Salvio giuliano
Archives
| |||
---|---|---|---|
|
Wondering if User:Natalie rose gauci Softblock Should Become a Hardblock Due to Presented History
editI am just reaching out because I saw you blocked User:Natalie rose gauci. I am wondering if the User:Natalie rose Gauci softblock was too light and the user should have a more traditional hardblock and their accounts should be considered sockpuppets.
According to the talk page for her article, users with names resembling (or outright claiming to be) Gauci have been editing the article since at least 2013. This includes User:Natalierosecowan, Natalie Gauci's former maiden name (who was blocked indefinitely for vandalism), User:89.240.30.134, and User:Shri207 (who was never blocked).
I also found User:Brainsoul and User:Xfactor1234 in 2012 (both never blocked), User:Shriyansh Sapkota in 2013 (who was also blocked indefinitely for vandalism), and User:Natg8888 in 2017 (never blocked) as other single-purpose accounts that only seemed to edit Gauci-related articles.
Feel free to do what you wish, but I just wanted to show it does not look like an isolated pattern. Thebirdlover (talk) 00:03, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for the heads up, I'll think about that, but I'm not sure it's particularly useful to upgrade the block; in fact, if the person who operates the account has already been hardblocked in the past and they create a new account, it's still block evasion, and so they can still be blocked, regardless of my soft block... — Salvio giuliano 15:00, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
The Signpost: 14 August 2024
edit- In the media: Portland pol profile paid for from public purse
- In focus: Twitter marks the spot
- News and notes: Another Wikimania has concluded
- Special report: Nano or just nothing: Will nano go nuclear?
- Opinion: HouseBlaster's RfA debriefing
- Traffic report: Ball games, movies, elections, but nothing really weird
- Humour: I'm proud to be a template