♠ (talk) 12:03, 1 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Newslinger, I suggested some updates to former Rolling Stone editor Noah Shachtman’s page. I see that you're a member of WP:Journalism, so I hope you'll consider reviewing my edit request here: Talk:Noah Shachtman#Additional information. I am available should you have questions. Thanks! RetroCrown (talk) 20:25, 3 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi RetroCrown, thank you for making use of the conflict-of-interest edit request system. The COI edit request queue is not an area of Wikipedia that I typically monitor or respond to, but you are welcome to post a neutral notice (like the one you posted here) at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Journalism. I did take a quick look and noticed that the New York Times link in the edit request appears to be broken, so you would most likely want to address that first. — Newslinger talk 20:41, 3 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the suggestion, Newslinger. I fixed the link and I will post in the group now, I hope you'll take another look and consider implementing. RetroCrown (talk) 21:11, 6 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there Newslinger, so a renamed user recreated the page of The Sword: Rebirth of the Red Wolf and as you're the one who deleted it, can you recheck if it is blocked evasion or not? Looking at the contents it seems the same before the deletion. ꕥ 𝙳.𝟷𝟾𝚝𝚑 ꕥ ^{→𝙼𝚎𝚜𝚜𝚊𝚐𝚎 𝚖𝚎←} 12:09, 9 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi D.18th, thank you for bringing this to my attention. Based on the deleted revisions, I can also confirm that the version Renamed user fecc8213a477aca3b82d24549b23a0d7 (talk · contribs) created was substantially similar to the version that had been previously deleted, and I have tagged the account as a sockpuppet of Fairyspit (talk · contribs). I have deleted the page again per criterion G5 and started a new sockpuppet investigation case, in which I have requested a checkuser scan to search for sleeper accounts. — Newslinger talk 12:42, 9 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Great! Thanks for your hardwork admin. ꕥ 𝙳.𝟷𝟾𝚝𝚑 ꕥ ^{→𝙼𝚎𝚜𝚜𝚊𝚐𝚎 𝚖𝚎←} 12:48, 9 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

No problem! — Newslinger talk 12:48, 9 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]