Jump to content

User talk:Ponyo

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Ponyo (talk | contribs) at 00:06, 20 December 2014 (→Julia Voth: + sig). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Welcome to my talk page. Click here to leave me a message.

If you have come here about a page I deleted, you will probably find the explanation here; if that does not answer your question, click the link just above to leave me a message. Please mention the name of the page, and sign your post with four "tilde" characters ~~~~ so that I know who you are.

If I have left a message on your talk page, please reply there; I am watching it.

If you leave a message here I will usually reply here, so please click the 'watch' tab at the top of your page in order to add my talk page to your watchlist.



Mateus Televisa 2

Hello. He warned only that Mateus Televisa has returned. I do not know where to go in these cases, your puppet is evident.--McVeigh / talk 20:45, 30 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Noted and blocked, thank you. --Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 21:02, 30 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hello again. Mateus returned, your new account is: Matheus Rosário Sales.--McVeigh / talk 12:32, 1 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I've blocked the account. In the future, please don't tag the account as a blocked sock unless it has actually been blocked. {{Template:sockpuppet|username}} is the correct template to use if you see another suspected sock pop up.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 17:22, 3 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Investigation

Do you mind taking a look at this? It's been close to a week and it has yet to revive input. Your help would greatly be appreciated. AcidSnow (talk) 04:47, 4 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi AcidSnow, checkuser isn't helpful in this case as the master account and socks are  Stale. --Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 18:18, 5 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
What do you mean by "stale"? AcidSnow (talk) 19:53, 5 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The technical data that the checkuser tool draws from is only kept for a limited duration after which we can no longer view the data when running a check (i.e. the data is "stale"). In other words, the checkuser tool no longer has the information I need to compare an old account's technical information against that of a suspected sock. The reviewing admin or SPI Clerk will need to rely on behavioural evidence to determine whether there's a connection to the master. --Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 20:04, 5 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I see, thank you for clarifying. I belive Middayexpress explains the behavioral relations. AcidSnow (talk) 22:26, 5 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
There's more behavioral evidence here. The Swedish ips, editing times, writing style, similar arguments, attempts to remove the same particular paragraph from the same page, and very nichey interests are all concordant. Middayexpress (talk) 14:26, 6 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

New Wikipedia Library Accounts Now Available (November 2014)

Hello Wikimedians!

The TWL OWL says sign up today :)

The Wikipedia Library is announcing signups today for, free, full-access accounts to published research as part of our Publisher Donation Program. You can sign up for:

  • DeGruyter: 1000 new accounts for English and German-language research. Sign up on one of two language Wikipedias:
  • Fold3: 100 new accounts for American history and military archives
  • Scotland's People: 100 new accounts for Scottish genealogy database
  • British Newspaper Archive: expanded by 100+ accounts for British newspapers
  • Highbeam: 100+ remaining accounts for newspaper and magazine archives
  • Questia: 100+ remaining accounts for journal and social science articles
  • JSTOR: 100+ remaining accounts for journal archives

Do better research and help expand the use of high quality references across Wikipedia projects: sign up today!
--The Wikipedia Library Team 23:25, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

You can host and coordinate signups for a Wikipedia Library branch in your own language. Please contact Ocaasi (WMF).
This message was delivered via the Mass Message to the Book & Bytes recipient list.

Not again

How dare you! HOW DARE YOU! HOW DARE YOU BROKE YOU'RE PROMISE!!! This is absolutely the LAST time that you blocked me! I'm THROUGH with you! 68.170.223.134 (talk) 01:06, 7 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I'll block you this time. Bishonen | talk 01:59, 7 November 2014 (UTC).[reply]
Thanks Bishonen. MarnetteD|Talk 02:13, 7 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Yes Ponyo. How dare you protect Wikipedia from those who are WP:NOTHERE to build an encyclopedia. It is so outrageous that I must present you with:
The Admin's Barnstar
Many thanks for all you do in so many areas (including your checkuser work) here at WikiP MarnetteD|Talk 02:13, 7 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
You've come through a lot for me too, Ponyo, and I am grateful. Lotta times I've said, "Man, is anybody going to catch this creep?" and you've already blocked them. Whackamole! Cyphoidbomb (talk) 06:29, 7 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks everyone! These messages, combined with the elderly gentleman on the streetcorner I just saw greet his equally elderly lady friend with a kiss to each cheek and one on the bridge of her nose before they walked away together hand in hand, just made my day. And it's only 8:30 AM (PST)!--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 16:30, 7 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

User:Sikander.alis

Could you please look Baloch people and other pages that were recently edited by this user. His/her edits were deleted in the past (3 november) and the pages were semi protected because of his/her edits with ip. This time, he/she added the same contents with his/her account. 176.54.62.144 (talk) 21:31, 7 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, all taken care of now! --Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 21:48, 7 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

YGM

Dennis - 2¢ 18:06, 10 November 2014 (UTC) ...and replied.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 22:15, 10 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

BabyFirst

You previously reverted a sock edit on this page and now another account has made the same exact edit. Because I have a COI, I am not suppose to revert per WP:COI. I was wondering if you could do the honors once more. CorporateM (Talk) 04:15, 11 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The account is now blocked. There's a bit more info at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/EstebanJals.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 17:05, 12 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Re.Continued issues with BLP policy:

I guess u haven't noticed the edit summary I have given while editing Kasthuri (actress), expanding article with the reference already given. Whatever I added to her page comes from [[1]] an interview she had given to a Malayalam magazine, Mangalam, which was already added by me itself. I just expanded the articles based on that reference. I wish if u could read Malayalam.

Same thing happened with Abhirami (actress) which I explained there itself. U raise same doubts there also and when I clarified it, u realized. The contents still lies there. Make sure to go through those details thoroughly before blaming me.Jai98 (talk) 04:34, 11 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I've replied on your talk page, where the conversation started. --Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 17:06, 12 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Active SPI clerks

Ponyo, some of the clerks listed as active haven't been active in quite some time. Some haven't even been active at Wikipedia. I don't know what criteria we use for moving a clerk from active to temporarily inactive. Obviously, if the clerk requests the move, that makes it easy, but otherwise? I believe that Rschen used to deal with this, but now that he's inactive, I don't know if anyone has filled in that vacuum. I suppose it's not a big deal, but it gives the false impression that we have a lot more clerking going on than we actually do. The editors who haven't been active in some time are: Mark Arsten, Shirik, and Someguy1221. This is obviously not meant as crticism of any of the clerks. I understand there are many reasons why one slows down at Wikipedia, and that's fine. I'm not as active as I'd like, mainly because of my personal life and because clerking is hard, but I try to do at least some work at SPI frequently enough so I don't feel too guilty.

Any suggestions?--Bbb23 (talk) 13:51, 12 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I generally go through and move them if they haven't done anything at SPI within a month. I didn't do that until I became a full clerk though. And yeah, while I'm still semi-active elsewhere on Wikipedia, I'm not at SPI... right now life is busy. --Rschen7754 14:26, 12 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I'll wait to hear from Ponyo (or anyone else) and then do the moves if there's no objection. Do you notify them, Rschen7754, when you do it?--Bbb23 (talk) 15:24, 12 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
No objections from me. It sure would be nice to have a few more active clerks on board (even if it's just to archive the closed reports). Active clerks are worth their weight in gold right now!--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 17:14, 12 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I generally do notify them, as a courtesy. Some of the trainees who haven't actually clerked in months should probably be removed, but that's usually a CU task. --Rschen7754 02:26, 13 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, everyone, I will take care of this, but it won't be today because my time is too limited and I want to recheck my analysis before doing anything.--Bbb23 (talk) 02:07, 14 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
 Done.--Bbb23 (talk) 01:59, 15 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@Bbb23: While you're at it, once User:Yunshui (or any of the other clerks) are granted CU, they are removed as SPI clerks. For the new ArbCom, it's usually granted sometime between Jimbo's appointments and January 1. Yunshui, if you're reading this, congratulations/sympathies! --Rschen7754 02:08, 17 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hehe, how am I going to know when it happens? When you say Jimbo's appointments, do you mean like his appointments with the dentist or his hair stylist? :-) Seriously, I have no idea what Jimbo's appointments means.--Bbb23 (talk) 02:12, 17 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
It's more of a formality these days, but the election results aren't official until Jimbo says so on his talk page. Following that, an arbitrator will make a request on Meta. Generally the page to watch is Template:Functionaries, though sometimes stewards don't update it. --Rschen7754 02:14, 17 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I put the template on my watchlist. I refuse to put Jimbo's talk page on my watchlist. If others want to contribute to the chaos there, that's their business, but it makes me squirm. You'd think this wouldn't all happen smack in the middle of the holiday season. Whatever happened to family and breaks and good cheer?--Bbb23 (talk) 02:27, 17 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@Bbb23: Well, I imagine the outgoing Arbs are feeling pretty cheerful.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 18:08, 17 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Good point. I think NYB is feeling positively giddy.--Bbb23 (talk) 01:54, 18 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Suspicious activity

A user appears to blatantly socking on the Sub-Saharan Africa page. I made it clear in the talk page why I view it as such. Shall I make a proper report though? Thank you for your time. AcidSnow (talk) 20:48, 13 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If you believe there is socking occurring at the article, please do start an SPI outlining the evidence. I couldn't parse who was being accused of what based on the talk page link.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 20:56, 13 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I will make a report tomorrow. Anyways, Vetrisimino0 is currently abusing his talk page privilege by making multipul unblock requests, making attacks against users, and accusations of spamming despite all ready being blocked as a confirmed sock. Do you mind looking at this? AcidSnow (talk) 22:52, 18 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Looks like Bbb23 already took care of it. He has the amazing ability to be everywhere at once!--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 16:38, 19 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, thank you as well. AcidSnow (talk) 23:11, 19 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The seemingly universal presence of Bbb23 reminds me sometimes of The Masque of Anarchy:
And he wore a kingly crown;
And in his grasp a sceptre shone;
On his brow this mark I saw -
'I AM GOD, AND KING, AND LAW!'
- Sitush (talk) 23:34, 19 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Your interpretation is so much more poetic than mine. I picture this guy. ""Faster than Twinkle. More powerful than The God King. Able to block multiple accounts in a single push of a button...It's Bbb23!"--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 23:39, 19 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Haha, this is some good stuff! AcidSnow (talk) 23:41, 19 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Bbb is certainly more sensible than the God-King. But then I guess most of us regulars are. - Sitush (talk) 23:44, 19 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Gee, others talking "behind my back" and saying nice things; how refreshing!--Bbb23 (talk) 01:05, 20 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A weird detour from Masque of Anarchy: a BBC (not Bbb) report of last year said that our Anarchism article was among the top ten most disrupted articles here. Presumably it suffered greatly from WP:IAR? <g> - Sitush (talk) 01:10, 20 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

User:MonaPisser

Very gratifying catch, my little pony. I have been a busybody at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/MehulWB; if you'd rather make the note yourself, please just overwrite mine. Bishonen | talk 21:46, 13 November 2014 (UTC).[reply]

The note is perfectly fine. It's good to be busy, it keeps one out of trouble no? Except this little one of course, completely incorrigible!--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 22:09, 13 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Unless there are outing concerns, can you identify MonaPisser's puppet-master, which will make it easier to spot-and-stop the disruption earlier the next time. We wondered about the puppeteer here right from the account's emergence but, alas, there were too many plausible candidates. Abecedare (talk) 22:17, 13 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I have no idea who the master is. The check revealed a truck-load of proxies with the occasional blocked throw-away account/IP popping up. I can't link to the IPs (most of who's edits are sitting in our various abuse filters) and the account name that popped up is a case of WP:OUTING that's been suppressed. In this case it's better to just block and ignore.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 22:37, 13 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the response. The silver lining is that the disruptive conduct is easy to recognize and is not allowed to effect article content. The dark cloud is that it ends up wasting editors' time and good faith, but arguably that is cost worth paying for wikipedia's open editing norms. Cheers. Abecedare (talk) 22:59, 13 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

IP hopping

Bonjour! You recently blocked 172.56.11.229 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log), an IP near the range of the IP has appeared 172.56.10.232 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log), editing the same topics and they maybe connected. Best, ///EuroCarGT 02:53, 14 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It was actually Acroterion who blocked 172.56.11.229. They do appear to be hopping around, though I don't see any related IPs editing today. Let me know if they pop up and I can take a look at semi-protection or rangeblock options.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 17:24, 14 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Alrighty, just to add 172.56.11.204 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) (you blocked), got them a bit mixed up! ///EuroCarGT 03:40, 15 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Jess Greenberg article

Hello,

I was wondering if you think semi-protection could be obtained for the Jess Greenberg article. Some would say that she is somewhat controversial, and therefore I fear that the article is in greater danger than others of being vandalized by unregistered users. Thanks in advance for your thoughts, and I appreciate the swift action you have taken to restore normalcy to that article more than once. Dontreader (talk) 22:06, 14 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'm watching it closely. If there is an uptick in vandalism or a recurrence of the blatant BLP violations we've seen previously I won't hesitate to semi-protect it, but I don't think it's quite at the level needing protection. Yet. --Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 22:40, 14 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, thank you very much, and have a nice day. Dontreader (talk) 23:07, 14 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Wiki-senetor

I've tried archiving this twice, and each time the script malfunctions. Can you take a look or point me to someone who can look at it? Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:10, 15 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) @Bbb23: Try adding <big> and </big> around the "14 November 2014" header. Other cases have that, but this one does not. EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 18:19, 15 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the look-see, but after adding that mark-up, it still fails.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:32, 15 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Crap... thought I'd give it a shot. Oh well. EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 18:43, 15 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I fixed it! You were on the right line, EvergreenFir. That section header had four equal signs instead of the required five. I've now archived it. I've also broken a "rule" because another case was added that I closed but I didn't want to leave it for another poor clerk. I'm inordinately pleased with myelf. --Bbb23 (talk) 22:04, 15 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Bbb23: Sweet! I'll take partial credit, even if not deserved :P EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 00:58, 16 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

ACC request

Hi Ponyo, could you please take a look at this ACC request. Thanks, Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 10:04, 17 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I've left a note there. Good to see you back!--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 16:54, 17 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

ISIS editor: possible sock-puppet

Yesterday a new editor made some controversial reverts in this article, going against consensus, and there has been quite a storm. Many of the reverts show bias towards the topic (in its favour) sanitising this terrorist group, as some editors have pointed out, and I note from the editor's userpage that they started editing in June this year but seem quite sophisticated at editing. One editor pointed out that the first entry on the editor's userpage looks a little strange. This may be quite innocent, but could this be a sock-puppet who has opened a new account? I can provide diffs from the long thread on the ISIS Talk page if needed. ~ P123ct1 (talk) 10:34, 17 November 2014 (UTC) (ISIS editor)[reply]

P123ct1, if you have evidence that the user may be abusing multiple accounts, please start an investigation at WP:SPI. If you're unsure of the master account, just use the suspected sock's name to open the case.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 21:55, 17 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. ~ P123ct1 (talk) 09:54, 18 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

REVDEL request

Requesting REVDEL on this edit per WP:REVDEL#2. Thank you! EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 21:48, 17 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

'Tis gone.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 21:53, 17 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

FYI

Hey. I'm messaging in regards to this person of whom we have dealt with before in User:Lilk846 but now in the form of this IP. I believe you may have blocked this IP on September 30 and the person started re-editing on October 30 as soon as the one month block expired. The person went straight back to the same style of disruptive edits that got him/her blocked in the first place and has been reverted many times already since returning. Also, the continued addition of this stats table on Shabazz Napier has been reverted many times in the past by not just me and every time, this person continues to re-add over and over again. Maybe you want to take a look, would another block be warrant? Isn't this still block evading? Cheers. DaHuzyBru (talk) 09:59, 18 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I've reblocked the IP for three months. Thanks for letting me know DaHuzyBru!--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 16:44, 18 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sure you are sick of this but check this nonsense out on Kara5386. This person just wont stop, it's rather comical. DaHuzyBru (talk) 16:15, 20 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Megalyn Echikunwoke

Stop! Megalyn Echikunwoke is a High Negro! --114.45.113.91 (talk) 17:17, 18 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Responded at Talk:Megalyn Echikunwoke#Ethnicity and descent. --Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 18:37, 18 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Johnson103

Hi: I fixed up the source this editor added at Jannie Chan and swung by his talkpage to thank him for rustling one up, and I see you already blocked him temporarily for resuming adding unsourced ethnicities. I note that he also added a source at Roy Chiu, although in that case it's a Baidu page that looks utterly unreliable. I can't read either source to evaluate the accuracy of his translations, and I can't even find the relevant sentence in the academic paper cited at the Jannie Chan page, but he does seem to have finally twigged. Rather than my chiming in with an additional note, I put it to you as blocking admin what to say to him about this. Yngvadottir (talk) 22:59, 18 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This edit from today was the one that convinced me that we were in IDIDNTHEARTHAT territory. I could try explaining again, though the messages so far have failed to stick and they have yet to communicate with anyone, anywhere, at anytime. They've made over a thousand such edits in only a two month window, the clean-up time is daunting. --Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 23:10, 18 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Who do we know who can read Chinese and evaluate that one possibly valid source at Jannie Chan? I took it on faith the quotation was accurate, and it is an academic paper, albeit one with an axe to grind. On the other hand the Roy Chiu one proved as inadmissible as it had looked. If the Jannie Chan is in fact faked, then this editor's work does need to be cleaned up. Otherwise, he has proved teachable. Yngvadottir (talk) 23:47, 18 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I admire your good faith. That being said, when BLP violations are being added to hundreds of articles I need more than the occasional adherence to policy to consider unblocking. The amount of potential damage here is significant. Category:User_zh-N may help find a native speaker to evaluate the reference. Philg88, who has a zh-5 userbox, may also be able help. --Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 00:01, 19 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, I wasn't suggesting unblock. I'm hoping he's shown he can learn, but it's a slim hope; he's looking rather SPAish, which doesn't bode well. Have asked Philg88 at his talk page. Yngvadottir (talk) 00:19, 19 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Okie dokie. --Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 00:27, 19 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Since that source does pass muster, I went ahead and thanked him for it in a follow-up note, also repeating about the need to add a source in the initial edit and about the need for it to be reliable. It felt mean not to. Please feel free to ping me to assist if the editor doesn't learn and there winds up being a need for a big clean-up. Yngvadottir (talk) 20:31, 19 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Will do, thanks Yngvadottir.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 20:36, 19 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Is it okay that I created a new entry for this? ( This is a ban policy question)

(ec)Hi, this is about List of terrorist attacks in 2014. I understand the original edit regarding an attack in Belfast was edited by a user who was evading a ban, and you reverted it as per the policy for banned users.


I created a new entry (with a different source) for the same attack.[[2] I used nothing of the user's original edit.

That wouldn't violate the ban policy, would it? I just want to make sure. If it is, you can revert me. Discuss-Dubious (t/c) 17:03, 19 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Discuss-Dubious: There's no problem in creating an article on a subject deleted under G5 speedy deletion, assuming you stand by the accuracy of the material.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 17:15, 19 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

hi

'hi, I just saw your comment and want to request you that please do not co relate my identity with other writers.I am just new one to write at wiki and commenting on the 3RR. All writers are not debating the issue but reverting the contents of each other. Reverting the article by one user is not appreciable but same act has been done by other writers. If my comments on such matter is wrong, then i am sorry to say that this is not the way to reach on consensus. If someone is wrong then he seems everybody as wrong as he is. ThanksRoyalGurjar (talk) 18:28, 19 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

When you create an account in order to immediately jump in to a contentious topic, and on your second edit state "I & other writers was regularly observing your and other writers activity specially on Gurjar article, then I certainly will "co relate" your identity with other writers since you have admitted it yourself. --Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 18:43, 19 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

May I trouble you to please take a peek...

Hi Ponyo, there's some weird editing coming from both Rigby77181 and John123521. There are weird article moves with no discussion, in some cases, clear mistakes, like moving Cartoon Network to CN (U.S. TV channel) and then moving it back again, or moving to "U.S" with no closing period. John expressed support for a proposed move made by Rigby, so of course I'm thinking sock/meatpuppetry. Also it reminds me of a user who kept nominating TV-related articles for deletion or moving them, but I just can't remember his name right now, which I know isn't helpful. Let me brainstorm on this... (time elapsed) Ah, Finealt is who I was thinking of, but I'm not confident it's him. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 23:46, 19 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure who the sockmaster is, but the Rigby account is certainly Mabel181, so I've blocked them for socking. John123521 is technically Red X Unrelated.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 00:12, 20 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
You da best! Thank you! Cyphoidbomb (talk) 00:13, 20 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
If you have a chance can you undo the disruptive page moves where necessary? Or maybe another kind Ponyo Page Watcher? I'm outtahere in about 10 minutes. --Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 00:15, 20 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The overwhelming page moves boggle my mind--it's an ADD nightmare--but I'll do my best. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 00:34, 20 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, come to think of it, I think I'll need an assist from @Jackmcbarn: since he protected Discovery Kids (U.S. TV channel) from page move. Jack, might you please move this back to Discovery Family since that's what it was before the pernicious child futzed with it? Thanks, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 00:41, 20 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@Cyphoidbomb: I see that there's already a move request open on its talk page. Would it be okay to let it finish first? Jackmcbarn (talk) 15:54, 20 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@Jackmcbarn: Sure. I figured since it was obvious vandalism the move request could be expedited/bypassed, but whatever you think is best. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:01, 20 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

SPI

I think this SPI may have been lost in the cracks.. Pearljambandaid Hell in a Bucket (talk) 01:01, 20 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Priya Anand

Hi, I was editing the name from Anand to Priya, because Anand is an male name and Priya is an female name. In India, the last name will be either father's name or family name. We usually referred with First name rather than last name.Vaidyasr (talk) 13:21, 20 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I understand Vaidyasr, however the Manual of Style for biographies on Wikipedia call for the surname of the individual to be used after the initial use of the full name in the lead. This is so that there is consistency across all articles. Wikiproject India endorses the use of surnames outside of the lead here. If you believe an exception to the standard should be applied in this particular article you need to find consensus for the deviation from the guideline. Perhaps you could post a note at Wikipedia talk:Noticeboard for India-related topics to see if you can get consensus for the change. Otherwise, the article should follow the Manual of Style.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 17:07, 20 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

YGM

Dennis - 2¢ 23:48, 20 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Backatcha.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 00:17, 21 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Help please!!!

Hello Ponyo, I have been being attacked by a troll in Lusophone wikipedia, and now he started attacking me here.

See:

Thanks, P.S: sorry for bad English, I speak only the basics of this language, Marcos dias de oliveira (talk) 03:33, 21 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Marcos dias de oliveira, normally we don't protect user's talk pages, however as it is obvious that you are being targeted by a disruptive user, and as you rarely use your en-wiki account, I have protected your talk page for 2 weeks and you user page indefinitely. I will also watchlist your talk and extend protection if the disruption continues. I hope this provides you with some relief.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 17:43, 21 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, Marcos dias de oliveira (talk) 18:12, 21 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Mamaluigi2 is back as Frietjessa

From the exact same edits, the first from Frietjessa and the second from Lara_Maigue (confirmed sock of Mamaluigi2) https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Rovio_Entertainment&diff=634749424&oldid=634749337

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Rovio_Entertainment&diff=631016273&oldid=630804789 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Frmorrison (talk • contribs)

Yup, there's a truckload of new socks. I'll work through the blocks and tags this morning.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 17:50, 21 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock request on hold

I have placed an unblock request at User talk:IloveU4ever on hold, as I can't see any clear evidence of sockpuppetry, which is the reason you gave for the block. In your block log reason you gave a link to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Mischief7/Archive, but there is no mention of IloveU4ever on that page. IloveU4ever's edits to Ahn Sahng-hong are not particularly similar to those on the same article by Nellyhan, and most other editing by IloveU4ever does not remotely resemble that by either Nellyhan or Mischief7: IloveU4ever's main editing interest is botany, a subject which as far as I can see has never been touched on by either of the other accounts. it is clear that IloveU4ever is acquainted with Vanessaliam, who has edited botanical articles, and who (rightly or wrongly) is blocked as a sockpuppet, but I really can't see the combined editing history of the various accounts as suggesting that they are all the same person. Can you let me know what persuaded you that IloveU4ever is a sockpuppet? (By email if you don't want to make the evidence public.) The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 16:27, 21 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

OK, thanks a lot for the clarification. I'll decline the unblock request. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 20:21, 21 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Vanessaliam

I completed the work and closed the case. I then merged Mischief7 into it. Everything went fine except the two closed cases that had not yet been archived at Vanessa didn't appear, even though the edits were all properly restored. The merge stuff drives me crazy. I even have a cheat sheet for this sort of scenario, although I can't remember for sure whether I've done it with the mergee not being archived. In any event, I manually reinserted the material. If you understand what I should have done differently, please let me know.

Separate question. Take a look at the bogus report at the bottom. It was a ridiculous filing. I've closed it, but should we keep it for historical purposes, or should I remove it entirely?

Best.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:12, 22 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Meh, I would just remove it as a bogus filing as it has nothing to do with the Vanessaliam case. I'm a bit of a hoarder when it comes to data, but in this case there is little value in keeping the report. --Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 03:11, 23 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
 Done. Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 05:55, 23 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Tsholofelo

Ponyo, someone made a new redirect Tsholofelo, and I renamed Tsholofelo (album) over that redirect. I noticed that you had move-protected it, so I feel you should know in case there is some problem I don't know about on this page. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 06:10, 23 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, thanks for the note.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 16:03, 23 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Katie Henry

Based on the circumstances of the AN thread, I think there's reasonable cause to CU User:Oldpeople330, if you haven't done so already. NE Ent 10:32, 24 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Oldpeople is likely just a throw-away vandal account; I doubt we'll be seeing them again. Katie Henry/Kiko4564, on the other hand, mistakenly appears to think Wikipedia just can't survive without their vandalism and sock-tagging skills. --Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 20:52, 24 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oh yea, agree, wasn't sure if it made sense to indef it so it couldn't be reactivated later. NE Ent 23:45, 25 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I've added them to my 10,969 page watchlist in case that happens. Because I hate myself that much. --Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 23:52, 25 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

PPdd's Sockpuppets

Hi Ponyo, you wrote on my talk page that I shouldn't be modifying sockpuppet tags. Apologies - I didn't know that only admins should be doing that. Who can I notify that the changes are warranted? The edit I made on user:DanieliM was changing {sock|PPdd|confirmed} to {sock|PPdd|blocked} which I believe is the correct syntax and as for user:ParkSehJik I think it's clear that it's also PPdd based on the common edit histories (if it's not clear, I can provide more evidence if necessary). I also believe the current sockpuppet of PPdd is user:FloraWilde / 50.247.76.51. Same manic rapid edit posting style, same interest in alternative medicine, and most importantly the same adding of unsourced fluff information to the Eric Diesel article. I tried to do a SPI a while back on this one but there wasn't enough evidence at the time apparently. Regards, Lampuser (talk) 07:05, 25 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The tags were added by a former Chekuser, they should not be changed as you don't know what evidence the Checkuser used in order to determine which tag to add. At the end of the day, DanieliM was blocked three and a half years ago. There is no benefit whatsoever in messing with the sock tags now.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 19:03, 25 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hits hits socking

Hi Ponyo, thanks for the CheckUser work on the Hits hits --> Chasbo123 --> WikiEditor2016 stuff. I'm curious what the rationale was for not indeffing Hits hits, since he created two socks and used IPs to promote his POV. I'm not challenging or questioning your decision, only curious for my own edification. Thanks! Oh, and since I opened an RfC at Talk:Phineas and Ferb (season 4) based on the assumption that there were multiple users arguing Position A, when in fact it was Hits hits and his socks, what is the appropriate way to treat that RfC? Let it run its course and look out for socks in the meantime? Or close it because it was created under a false assumption? Much obliged, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:48, 25 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Blocking the sock master for a week is pretty standard for first time offenses, unless they are a purely vandalism account, and is the typical duration used by Clerks when closing SPIs. This is (generally) bumped up to a month on the second offense, followed (often) by indef if the socking concerns continue. Hits hits has 500+ edits and has been editing since March 2013. You have to give the editor a chance to learn from their errors and correct their behaviour when the block expires. If they sock in an attempt to gain advantage whenever they find themselves in a conflict with other editors, then it's time to indef. I'm not sure the best way forward on the RfC. Perhaps just strike the sock edits? --Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 18:58, 25 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Good notes. Thanks for the feedback! Cyphoidbomb (talk) 19:10, 25 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ponyo! During the heat of this case, two Florida IPs (including admitted IP to account convert Chasbo123) were editing POV in favor of binding various Phineas eps in S4. We now have a third addition with 107.72.162.80, who seems to now have a dog in the race with these edits. Not asking for comment, but these edits all seem related to me. Thanks, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 05:05, 1 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It's certainly quaking loudly, so I've blocked the IP for 2 weeks.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 23:34, 1 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Ponyo. Does the sockmaster bear any culpability here? That is, if we know user Hits hits was socking to promote his POV, and he keeps trying to influence the discussion through sockpuppetry, shouldn't the main account be sanctioned in response to the continued disruption? Danke, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 03:04, 2 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I forgot the master wasn't already indef'ed. I've reblocked for 1 month. I'll watchlist the target talk page/RfC as well.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 18:50, 2 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks friend! He's using another IP at the RfC, 107.72.162.93. I asked him to please let the RfC run its course. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:54, 2 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, I saw that, but it was in the short window between the last block and the new one, so I just let it go. --Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 19:12, 2 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Here's a new one: 155500oo. Same dude? Cyphoidbomb (talk) 22:42, 2 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
It is. Feel free to strike their comments.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 22:57, 2 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Page deletion - R. K. Raghavan (CBI director) Comment

Hi, I noticed that you have deleted the page R. K. Raghavan (CBI director). I just did Tag & Assess for it a few days ago and thought that it was a good page. We definitely need an article on this subject. Can you please reinstate it? Cheers, Kautilya3 (talk) 00:42, 27 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The article was created by a sock account contrary to their block and was deleted under the relevant criteria. If you believe that the subject is notable please consider creating the article; there is nothing barring creation by unrelated editors.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 00:46, 27 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Suspected Sock Puppetry - Gmisa3

Hi,

Just wanted to reach out to you regarding the suspected sock puppetry against Gmisa3. I have a secondary account. I created Angularjs as a 2nd account since I would like to keep my real name private. Gmisa3 is my real name and would like to use Angularjs moving forward. I tagged the relation on the Angularjs user page. Dragndropmaster is my co-worker and we are on the same IP network most of the time. Sometimes we share an iPad device. Montecristolady is not known to me and has nothing to do with my account. Thank you so much for your consideration. Gmisa3 (talk)Gmisa3 — Preceding undated comment added 01:52, 28 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This information belongs on the SPI case page. You should note that your claim that Dragndropmaster is a coworker isn't relevant - if we cannot tell you apart technically or behaviourally, you will be treated as a single account. See WP:COWORKER.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 16:13, 28 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ponyo,

Thank you for your reply and this information. Moving forward, I will make sure this does not happen again. I will inform Dragndropmaster not to make any edits when we are on the same network. This has been a learning experience for me and I apologize for this incident. I did not intend to abuse wikipedia in any way. Thank you for your consideration. Gmisa3 (talk) 23:45, 28 November 2014 (UTC)Gmisa3[reply]

IP editors

Hi. [IP user] reverts all my edits without a clear reason. Actually he wants the articles to have the materials that he like and adds unnecessary details to articles. Take a look at this history, I explained all of my edits, also I removed two useless template and add normal templates that we at the bottom of the page. What's the purpose of having such huge templates that call the people like "Her Imperial Majesty Queen Mother Nurbanu", what necessary information is in these templates? the For example, this one. I changed Hurrem Haseki to Hurrem Slutan the usual way that Turkish people call their sultanas and removed Devletşah Hatun's name from the template because she wasn't a queen mother as her son wasn't sultan. I also removed Template:Ottoman Dynasty from Devletşah Hatun's article and I also wrote my reasons. But except discussing the issue, he changes the materials without undoing and behave like a scared mouse. His edits are also very similar to User:68.100.172.139 who also made vandalism. Keivan.fTalk 18:05, 29 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

He finally discussed but if we had any problem in the future I'll ask for your help. Keivan.fTalk 19:41, 29 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
He seems to be not listening to my statements. Keivan.fTalk 09:50, 1 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keivan.f, if you find yourself in a content dispute with another editor, please follow dispute resolution. --Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 23:29, 1 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This week's article for improvement (week 49, 2014)

The Mexico–United States border spans six Mexican states and four U.S. states, with a total length of 3,145 km (1,954 mi).
Hello, Ponyo.

The following is WikiProject Today's articles for improvement's weekly selection:

Mexico–United States border

Previous selections: Tourism in the Caribbean • Military technology

Get involved with the TAFI project! You can...
Posted by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of EuroCarGT (talk) 00:36, 1 December 2014 (UTC) • Opt-out instructions[reply]

SPI opened by sock

Hi Ponyo. I know you are busy, so I apologise for disturbing you, but this is a rather unusual case. Nosophobia is an obvious sock who opened Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/TU-nor just to harass TU-nor, 213.7.22.7 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) and myself. Nosophobia is either a sock of Alexyflemming or of Hadgimarvi. I have also opened Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Alexyflemming regarding Dosiaab, yet another sock of Alexyflemming. IP editor 213.7.22.7 feels harassed by Nosophobia, and this is the reason I contacted you. If you have any time I would appreciate it if you looked into this activity. Needless to say I would fully understand if you don't. Thank you. Δρ.Κ. λόγοςπράξις 19:53, 2 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Dr.K: I've posted the results at the Alexyflemming SPI and deleted the bogus one.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 20:23, 2 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Ponyo. Thank you very much for taking the time out of your busy schedule. I really appreciate your help. Take care. Δρ.Κ. λόγοςπράξις 20:51, 2 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Jacob Zuma

Extend PC time? --George Ho (talk) 09:17, 3 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Thanks for the head's up, as usual.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 19:04, 3 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

REVDEL request - again

Requesting REVDEL on this edit. EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 20:28, 3 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Sorry for the wait, I was giving my wallet a workout whilst Christmas shopping.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 21:08, 3 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 21:12, 3 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Evergreen, what might useful later is to join #wikipedia-en-revdel at The IRC chatroom (by doing /join #wikipedia-en-revdel) that way edits which may be sensitive won't temporarily get more exposure by asking for revision deletion on an admin's talk page. Tutelary (talk) 21:14, 3 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@Tutelary: Thank you! I didn't know there was an IRC chat for that. Haven't used IRC is years... #memories. I'll be sure to use that in the future. Thanks for letting me know about it! EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 21:17, 3 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Need advice on potential sockpuppetry

I apologize for bringing this up here instead of at SPI, but I think I need advice. You recently investigated a sock, 1wikideb1, who was heavily active at Jacques Borker. I recently made an edit there and explained it on the talk page. I was reverted by Wikiwakamickey (talk · contribs), a new user, without any comment. I really don't have any actual evidence of sockpupetry at all, but it seems rather suspicious that someone would, within 30 minutes of their first edit, head directly to an article where a known sockmaster had already edited with multiple accounts. Is this just paranoia on my part, or should I file a report at SPI? NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 21:20, 3 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

User gutted this article, rendering it PROD-fodder, which I have reverted. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 21:51, 3 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@NinjaRobotPirate: Wikiwakamickey is a  Confirmed sock of 1wikideb1, along with Officerclemens (talk · contribs). I've blocked and tagged both accounts.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 21:55, 3 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Frayten

Hi Ponyo, I noticed that you marked the checkuser request on this investigation as Stale for the Bmotbmot (talk · contribs) and Newdod (talk · contribs). However, as Bmotbmot has been indeffed a year ago (by yourself, no less), there is a real danger that Frayten (talk · contribs) is a sockpuppet being used to get around the ban. I realize now that I should have named Bmotbmot as the primary sockpuppet master (and not Frayten), and I apologize for this mix-up. Frayten's recent behaviour of ignoring and blanking other editors' attempts at communication is also reminiscent of the same behaviour that got Bmot banned. Hence I hope you will consider performing the CU on this investigation. _dk (talk) 01:56, 4 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Technical data is only available for a short time and neither Bmotbmot nor Newdod have edited since 2013; there is no way for me to check if there is a technical relation between Frayten and the other socks/master as there is no technical evidence remaining on the older accounts for me to use for comparison (hence "stale"). The case is now being held for a behavioural review by a clerk or admin.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 17:53, 4 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Admirenepal

Hi, it might be worth keeping an eye on the activities of Antsnepal (talk · contribs). Nothing too worrisome as yet but you'll remember how Admirenepal suddenly begins to rack up edits. - Sitush (talk) 14:37, 4 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

That was pretty obvious. I've blocked the account.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 17:44, 4 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. You saved me G-what'ing the things at CSD, too. The service is excellent, as always ;) - Sitush (talk) 18:34, 4 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
It was service with a smile too, though the effect is lost across the interwebs.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 18:49, 4 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thank you for blocking 64.183.48.206. I don't understand these sociopaths. Bob Caldwell CSL (talk) 20:08, 5 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Ponyo. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Malbin210.
Message added 11:25, 6 December 2014 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 11:25, 6 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

User:Gabrielaisler

User:69.174.87.36 recently de-prodded three articles created by User:Gabrielaisler, who you blocked as a sock of User talk:Jillian Hall. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:04, 6 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing much to do here. The IP made the edits weeks ago, and two of the articles now have a valid source and are no longer eligible for BLP PROD. --Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 18:25, 6 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

sockpuppet of Waldemar15

Hi! Maybe Trumplink's account is a sockpuppet of Waldemar15. In es.wikipedia Trumplink's account was locked because it's a sockpuppet of Waldemar15 (Covervisit/Oglesruins/etc etc etc). Regards! --Sofreesopure (talk) 07:24, 7 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This week's article for improvement (week 50, 2014)

Game design is the art of creating rules and mechanics to facilitate interactions between players in a game.
Hello, Ponyo.

The following is WikiProject Today's articles for improvement's weekly selection:

Game design

Previous selections: Mexico–United States border • Tourism in the Caribbean

Get involved with the TAFI project! You can...
Posted by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of EuroCarGT (talk) 00:25, 8 December 2014 (UTC) • Opt-out instructions[reply]

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Nitishkumartn

Hey there. Reporting Special:Contributions/Lahavharkov who has a similar editing pattern with Special:Contributions/Antulezubin. A question, do their edits really need to be reverted? Thanks, Ugog Nizdast (talk) 17:39, 8 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Ugog Nizdast:, It was indeed a sock account and has been blocked. I've reverted their edits as they had a history of adding unsourced categories to articles contrary to WP:BLP. If there are any instances wherein the inclusion of the religious category is supported by reliably sourced content in compliance with WP:BLPCAT / WP:EGRS, please feel free to restore the category.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 23:06, 8 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sanam Saeed Profile Birth Date

hi

the real & exact DOB of the cleberity Sanam Saeed is 2nd February as confirmed by Sanam Saeed real Twitter Account @sanammodysaeed

[img]http://i.imgur.com/ACVI9VL.png[/img]

so kindly help me in editing the accurate information thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rockyleo94 (talk • contribs) 20:02, 8 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

That link is an image of a Tweet, not the tweet itself. As the date is disputed it has been removed from the article entirely until a reliable source is found for verification.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 23:19, 8 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Bitafarhadi

Bitafarhadi has been active at Elam (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) recently. I don't know if there's a case for it or anything.—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 09:52, 11 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like Materialscientist and Kino have nipped it in the bud.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 16:30, 11 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I don't feel like making a new thread, but I just saw the flurry of activity at the Dragonron case. You said he has a new IP but the last set of IPs he was using (logged out) were found to be open proxies. Is that the case again?—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 21:45, 12 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Did I say he was using a new IP(s)? Anyway, no, I didn't notice any proxies in my most recent couple of checks.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 22:22, 12 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, but the Israeli /24 got blocked I thought.—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 00:58, 13 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
hi Bitafarhadi has been active at Elam (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) recently. with name Lars pip. thanks --Florence (talk) 13:41, 19 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Future Perfect at Sunrise blocked the account and JamesBWatson has protected the article. It's amazing how much gets accomplished whilst I sleep.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 17:30, 19 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Untitled

You stalking me 😀😀 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Savik84 (talk • contribs) 00:35, 12 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Savik84: I'm confused. You send me a thanks for the welcome message on your talk page, then accuse me of stalking you? <shrugs> As another editor has pointed out to you, the material you are adding to Ragib Ali contradicts the source provided in the article. If you believe the sourced data is incorrect, explain why on the article talk page (along with the sources you are using to conclude the current information is incorrect). Also, please stop using the edit summary "fixed typo" when you are actually changing information as it's misleading.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 16:42, 12 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Haireh seenal — Preceding unsigned comment added by Savik84 (talk • contribs) 02:47, 13 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Saint Lucia's Day!

Special Saint Lucia's Day celebration for you my little pony! Lucia coffee and buns from festively arrayed Bishzilla Lucia! ['Zilla twirls to display her becoming Lucia crown in the round.] bishzilla ROARR!! 15:38, 13 December 2014 (UTC).[reply]

  • Bishzilla Lucia
    Bishzilla Lucia
  • Cappuccino
    Cappuccino
  • Gingerbread
    Gingerbread
  • Saffron buns
    Saffron buns
  • Little helper bearing gift
    Little helper bearing gift

This week's article for improvement (week 51, 2014)

A plate of spaghetti and meatballs.
Hello, Ponyo.

The following is WikiProject Today's articles for improvement's weekly selection:

Spaghetti

Previous selections: Game design • Mexico–United States border

Get involved with the TAFI project! You can...
Posted by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of EuroCarGT (talk) 00:22, 15 December 2014 (UTC) • Opt-out instructions[reply]

A barnstar for you!

The Admin's Barnstar
You brutal Admin. Thanks for blocking me :) I decided to cool off from Wikipedia for a while. (¯`·._.·[God Of Death ÐËxtËR]·._.·´¯) (talk) 13:02, 16 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your correct arbitration

Hi, I just noticed the (Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Thehoboclown) case and my involvement...I was suprised and hurt by the accusation, anyway it's archived I responded as asked by user Stickee, and every involved persons, only after I noticed the accuser (FromOradea) was blocked because of sock-puppetry :) Life can make interesting situations, never the factuality or truth-content of my edits are debated, the accuser did not like debunking propaganda. Yours Sincerely (KIENGIR (talk) 23:32, 16 December 2014 (UTC))[reply]

Gauri Pradhan Tejwani

I'm having some problems at Gauri Pradhan Tejwani, which is an article that you recently semi'd because of disruptive editing. Are recent edits such as this a part of a pattern that you recognise? I've left notes on their talk page and the article talk. - Sitush (talk) 19:17, 17 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I notice that they are pretty much a SPA, with most edits relating to that article and the one relating to her husband. - Sitush (talk) 19:24, 17 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Nope, that looks to be a separate content issue. The semi-protection was for an IP hopper that keeps adding interwiki links to non-existent foreign language articles. Note I removed the names of the minor children per WP:BLPNAME. --Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 19:27, 17 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, thanks. I'll just have to duke it out with them. - Sitush (talk) 19:28, 17 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Only now they're edit warring with you also - [3]. AN3? - Sitush (talk) 19:55, 17 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Fantastic. I'm off to a Christmas concert, but have again removed the names of the children (and the hospital where they were born) per WP:BLPNAME. Are they over 3RR? I don't have time to check, sorry!. If so then 3RN is the way to go.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 20:02, 17 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
No probs, and enjoy the concert. I've reported it now. - Sitush (talk) 21:24, 17 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

New Wikipedia Library Accounts Now Available (December 2014)

Hello Wikimedians!

The TWL OWL says sign up today :)

The Wikipedia Library is announcing signups today for, free, full-access accounts to published research as part of our Publisher Donation Program. You can sign up for:

Other partnerships with accounts available are listed on our partners page. Do better research and help expand the use of high quality references across Wikipedia projects: sign up today!
--The Wikipedia Library Team.00:25, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

You can host and coordinate signups for a Wikipedia Library branch in your own language. Please contact Ocaasi (WMF).
This message was delivered via the Mass Message tool to the Book & Bytes recipient list.

Thank you for pointing out my mistakes in editing

Please accept my most sincere apologies! That was absolutely not my intention. I am still learning and I truly welcome and appreciate any and all constructive criticisms and advice. Thank you so much for pointing this out to me. --Exhaust 18:59, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

@Exhausted200: Please don't apologize, I was honestly asking if you were aware of what you had restored to the article. On a separate note however, are you signing with four tildes (~)? Your signature doesn't contain any links.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 19:22, 18 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I honestly had no idea that my edits had done that! I truly am very happy that you took the time to point that out. As for my signature, I used the icon (the pencil with what appears to be a cursive lower case "F") at the top of the toolbar that appears here. I noticed that there was no link in the signature, and I have been trying to figure out why that is and how I can correct that. --Exhaust (talk) 19:32, 18 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Christmas!

Merry Christmas!
Merry Christmas to you and thanks for all the help you give at SPI :) 5 albert square (talk) 00:55, 19 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Seasonal Greets!

Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2015 !!!

Hello Ponyo, May you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you a heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New year 2015.
Happy editing,
LADY LOTUS • TALK 19:38, 19 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to user talk pages with a friendly message.

Julia Voth

Hello, I recently updated Julia Voth's wiki page with the correct information of what city she was born in which happens to be Saskatoon and NOT Regina. I know her personally and she had asked me to update her wiki page to reflect this. Please don't change it back. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.174.239.165 (talk • contribs)

  • The information regarding her place of birth is sourced to a News1130 reference included in the article as is required by policy. As information added to articles needs to be verifiable, we cannot simply take your word that the information is incorrect. If Julia Voth would like to contact Wikipedia in order to address concerns regarding her article she can do so (privately) by emailing info-en-q@wikimedia.org. Alternatively, you could provide a reliable source that confirms the Saskatoon place of birth and the discrepancy can be addressed on the article talk page.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 00:05, 20 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Ponyo&oldid=638844842"