User talk:Polygnotus

Eine Treppe

There is one Wikipedian looking for help. (refresh)

Snow

When you come back in 6 months, could you remove the snow on your user talk page? It's causing my browser to lag. --TheAuroraBorealis (she/they) 19:43, 16 May 2026 (UTC)

@TheAuroraBorealis Hope you don't mind the unsolicited advice, but the the snow view (and all userpage/user talkpage visual effects) can be disabled in your preferences. WP:STICKYDECO has the instructions. GreenLipstickLesbian💌🧸 21:00, 16 May 2026 (UTC)

Oh ok, thanks @GreenLipstickLesbian. --TheAuroraBorealis (she/they) 21:18, 16 May 2026 (UTC)

Did not expect to spot you again | One Reaction was here. Got a complaint? 11:23, 28 May 2026 (UTC)

@ABx11: Okay. The page was getting very long because I wasn't here for 3 months so that probably made it more difficult for the browser to render. I cleaned it up a bit. Polygnotus (talk) 05:29, 14 August 2026 (UTC)

August 11

Is that when you're scheduled back? Hope you're getting tons of stuff done IRL in your self-imposed Wikibreak, and will be ready to go when you get back! Mathglot (talk) 09:15, 23 June 2026 (UTC)

@Mathglot: I recently discovered the article Hydra effect. See also Zeno's_paradoxes#Dichotomy_paradox. Polygnotus (talk) 04:41, 14 August 2026 (UTC)

I remember it, but as Aristotle's. Think I had it in math class, or maybe science class in high school. Reminds me of radioactive decay measurement. Mathglot (talk) 04:59, 14 August 2026 (UTC)

I wish my todolist would decay a bit faster that would be nice. Ideally before I do. Polygnotus (talk) 05:27, 14 August 2026 (UTC)

SectionLinks

For when you're back in a few hours: special:diff/1368006720. Hope you had a nice break! :) — DVRTed (Talk) 17:15, 12 August 2026 (UTC)

@DVRTed Thank you! I have implemented the change here. Polygnotus (talk) 02:27, 14 August 2026 (UTC)

Welcome back

I have only been attacked by one other user since you took some off, and was feeling lonely, as I missed your snide remarks about my ideas. Looking forward to your biting criticisms and veiled insults. (kidding) Viriditas (talk) 00:28, 13 August 2026 (UTC)

@Viriditas My nemesis! Welcome to my evil lair/slightly under-decorated talkpage! As you are well aware, absence makes the heart grow fonder and I've missed you.

Because I am a simple-minded fool I can only remember disagreeing with you twice, once on Talk:Bernadette Meehan and once on Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/2024_Wikipedia_blackout.

We should both make it our New Year's resolution to follow each other around and keep each other sharp. I can learn little from those who agree with me. We should both continue to be wrong in interesting and unpredictable ways. Polygnotus (talk) 00:38, 13 August 2026 (UTC)

Sounds like a plan! Viriditas (talk) 00:41, 13 August 2026 (UTC)

@Viriditas: And for the record, while I have a serious case of resting bitch face in written text, we will fight side by side in the upcoming Machine War. Polygnotus (talk) 00:51, 13 August 2026 (UTC)

Don't forget, the highest form of strategic victory is achieving your objective without having to engage in battle at all. Viriditas (talk) 00:54, 13 August 2026 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Barnstar of Good Humor
	For having a good sense of humor and not taking this place too seriously, I award you this barnstar, which you richly deserve. Viriditas (talk) 02:55, 13 August 2026 (UTC)

Thank you! It is surprisingly difficult to find a good "Books Not Bombs" poster 'round here. Polygnotus (talk) 02:23, 14 August 2026 (UTC)

Roll your own. Viriditas (talk) 22:35, 19 August 2026 (UTC)

Thank you! I'll have it printed and framed as a gift. Polygnotus (talk) 22:37, 19 August 2026 (UTC)

DetectPromo false positives

@Losipov, Lalaithan, Chronos.Zx, ABx11, Spiral6800, Mesidast, EatingCarBatteries, and James Allison: Apologies for the delayed response, I had some tasks to do in real life and Wikipedia can be rather addictive so I was on a self-requested block. Thanks for the false positive reports for DetectPromo! There is now a new version that should show far fewer false positives, and make reporting false positives easier. As far as I can see it should resolve the false positives y'all reported. If you use the script to mark an exception it ends up over at User:Polygnotus/Scripts/DetectPromo/Exceptions. That page is open for editing by anyone so feel free to make any changes you see fit. Thanks! Polygnotus (talk) 04:32, 14 August 2026 (UTC)

No worries, and welcome back! --ABx11 (she/they) 04:39, 14 August 2026 (UTC)

Awesome! Thank you. EatingCarBatteries _{(contribs | talk)} 05:38, 14 August 2026 (UTC)

No issue. Real life first. Thanks. Chronos.Zx (talk) 06:15, 14 August 2026 (UTC)

Thanks a ton! Losipov (talk) 14:15, 14 August 2026 (UTC)

Welcome back!

I saw that your temporary block expired. Welcome back to Wikipedia! I hope everything in real life is going well :) ‍🌷Reverosie🌷^★talk★ 03:28, 18 August 2026 (UTC)

@Reverosie Thank you! Good to be back! Real life is as chaotic as ever but that's life. A little chaos is a good thing. Polygnotus (talk) 05:17, 18 August 2026 (UTC)

Stephanie Mehta

Hi, I saw a quick notification about your note on this that disappeared, and I wanted to clarify that I have no connection to, or compensation for, anything related to this article. It does seem like there were some questionable edits by others afterward. Thanks. - Fuzheado | Talk 14:01, 19 August 2026 (UTC)

@Fuzheado Thanks. Yeah I mixed you up with the IPs for a sec, my bad. I have removed the copyvio but I should probably take another look at the article at some point to see if I missed anything/if later edits can be restored. Thanks! Polygnotus (talk) 17:57, 19 August 2026 (UTC)

Yeah, good question - I think it may be easier to punt and just say "took to the rooftops of local businesses to defend the area" and leave it vague? Fuzheado | Talk 18:42, 19 August 2026 (UTC)

Now that you're here, do you have ideas about the whole "Rooftop Koreans" thing? In this edit the change was made from "them" (referring to the businesses to "themselves" (referring to the people).

I think that word should be reverted, but it would also be good to flesh the nuances in the article out a bit more. Maybe ask a WikiProject or whatever? Polygnotus (talk) 18:02, 19 August 2026 (UTC)

@Fuzheado Also should this be framed as "after Oct 7" instead of "during the genocide"? Changing the framing a bit changes the story. And we need a new source there. Please look at the edits I made. Thanks, Polygnotus (talk) 18:32, 19 August 2026 (UTC)

Yes, now with time and distance, I think "October 7" is a good way to introduce the issue. Is there a reason you think that news source is no longer valid? - Fuzheado | Talk 04:21, 21 August 2026 (UTC)

@Fuzheado Well it was in response to the war/genocide, not in response to Oct 7, so to frame it as if it was in response to Oct 7 is misleading. Fox News is not a news source but a source of propaganda, and has never been valid. Polygnotus (talk) 04:25, 21 August 2026 (UTC)

Yeah, good point – one would have to be careful about "genocide" wording to keep it neutral. As for the news source, the GW paper could work (https://gwhatchet.com/2023/11/14/gw-suspends-sjp-for-three-months-after-anti-israel-library-demonstration/) or NBC News (https://www.nbcnews.com/news/students-justice-palestine-became-national-lightning-rod-rcna125420). - Fuzheado | Talk 04:50, 21 August 2026 (UTC)

@Fuzheado Yeah, neither "genocide" nor "October 7" would be appropriate in this case so I used "pro-Palestinian" which NBC also uses. Talk:Gaza genocide is already nearing 12k revisions, we don't want to relitigate that in every article. Polygnotus (talk) 05:10, 21 August 2026 (UTC)

Decent chance there are more NPOV violations in Special:Contributions/73.134.81.186 that I haven't discovered yet. Polygnotus (talk) 05:17, 21 August 2026 (UTC)

The local student newspaper says

Other statements projected onto the building included “Glory to our martyrs,” a phrase demonstrators said honors any Palestinian killed by Israelis. Some argue the phrase wrongfully honors Hamas militants, a group the U.S. and European Union consider a terrorist organization.

And yet it was framed in Wikivoice as if it was definitely about Hamas, which sounds like an NPOV violation. Polygnotus (talk) 18:46, 19 August 2026 (UTC)

Praise

Section header added by Polygnotus (talk) 05:22, 21 August 2026 (UTC)

Polygnotus is not fit to hold any sort of moderation role as they clearly can’t read. ~2026-45321-23 (talk) 19:51, 19 August 2026 (UTC)

I did invent polar bears tho. So that's kinda cool. Polygnotus (talk) 19:56, 19 August 2026 (UTC)

Reporting DuplicateReferences false-positive

Donald Trump https://www.forbes.com/sites/danalexander/article/the-definitive-networth-of-donaldtrump/ Pac Veten (talk) 17:17, 20 August 2026 (UTC)

Re: Communication support tools; seeking feedback + collaboration

Hi Polygnotus ! My name is Laerdon; I’m part of a team at Cornell working with Wikipedia editors to develop tools for communication support https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Opportunities_for_Supporting_Community-Scale_Communication. We're currently working on developing tools that would be useful not just for editing at an article layer, but also supporting constructive deliberation and communication on talk pages.

Would love to chat and hear more about your thoughts on Wiki talk pages, associated tools, and how to manage AI use on Wikipedia! Laerdon (talk) 20:18, 20 August 2026 (UTC)

Hi Laerdon! Perfect timing, I was just writing on your talkpage. Thank you, Polygnotus (talk) 21:56, 20 August 2026 (UTC)

Good to have you back

About 8 days later, but better late than never, no? It's good to have you back after the 3 month block, Polygnotus. To be honest, when I saw your username crossed-out about 3 months ago, I got startled because you seemed like a kind person who probably accidentally made a grave mistake that got you blocked, though looking at the block log quickly cleared out any confusion within myself.

Again, it's good to have you back. See you around soon. Hacked (Talk|Contribs) 20:32, 20 August 2026 (UTC)

Hey Ivebeenhacked! Good to see you again. Yeah, while Wikipedia is fun sometimes you just need to focus on other stuff. I may have to buy one of those Honeycomb Alpha-Bravo-Charlie kits. Do you do sim-flying? Thanks and have a nice day! Polygnotus (talk) 22:05, 20 August 2026 (UTC)

No, I don't do sim-flying and I don't have a kit either, though I envy of purchasing one. You know how to sim-fly? Hacked (Talk|Contribs) 18:41, 21 August 2026 (UTC)

A bit. I have MSFS2020 (I should probably upgrade to 2024) but I also like Ace Combat & Project Wingman. Polygnotus (talk) 18:49, 21 August 2026 (UTC)

Oh, I (respectfully) didn't know you sim-fly. Maybe I should get one after all, though I'm afraid of possessing and maintaining expensive equipment. How frequently I even use it matters as well, no? Where to keep it during family reunions as well... I think that's why I'm skeptical. Hacked (Talk|Contribs) 18:58, 21 August 2026 (UTC)

Reporting DuplicateReferences false-positive

Barack Obama http://www.senatedem.state.il.us/obama/index.html Pac Veten (talk) 02:41, 21 August 2026 (UTC)

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:K-stability on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

SodiumBot (botop|talk|contribs) 11:30, 21 August 2026 (UTC)

Union busting

There are probably some exceptions to each of the statements I'm making, but they're generally true.

Unions work through coercion — consider how they treat workers who work despite a strike, and how strongly they oppose right-to-work laws. In the absence of such laws, they seek to force you to choose between joining and not having a specific job. They're inefficient, forcing employers to allocate jobs to union employees ("can't do that task; it's a union job") and making it very difficult to evaluate individual employees based on their job performance. They're self-centred in wage and hiring actions, seeking to force sacrifice by others rather than self-sacrifice for others' good, and hurting their employers and communities by seeking shorter-term gains. Unions have driven up labour costs, devastating the industrial sectors of countries like the US and Australia; one can consider the histories of many formerly highly unionised cities, whether small ones like Wheelwright KY, or big Rust Belt cities heavily affected by offshoring. They take advantage of imbalanced legal power, coercing employers who cannot legally unionise against employees. They're often linked with corruption of their own; if you're not in Australia, run a Google search for CFMEU and SRL. (Our Labor state government are naturally friendly toward unions; our previous premier was just brought down by a refusal to investigate allegations of widespread rorting, and her successor is having to appoint a royal commission that threatens his political base.) And they encourage a sense of class warfare, idealising a situation in which the proletariat can take from the bourgeoisie, regardless of whether it's done via Leninist revolutions, or Rocker-type anarchosyndicalism, or US-style peaceful protests and elections. Nyttend (talk) 20:45, 23 August 2026 (UTC)

@Nyttend But out of those only the Unions have driven up labour costs and class warfare bits don't have a clean parallel right? It sounds like this criticism of unions is mostly criticism of companies, but in the other direction. Polygnotus (talk) 21:02, 23 August 2026 (UTC)

Reporting DuplicateReferences false-positive

Celine Dion http://cria.ca/cert_db_search.php Pac Veten (talk) 01:25, 24 August 2026 (UTC)

DuplicateReference miss?

Hi, love the Duplicate Reference script, very useful. It didn't though flag anything [here], rather puzzling? Neils51 (talk) 22:16, 29 August 2026 (UTC)

Hiya! That is intentional; it doesn't compare archive.org links because that could lead to false positives.

It also doesn't consider

https://cartoonresearch.com/index.php/how-old-is-bugs-bunny/#prettyphoto%5B2744%5D%2F1%2F

and

https://cartoonresearch.com/index.php/how-old-is-bugs-bunny/

to be the same as that could also lead to false positives.

The User:Polygnotus/Scripts/DeduplicateReferences script does merge them tho; if you'd like. If you want to improve the names you can use User:Nardog/RefRenamer. Have a nice day, Polygnotus (talk) 22:30, 29 August 2026 (UTC)

Many thanks! Neils51 (talk) 11:45, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

Blocked as a sockpuppet

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abusing multiple accounts as a sockpuppet of User:A conceptual entity per the evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/A conceptual entity. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.

If you believe that there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then submit a request through the unblock wizard or through your talk page.  Moneytrees🏝️(Talk) 18:21, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

You did what...?

*and why* 海盐沙冰 _{/ aka irisChronomia / Talk / Uploads} 19:25, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

Topic

I've enjoyed working with you and I'm rather sad about this whole thing. Assuming that my understanding that you have only edited as Polygnotus since 2022 is correct, and in case you decide to appeal the block, please let me know and I'll add my 2 cents. Alaexis_¿question? 06:26, 3 September 2026 (UTC)

User scripts

Given this user's large amount of user scripts (and user scripts that are heavily used), I've adopted some of their more popular user scripts which can be found at User:LuniZunie/scripts#Polygnotus. If you have a specific user script you want adopted so it can recieve updates, just let me know and I'll look into it. – LuniZunie_(talk) 21:59, 3 September 2026 (UTC)

@LuniZunie cheers for that as I use some of Polygnotus's scripts. Polygnotus, if you're reading this I hope you do at some point request an unblock. TarnishedPath^talk 01:25, 19 September 2026 (UTC)

A message

Hello, I don't think I ever talked to you, but I've seen you around every corner of Wikipedia's projectspace, and I'd just like to say: thank you for your contributions. Hopefully you'll find a way to return someday. Best wishes, --not-cheesewhisk3rs ≽^•⩊•^≼ ∫ (pester) 19:23, 7 September 2026 (UTC)

Warmly seconded~ ! Thank you for your work; please be well and return well if you wish. – SJ + 13:39, 8 September 2026 (UTC)

Thirded. 海盐沙冰 _{/ aka irisChronomia / Talk / Uploads} 13:40, 8 September 2026 (UTC)

4thed ^MetalBreaks_AndBends (One for all) 16:48, 8 September 2026 (UTC)

Yeah. I don't know the backstory here, so I can't calibrate my opinion based on how bad that might have been, but it seems that recently you were doing only good and, presumably, you thought that you had put all the old stuff behind you only for it to unexpectedly come back and bite you. That must have been a nasty surprise. If it is possible for you to make a full declaration of past accounts and misdeeds then I would hope that the admins would at least give an unblock request a fair hearing. In the meantime, I hope you are doing okay. --DanielRigal (talk) 18:06, 8 September 2026 (UTC)

+1 Sdkb ^talk 21:03, 8 September 2026 (UTC)

Guess that makes me the 7th? I utterly despise the idea of blocking for socking. Cheers, _{In solidarity} Wikipedian12512 (Talking is fine | contribs) 11:35, 10 September 2026 (UTC)

Most of our regular socks are abusive. Block appeals exist for a reason - refusal to utilize existing channels always makes one wonder about motives. ChompyTheGogoat [ Bleat | Munched ] 23:36, 18 September 2026 (UTC)

Yet if we have a constructive editor, I see no reason to block because of a mistake made a long time ago. Cheers, _{In solidarity} Wikipedian12512 (Talking is fine | contribs) 00:03, 19 September 2026 (UTC)

The question is why they're unwilling to own said past mistakes. Accepting responsibility is a necessary step in order to move forward. ChompyTheGogoat [ Bleat | Munched ] 00:07, 19 September 2026 (UTC)

One could do that then clean start, no? I agree that those who do things like this are generally untrustworthy, but that is a side effect of unreliability, not a symptom. That said, I know it’s a controversial take, so feel free to leave this discussion unresolved. Cheers, _{In solidarity} Wikipedian12512 (Talking is fine | contribs) 00:13, 19 September 2026 (UTC)

But they didn't. That's the underlying issue here. If they'd requested unblock under the standard offer I don't think there would be any problem. I'm not sure why they were socking in the first place, nor why they'd continue to do so instead of following SOP. ChompyTheGogoat [ Bleat | Munched ] 00:16, 19 September 2026 (UTC)

I disagree that it is an issue. We don’t block editors for doing a suboptimal thing, we block them for harming the encyclopaedic goal of this project. Yes, poly should have taken the standard offer, but I strongly disagree that we should unseat a constructive editor for such. If we blocked anyone who socked in their past and didn’t get unblocked, I’m sure we’d get at least one admin, and I’m very sure there are people who had the only thing holding them back be past socking who are still editing constructively. Cheers, _{In solidarity} Wikipedian12512 (Talking is fine | contribs) 00:27, 19 September 2026 (UTC)

@Poly! Nooo… I’m just seeing that you were blocked. Please take care. Dw31415 (talk) 20:14, 10 September 2026 (UTC)

Surprised. If you are a sock, i hope you appeal somehow. Barring shocking evidence to the contrary , I think community would overwhelmingly vote for you to stay. User:Bluethricecreamman (Talk·Contribs) 21:14, 10 September 2026 (UTC)

I was very surprised to see your name struck! FaviFake (talk) 21:51, 10 September 2026 (UTC)

Good morning, @Polygnotus!

I'm the 11th! I'm quite worried to see you blocked. 😞

Happy editing and I hope to see you unblocked in the future. 😊 Cheers, (⁠◕⁠ᴗ⁠◕⁠✿⁠) Zahrazamedahmedi (🗨️My Talk Page🗨️) (🫗My Mistakes🫗) 23:55, 10 September 2026 (UTC)

Well this sucks. I hope you appeal and the community decides to unban you. qcne (talk) 21:42, 11 September 2026 (UTC)

Huh? Polygnotus was never banned. FaviFake (talk) 21:58, 11 September 2026 (UTC)

I meant blocked. qcne (talk) 22:58, 11 September 2026 (UTC)

Given that starting over with a new account after a block seems to have been something you've done in the past, I'll add a word of advice: It would be a really bad idea to try that again in response to this. Because you've had many years of constructive editing as Polygnotus, your odds of a successful appeal right now seem quite good. But if you evade a block again, there won't be another chance to come clean. And given how recognizable you are as Polygnotus, you would be very likely to be caught. So save yourself the trouble of having to constantly hide your tracks and of having to rebuild your reputation from scratch — just come clean, go through the appeal, and then carry on with the excellent work you've been doing. Sdkb ^talk 22:13, 11 September 2026 (UTC)

+1 I do hope you appeal. Probably after a week or two to show some contrition Dw31415 (talk) 22:47, 11 September 2026 (UTC)

We all respect you and hope you come back. I cannot speak on behalf of admins, but my interpretation of these: please do not take this as aspersions so much as fear of losing a valuable contributor! User:Bluethricecreamman (Talk·Contribs) 14:53, 12 September 2026 (UTC)

Am I reading correctly that Poly had a different account years ago, created this one 4 years ago after being blocked (or banned), has been editing under this account since without any sanction, then got randomly discovered and immediately blocked? With the main transgression being that Poly didn't file the appropriate "paperwork" 4 years ago? Just trying to make sense of this. Dw31415 (talk) 16:27, 12 September 2026 (UTC)

Basically. See why I hate the very concept of blocking for past socking? Cheers, _{In solidarity} Wikipedian12512 (Talking is fine | contribs) 16:43, 12 September 2026 (UTC)

We have to do something but I'm not sure that a block that comes like an unexpected bolt from the blue is the best thing in cases like this. I feel that the discovery of the old accounts should have kicked off a process where Polygnotus had a chance to explain the situation and have that taken into account. As Wikipedia ages we are going to have more cases where people who misbehaved as teenagers or young adults want to come back and do things right. --DanielRigal (talk) 17:35, 12 September 2026 (UTC)

"Blocks are to prevent damage to the project". I don't think just because the guideline identify we can then we should in all cases. 海盐沙冰 _{/ aka irisChronomia / Talk / Uploads} 17:59, 12 September 2026 (UTC)

I am really sad that @Polygnotus is blocked as a sockpuppet. 😥 However WP:SOCK says:

"Sockpuppetry or socking is the misuse of multiple Wikipedia accounts. To maintain accountability and increase community trust, editors are generally expected to use only one registered account."

You can use the WP:UNBLOCK WIZARD or you can use the {{Unblock}} template if you wish.

Happy editing and I hope to see you unblocked on Monday! 😊 Cheers, (⁠◕⁠ᴗ⁠◕⁠✿⁠) Zahrazamedahmedi (🗨️My Talk Page🗨️) (🫗My Mistakes🫗) 18:18, 12 September 2026 (UTC)

? Why Monday? qcne (talk) 18:21, 12 September 2026 (UTC)

I said Monday because I have a type of addiction to Monday! Cheers, (⁠◕⁠ᴗ⁠◕⁠✿⁠) Zahrazamedahmedi (🗨️My Talk Page🗨️) (🫗My Mistakes🫗) 18:24, 12 September 2026 (UTC)

Welp, happy early Monday to both you and poly! Cheers, _{In solidarity} Wikipedian12512 (Talking is fine | contribs) 18:27, 12 September 2026 (UTC)

Thank you and happy editing! 😊 Cheers, (⁠◕⁠ᴗ⁠◕⁠✿⁠) Zahrazamedahmedi (🗨️My Talk Page🗨️) (🫗My Mistakes🫗) 18:29, 12 September 2026 (UTC)

What? qcne (talk) 18:28, 12 September 2026 (UTC)

Huh? --not-cheesewhisk3rs ≽^•⩊•^≼ ∫ (pester) 18:36, 12 September 2026 (UTC)

Hopefully @Polygnotus decides to appeal the block soon! 😊 Cheers, (⁠◕⁠ᴗ⁠◕⁠✿⁠) Zahrazamedahmedi (🗨️My Talk Page🗨️) (🫗My Mistakes🫗) 18:43, 12 September 2026 (UTC)

They haven't edited since the block 9 days ago, nor messaged in the Wikipedia Discord. qcne (talk) 18:45, 12 September 2026 (UTC)

That said, they probably will eventually check in. Probably just a well- deserved wikibreak. Cheers, _{In solidarity} Wikipedian12512 (Talking is fine | contribs) 18:46, 12 September 2026 (UTC)

OK maybe @Polygnotus will come back and appeal the block on Monday! Cheers, (⁠◕⁠ᴗ⁠◕⁠✿⁠) Zahrazamedahmedi (🗨️My Talk Page🗨️) (🫗My Mistakes🫗) 18:49, 12 September 2026 (UTC)

Why Monday specifically? qcne (talk) 18:52, 12 September 2026 (UTC)

Because I always have a deep liking for Monday! Cheers, (⁠◕⁠ᴗ⁠◕⁠✿⁠) Zahrazamedahmedi (🗨️My Talk Page🗨️) (🫗My Mistakes🫗) 18:53, 12 September 2026 (UTC)

ok qcne (talk) 18:57, 12 September 2026 (UTC)

I hope you understand that this really doesn't matter. --not-cheesewhisk3rs ≽^•⩊•^≼ ∫ (pester) 08:29, 13 September 2026 (UTC)

*Ahem* ChompyTheGogoat [ Bleat | Munched ] 23:33, 18 September 2026 (UTC)

I am still worried that Polygnotus is still blocked. 😞 Zahrazamedahmedi (🗨️My Talk Page🗨️) (🫗My Mistakes🫗) 17:10, 3 October 2026 (UTC)

I think the ball is in Polygnotus court to request an unblock. I think they can still edit this talk page but I’m not sure about that. I hope P will check in when ready and let us know. Dw31415 (talk) 17:14, 3 October 2026 (UTC)

Timestamp:

18:21, August 30, 2026

Target:

Polygnotus

Expires:

No expiry set

Blocking admin:

Moneytrees

Block parameters:

editing (sitewide), account creation disabled

Reason:

Abusing multiple accounts: Please see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/A conceptual entity

From Special:BlockList. Zahrazamedahmedi (🗨️My Talk Page🗨️) (🫗My Mistakes🫗) 17:30, 3 October 2026 (UTC)

It's even worrying to see Polygnotus in Special:BlockList. 🥺 Zahrazamedahmedi (🗨️My Talk Page🗨️) (🫗My Mistakes🫗) 17:31, 3 October 2026 (UTC)

No need to post that. qcne (talk) 17:36, 3 October 2026 (UTC)

This account is a sockpuppet of A conceptual entity, and has been blocked indefinitely.

Please refer to the sockpuppet investigation of the sockpuppeteer, and editing habits or contributions of the sockpuppet for evidence. This policy subsection may be helpful.

From Polygnotus' userpage.

I'm still worried. 🥺 Zahrazamedahmedi (🗨️My Talk Page🗨️) (🫗My Mistakes🫗) 17:39, 3 October 2026 (UTC)

Please stop posting that. qcne (talk) 17:40, 3 October 2026 (UTC)

OK I will stop. Zahrazamedahmedi (🗨️My Talk Page🗨️) (🫗My Mistakes🫗) 17:40, 3 October 2026 (UTC)

A little concerned

I’ve lost friends so forgive me for posting here. I’m a little worried. Are you thinking about suicide or hurting yourself right now? If you are, please put some distance between yourself and anything you could use to hurt yourself and contact someone who can be with you now. you can text HOME to 741741 to reach a trained counselor, free and available 24/7: Crisis Text Line. If you’re able, please leave even a brief reply or email me letting us know you’re safe. Dw31415 (talk) 17:12, 12 September 2026 (UTC)

What the hell. I know him well enough that you can delete this entire section. — DVRTed (Talk) 17:34, 12 September 2026 (UTC)

That is good to hear, at least. But it is good to hear also that we all care for polygnotus’ welfare too, so perhaps we may keep this section? User:Bluethricecreamman (Talk·Contribs) 17:40, 12 September 2026 (UTC)

Please appeal and return when you feel comfortable

[just finally came here to look at the new edit-warring script you created when I saw this] I just wanted to add that I also appreciated your editing and your very thoughtful and insightful comments. Like others here, I believe the community is better with your presence.

I also agree that since Wikipedia's policies for blocking or banning are meant to prevent harm to the project (not as punishment), and that from your block log it is clear that you have edited since 2022 (almost 4 years to the day) without being blocked for behavior (only self-requested blocks) under only one account (not abusing multiple accounts to win edit-wars), you have already proven what the WP:standard_offer requests as far as proof-of-work/behavior of an editor being a net-positive for the project.

Take care, and I hope to see you back. ---Avatar317^(talk) 23:44, 16 September 2026 (UTC)

@Moneytrees: Do you have an extra reason to have Poly blocked, or is it just the socking thing? Cheers, _{In solidarity} Wikipedian12512 (Talking is fine | contribs) 19:45, 3 October 2026 (UTC)

@Wikipedian12512 I know you think I'm dumb/stupid for making this block, but I honestly don't really care about the socking very much. I try to be lax when it comes to unblocks for socking; see this unblock with conditions from around the same time I blocked Polygnotus for example. I was planning on giving Polygnotus an option like that, but when discussing this block with other admins and checkusers it was pointed out to me that it isn't my choice to make; while not community banned, Quixotic Potato was supposed to appeal their original block to the community at WP:AN. In other words; if this was just a socking case, it wouldn't be that big of a deal, but because of the 2018 block, it's not, unfortunately.

Also; Eostrix was an extremely bad faith sock, of someone who was globally banned for doxing and harassing numerous editors, who was planning on using their administrative rights against their "enemies" had they passed rfa. That case is really not similar to Poly's at all, and bluntly, you should do some research before making a comment like that, as you risk drawing negative attention; Icewhiz's harassment and socking is still a sore subject for many. Moneytrees🏝️(Talk) 04:48, 4 October 2026 (UTC)

/

While some would try to gravedance, I would like to do some sorcery and revive the blocked. 海盐沙冰 _{/ aka irisChronomia / Talk / Uploads} 02:54, 18 September 2026 (UTC)

I may try to call an incantation as old as time itself for the trick. Cheers, _{In solidarity} Wikipedian12512 (Talking is fine | contribs) 00:29, 19 September 2026 (UTC)

Grave with the Hands Good Article

I was just coming to tell you that the article we built together, Grave with the Hands, has been awarded Wikipedia:Good article status. ("Awarded" makes it seem less that it was, the review was a bear and a half!) Anyway, I hope this makes you a bit happier. If you need someone to put in a good word for you, please let me know, I appreciated our interactions. --GRuban (talk) 19:07, 24 September 2026 (UTC)

And I am here waiting. 海盐沙冰 _{/ aka irisChronomia / Talk / Uploads} 11:32, 27 September 2026 (UTC)