Jump to content

User talk:Ponyo/Archive 49

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 45←Archive 47Archive 48Archive 49Archive 50Archive 51→Archive 55

Thank you for reverting my talk page

Thank you for quickly reverting User:2601:180:8200:63D0:5D31:D5D7:CBCF:6164 vandalism on my talk page and then blocking them. D Eaketts (talk) 16:53, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

No problem. They've been messing about across the range for far too long.-- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 17:23, 12 April 2020 (UTC)
No worries Ponyo, glad that someone blocked them. D Eaketts (talk) 18:36, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

User:LoganRich

Hello Ponyo, Trust you are well in these uncertain times, we are on lock-down and have not seen our family, except for video phone calls. Could I please draw your attention to the activities of LoganRich (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) who keeps adding unsourced information to various BBC articles. I have asked on their Talk page several times for them to supply reliable, secondary sources, but they have ignored all requests - and seem to be doing the same with others editors comments. Can I please leave this with you. Thank you and best regards, David, David J Johnson (talk) 18:09, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

I tried. We shall see if it has any effect. -- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 18:20, 12 April 2020 (UTC)
Thanks so much. I wouldn't bet that you will get an answer. Hope the rest of your Easter is good. David, David J Johnson (talk) 18:26, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

I'm shook

You're here on a weekend. Also, do you have any particular experience with our dear friend Kingshowman. Pretty sure he's back and using proxies/is the same person as the SPI troll we've been dealing with off and on for a few years. I normally pestered DoRD about him, but, alas, DoRD has left for greener pastures. TonyBallioni (talk) 18:42, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Well, I dug enough that I'm willing to call it him: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Kingshowman if you or Mr. DoRD are curious. TonyBallioni (talk) 19:46, 12 April 2020 (UTC)
I edited just long enough to lull you in to a false sense of security, then *poof* I was gone again! Diabolique!-- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 18:35, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

Sock drawer

Hi, I've just blocked 30 socks from a sock drawer. I see you've tagged some of the previous ones and blocked a few ranges, so I'm letting you know they came back. I don't know if it makes sense to tag all of these. Eagles 24/7 (C) 20:18, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

@Eagles247: Do you have a link to two for context? -- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 18:32, 14 April 2020 (UTC)
Never mind, I figured it out.-- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 18:36, 14 April 2020 (UTC)
There were a number of sleepers that I've blocked as well. No point tagging, they're not worth the time or effort.-- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 18:42, 14 April 2020 (UTC)
Thanks, I've also blocked a couple IP ranges that cover ones that posted on my talk page yesterday. Could you review those blocks to confirm they aren't too large? Eagles 24/7 (C) 18:54, 14 April 2020 (UTC)
I can't really comment on specific IPs or ranges; the curse of being a Checkuser.-- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 18:58, 14 April 2020 (UTC)
Okay, I hope they're the right size. Eagles 24/7 (C) 19:11, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

Possible block evading

You blocked User:103.127.30.249 in March of this year, it appears that the editor is evading their block by using other account User:73.1.41.245. For example, the block IP created the article Whole Lotta Red without adding sources [1], the IP just recently recreated the article without adding sources also [2]. I don't know what who this editor is but the edits looks similar. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 03:17, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

Behaviourally there is some overlap, but the technical details don't align (unsurprising as the 103 IP is a webhost). Given that IP 731.1.41.245 has been editing for well over a year, I don't feel comfortable blocking it without more pressing evidence.-- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 16:28, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

Thank you

Thanks for your kindness...;) — Preceding unsigned comment added by NikoPAR (talk • contribs) 19:23, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

Blocked as a sock of User:Fona2000. Favonian (talk) 19:31, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

I got a message from Ponyo to declare connection with an account

I got locked out of FeiGao2020 and created another account (AprilAnon2020). That other account is inactive and as far as I'm aware hasn't been banned from anything so I'm not trying to avoid a ban or any form of sock puppetry — Preceding unsigned comment added by AnonApril2020 (talk • contribs)

Hi @AnonApril2020: I was pretty sure that's what had happened, which is why I asked. It would be helpful to include Template:User previous account on your user page, just to keep the connection clear. -- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 21:08, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

Request

This probably won't happen because of the whole issue with User:Banana Mutant but would you have a problem with lowering the protection level for Template:Justice League characters and Template: Avengers characters. Mark Rhodes 12 (talk) 20:40, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

I've made a few adjustments to Template:Avengers characters protection, but the Justice League template needs the additional protection - it's a prime sock target. You could always request an edit be made using the requested edit template on the template talk page (see Wikipedia:Edit requests#Making requests for instructions).-- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 18:11, 20 April 2020 (UTC)

Quick help?

Not sure if it helps/hurts anything, but I saw your warning on this users page and their last three or four edits have been just more slandering. I gave them a fourth warning and it didn't really make them budge. Andrzejbanas (talk) 00:51, 20 April 2020 (UTC)

Sigh. I get their frustration, it's never fun to see your work reverted. It takes maturity to take on the information that more experienced editors are attempting to provide, and lashing out with "fascist/nazi" personal attacks demonstrates that this editor may have a way to go (and grow) in that regard. As they've posted a retirement template on their talk page it would be overly harsh to block now, so we'll just wait and see whether time away will help ZombieHorrorMovie13 achieve some interspection. It would be nice if they could tone it down a bit and return willing to follow our sourcing and verifiability guidelines and policies as they seem very knowledgeable on their topic of interest. -- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 18:36, 20 April 2020 (UTC)
Fair enough. I was trying to be be reasonable as I could with the user without removing their content, but it didn't seem to go well. Thanks for your help on the whole ordeal though. Its greatly appreciated. Andrzejbanas (talk) 18:36, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

User talk:SlipperyOliveOilChoc 69

You may wish to revoke TPA.--Cahk (talk) 08:06, 20 April 2020 (UTC)

Done by JJMC89. -- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 18:13, 20 April 2020 (UTC)

Prajakta Koli

Hi P, sorry to bug you with this, but I just blocked Trusha.daware for undisclosed paid editing based on on-site info and a touch of off-site info. Short story, Prajakta Koli is affiliated with One Digital Entertainment, an article that Trusha.daware created, so it seems like just a marketing team taking ownership of both topic articles. But I also notice Latika2301 seems rather interested in the Koli article as well. Is there any way you could look into the unraveling of whatever sock/meat ring-ery is happening there? If you want me to write up an SPI, I'd be happy to. Thanks, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 23:10, 20 April 2020 (UTC)

I know it's a pain, but an SPI would be helpful. A number of CUs have been working hard to keep the backlog down and I imagine it would get quick attention.-- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 17:26, 22 April 2020 (UTC)
Can do. Thank you. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 19:11, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

Clarification on G11 denial for Draft:Arunansh Shokeen

Hi P, could you clarify why you presumably declined the speedy here (even though it wasn't mine)? I have struggled at points to understand why some admins follow through and some remove. There doesn't seem to be a consistent rationale based on past new page reviewing I've done, and I'd like to have a firmer idea so future admins don't think I'm just indiscriminately CSD tagging articles. Etzedek24 (I'll talk at ya) (Check my track record) 19:55, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

The article has bounced around from article to draft space. I've salted the article until an approved draft becomes available (if it ever does). As with any speedy deletion, it's up to the reviewing admin to decide whether the page meets the criteria using their own judgement, experience, and interpretation of the deletion policy. Outside of G10 and G12-eligible deletions, there is a gradient as to what admins consider inappropriate for inclusion to the point of speedy deleting. A7 and G11 are the common deletion rationales that rely most heavily on individual administrator's interpretation of the deletion rationale, and, in my opinion, the draft does not meet G11 (from G11" "This applies to pages that are exclusively promotional and would need to be fundamentally rewritten to serve as encyclopaedia articles"). From my experience there is also a great deal more leeway provided in draft space with regard to promotional tone, allowing new editors to work on writing more neutral content supported by reliable sources outside of article space.-- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 21:12, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
Well said. Thanks, I appreciate it! Etzedek24 (I'll talk at ya) (Check my track record) 21:14, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
I did just pull a copyvio image from the article, and a removed a couple of WP:BLPNAME violations as these shouldn't appear on any pages, article or draft. Thank you for the work you put in to reviewing drafts; it is an endless and often thankless job.-- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 21:19, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

IP socking

Hi, Can you clarify to which master did the 2605:6001:E7C4:1E00:0:0:0:0/64 IP range that you blocked belong to? Thanks. Gotitbro (talk) 00:51, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

@Gotitbro:, our privacy policies prohibit Checkusers from directly linking accounts to IPs in most situations, this being one of them.-- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 16:24, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

CGSFH

Found this IP readily admitting to being a sock, see here. lavender|(formerly HMSSolent)|lambast 02:46, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

The IP is blocked now (not by me).-- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 16:26, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Block temp

Sorry, was unaware only the blocking admin is authorized to put the template. Won't happen again. Hillelfrei• talk • 20:14, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

No problem; I also left a note on your talk expanding on my edit summary. -- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 20:16, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Revdel request

Hi P:

Would you be willing to revdel what I have flagged on Lululemon murder? Etzedek24 (I'll talk at ya) (Check my track record) 20:18, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

@Etzedek24:, can you confirm which portions of the article you find to be a blatant copyright of the Washington Times article? If it goes back to the B4byfir3fly182 addition on April 7th, I'm not sure the amount of overlap is significant enough to require revdelete (per Earwig comparison), but Diannaa would know better than me.-- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 22:46, 30 April 2020 (UTC)
Huh. I could have sworn it was more. Don't know what I was looking at. I'll remove the revdel but maybe someone with more experience could take a look. Etzedek24 (I'll talk at ya) (Check my track record) 23:07, 30 April 2020 (UTC)
Dianaa is the best of the best.-- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 23:08, 30 April 2020 (UTC)
I have done the revision deletion.— Diannaa (talk) 00:45, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Thank you ...

... for speaking my mind better than I could, while I slept, and often --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:18, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

♥-- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 16:59, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
look, 15 May Mary Monteverdi --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:33, 15 May 2020 (UTC)
today a composer pictured who wrote a triple concerto for violin, harp and double bass, in honour of the composer who died and my brother who plays double bass. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:32, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

Revdel request on TwoSet Violin

Article TwoSet Violin was hit with a wave of vandalism that meets Criteria #2 "Grossly insulting, degrading, or offensive material" [3] Last known good version was on 28 April 2020. Thanks in advance. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 14:09, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

@AngusWOOF: Rev deleted under RD#2, blocked the /64 for two weeks and added the article to my watch list for a bit.-- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 17:11, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Please see...

The history of We Think the World of You, with which you've previously been involved. Thanks. Shadikk (talk) 20:07, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

@Shadikk: If you think the IP is a sock of Dopepenguins, please report it at WP:SPI. I can't really look into it further as I can't directly link accounts to IPs in most instances (like this).-- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 22:38, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

Untitled

What can i do?, can you help me to upload my profile to wikipedia , because i want to get verified on instagram. My instagram id is @__mohitjaat__ Mohit Gulia Jhajjar (talk) 14:55, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia has no interest in helping you get verified on instagram. Please read WP:AUTOBIOGRAPHY.-- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 22:41, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

User:Mrwallace05

Special:Contributions/Quilliam333 is obviously a Mrwallace05 sock. Same as before [4][5][6] with previous socks.[7][8][9]. 2402:1980:8249:4FE7:EC37:FA52:676F:E25B (talk) 03:53, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

Materialscientist blocked the user. 2402:1980:8249:4FE7:B099:3D23:9629:A6A7 (talk) 04:30, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

Problematic remnants

Hi,

the sock with various evasions created this redirect page ([10]), but user:Materialscientist who this time reverted all the sock edits, forgot to delete this page...I just wanted to draw both of your attention to this, to perform deletion. Regards(KIENGIR (talk) 07:43, 7 May 2020 (UTC))

@KIENGIR: It's not eligible for G5 speedy deletion because there have been significant edits by another editor. Is the redirect useful and plausible? If not, WP:CSD#R3 may apply.-- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 15:48, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
Ponyo, no significant edits were made, those three edits were from a reviewing admin (@Zanimum:) and just put some technical edits there, maybe missing to check the background of the creator. @Materialscientist:, could you solve this is issue with Ponyo and Zaminum together somehow? (anyway not just technically, but the redirect would have problems historically as well, it was created the same way of POV pushing as the sock did in those large number of articles...)(KIENGIR (talk) 10:05, 8 May 2020 (UTC))
The AfC reviewer accepted the draft and moved it to article space; I believe most admins would agree that that counts as a substantial edit. So the question remains, is it a plausible helpful redirect or a disruptive POV one. If it's the former, there is no reason to delete it solely because it was created by a sock. And I'm saying this as an admin who leans very strongly towards deleting or reverting sock edits.-- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 16:09, 8 May 2020 (UTC)
Sure. Well I think it may be regarded as a POV, but will address the issue to an uninvolved admin who also comfortable with the subject itself, particularly.(KIENGIR (talk) 22:02, 11 May 2020 (UTC))
If you do approach another admin, please also point them to this discussion. Thanks, -- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 22:36, 11 May 2020 (UTC)
I would say the safest is to send it to MfD. I would also add that even of the redirect is eventually kept nobody is going to die.--Ymblanter (talk) 05:40, 12 May 2020 (UTC)
Thank you for your opinion, I will now create the MfD (I do it first ever, hope won't do any mistake), Ponyo please correct me in case. Thank You.(KIENGIR (talk) 07:25, 12 May 2020 (UTC))
Ponyo, in theis edit of mine ([11]) I failed the link properly, it would be correctly Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Ancient Ukraine (by mistake I duplicated the Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion prefix...), could it be corrected somehow? Thank You(KIENGIR (talk) 07:34, 12 May 2020 (UTC))
Looks ok now, I think?-- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 17:50, 12 May 2020 (UTC)
I did not notice any change, but just noticed a fresh user Crazyboy826 claims I chose a wrong forum and closed the Mfd with non-admin closure ([12])...?? What concerns me he also notified the sock ([13]) about changing it to Rfd...what's going on??(KIENGIR (talk) 18:42, 12 May 2020 (UTC))
I think that Ymblanter mistakingly mentioned taking it to WP:MfD instead of WP:RfD. While it's considered courteous to notify good faith editors that a page outside of their user space has been nominated for deletion, it doesn't make any sense to notify a blocked sock. In fact, there are many reasons why this is very much not a good idea. Perhaps CrazyBoy826 didn't realize they were notifying a blocked sock account.-- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 19:48, 12 May 2020 (UTC)
Yes, this is right, I should not have commented before taking my first coffee in the morning. At least now the redirect seems to have been taken care of.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:50, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

Archives vandal

I see we found them at about the same time. There was more on the /48, going back about a month. I think I've reverted all the archive edits. In case you were assuming good faith, as I was at first, see Special:Diff/954269093. Do you think the unsourced article space edits should be rolled back as well, as presumed sneaky vandalism? Suffusion of Yellow (talk) 18:52, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

@Suffusion of Yellow: I was working through reverting the main space edits when I ended up being sidelined by a call. The edits I checked consisted mainly of the addition of unsourced dates of birth, which, even if I assumed good faith (I don't), should be reverted.-- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 19:11, 8 May 2020 (UTC)
P.S. I switched the block to include the larger /48 range. Thanks for catching that.-- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 19:13, 8 May 2020 (UTC)
Thanks. I'll help with the mainspace reverts for a bit. Suffusion of Yellow (talk) 19:14, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

Vendalism

Mr Bugti is a living person. Any details about him requires reliable sources. You edited false information and facts about him which you're not authorized to do. Remove the protection template so i can add reliable statements about him. He has a image and reputation to keep which you're intruding in. Aloha31 (talk) 23:20, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not a venue for you to manage the image and reputation of people you're personally connected to. It's an encyclopedia on notable topics that includes material supported by reliable sources. Your attempt to remove all content you personally disagree with despite it being very well sources is unacceptable. When I protected the article I also created a section on the talk page to allow editors to discuss their concerns, feel free to use it and see if you can get consensus for the changes you want to make. Throwing around false claims of vandalism will get you nowhere. Please also be aware of our policies regarding illegitimate use of multiple accounts, it seems particularly pertinent in this case.-- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 23:29, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

The information added previous were of trusted sources and reliable. It is not my personal disagreement, nor I feel it is. You're added edits are false and are just accusations which you might not be aware of. Mr. Bugti is a political leader and has human rights affairs, but you listed him as a terrorist which him and I won't appreciate. I'm aware of the our policies regarding illegitimate use of multiple accounts. People similar to your IP address have been editing it falsely since they day we created this page. So I suggest you remove your edits and the protection template Aloha31 (talk) 10:33, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

There is nothing you have written here that negates anything I wrote in my reply to you above. If anything, it leads me to believe that the article will need to be protected for a longer duration as the intent of the protection, i.e. to drive discussion to the talk page to gauge consensus, has not been realized. The various discussions on your talk page insinuate that you intent to wait out the protection and to continue the disruption, which, if true, will ultimately lead to you being blocked from editing the page entirely. You've been directed to the talk page. Use it. -- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 17:53, 9 May 2020 (UTC)
Hey Ponyo! I stumbled upon the above user during RC patrolling. They've continued their disruptive efforts and are clearly WP:NOTHERE. I agree with your assessment of reprotecting the article or block. HickoryOughtShirt?4 (talk) 21:35, 11 May 2020 (UTC)
I can't say I'm surprised. Thanks for stepping in HickoryOughtShirt?4.-- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 22:35, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

Vandal continues to attack Pat Day page

Hello,

Can you please revert the changes made by 72.227.160.141 and Aryeh10 (sockpuppets of the same user as banned Peteski 123, YYY613 and JIJJRG) back to my version (last update May 7 at 15:54)?

I have spent a lot of time providing the most historically accurate, balanced and non-biased version. I need my edits protected and locked from further attack by this user who is dedicated to destroying the reputation of Pat Day. He will not quit until his one-side negative attacks on Pat Day has completed destroyed his reputation. In addition to his attacks on the biography page, he has taken out dozens of big races that Pat Day won off the page. This is vandalism at its worst. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:6C3:4081:A10:9861:3D6C:866A:F11C (talk) 04:44, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

A content dispute at Pat Day may be frustrating for you, but it most definitely is not "vandalism at its worst". If you find yourself in a content dispute, you can make use of the advice here. If you believe there is a Peteski132 active at the article, WP:SPI is the correct venue.-- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 17:59, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

/* Devlin (surname) */

Any way to get link to Michael J. Devlin page removed from Devlin surname page?

Secondly if not, can the name the biography page title be changed to Michael John Devlin?

MikeD2000 (talk) 07:04, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not going to remove a completely valid navigational link because a single individual who shares the same common name doesn't like to see it there.-- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 22:30, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

A brownie for you!

Thanks for helping me find help on how to do things. JTZegers (talk) 18:01, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Some bubble tea for you!

Here is some bubble tea to go with your brownie P. I've been meaning to stop by and say that I hope you and yours are safe and well in these crazy times. Best regards MarnetteD|Talk 19:47, 14 May 2020 (UTC)
This came at the perfect time. A nice post-lunch treat! Cheers, -- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 19:49, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

At Talk:Momo (food) and Talk:Kukri.

Thanks for noticing this obvious issue. I have reported it at WP:RFPP. Has there been a report filed at WP:SPI? I wouldn't want to be duplicating requests. Cheers, RandomCanadian (talk | contribs) 23:18, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

It very much looks like offsite coordinated editing as opposed to outright socking. I did some very basic initial checks and quickly realized that WP:MEAT is likely the case. If the recruitment template doesn't help, it may be necessary to protect the talk pages as well.-- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 23:22, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

Bigg Boss socky socks

Hi! Since you blocked the accounts, could you also leave a note or something at SPI report where I reported them. —  HELLKNOWZ   ▎TALK 16:20, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

I didn't realize there was an SPI, just sort of stumbled upon it. I've closed the report; thanks for letting me know.-- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 16:26, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

Hey again! A new account for your consideration. It might also be time to semi this particular article too. —  HELLKNOWZ   ▎TALK 14:06, 22 May 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for taking care of it. I also filled in Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Srinesh.saravanan#25_May_2020 since a couple new ones popped up. —  HELLKNOWZ   ▎TALK 14:16, 25 May 2020 (UTC)
SPI updated and closed. Thanks for letting me know.-- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 17:54, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

fake game show

I figured it was at least meat puppetry. I just hadn't see the whole fake game show thing in a while, I guess I was dumb enough to think they might have gotten the point and moved on... Beeblebrox (talk) 21:18, 16 May 2020 (UTC)

I never really get the end game for this type of socking. None of it's in article space and they're not really fooling anyone with the hoax; it's just a huge waste of time. <Shrugs>.-- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 21:25, 16 May 2020 (UTC)
Yep. I was dealing with it a lot maybe 7 or 8 years ago, and I kept trying to get one of them to engage and explain what it was they were getting out of it but I never got an answer. Beeblebrox (talk) 23:33, 16 May 2020 (UTC)

RevDel

Please RevDel this. Thanks. --Stay safe, ◊PRAHLADbalaji (M•T•A•C) This message was left at 22:45, 16 May 2020 (UTC)

I already redacted it and revoked talk page access, and it's not really directed at anyone. I think anything further at this point would just be leaning in to WP:DNFTT.-- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 22:55, 16 May 2020 (UTC)
But even trolls need to eat... TonyBallioni (talk) 22:57, 16 May 2020 (UTC)
Silly Ballioni, weekends no longer exist!-- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 22:59, 16 May 2020 (UTC)
Silly Ponyo, weekends are when we day drink. I had a nice Sav Blanc today. BH was drinking some fancy alcoholic root beer last night. We need DoRD to join us for his bourbon wisdom, though. TonyBallioni (talk) 23:19, 16 May 2020 (UTC)
We need DoRD to <fill in the blank here>. -- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 23:23, 16 May 2020 (UTC)

Request to reduce protection level of The Skywalker Saga

Hey, I think admin protection was a little too harsh. I think Extended confirmed protection would be better since the only user that has been disruptively changing the page is not even close to the required edits for extended confirmed rights. OcelotCreeper (talk) 16:16, 17 May 2020 (UTC)

@OcelotCreeper: I think you mean Skywalker saga. Extended confirmed is better suited for articles, not redirects that are being protected so that they remain in place pending talk page consensus otherwise. It's essentially the same as salting an article and create protecting the redirect. Is there an edit you need to make to the redirect? -- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 16:24, 17 May 2020 (UTC)
No, but thanks for explaining. OcelotCreeper (talk) 16:40, 17 May 2020 (UTC)

Article Creation Tips?

Hi, I saw some of the articles you've created and I was impressed. Do you think you could give me some tips on places to look to get started with writing an article from scratch? It looks like a bit of a daunting task given formatting challenges. If you are too busy feel free to disregard!

Warm regards, BasicsOnly (talk) 19:48, 17 May 2020 (UTC)

That "American" IP...

...see this. Drmies (talk) 02:12, 19 May 2020 (UTC)

I knew I'd seen them before, and they were indeed using another open proxy.-- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 02:17, 19 May 2020 (UTC)

Rothschild1234

Hi Ponyo. Rothschild1234 has been using the 114.5.250.143 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) IP for socking. As you blocked a previous sock, I was wondering if you can keep an eye on this one, and block it if the disruption continues. Regards. --Urbanoc (talk) 13:52, 19 May 2020 (UTC)

Thanks. Rothschild1234 was later editing with the 114.4.213.215 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) IP, but it seems inactive now. --Urbanoc (talk) 21:02, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
Got it. I also semi-protected a handful of their target articles.-- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 21:07, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

unhelpful edits

You might want to remove this unhelpful edit from an IP who seems to know an awful lot, as I would imagine it's going to be confusing to a newbie. Praxidicae (talk) 15:43, 22 May 2020 (UTC)

Draft: Kamil Tolon

Hello, Could you check this page. It is from TRwiki. Thank you!--Yiğitcank (talk) 19:06, 22 May 2020 (UTC)

It looks like there are already a couple of helpful people checking the draft for you.-- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 19:12, 22 May 2020 (UTC)

But they did not take to the main section :(--Yiğitcank (talk) 19:14, 22 May 2020 (UTC)

Note the bolded message in the draft review box that states "Review waiting, please be patient" and "This may take 5 weeks or more". There are plenty of ways you can help out in the meantime! -- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 19:17, 22 May 2020 (UTC)

Okay Thank you! I need to wait so then...--Yiğitcank (talk) 19:18, 22 May 2020 (UTC)

Maybe you can work on some of these requested translations to make the time go faster, if it interests you? -- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 19:27, 22 May 2020 (UTC)

Sorry

Sorry — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mirchindia (talk • contribs) 03:41, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

@Mirchindia: Your edits required a significant amount of clean up. Please leave drafts alone until you have more experience and basic editing skills.-- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 03:46, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

Help me to develop this Article

Jayasurya_Mayilsamy_(Blogger) i did not created this article may be if you help to develop this article for me please — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mirchindia (talk • contribs) 03:52, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

There is no such article and there has never been an article under that title. Your edits are very concerning and follow a pattern that we have seen many times when it comes to undisclosed paid editing. -- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 03:55, 26 May 2020 (UTC)
@Mirchindia: What edit exactly brought you to this page?-- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 04:01, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

Thanks and a question

Thanks for the rangeblock. I should spend the time figuring those out. We crossed paths; I removed talk page access while you were rangeblocking. My change didn't mess yours up, did it? --Floquenbeam (talk) 19:41, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

It should be fine. I removed talk page access from the range as well when I blocked, just to avoid the inevitable time sink. -- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 19:44, 27 May 2020 (UTC)
Rendering me pointless again. --Floquenbeam (talk) 19:45, 27 May 2020 (UTC)
Not pointless. We're mutually redundant.-- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 19:47, 27 May 2020 (UTC)
Uh... I didn't think a range even had a userpage? Or does it have thousands of them ? Bishonen | tålk 20:37, 27 May 2020 (UTC).
The rangeblocked editor will have access to whichever talk page their IP is currently allocated to. By disabling talk page access when blocking the range, it stops that particular avenue of disruption (assuming they're known to abuse their IP talk pages).-- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 21:40, 27 May 2020 (UTC)
Even when she's not pinged, and even when she does it silently, Bish always shows up to mock me for not being able to rangeblock. That's right, Bish, I know what you're thinking. --Floquenbeam (talk) 21:34, 27 May 2020 (UTC)
Perhaps your Monster can do rangeblocks? I mean, he's quite clever. Bishonen | thinking furiously 21:40, 27 May 2020 (UTC).

Stolen userpage

Ponyo, I made several attempts to delete the userpage of new user MTV Hits, purloined from Legacypac, but I kept getting error messages saying it couldn't be deleted, or failed to be deleted, or similar. Isn't that odd? Did you have the same experience, since you merely blanked it? Bishonen | tålk 20:37, 27 May 2020 (UTC).

Well, I see you now have deleted it. Hardly fair. :-( (On me, I mean.) Bishonen | tålk 20:40, 27 May 2020 (UTC).
(edit conflict)I had the same issue; nevertheless, I persisted and it eventually worked. I think I know who this is as they're on the same range of an LTA who has done similar things in the past. I'm just double checking a few things...-- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 20:41, 27 May 2020 (UTC)
I persisted too, say five or six times. Do you think it's possible that we tripped each other up in mid-air? Anyway, I hope you find... stuff. Very annoying character. Bishonen | tålk 20:45, 27 May 2020 (UTC).
If it was our fault it affected all of Wikipedia!-- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 20:51, 27 May 2020 (UTC)
I hope it was all my fault, that would be powerful. I must say MSGJ got considerably more helpful messages than I did. Bishonen | tålk 21:02, 27 May 2020 (UTC).
You are powerful. You have a virtual army backing you up!-- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 21:08, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

Cloudkitty sock?

Hi Ponyo, maybe another Cloudkitty sock - User:CanIHaveSomeofJESUS (suspecting them because they also went to WT:RFA as one of their first actions to request administratorship - not super firm evidence, I know, but color me suspicious that two people did that in the same day). creffett (talk) 00:25, 30 May 2020 (UTC)

There's CU evidence beyond just the standard IP and UA that make me believe this is the same individual. Thanks for letting me know.-- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 00:55, 30 May 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for trying

Hello P. Thanks for you efforts in talking to G. I was concerned when I saw this request to shut down the SA page. Best regards and enjoy your Sunday. MarnetteD|Talk 03:31, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

Sigh. It's frustrating when there is someone who wants so badly to help but is both clueless in how to go about it and is not receptive to criticism. -- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 03:37, 31 May 2020 (UTC)
So true P. Fortunately, my evening is being made magnificent by watching this video of Lovely Linda singing that is airing in my PBS station. Here she is in another treat from my past :-) Cheers. MarnetteD|Talk 03:54, 31 May 2020 (UTC)
That's infinitely more enjoyable than what I'm doing. I grew up listening to Heart Like a Wheel. What a voice!-- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 03:59, 31 May 2020 (UTC)
That is even truer than your first post in this thread!!!! :-) MarnetteD|Talk 04:07, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

I do not understand your edition on the Saki Nakajima's page

Hello, I do not fully understand your edit that you made on the Saki Nakajima's page here 1, I have tried to add the Saki Nakajima's birth year, what happens is that the users of Japanese Wikipedia erroneously deleted the date of birth of the seiyu, now that there was no source and guess that, one already exists and well, they add it again. 148.0.96.73 (talk) 04:51, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

In order for a year of birth to be added, it needs to be supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources include independent sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy; tertiary websites such as movie and celebrity databases do not meet the criteria, which is why your edit was reverted. -- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 04:59, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

What the heck

You have gone too far you. You have reverted my edit yet it is true, what wrong with you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 102.0.87.180 (talk) 12:17, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

You'll have to be more specific.-- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 19:38, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

User:WIKEPEDIA1211 Sock

User:Wikiepedia015/sandbox looks awfully familiar. Best, GPL93 (talk) 19:00, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

It sure does GPL93. Or at least it did before I deleted it. Sock account blocked as well.-- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 22:53, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

Thank you

Hi Ponyo, just wanted to say a quick thank you for your help over at RFPP. Always appreciate the help! -- LuK3 (Talk) 20:54, 7 June 2020 (UTC)

No problem. I should check in there more, so it's a guilty response.-- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 20:56, 7 June 2020 (UTC)

Re: WDDM Article

Hi. Firstly thanks for protecting the article. Secondly, I don't believe it necessary for me to be making a case on the article's talk, as I have been purely removing unsourced speculation. Similarly why I continued to revert beyond 3RR, in accordance with the exceptions listed on the policy page. If you review the respective revisions you'll see that comparatively, the other entries (that were accidentally removed by your rv) all had citations to official MSFT documentation. While the other user persisted in introducing information (Along with abusive summaries) with no sourcing other than Reddit/Forum gossip and speculation. It'd be greatly appreciated if you could restore the lost sourced information, and prune the unsourced speculation. Thanks. 92.29.94.171 (talk) 01:44, 8 June 2020 (UTC)

As the protecting admin it's really not my role to choose sides and the amount of diffs involved is overwhelming. My best suggestion is to lay out your argument(s) on the article talk page and to leave a neutral message at relevant Wikiprojects requesting their input. From the article talk page, Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Microsoft, Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Microsoft Windows and Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Software appear to be related to the article. If the consensus is that a specific revision should be restored, please ping me and I'll lift the protection.-- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 01:56, 8 June 2020 (UTC)
I appreciate the response, and that as the protecting admin policy (or convention) may tie your hands somewhat, but I feel I must stress that there really isn't an argument for me to make beyond "Does unsourced speculation belong on Wikipedia?". I'd like to refer you to the two revisions prior to your intervention, as they (The unsourced additions relating to "Hardware-accelerated GPU scheduling") are the entirety of the dispute in question. The other information that was unfortunately pruned by your subsequent rv was sourced and neither in contention by either myself or the other user. My stance is essentially "Don't add unverified speculation until MSFT or another authoritative party provide appropriate documentation". Apologies for continuing to push this issue, but I feel strongly that the matter is clear cut with regard to Wikipedia policy. Thanks. 92.29.94.171 (talk) 02:14, 8 June 2020 (UTC)
This essay, while humorous, touches on the reality that the version protected is always wrong to one side or the other. As there is no blatant vandalism or BLP info involved, there is no immediate need to restore the article to any specific version. It will benefit you in the long run as you will be able to point to the talk page discussion if your edits are reverted once the protection is removed or expires.-- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 02:29, 8 June 2020 (UTC)
I disagree, there is a clear violation of Wikipedia's policies of WP:V and WP:NOR. I am unable to discuss the matter on the talk page as there is nothing to discuss beyond the aforementioned policies themselves. As MSFT have yet to release any documentation for the relevant bulletpoint this dispute is regarding, there is no recourse for further action. I strongly implore you to consider the matter further, and take a stand in stemming the tide of misinformation from individuals enshrining Reddit hearsay and speculation as fact. This is the last I shall say on the matter, as I do not wish to bother you further. Thank you for your time. 92.29.94.171 (talk) 02:58, 8 June 2020 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Original Barnstar
Hey! I just saw your page. Great work. Chandranshu Gupta 02:09, 8 June 2020 (UTC)

User talk:Jadapalli narayana

You may wish to revoke TPA.--Cahk (talk) 07:49, 8 June 2020 (UTC)

 Done-- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 18:01, 8 June 2020 (UTC)

Increasing of security level

Dear administrator, Please, increase the security level of the article 'bp mandal' as it the victim of wrong editing and removal and distortion of statement sourced by a reliable source by an unauthorized/ unregistered editor. The sentence is correct and sourced by reliable source, though some unauthorized editors are creating vandalism. Deokalimuskabad (talk) 11:25, 9 June 2020 (UTC)

I've semi-protected the article for one week. It looks to me like the IPs involved were introducing punctuation and grammar errors and blanking sourced content.-- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 15:38, 9 June 2020 (UTC)

Please, increase the expiration date of protection to indefinite or for a year.Same unregistered person edits with different IP address. Deokalimuskabad (talk) 15:59, 9 June 2020 (UTC)

We'll start with a week and go from there.-- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 19:28, 9 June 2020 (UTC)

check mate?

The apparent sock Special:Contributions/Ali_Jaberian was a check user block, so I was unsure. But like you say, they have an uphill climb if they wish ti be unblocked. --Deep fried okra (schalte ein) 16:10, 9 June 2020 (UTC)

Ah, I see. That would be confusing.-- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 19:24, 9 June 2020 (UTC)

Block

Thanks for blocking me for a week. You didn't even review the circumstances of the block, and didn't even let me request a unblock appeal because you blocked my talk page. Thumbs up. Sounds like you didn't give a fuck. Matthewishere0 (talk) 18:03, 9 June 2020 (UTC)

She did not block your talk page, because as you may have noticed, you actually requested an unblock on it. Passive aggressive dishonest whining should be grounds for an indef block, IMHO, but for some reason we tolerate it here. In limited amounts. You got caught acting like a 12 year old, told the least believable story imaginable (and yet, for some reason, the most frequently attempted) as explanation, and you're the aggrieved party? You're lucky it wasn't indef. "My friend did it, on my computer, that I left at their house"! Good grief. Like we're all idiots or something. --Floquenbeam (talk) 18:15, 9 June 2020 (UTC)
@Floquenbeam: I got my talk page unblocked after I submitted a UTRS appeal. I literally said I didn't want to sound like my little brother did it. Why are you acting like it is impossible for another user to hop on someone else's computer? You obviously don't even know what happened. Why would I try to vandalize a page on a random day when I am autocomfirmed? obviously it wasn't me as I didn't log into my account after like an hour or so later after the vandalism happened. The worst part is that the person who blocked me was a girl. Matthewishere0 (talk) 18:37, 9 June 2020 (UTC)
Holy fuck. Did you really just say that? In the 21st century? Blocking indef. Troll or idiot or 10 years old, unclear which. --Floquenbeam (talk) 18:39, 9 June 2020 (UTC)
If Matthew hated being blocked by a girl, imagine how he's going to feel now that he's been blocked by the deposed King from Ashara Kor.-- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 19:00, 9 June 2020 (UTC)
Yeah, that's probably gonna sting a little. --Floquenbeam (talk) 19:04, 9 June 2020 (UTC)

Some more warring

Hey Ponyo, hope you are well. I saw you fully protected Andrew Garbarino for edit warring. I'm seeing the same editing behavior over at Mike LiPetri. The dispute is between the same two editors. -- LuK3 (Talk) 20:03, 10 June 2020 (UTC)

Ok, protected that one too. If the same usernames keep popping up I'll just reach for the block button instead of allowing this to spread further.-- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 20:13, 10 June 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for saving me some time

Thanks for the protection and blocks around this Ponyo. The IPs look to be the return of Icewhiz (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) (though I should add that it could be someone else) and I was clicking on the SPI page when I found that you had dealt with it. SPIs and 3RRs are such a time sink so I appreciat not having to spend time on this one. Unless you think I should :-) Best regards. MarnetteD|Talk 23:21, 10 June 2020 (UTC)

Sorry you had to deal with the fall out from this one.-- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 15:43, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
No worries P. You were hit by the shrapnel as well. As I wrote on El C's talk page I don't know if my acronym for that kind of troll will ever become part of the vernacular but they are just another CWaK. That is a "Coward With a Keyboard" and yes that can be pronounced as Quack or Qwack :-) Best regards. MarnetteD|Talk 15:46, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
Very clever. CWanKer would work as well, with acronym or without.-- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 15:51, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
Hashtag I like it :-) MarnetteD|Talk 15:56, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

Saïd Taghmaoui

Hey Ponyo, Can you take a look at my reply to you in "Ethnicity vs. citizenship". It's been over two weeks since I notified you. Kind Regards -TheseusHeLl (talk) 00:12, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

I hope you noticed my reply. -TheseusHeLl (talk) 19:18, 24 June 2020 (UTC)

My note on the talk page was made as an administrator outlining the policies and guidelines for the inclusion of ethnicity in articles as there is a recurring issue on that article with such content. I think more eyes need to review your arguments for change in order to determine consensus in this case. Perhaps a post to WP:BLPN may bring more editors to the discussion? -- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 19:30, 24 June 2020 (UTC)

Why did you revert my talk page?

You reverted my page to remove this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8EDW88CBo-8

But that video is quite right: the Israeli cause is meet, right and just. Why are you removing the explanation of things that are right from this site? Marplesmustgo (talk) 22:54, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

An IP user was spamming the link across multiple user talk pages with zero context and no exit summary. If you want to take the chance of clicking on an unknown mystery link from an unknown mystery IP that's your prerogative, but I hope your anti-virus software is up to date.-- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 23:04, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

Thank you

Thanks for blocking User:2600:8800:8C81:3600:44D6:A906:9414:5126. I seriously didn't know how much longer that was going to go on. JeffSpaceman (talk) 23:01, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

It's not their first go at adding that particular BLP violation. The article is semi-protected now.-- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 23:05, 13 June 2020 (UTC)
I was actually initially wondering "why was the article protected indefinitely?" Now, thanks to the gift of the "View history" tab, I know why... JeffSpaceman (talk) 23:07, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Copyeditor's Barnstar
Bravo: you are excellent. Drmies (talk) 17:48, 15 June 2020 (UTC)
The red star is nice. I assume the gold star is reserved for those who don't make such errors in the first place.-- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 17:58, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

Issue on Kevin Andrew Tan article brought back and page-protected article

Hi Ponyo I see that you brought up again this issue and even made this page protected. I'm here to inform you that the issue COI/UPE has already been resolved. Accounts have already been disclosed and the article has gone through a numerous edits to improve notability. I'm asking for your assistance on this one since I can't "resubmit" the changes nor publish it. I hope you can review it and finally, move it back to the mainspace. Thank you. Kileyco17 (talk) 00:44, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

Just noting that after a request on my talk page I submitted this page to AfC on Kileyco's behalf as it seems that the COI/PE has been appropriately declared at this time. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 00:55, 16 June 2020 (UTC)
Thanks Barkeep49. How will I know the status of the article on AfC submissions? I can't find it there. Also, what is the timeframe for this to move to the mainspace? Kileyco17 (talk) 03:21, 16 June 2020 (UTC)
Kileyco17 look at the big yellow notice on the draft page. That will tell you more information including the answers to these questions. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 03:40, 16 June 2020 (UTC)
@Barkeep49: Given the amount of blatant WP:SOCK violations going on at that article, I'm definitely in no rush to undo the EC protection. Kileyco17 and Antagonizer05 are  Confirmed to each other and are just the latest two accounts trying to push the draft through to article space. The accounts are going to keep popping up because the range is too large to block. Joy.-- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 18:03, 16 June 2020 (UTC)
Ponyo, I agree that lowering the protection level on the draft is not the right move. With the paid editing now compliant with TOU (though obviously not user accounts) if this article is ready for mainspace I don't have issue with it being moved there (though it would likely need to be protected at that point). Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 18:13, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

Air Canada

I want to remove Air Canada fleet section content because the content has been transferred to Air Canada fleet need your opinion Ktdk (talk) 01:44, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

and leave the summary of the fleet in Air Canada fleet section Ktdk (talk) 01:46, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

@Ktdk: My approving the article via New Page Patrol by no means affords me any extra say in what ends up happening to the article in the long run. If you find yourself in a dispute regarding article content, please follow these dispute resolution guidelines. -- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 18:13, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

Blocked user has returned

You blocked Khicks2212 back in September, and I believe at least one other associated account before that. Now there's a new account, Kh122201. Leaves the exact same edit summaries ("fixed content on page", "added accurate content on page", etc.) and makes similar article edits. No doubt in my mind this is the same editor. Please have a look when you have a chance. --GoneIn60 (talk) 14:53, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

Obvious sock blocked and tagged. Thank you, GoneIn60.-- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 18:23, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

Reliable sources

@Ponyo: Could you provide some information regarding reliable sources which should be used in the articles. Thanks. C1K98V (💬 ✒️ 📂)

@C1K98V: I linked to the guidelines on your talk page (it's this link). This page includes a number of sources that have undergone significant discussion and explains the outcome of those discussions. You could also ask at the Teahouse or the Reliable sources noticeboard if you're unsure.-- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 17:53, 17 June 2020 (UTC)
Also, if you intend to continue editing biography articles, reviewing WP:BLP is important.-- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 17:54, 17 June 2020 (UTC)
@Ponyo: could you provide some task which I should work upon. Thanks C1K98V (💬 ✒️ 📂) 17:57, 17 June 2020 (UTC)
The Community Portal is a good place to start.-- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 18:01, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

Another one

No explanation needed (electrochoc)/49.130.203.118 (talk) 02:03, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

108.21.73.223 (talk) 14:29, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

Heres a cookie for blocking User:46.208.236.218, who was giving me trouble! SuperGoose007 (Honk!) 20:44, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

Brahumdagh Bugti Wiki Page

You have reverted back information to the page which are wrong and false information. I can prove to you with news links that will provide you with correct sources of information of Brahumdagh Bugti so I suggest you apply those please because I know Brahumdagh Bugti personally and some information added to the page currently are false. Please get back to me soon. Mohammad Jan Bugti (talk) 11:19, 21 June 2020 (UTC)

@Mohammad Jan Bugti: Please follow the conflict of interest guidelines provided on your user talk page. You can request changes using the article talk page, but if your intent is to try to remove reliably sourced content and replace it with your own personal spin, it's not going to happen.-- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 17:35, 21 June 2020 (UTC)

Socks?

Hi my little Ponyo. An IP, 2409:4042:E9F:14B0:0:0:6D08:E613, opened an ANI thread about revoking my admin tools for topic banning ScholarM, with no great success.[14] ScholarM denies having used the IP. I'm not even asking you about that, as I know CU's won't say anything about IPs, nor do I much care, but I was interested to see the suggestion here that the IP was actually used by Khadim ahlesunnah waljamaah. So... do you see a connection between ScholarM and Khadim ahlesunnah waljamaah? Bishonen | tålk 20:46, 21 June 2020 (UTC).

I don't see enough of a behavioural overlap between the two to justify a check. Also, the Khadim account has been checked so many times already without uncovering a connection to ScholarM, so it's unlikely I'd be able to see anything different than what's already been uncovered at the SPI. -- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 21:01, 21 June 2020 (UTC)
OK, thanks. Bishonen | tålk 22:13, 21 June 2020 (UTC).

Question about what's appropriate on a LTA page

Hey there, Ponyo. I hope life's been treating you alright during this catastrophic year. I have a question about LTAs - one that has been at the back of my mind for several years. Way back when, the better part of a decade ago, somebody added a note on Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/Dragon2016, pertaining to a comment I made, in which I postured that Dragon2016 may have been impaired in some way. Now, I've always found it dubious to include such a notation attributed to me, as it was in passing and was naturally made in good faith, due to the odd and incomprehensible edits Dragon2016 was making. This raised another question that I haven't broached yet; is including notes about legitimate mental disorders appropriate on LTA pages? I ask, because the troll Zhoban - fifteen years and counting - claimed on another wiki that he has been diagnosed with Pervasive Personality Disorder, which is the root of his crude habits. Should notes about psychiatric diagnoses be stricken from pages? If so, I'd be happy to remove the note attributed to me. If not, it could add clarification to the Zhoban saga. DÅRTHBØTTØ (T•C) 17:45, 23 June 2020 (UTC)

I don't think we should be adding notes regarding the mental health of other editors, self-admitted or otherwise, on any Wikipedia pages. That's just my opinion though. -- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 21:16, 23 June 2020 (UTC)
That's a good opinion! I've removed the note the editor made that mentioned me on Dragon2016's LTA page. DÅRTHBØTTØ (T•C) 16:04, 24 June 2020 (UTC)

Template - speedy deletion?

Good afternoon Ponyo, I am looking for some advice please. I came across Template:No Sleep 'til Sudbury: Adventures in 80s Hard Rock and Metal Deconstruction in my recent changes patrolling. This seems to be an inapprorpiate use for a template from a new editor (who only seems to be here to promote his/her/their book) and I wondered if they were trying to create an article? Would this be an example of a G2 candidate? Many thanks. Agent00x (talk) 22:28, 23 June 2020 (UTC)

@Agent00x: It falls under WP:CSD#G6 in that it was "unambiguously created in error or in the incorrect namespace".-- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 22:32, 23 June 2020 (UTC)
Thank you very much, noted. Agent00x (talk) 22:34, 23 June 2020 (UTC)

User talk:DJTonyPrep

Oh great. Now he'll go back to UTRS. I just got him to respond on his talk page. (laughs, then weeps) --Deepfriedokra (talk) 20:10, 25 June 2020 (UTC)

I thought about that (sorry!), but there's no way that that discussion is going to lead to an unblock. They're just going to keep banging on about the unfairness of the block and attacking the blocking admin(s) as opposed to actually addressing the reasons for the block. Can we block editors from UTRS with the new system? Because that seems inevitable.-- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 20:14, 25 June 2020 (UTC)
Don't I wish. I'd have already requested that. I'll just decline anymore I see which need it w/o commenting further. --Deepfriedokra (talk) 20:17, 25 June 2020 (UTC)
I haven't used the new system. Logged in once, poked around and hated it. Boooo.-- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 20:23, 25 June 2020 (UTC)

He is Not compatible with a collaborative project. --Deepfriedokra (talk) 20:19, 25 June 2020 (UTC)

Citing sources

Hi. I'm just curious on how to cite sources. Thanks! Tarantino101 (talk) 22:37, 26 June 2020 (UTC)

@Tarantino101: There were a number of links provided in the welcome message I left on your talk page. Help:Referencing for beginners should be enough to get you started. -- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 22:39, 26 June 2020 (UTC)

Thanks Tarantino101 (talk) 23:24, 26 June 2020 (UTC)

Protecting Dasha Nekrasova

Thanks for protecting Cum Town, could you do the same for Dasha Nekrasova? The same troll is posting the same thing over and over again on her page. I think its this guy User talk:Yellow-billed Loon, he's obsessed with her and keeps vandalising her page and Red Scare and nominating them for deletion. Pinchofhope (talk) 00:39, 27 June 2020 (UTC)

I've semi-protected Dasha Nekrasova for a couple of weeks. There's not a lot of activity, but it is particularly nasty. I've also provided Yellow-billed Loon with information on Discretionary Sanctions on BLPs.-- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 18:16, 27 June 2020 (UTC)

Sock drawer?

There's a brand new editor on my page named Bishonen Kumari [sic], quoting the post by Aadhaar Gupta Columbo that you removed from Talk:Kayastha on 23 June. Anything..? I've asked them whose sock they are. Bishonen | tålk 20:11, 27 June 2020 (UTC).

Never mind, all taken care of. Bishonen | tålk 20:25, 27 June 2020 (UTC).
There were sleepers, which I've blocked as well. You can see them in my block log if you're interested.-- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 21:25, 27 June 2020 (UTC)
Oh yes, I am. Always good to see a flock of specific "Bishonen" and "Sitush" socks. Thanks for taking care of them. Bishonen | tålk 19:52, 30 June 2020 (UTC).

JoshGaming2003

I am firmly convinced that this editor is here to do nothing but troll us, based on a combination of his previous activity as an IP user, the totality of his rants on his user talk page, and his now current antics in his sandbox. Change my mind. Elizium23 (talk) 02:12, 28 June 2020 (UTC)

@Enterprisey: might also be interested in my evidence. Elizium23 (talk) 02:16, 28 June 2020 (UTC)

suppression

Hi.
Would you kindly suppress something for me? If you say yes, I will post rev-del'ed diffs here. —usernamekiran (talk) 19:54, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

@Usernamekiran: Please use the oversight email address to request suppression as such links, if they are suppression candidates, shouldn't be posted on-wiki.-- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 20:03, 29 June 2020 (UTC)
another suppresser responded. Sorry for the inconvenience. But thanks a lot for the response. See you around —usernamekiran (talk) 20:05, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

edit request of the article

hi ponyo thanks for the locking the edit section on the article of zorawar singh kalhuria , due to so much edit wars on the page . iam unable to handle the article again by reverting the edits made by several non wikipedia users from several i.p. addresses. this message is regarding the issue of some non referenced content and misleading type of texts in current version of article . i also made a edit request regarding that but no use of that till now. so matter is regarding onlt the first line of the article where it says "Zorawar Singh Kahluria (1784-1841) was a general of the Sikh Empire in the Indian subcontinent. He was subordinate to the Dogra ruler Gulab Singh, who was a vassal of the Sikh emperor Ranjit Singh.[4][5] In reference to his legacy of conquests in the Himalaya Mountains including Ladakh, Tibet, Baltistan and Iskardu as General and Vizier, he has been referred to as the "Napoleon of India",[6] and "Conqueror of Ladakh".[7][8]" according to the references and citations present in this article .it makes clear that zorawar singh kalhuria is the dogra general of the army of dogra maharaja gulab singh the maharaja gulab singh is the vassal of the sikh empire . so mentioning term he was general of sikh empire is quite misleading .it may be a previous edit by somebody ,so kindly don't associate sikh empire with zorawar singh term if you need more realible references by 19th century british historians books i can provide you here is references Frederick Drew, The Jummoo & Kashmir territories Alexander Cunningham, Ladak A. H. Francke, Antiquities of Indian Tibet Fisher, Rose, and Huttenback, The Himalayan Battle-ground

i raised this issue due to the fact the i found people got mislead by reading the first line and talking him as a sikh by the reading the first line of article ,i have seen multiple people twitter which got mislead by thinking that he is sikh by his identity although article mentions the his religion in early life and career section but most people don't go further upto that section by reading whole article beacause people nowdays just google the name and it shows the first line on google only ,thats why this is misleading in this way, for further info check talk page of zorawar singh kalhuria where the dispute of his religion is already solved in 2017-2018. so as a wikipedia community member i thought its my duty to raise this issue to respected admins . thanks waiting for your response --Loneltrussia (talk) 09:01, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

Everyone editing Zorawar Singh Kahluria believes their version of the article is correct which resulted in endless edit warring. As the protecting admin it would not be prudent for me to become involved in the content dispute and the article talk page is the best venue to request changes. It looks like you've done that and have received assistance there.-- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 17:57, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
Archive 45←Archive 47Archive 48Archive 49Archive 50Archive 51→Archive 55
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Ponyo/Archive_49&oldid=1190256011"