User talk:Ponyo

Hmm

You blocked someone for "piss-poor analogies"--be careful: someone is going to argue that they can't find that among the valid block reasons, haha. But seriously, you have proven to be an incredible ally and I'm sure I'm not the only one who really appreciates the work you do here. Did you know we got a new dog last year? He is a delicious hairy little fat sniffler and he's on the couch next to me. I never thought I would like dogs until Mrs. Drmies started bringing home these animals. Can you tell I'm just sitting here typing because I don't want to do any online grading? Woof! Drmies (talk) 19:26, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

I covered my bases and blocked them for socking and piss poor analogies, though I would have been willing to fight to block just based on the latter in this case. We have a lovely dog as well, straight from the streets of Delhi. We don't tell her that she was considered a pariah, but instead an Indian princess who came to Canada to expand her cultural horizons. I love when Mr. Ponyo has marking to do as a million neglected chores suddenly gain attention and urgency and the house benefits as a result. Now unless you intend to change the burned out light bulb in my basement or oil my kid's squeaky door, I suggest you get back to your marking, Drmies. -- Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 19:47, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Gah, do you find grading grating? --Deepfriedokra (talk) 20:06, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

I'm shocked

shocked, I say. --Deepfriedokra (talk) 19:39, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

It definitely was not a twist ending.-- Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 19:58, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Need help on SPI Dcelano again

Hi, I'm trying to get SPI reported for Dcelano again, but admin there is having difficulty with processing it; wants line by line diffs of the sock editing. There's been tens maybe hundreds of these edits over the years. Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Dcelano AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 17:20, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

It looks like this has been sorted. They're not exactly the trickiest of sockmasters are they?-- Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 15:51, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello Ponyo

Hello Ponyo, I thought it best to address you directly, I am aware there is a seperate section on your talk page surrounding me of which I have not been invited, hence I thought we could start a fresh section. I would like to convey that though there appears to be a campaign to slander my account through any means possible I truely do have only good intentions, genuinely compatible with Wikipedia expectations. I have undeniably made mistakes in the past, not all that are being alleged, but enough to recognise I need to pursue a more diplomatic and constructive approach. I apologise for using your time and for you having to communicate what guidelines cannot be abrogated. My motives in appealing to editors that have had experience with 'Kiengir' was to help improve the situation and help facilitate a resolution that would appeal to all parties. In rebuttal of being alleged that I am 'not here to build an encyclopedia'(copied directly from my own appeals to editors regarding the behaviour of 'Kiengir') I truely am here to build a Wikipedia and my appreciation of the site and positive motivations are indicated by my persistence in discussing and resolving this. The fact that "They don't seem to be identical socks, just one support the other one...in such case also I should make such report?" was even a question really illustrates the length to which my views and any one who shares them are being silenced. I cannot address the allegations thrown at me as I dont have the capacity or knowledge to address something I know nothing about. I want to reiterate that I sincerely wish to contribute to Wikipedia in a beneficial and constructive way in areas that interest and I am curious about, I apologise for those instances in which I have gone about it the wrong way, and am willing to heed your advice and feedback. Kind RegardsDanielLerish (talk) 16:14, 5 October 2020 (UTC)DanielLerish

@DanielLerish:, you continue to canvass different admins and editors looking for a different result (the result being action against KIENGIR). You have done this repeatedly ([1] [2] [3]). Both Blackmane and Jpgordon advised you to take your concerns to the Administrators' Noticeboard if you have evidence of inappropriate conduct. My talk page is not the Administrators' Noticeboard. -- Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 18:49, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

DanielLerish, this is just boring, you should stop your disruptive activity and not harass other editors who respect our policies.(KIENGIR (talk) 19:20, 5 October 2020 (UTC))

2A00:23C7:F90A:5D01:EC68:6525:6B75:44E0

Hi Ponyo, I know you blocked this IP already, but I thought you might want to know that this is probably User:Youtubewikiwriter, who is the puppet master of several SPA accounts who's only purpose seems to be blanking the pages of all the members of Stiff Little Fingers. I don't know if it's worth adding something to the closed SPI investigation, but I thought you should know, just in case your block is temporary. Robman94 (talk) 02:19, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

@Robman94: Outside of certain WMF Office actions and extreme cases, IPs are not blocked indefinitely. Note that I already made the obvious connection between the IP range and the sock in my block message (here).-- Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 16:01, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

Sock

Can you do the needful please on this self-declared block evading sock? Valenciano (talk) 18:45, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

 Done-- Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 18:53, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

User: 86.8.101.221

Hello Ponyo, some time since we last spoke. Could I please draw you attention to the activities of 86.8.101.221 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) who appears to be a sockpuppet of 86.9.95.201 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) who was blocked for a considerable time by El_C a few months back. This IP only seems to concentrate on BBC articles and never quotes any references, in spite of being warned. The new IP is in exactly the same area of the UK as previous. I have informed El_C, but they appear to be offline for a couple of days. Can I leave this with you for action please? Regards, David, David J Johnson (talk) 19:17, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

Is this this guy, still at it? Regardless, it's obvious block evasion and I've blocked the new IP. I also semi'ed a couple of troublesome articles.-- Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 19:25, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

Yes, same guy who has used multiple IP's for a considerable time and taken no notice of warnings. Many thanks for you help - yet again. Best regards, David, David J Johnson (talk) 19:28, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

I'm afraid that they have now resurfaced as 185.130.159.238 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), a location they have used before. This guy does not seem to realise that sources are required and he has been blocked multiple times. Can you action again please? Best regards, David, David J Johnson (talk) 18:57, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

Ladies and gentlemen, he has been blocked for two years. JTZegers (talk) 20:55, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

Sitebanned?

Can you confirm that due to this, the user is sitebanned under policy WP:THREESTRIKES? It looks like you did the checkuser before applying the sockmaster template; I just wanted to be sure. Bri.public (talk) 21:09, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

I don't think so in this case as there doesn't appear to have been any confirmed socking since EdJohnston's indef block in November of 2019.-- Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 21:14, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

I see, thanks. I got confused when I started to track Susana Hodge sockfarm instead (they were suspected in that group). ☆ Bri (talk) 21:26, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

I have no doubt that they are socking, but there's no paper trail that I can see that would allow for a 3X ban at his time.-- Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 21:29, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

Okay, wait a sec ... the policy is invoked when an editor engaged in sockpuppetry on at least two occasions after an initial indefinite block that is active. I think you might not be counting from the right block. Or I'm reading the logs wrong. Alex Shih blocked 13:54 14 September 2018 and you extended it 22:21, 24 September 2018 another three months. So any edits between 14 September and 24 December 2018 count toward THREESTRIKES. Here are two edits by two different CU confirmed socks in that interval: [4] and [5]. Am I missing something? -- Bri.public (talk) 21:42, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

The first indefinite block for Neptune's Trident was made in September 2019; all of the confirmed socking occurred prior to the indef block, not after as is required by WP:3X.-- Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 21:56, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

quick block on rapid-fire vandal?

Care to drop a block on 207.81.189.27 (talk · contribs · WHOIS)? After comments such as "ban me, Wikipedia" [6] and "I like to edit Wikipedia and somehow they haven't banned the IP address yet" [7] there does not seem any point in waiting for AIV to catch up. Meters (talk) 21:13, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

I've provided them with a three-month time out to allow them to concentrate on their schoolwork.-- Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 21:17, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

Crunchers Alt

Crunchers Alt (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) Hello Ponyo, could you please redact the user's creations in the logs? At least a part of them are offensive. Victor Schmidt (talk) 19:49, 8 October 2020 (UTC)

Already done, I think. Are you still seeing the page names somewhere?-- Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 19:50, 8 October 2020 (UTC)

Yes, in your logs. Victor Schmidt (talk) 19:55, 8 October 2020 (UTC)

(deletion log, mass deletions create a log entry for each deletion) Victor Schmidt (talk) 19:58, 8 October 2020 (UTC)

I've nixed the ones in my log. Anything else? As an admin and oversighter I can sometimes still see things that are hidden from other editors, so it can be difficult to ensure I've caught everything.-- Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 20:05, 8 October 2020 (UTC)

Seems like you got everything. Victor Schmidt (talk) 10:50, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

Sock puppet possibility

Hi! This user Sangitha rani111 had been blocked by you for Wikipedia:Sockpuppetry. Now this user Byasa_Banerjee seems to be Sockpuppet of Sangitha rani111. I suspect this user is sock of the previous user so please help me to check with both IP's. One best reason to suspect both user is interestingly both edit violating terms of Wikipedia policy specifically about social groups, explicitly including caste associations and political parties, related to India. This user Byasa_Banerjee is violating terms of Wikipedia policy and been warned in Talk page for the same. Please block if they are sock or make editing restrictions for violating policies on pages relating to social groups, explicitly including caste associations and political parties, related to India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan.Thank you.--Universalrahu (talk) 18:02, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

Another surprising note is Sangitha rani111 was blocked on 9 June 2020 and this user Byasa_Banerjee was created on 11 June 2020. This immediate sprout of another username makes a strong doubt of sock. Please help to resolve this issue. Thank you.--Universalrahu (talk) 15:07, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

@Universalrahu:, please make a report at WP:SPI.-- Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 23:09, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

User:185.130.159.238

Hello Ponyo, and hope you enjoyed your vacation? Sorry to report, as detailed above the BBC vandal has now resorted to block evasion by using 185.130.159.238 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), this is the same location used earlier on in 2020. They do not seem to take any notice of requests for references, or warnings for block evasion. Can I please suggest a longer block and possibly a range block on IP's they have used? Regards, David David J Johnson (talk) 18:31, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

I don't see a workable range in this case, but have blocked the IP. When they have many dynamic ranges at their disposal, the only available option is to play whack-a-mole as they show up.-- Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 20:13, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for your help. Regards, David, David J Johnson (talk) 10:41, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

You've got mail!

Hello, Ponyo. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 19:40, 16 October 2020 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Nathan2055^{talk - contribs} 19:40, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

Hey

Hello Ponya, I got a message from you when I first joined, hope your well!!

I need your advice Sophie19900 (talk) 23:27, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

Perms request declined

Hello, my request for the Confirmed right got declined, with the reason that "I need to understand Wikipedia more". Please note that my IP has already made 10 edits over 4 days, and I am not saying that you shouldn't take my block into consideration at all, I was trying to say that you shouldn't take the vandalism-related edits as valid edits towards the requirement, as they got reverted. Even if you ignore the vandalism edits, my IP still has ten edits. Please explain the actual reason why was my request denied and what do I need to fix. Thanks. Ondrashek06 (talk) 20:01, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) @Ondrashek06: FWIW, I had > 50 edits over weeks before I created a user name. I don't think it unreasonable for you to show us you can edit constructively before you are automatically autoconfirmed. --Deepfriedokra (talk) 20:16, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

Please read the information in the blue box at Wikipedia:Requests for permissions/Confirmed which states "Since the bar for automatic confirmation is deliberately quite low, the vast majority of requests here are denied. Unless you are requesting confirmation for a legitimate alternate account your request will almost certainly be denied." (emphasis original). This same text would also have appeared in a large edit notice when you edited the page to request the permission.-- Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 20:28, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

Oh, sorry, I took the ABF route, and blocked them indef for trolling. --Floquenbeam (talk) 20:30, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

I let the post sit for a bit because I couldn't figure out how much time I wanted to invest explaining something when the outcome seemed inevitable. If I'd just procrastinated a minute or two longer it would have saved me the effort altogether! -- Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 20:46, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

AH FLOQUENBEAM IS IN THE HOUSE — Preceding unsigned comment added by Drmies (talk • contribs) who should probably be marking, amirite? (UTC)

Patrick Bamford

Hello Ponyo. I saw your edit to the Patrick Bamford page concerning the deletion of Premier League Player of the Month (for Sept. 2020) text that I'd added recently. I'm not 100% wedded to it - it was about the eventual winner of the PotM award - but always feel that it's worth adding the winner of something to an entry on the runner-up. Let me know what you think. As I mentioned, it's not going to keep me awake at night! Thanks. Franburke2 (talk) 21:34, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

@Franburke2: Please restore whatever you think would be useful. I think your edit unfortunately became mixed among some missed vandalism in the article and was collateral damage when I reverted.-- Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 21:44, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Thanks @Ponyo: - I'll get back to it in a little while and restore it. This page has been heavily vandalised over the past couple of seasons - thanks for keeping an eye on it.Franburke2 (talk) 23:43, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Evelyn Return

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/91.110.83.83, is most likely https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Evelynkwapong539 not logging in again to edit over on Looney Tunes Cartoons. Just a heads up since they've been blocked for socking, Thanks!

Noelephant(talk) 02:38, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

@Noelephant: I've reblocked the IP.-- Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 15:28, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for the block. I got caught up in quite a rabbithole there: The association really just came about because Jostwiki made the same erroneous claim as Jostcom on Rockstar Games and I wanted to check whether one was a sock of the other. I only noticed then that GroupJWbackup, which had made the same hoax-claim sometime before that, had already been sock-blocked. It became clear that all three were part of the same troll ("Jost" is also obviously "[Jo]hnwe[st]"). If I ever see this particular change happen again and add a new SPI case, should I ping you from the new SPI entry for quick handling? Regards, IceWelder [✉] 16:05, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

When the socking is as blatantly obvious as in this case (I mean, really? master sock), the SPI tends to get a faster response.-- Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 17:39, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

q

Hey, Ponyo. I'm here because I saw this block and thought you might have some insight. Is there anything worrisome about an editor repeatedly using a phrase generally seen as a dogwhistle to white supremacists in talk posts/edit summaries?12 Any insight? —valereee (talk) 12:01, 30 October 2020 (UTC)

Personally, I find it worrisome. And unseemly. I'm not sure how the community as a whole views it though. Having had a bird's eye view of the absolute shit show unraveling below me in the past four years, I do my utmost to avoid politics altogether when editing here. One must protect one's sanity after all! Drmies has a better finger on the pulse of editors' level of tolerance for antics like this than I do.-- Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 15:56, 30 October 2020 (UTC)

Holy fuck. Valereee, yes, that's a dog whistle, and I'm not surprised that that would be coming from that editor. The second diff is from their rather shortsighted critique of this piece in Wired; GorillaWarfare replied. It's on that 86 talk page. Honestly, I think that editor should be topic-banned, certainly after these kinds of comments. Plus, the whole "Wikipedia is censored" is usually a prelude to a block--often an indefinite one--since it signals that whoever says it cannot play by the rules. Drmies (talk) 23:48, 30 October 2020 (UTC)

After asking about it at their user talk, I was asked to no longer post there. I'm concerned, but I'm not ready to topic-ban AP32+ myself. If someone else thinks it's a good idea, I would support. —valereee (talk) 17:26, 31 October 2020 (UTC)

IP:86.8.101.221

Hello Ponyo, The BBC IP having just emerged from your block is again making the usual non-referenced changes to BBC articles, 86.8.101.221 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) from exactly the same part of the UK as previous. They seem to take no notice of editors warnings regarding Wikipedia conventions. Perhaps a longer block and page protection on BBC articles is necessary? Best regards, David, David J Johnson (talk) 11:11, 3 November 2020 (UTC)

Reblocked, for 1 month this time.-- Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 20:56, 3 November 2020 (UTC)

Many thanks for your help. Best regards, David, David J Johnson (talk) 10:16, 4 November 2020 (UTC)

User:(Violiniswwt)/sandbox

Looks like another sock of the Mostafa Momeni long term disruptive editor? Deletion log. Also Amir Sarkhosh. Eagleash (talk) 16:08, 4 November 2020 (UTC)

The ever-helpful GeneralNotability has done the needy in this case.-- Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 18:22, 4 November 2020 (UTC)

Yep; Whoo-ee-whoo (Morricone); they must have made fun of his mule. Thanks anyway. Eagleash (talk) 18:56, 4 November 2020 (UTC)

There's more still Draft:Mostafa Momeni Ab Kharaki another redirect req. to a variation of the name that does not exist in the article. If accepted this draft could likely be turned into yet another article about the NN musician. Eagleash (talk) 13:50, 7 November 2020 (UTC)

'Tis gone now.-- Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 22:40, 9 November 2020 (UTC)

Please revdel this. It is the exact same vandalism that got revdelled.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Pete_Buttigieg&oldid=987110764 Also, sorry about the SPI. I was a bit reckless as I somethimes am.. 4thfile4thrank {talk} :? 00:19, 5 November 2020 (UTC)

That diff is already revdeleted. Did you mean to include another one?-- Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 00:21, 5 November 2020 (UTC)

Vandalism

Hi! Thought you might want to be aware of this. Doctorhawkes (talk) 00:38, 8 November 2020 (UTC)

Re-blocked.-- Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 22:53, 9 November 2020 (UTC)

Revdel

Is this revision bad enough to be deleted? https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Tom_Welling&diff=next&oldid=987828642&diffmode=source 4thfile4thrank {talk} :? 13:58, 9 November 2020 (UTC)

Meh, it's pretty much just throw-away vandalism. I certainly "sympithise" with their English teacher though.-- Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 22:53, 9 November 2020 (UTC)

Continued CIR issues for LeoKids123

Not sure if this is ANI-worthy but since your block was lifted LeoKids123 appears to have engaged in a new edit war (including some childish personal attacks), made some unsourced and somewhat conjecture based additions (Example and vandalized major articles. Best, GPL93 (talk) 19:25, 10 November 2020 (UTC)

Yeah, they're just not ready to edit constructively. No ANI necessary, I've blocked to prevent further time sinkage.-- Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 19:41, 10 November 2020 (UTC)

Does this need to be revision deleted? I don't use IRC so I looked to the Admins that accept revdel requests.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=%C3%81lvaro_Uribe&curid=243680&diff=988856060&oldid=988377286&diffmode=source 4thfile4thrank {talk} :? 18:17, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

I wouldn't say so as he has been convicted of conspiring with paramilitary groups, which is sourced in the article. It definitely doesn't belong in the lead though, especially as phrased, per WP:UNDUE.-- Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 19:03, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

Does this need to be revdelled?

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Parna_Pethe&curid=55793722&diff=989053127&oldid=976717465&diffmode=source 4thfile4thrank {talk} :? 20:06, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

I revdeleted it but it was borderline; it's throw-away childish vandalism that no one would really take seriously.-- Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 20:15, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

Giolocam's sockpuppet is back again.

As expected, after his block, Giolocam (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) has created a brand new account, he made 10 disruptive edits in his own talk page and he waited 4 days to be able to edit the page List of European countries by average wage which is protected only for confirmed users with more than 4 days and 10 edits. The brand new account is Tarvis73 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) which is editing the same as Giolocam did.

I also suggest a bigger level of protection in this page. The IP 80.117.253.168 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is also him, as he's putting exactly the same numbers and doing the same edits as Giolocam (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) which was confirmed as a sockpuppet. I also call @Deepfriedokra: if it's possible to have a higher level of protection, or at least to watch the pages List of European countries by average wage, List of countries by average wage and List of European Union member states by average wage which are the pages constantly vandalized by this blocked user. I won't even redo his edits until he gets blocked, as I don't want to start another edit war with a sockpuppet. --Pfarla (talk) 18:40, 17 November 2020 (UTC)

I've blocked the new sock account. I don't currently see the level of sock activity at the articles you mention that would allow me to add or change the protections in place, but will be happy to revisit the issue if it keeps up. I also have Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Benniejets on my watchlist so I can act based on reports there as long as I'm online.-- Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 18:49, 17 November 2020 (UTC)

Copyright/attribution problem sock/meat farm

Hey P, I blocked a couple of accounts today as socks of Kiranpz, had blocked the earlier account for advertorial editing (there were a couple of follow on socks back then too), blocked Chiki170 as the editing and content was far too similar, then AjKa180 came along to tell me that it isn't a sock but content copied from Wikitia (that attribution trail is missing everywhere) and I went and looked at Wikitia and found that they are copying stuff from here just before it gets deleted (and no attribution there either, just look at Wikipedia for attribution). These two are most likely socks but could be a part of a meat collective, then I looked around and saw that there are loads of such articles created, so surely these two aren't alone. Could you take a look please? Don't spend too much time on the drafts/articles or you might have to take headache medication too! —SpacemanSpiff 19:14, 17 November 2020 (UTC)

Always nice to hear from you, but why does it always need to be under such complicated circumstances?! I can take a look at the socking aspect, but the content issue may be better serviced by admin extraordinaire, Diannaa.-- Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 19:42, 17 November 2020 (UTC)

• @SpacemanSpiff: Did you see this? -- Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 19:44, 17 November 2020 (UTC)

If there's some specific drafts/articles you want me to check please let me know. I did some spot checks and didn't find anything.— Diannaa (talk)

Thanks P, the doyen of Indian cinema --Cyphoidbomb also alerted me to the SPI, I'll post on the SPI so that this is properly documented. Diannaa: Draft:Anusharai (actress) is lifted from wikitia. com/wiki/Anusharai_(actress) but the attribution trail there is incorrect as the linked article doesn't exist on/prior to that date, it's a version of Anusha Rai which was deleted at AfD. Anyway, wikitia. com/wiki/Wikitia:About story is that they are pissed off with admins and editors here!] Likewise, many of the articles created by this farm seem to have very similar origins although I can't find the Wikitia source to be sure. These are definitely not new articles by an editor in their first week: [8], [9] and so on. This is not a conventional copyvio problem, it's more of a find the attribution trail problem. (had to mess with the wikitia links as it seems the site is on our blacklist) cheers. —SpacemanSpiff 00:54, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for making me look up doyen, SpacemanSpiff. I'm no doyen. I'm more of a docent, making sure kids with cruddy paws don't touch or lick the paintings; I don't actually know anything about Indian cinema other than wot I've learned while maintaining this "perennially interesting" topic area. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 01:38, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

I get the impression that Wikitia is at least in part a Wikipedia mirror and/or a depository for articles that were deleted on Wikipedia.— Diannaa (talk) 13:37, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

Should this be revdelled under RD2?

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=John_McAreavey&curid=8698848&diff=989275806&oldid=989002058&diffmode=source 4thfile4thrank {talk} :? 01:52, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

(talk page stalker)4thfile4thrank, probably ought to follow WP:REVDELREQUEST and hit the IRC room, that's ugly stuff. Ravensfire (talk) 03:39, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

@Ravensfire: Yeah, but I don't have IRC, so I looked at the list of admins that were willing to accept revdel requests. Should I use email for egregious stuff like this? 4thfile4thrank {talk} :? 03:41, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

Probably. There's a link on the RD page (labeled "Connect") right after the IRC channel name that opens a browser IRC connection which is what I use. Can't remember the last time I used IRC. Ravensfire (talk) 03:43, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

went ahead and requested it on IRC. Ravensfire (talk) 03:41, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

@Ravensfire: I can't enter. It is requesting an account I don't have 4thfile4thrank {talk} :? 04:02, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

Revision-deleted and (since that was a particularly bad BLPVIO) also handed off to an oversighter for suppression on IRC. GeneralNotability (talk) 04:06, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

GeneralNotability, thank you! Ravensfire (talk) 04:10, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

@Ravensfire: EDIT: It got suppressed. How should I know if an edit (aside from obvious personal info) needs suppression? 4thfile4thrank {talk} :? 04:04, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

4thfile4thrank, well, honestly, I'll ask them to review it, and then go with whatever the reviewing admin decides. That was a pretty easy call though. It's an easy request to make, so when it doubt, ask for an admin to review. For the IRC, you actually DON'T need a password or have any existing account. I just use my username here for the Nick(name), click the I'm not a Robot checkbox and deal with the captcha, and click start. Easy as that. The password is for people who are on that channel regularly. Having the account makes some things easier, but since we just need to make the request, we can skip that. Once you get in the channel, it's pretty easy. I still screwed it up, and forgot use the command that pings the channel admins, but they still spotted it. The intro message is pretty good, instruction-wise. Ravensfire (talk) 04:10, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

4thfile4thrank, Ponyo can probably give you a more definitive answer than I (considering that she's an oversighter and, well, this is her talk page) but WP:OSPOL has the gist. In this case, this could fall under OS 2b - clearly libelous information where there is no value in keeping the revision. Side note: in my experience there are varying opinions on what should and should not fall under OS 2b as opposed to ordinary revision deletion under WP:RD2. Regardless of whether it should be suppressed or "just" revision-deleted, though, priority 1 is to hand it off to an administrator - if it needs suppression, they can revision-delete while waiting for an oversighter. GeneralNotability (talk) 04:16, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

Edge cases can always be sent to the OS mail list for review. We can easily rev delete in lieu of suppression depending on the circumstances.-- Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 21:56, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

Oops

Didn't mean to get in your way here. That page was on my watchlist. Tiderolls 21:25, 19 November 2020 (UTC)

It all worked out the way it was intended in the long run!-- Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 21:33, 19 November 2020 (UTC)

Nosferatu (band) stuff

Hi Ponyo, per my talk page, it looks like Aces High 1945 wants to get legal action on behalf of the band to try to get the section concerning "The Nosferatu" removed from Nosferatu (band), even though "The Nosferatu" was clearly formed by the band's former members and has sources to back that formation up. :/ AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 16:12, 20 November 2020 (UTC)

While they are entirely free to pursue their legal options, they cannot continue to edit the article while the case (potential or otherwise) plays out. I've blocked the account.-- Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 22:05, 23 November 2020 (UTC)

Did you mean WP:NOTHERE

I'm not sure the editor will know what "nothere" means. Also, you said "temporarily" but the block is indef. I know "indef" doesn't mean "forever" but well it is confusing. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 23:30, 25 November 2020 (UTC)

The "nothere" block template automatically sets the block to indef, so when I messed up the template it defaulted to temporary. All fixed now, so thanks for the heads up! As an aside, given the content of their deleted contribs, I have my doubts that this editor will comprehend any block message, regardless of its wording.-- Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 23:38, 25 November 2020 (UTC)

You are welcome. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 23:44, 25 November 2020 (UTC)

This user is back at it with his lawsuit soapboxing.

User:Joann Norman Does he need to be blocked per WP:NOTHERE? - Best regards, Steve ^talk _contribs 04:14, 28 November 2020 (UTC)

(talk page watcher)  Done --Deepfriedokra (talk) 12:18, 28 November 2020 (UTC)

Actually, I think he is a she. --Deepfriedokra (talk)

Thanks Deepfriedokra. I took care of some additional cleanup as well.-- Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 21:03, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – December 2020

News and updates for administrators from the past month (November 2020).

Administrator changes

Andrwsc • Anetode • GoldenRing • JzG • LinguistAtLarge • Nehrams2020

Interface administrator changes

Izno

Guideline and policy news

• There is a request for comment in progress to either remove T3 (duplicated and hardcoded instances) as a speedy deletion criterion or eliminate its seven-day waiting period.

Technical news

• Voting for proposals in the 2021 Community Wishlist Survey, which determines what software the Wikimedia Foundation's Community Tech team will work on next year, will take place from 8 December through 21 December. In particular, there are sections regarding administrators and anti-harassment.

Arbitration

• Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee Elections is open to eligible editors until Monday 23:59, 7 December 2020 UTC. Please review the candidates and, if you wish to do so, submit your choices on the voting page.

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:37, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

Gibby MacDonald

Have you seen Gibby MacDonald? My gut is saying it's Atomic Meltdown. Same articles, same disruption. Sro23 (talk) 22:12, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

Well spotted! Block updated and tagged.-- Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 22:22, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

New sockpuppet for Tariq afflaq

They're back as Tariq afflaq186379 at Talk:Zeno_of_Citium pursuing their ethnicity claim. Teishin (talk) 14:11, 5 December 2020 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Looks like they've been here all along, they even created one of the accounts that got blocked. I don't know how you can get more WP:DUCKY than that. Special:Log/Tariq_afflaq186379 davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 17:12, 5 December 2020 (UTC) Update I stand corrected, this quacks even louder: Special:Log/Tariq_afflaq. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 17:16, 5 December 2020 (UTC) Not to be confused with Aflac#The_Aflac_Duck davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 17:19, 5 December 2020 (UTC)

Thanks to you both. I've blocked the account and updated the SPI.-- Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 19:24, 5 December 2020 (UTC)

And another one: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/109.177.89.178 Teishin (talk) 12:32, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

User:82.49.121.201

Hi, could you block (again) the IP 82.49.121.201 (talk · contribs)? After the end of your block he returned with the same edits, look also at my report on WP:AIV, thank you--Luke Stark 96 (talk) 22:45, 6 December 2020 (UTC)

School cat rollbacks

Hi Ponyo. Hope all is well and thanks for the mass rollback of school categories added by Dualipa95. Much appreciated. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 20:13, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

I spot checked a bunch of them, and none met WP:BLPCAT. Hopefully they'll read through the info we provided.-- Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 20:18, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

Hi again. I don't think it's sunk in, and now they're not bothering to log in either, based on this and this. Thanks. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 20:56, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

I saw them popping up as an IP and blocked their account for a week for socking. If you see them doing this again, please let me know and I'll come up with another plan. Thanks for keeping an eye on this, Lugnuts.-- Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 16:41, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

No problem - I've got several of the articles on my watchlist to keep an eye on for WP:CATVER issues, just incase. And thank you for doing the block. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 17:18, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

CSD removed

I know it's not A7, but there was no tag for a non notable disaster, so I chose the most similar one to the disaster. The fires haven't done much damage either. --a gd fan (talk) 23:41, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

If there's no applicable tag, it means that it's not eligible for CSD.-- Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 23:44, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

Hi great friend

hello check your mail inbox please Kelvin Jasper12 (talk) 15:35, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

Please I am pleading for reconsideration

Dear Wikipedia great admins and super moderators,

I am writing to make an apology for violating the rules and regulations of Wikipedia.

With no pride and haughty temperament, I have admitted wholly with my humble self that I have gone against the terms and conditions of Wikipedia. I offer my profound humble apology to the whole staff of Wikipedia for what I have done.

On this day (11 December 2020) notification bumped up on my screen and I found out that my websites; xclusivepop.com and xclusivesongs.com have been flagged and blacklisted. Honestly, I have no grumbles and I have admitted this's all I deserved for I violated the rules guiding Wikipedia by creating multiple accounts and involving in spams.

Please accept my deepest apologies for my mistake in regard to multiple accounts.

It was not my intention to create such an awkward and embarrassing situation for Wikipedia. My aim is to be part of Wikipedia communities that will contribute, not to cause damages.

In a humble apology, I plead the whole staff of Wikipedia to consider giving me a second chance and remove my website from the blacklist. I promise I shall remain ever obedient consistently so to give out a genuine and genius result to the world. I will be engulfed with pleasure if my request and apology are granted.

Please feel free to let me know your thoughts and concerns over this matter.

Sincerely,

Desmond Afam. Desmond Afam130 (talk) 20:22, 13 December 2020 (UTC)