Jump to content

User talk:Ponyo/Archive 35

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 30←Archive 33Archive 34Archive 35Archive 36Archive 37→Archive 40

Hello Ponyo

I like the way You handled a user called richybachvevo. He finally had his final downfall and won't ever be able to Edit or create Fake entity's again. Also I was wondering if I can work for You. As a Wikipedian I would be Admins Helper and More Reply back if Yes or no Thank you.Mr.Madison (talk) 21:41, 14 October 2016 (UTC)

Blocked user back again

Hi Ponyo
User:70.124.133.228 is back and stomped me a couple times. Three IP hops and a pair of proxy buddies in a few days: 2605:6000:ef52:b200:e88c:6801:6567:6f6e, 2605:6000:EF52:B200:B8D5:511F:4EFA:4323, 2605:6000:ef52:b200:c8a5:a0dc:501b:23ae, 172.56.6.161, and 172.56.31.32
With all the hopping, I don't think an IP block will work, so it would cheer me up considerably if you could semi-protect the following three pages:
Soroti Airport, Namulonge Airport, and Index of Uganda-related articles.
If you check Soroti, you can see what User:Fsmatovu and I have been putting up with for the past two years. Thanks very muchly, Cptmrmcmillan (talk) 07:07, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

@Cptmrmcmillan: I've blocked the 2605:6000:ef52:b200::/64 range for two weeks as there has been plenty of block evasion from that range. The other IPs are more problematic as the range is too large to block. I've semi-protected Index of Uganda-related articles as it has been edited extensively by IP-hopping socks, but the other two articles really don't have enough disruptive edits to be considered for semi-protection according to the policy for its use. I would suggest you just revert the edits when necessary (see WP:BANREVERT).--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 20:35, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
Thank you. Cptmrmcmillan (talk) 22:17, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

Special:Contributions/Tum_Kon_Piya??

Hi. This an obvious sock of Special:Contributions/Aap_Yahan_Aaye_Kis_Liye. Ugog Nizdast (talk) 12:55, 7 October 2016 (UTC)

Its is indeed another  Confirmed sock. Now blocked and tagged.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 18:09, 7 October 2016 (UTC)

Vicky12333 sleepers?

Hi Ponyo, is there any chance I could get your help in looking for sleepers of Vicky12333? (Previous SPI cases here.) Naagin (2015 series) was an area of interest, with several users prefixed "Parth" having edited there. Things seemed to go quiet, but Tippu Sultan 786 sprang up around the tail end of the last few Vicky socks, Kasamterepyar ki and Parth 1245. I'd been having competence issues with him in the world of Indian TV article formatting. Then VarunFEB2003 made some questionable changes to this article, removing a merge template and deciding that the related discussion was closed. This account has been around for many months and he's made about 7000 edits, so my guess is that he's probably unrelated. However, he was recently indeffed for incompetence, which is what makes me curious about his potential relationship to the Vicky socks. Then, a day after Varun was blocked, three edits were made by user Please stop blocking me I have done nothing. Obviously a cry for attention, and if you note their talk page, "I dont like when people block me without reason from editing." So this guy at the very least needs some CU attention, methinks, and it made me think that maybe there are multiple accounts related here. I appreciate any help you can provide, as usual. Thanks!! Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:10, 7 October 2016 (UTC)

The "Please stop blocking me I have done nothing" account is a  Confirmed sock, but the Vicky12333 ranges are extremely large and varied which makes sleepers pretty much impossible to find in advance (unfortunately).--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 18:12, 7 October 2016 (UTC)

Azul411 sock

Hi Ponyo, this is just to alert you of another Azul sock, 5gsaw8, per WP:DUCK. Not going to revert their only substantial edit so far, as they may in that particular (and rare) case be correct. -Darouet (talk) 17:32, 7 October 2016 (UTC)

Clearly a sleeper, now blocked and tagged.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 18:13, 7 October 2016 (UTC)
Thanks. I did a little searching today, and it's weird how some of these prolific sock account creators will all create very similar-sounding sock accounts. -Darouet (talk) 01:39, 8 October 2016 (UTC)

Blocked Sockpuppet

Looks like blocked sockpuppet User:Øystein.Eide is back with new account User:Sadashiva23.Ilber8000 (talk) 00:35, 9 October 2016 (UTC)

Blocked by SpacemanSpiff.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 21:57, 11 October 2016 (UTC)
I've left this (and a couple of other) SPIs open as I suspect there are a few more accounts active. *hint*hint*. —SpacemanSpiff 04:21, 12 October 2016 (UTC)
@SpacemanSpiff: Hint taken. I've noted a few extra accounts at the SPI.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 16:06, 12 October 2016 (UTC)
Thanks Ponyo. Meantime, is there any benefit to a range block? He's active with IPs on Gujarati people as well as many other such linguistic people articles. Some changes have been dubious at best while others seem reasonable but it's wasting a lot of time having to check them all out. I've blocked a few IPs individually, but I'm not as savvy as some dinozillas are to check on range blocks. cheers. —SpacemanSpiff 06:28, 13 October 2016 (UTC)
I wish a rangeblock was possible, but even if I could cobble together a short term fix they are using proxies and webhosts so it wold be ineffective. We're left with quick detection and blocking unfortunately. Semi-protection is also available, though there are many articles affected.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 16:09, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

Neeeiiigh!

Neeeiiigh, little Ponyo! Maybe, since you have confirmed that Thandrapaparayudu is a sock of Padmalakshmisx, you want to put that into the SPI, which currently just has me being deafened by the quacking? I'm not sure what the practice is with these things. I know it's already archived. Bishonen | talk 22:54, 12 October 2016 (UTC).

I was going to add a note, but the archives really shouldn't be edited. There were a number of confirmed socks that popped up when I ran a check.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 23:01, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

Another Thebadboyclownlol sock

Deeznuts101 [1] Meters (talk) 18:56, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

A "deeznuts" account vandalizing? Shocker! Now blocked.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 19:02, 13 October 2016 (UTC)
Yup. Has there even been a "Deeznuts" account that wasn't a problem? Meters (talk) 19:33, 13 October 2016 (UTC)
Nope.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 19:35, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

At least two SPIs

Hey, please look at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/1900toni and Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Nscharan007. I started a check of Nscharan007 yesterday. It's very messy. If I understand properly, your implicit finding at 1900toni is that 1900toni has nothing to do with the list of confirmed socks. Is that right? I'm hoping I'm wrong so I can try to turn this all over to you. I wasn't looking forward to continuing my check.--Bbb23 (talk) 12:13, 14 October 2016 (UTC)

@Bbb23: @Ivanvector: I'll have to take another look. It's all very convoluted. And painful. I think I ran a check on the named sock suspect first and then a sock farm unraveled before my eyes. I'm not sure if I ever circled back to check the 1900toni account. --Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 15:50, 14 October 2016 (UTC)
Sorry Bbb23, the 1900toni account technical info does not match those of the sock farm I uncovered, so you'll have to slog through the Nscharan007 mess. It all smells like paid editing to me.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 16:02, 14 October 2016 (UTC)
Ah well, I could always hope. That doesn't mean I'm going to rush right out and complete my check, though. BTW, the pattern is similar in mine. At a minimum I have a sock farm; the question is whether there's one master or more than one master. The words you used (convoluted and painful) are exactly the words I would use for mine. Thanks for looking into it.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:55, 14 October 2016 (UTC)
Well that's a crappy way to spend a Friday. I suppose it's too late to pretend you never saw it in the first place?--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 16:58, 14 October 2016 (UTC)
Only if I continue it today, which, at this point, I don't plan on doing. Hoisted on my own marking-as-checking petard.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:45, 14 October 2016 (UTC)
I'm not sure if I'll get anything more accomplished today before I blow and/or float away in the current storm hitting the West Coast. --Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 18:50, 14 October 2016 (UTC)

There's no I in Team

The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
Love it when the Cavalry comes running over the hill Thank you for what you do !
- Mlpearc (open channel) 17:44, 14 October 2016 (UTC)
That's very kind, thank you.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 17:54, 14 October 2016 (UTC)
Ditto - thank you for all that you do. GABgab 22:20, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

Draft:2017 Rafael Nadal tennis season

So does this Draft:2017 Rafael Nadal tennis season draft article just stay here forever? Right now Nadal doesn't qualify for a 2017 article but someone would likely create one if he does qualify and this draft would still be sitting here. I just want to know the proper procedure or if we should just let this rot in place. Fyunck(click) (talk) 21:39, 14 October 2016 (UTC)

If there is a legitimate reason to CSD it you can add a different tag. Or send it to WP:MFD. What I can't do is delete it as CSD G5 as it doesn't apply.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 21:45, 14 October 2016 (UTC)

October Nagendra check

Hi P, any chance I could get you to look into whether or not any socks of Nagendra NJ are active recently? There's been a flare-up of activity at the savory Mungaru Male morsel, and before I get into a lot of edit fixing, I thought I'd see if dude is working there again. Animluvhoney would be the obvious candidate. Account created October 8, didn't edit until four days later , made 11 edits on their first day (Cha-ching! Autoconfirmed!) then started editing Mungaru Male on their second day. They have also mastered citations in a single day![2] Thank you! Cyphoidbomb (talk) 22:10, 16 October 2016 (UTC)

@Cyphoidbomb: Same geolocation, but different device and ISP. That being said, they are socking: Animluvhoney, Karanjoharsinha and Mechstudent are  Confirmed to each other. I've blocked the lot; even if they aren't Nagendra, they're still pushing promotion/paid editing via multiple accounts. --Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 20:54, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
It's always something... Thanks Ponyo!! Cyphoidbomb (talk) 21:38, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
@Cyphoidbomb: I was wrong. I should have checked the Mechstudent account closer when it popped up as it is definitely part of the Najendra sock farm. I've retagged it.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 21:00, 18 October 2016 (UTC)
Ah! OK, cool. Thanks for your eagle-eyed-ness. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 21:05, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

Here's an annoying question

Per my report here, I can see the similarities that tip off that this is the same person. If I wanted to add a report of the whole range at AIV, what would it look like? RunnyAmiga ※ talk 22:46, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

A /64 IPv6 rangeblock can often cover a single disruptive user's allocated range (the rangeblock I just placed is on 2601:C8:C000:363D:0:0:0:0/64). IPv4 can be trickier and even small ranges can include a large amount of traffic. In my opinion it's best to list all of the disruptive IPs in the AIV report so that the admins can decide whether a range block is necessary and check for unintended collateral.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 22:53, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
That's fine. I was wondering if I was giving any reviewing admins extra work because I wasn't including the whole range but I guess doing something wrong, always a distinct possibility with me, is worth avoiding. RunnyAmiga ※ talk 23:10, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

Mysterious disappearances edit

As per this edit, you are better served not reverting a non-referenced item being removed until you are adding it back in with a reference. I will wait a very short while to allow you to add supporting citation, but understand that it is in keeping with Wikipedia to remove uncited material, especially from articles that might fall under the BLP banner. - Jack Sebastian (talk) 23:12, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

The references were already there two minutes before you hit save on your finger-wagging message. Two of them in fact.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 23:16, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

Mentioned you on AN/I

Just for the record, the autoblock kerfluffle is discussed at AN/I at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Iwachiw2001, block evasion, unblock requests. Huon (talk) 18:27, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

Thanks Huon, I took a look while enjoying a nice bowl of chicken soup on a very rainy day. --Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 19:29, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

Recreation of Radhika Gandhi

Hi Ponyo. Last month you deleted and locked Radhika Gandhi as a "G5 Creation by a blocked or banned user in violation of block or ban". It has since been recreated at Radhika Gandhi (Indian actress) but I'm not sure the G5 applies. Can you take a look, thanks. Tassedethe (talk) 20:44, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

It was definitely the same sock (and there was more than one there) recreating the article. It's paid editing so they are nothing if not persistent. Thank you for letting me know.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 20:55, 18 October 2016 (UTC)
Thanks, quick work! Tassedethe (talk) 21:05, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

High-decibel quacking

Hi Ponyo. I hope everything is well with you. First things first: Thank you for blocking the Iga socks. Ironically, as soon as I tried to relax a bit from SPI activities, here comes Danelylone885 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), the new sock of our old friend Ryanjay1996 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). Everything is there: R&B, genre-warring, position warring etc. But here comes the clincher: Just look at Category:Suspected Wikipedia sockpuppets of Ryanjay1996 under the letter "D". Most of the entries under that letter look like close-paraphrasing of Danelylone885's name. So I am wondering if the quacking is intense enough to just indef the account without going through the formality of an SPI. I think this is RBI territory. What do you think? Dr. K. 03:45, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

@Dr.K.: I've blocked and tagged the account. I also made a note at the SPI so that Checkusers can pick up the thread as it had gone  Stale.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 20:43, 19 October 2016 (UTC)
That's great. The SPI note was an excellent idea. Thank you very much Ponyo. It was very nice talking to you. Take care. Dr. K. 20:51, 19 October 2016 (UTC)
Happy to help. In a day where everything has been complicated it was nice to be thrown a softball.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 20:54, 19 October 2016 (UTC)
It is because you are an expert on Ryanjay that this was a softball. That made a big difference, at least for me. I could just take it easy for once and not do the paperwork from A to Z. I really appreciate that. :) Dr. K. 21:07, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

Jaredgk2008

This seems to be the latest sock. Another one recently managed to become autoconfirmed, so I wouldn't be surprised if there are more currently lurking about. Sro23 (talk) 07:12, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

There are always extra accounts lurking about, all sorted now.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 16:38, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

Page protection

Hi Ponyo! Is it possible for the page Maghrebis to be protected? There are two users who seem to team up on North African relates pages and remove links and twist information without sources (link) and (link). One user also uses french sources which can not be understood by non-french speaking people, thereby not be checked, of which I believe are used to mislead people. I believe one of them is a old sock-puppet with a new account. Alhaqiha (talk) 21:13, 20 October 2016 (UTC) Alhaqiha

@Alhaqiha: There is not enough activity for protection, and this appears to be a content dispute. Note that, although it is preferred, there is no requirement that sources be in English (see Wikipedia:Verifiability#Accessibility). --Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 21:25, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Oke, that's clear. Though, he uses links to amazon, of which the content can not be read. Neither is it a reason to replace other information like that. Alhaqiha (talk) 21:30, 20 October 2016 (UTC) Alhaqiha
If a source is dubious then you can be bold and remove it (leaving an explanation on the talk page). If the removal is challenged you can bring the source to the reliable sources noticeboard for wider review.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 21:34, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Oke thank you for the explanation. Have a nice day! Alhaqiha (talk) 08:39, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

Novice Entertainment

Why did you delete my article, it had good credible information about a company people want to know about. if you can please put it back because it was an article with actual importance. even though you may not think it does, it does. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Brocraft10 (talk • contribs) 19:31, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

The article was deleted, as it has been several times before, because it is being used to promote a company that doesn't even come close to meeting Wikipedia's notability criteria for inclusion. I understand that it's probably important to you, and the related account Lukisfer02, to have an article on your company here, however simply existing is no reason for an article. Perhaps if the company actually successfully launches games that receive wide attention, then an uninvolved editor may create an article on the company.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 19:38, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

You've got mail!

Hello, Ponyo. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 11:58, 22 October 2016 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Matter of importance -- Amanda (aka DQ) 11:58, 22 October 2016 (UTC)

Sock ring check?

Hi Ponyo, is there any chance you could look into a possible sock ring at Swaragini - Jodein Rishton Ke Sur? I've been having issues with really asinine formatting changes at this article (and several others) for months. At first it was Roseness 12, who I first encountered at other Indian TV articles doing weird stuff like numbering things 01 instead of 1, adding "Former cast" sections to cast list, incorrectly using semi-colon style pseudoheadings instead of L3 headings, using the "followed_by" infobox parameter to indicate what series replaced it in the lineup, etc.

This user has basically stopped editing (except I think this is her) but then Sab Fan 2323 sprang up doing stuff like this, where he's adamant "supportive" is a valid Cast subsection (he's done this numerous times) and again with the "Former" cast. And Tippu Sultan 786 has done the same weird stfuff with subsection formatting here. This sort of crap has become an epidemic across these articles. While I'm not sure they're all the same person, based on the types of edits they make, it seems a lot like a team of editors is trying to force these articles into conformity with some template that only they know about. Aaaand, many of the articles were created by Arnav19. There are also numerous intersections between these actors.

I've asked Arnav19 to help clean up these articles, but he's done jack. He has been around for a while, and I highly question his motivations. See his article creation list. Thanks! Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:15, 25 October 2016 (UTC)

@Cyphoidbomb: Sorry for the delay, I was away unexpectedly. I'll be playing a bit of catch up with my notifications today and will take a look shortly.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 18:47, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
Hey, I know I'm causing you work, so take your time. :D Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:51, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
My answer will totally not be worth the wait, unfortunately. I poked around a little based on the block of Tippu Sultan 786, but the ranges at play here are extremely dynamic and varied. Checks in this case are useless without a very specific connection being proposed (i.e I believe "x" is a sock of "y" because [insert evidence here]). In other words, it would need an SPI. --Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 20:41, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
Point noted. Thank you, P! Cyphoidbomb (talk) 01:31, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

Unclear LTA identity

There's some trolling going on at Talk:Profanity#Useless_introduction from an 86.173.* IP, ostensibly defending the 86.173.* IP edits that resulted in the article being protected last week. Several of these past IPs were blocked by you as "long-term abuse", but the master account was never mentioned by any blocking or unblock-request-rejecting admin, so I don't have enough information to request another block on those grounds. Would you mind taking a quick look? --McGeddon (talk) 08:02, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

I'm not sure if there's an LTA page that I can point you to. Materialscientist made both blocks, it was their block summary here, I was just the admin who revoked the talk page access to avoid the repeated "my edits are good, you have no right to block me" appeals that they often post ad nauseum whenever blocked. If they have hopped to another IP, then it's likely block evasion. Favonian, your thoughts?--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 16:04, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
My money is on WP:Long-term abuse/Best known for IP, who seems to have relocated to England. Same harping on NPOV etc. and similar unblock requests. Favonian (talk) 16:20, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
That was my inclination as well.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 16:33, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
Thanks. And yes, it looks like they're also picking a fight on a tennis article over whether a player is "known for" something. Will flag it at ANI. --McGeddon (talk) 20:12, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
@McGeddon: I've blocked the IP.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 20:17, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

Eric's World

Hi Ponyo - wondering if we can get this diff [3] hidden? While clearly vandalism, there's some gross stuff in there that includes allegations of illegal activity, and for some reason the show and its star are subject to repeated vandal edits that get out of hand. You were listed as one who does RevDels, and since you've previously edited the article I thought I would ask you. Echoedmyron (talk) 17:34, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for the head's up, I know who that is. I'll take of it.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 17:42, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
Great and thanks. Someone shared the result of that edit on social media which is how I came to see it, although I've come across some previous Nagler-related edits before, where someone puts the bio infobox in the article for some reason. Weird target, but still. Echoedmyron (talk) 18:16, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protection

Dear Ponyo, would you please semi-protect Ceyda Ateş's article for two weeks? It has been constantly vandalized by IPs from India, and now Bulgaria who just today become a member. Thank you Mona778 (talk) 18:17, 27 October 2016 (UTC) By the way, it's been a while since I've posted here I missed you a lot.

Hi Mona, it's very nice to hear from you. As none of the proposed birth dates that were being added to the article were supported by reliable sources, I have removed the date altogether per our policy regarding such discrepancies. I added a month of pending changes to the article to ensure dates don't continue to be added unless they are supported by the reliable sources required. --Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 18:28, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
You will always be my favorite. Thank you so much. Mona778 (talk) 18:39, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

User: Visualhistory

Hello Ponyo, We have not spoken for some while, trust you are well? Can I please bring to your attention the activities of Visualhistory (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). This "editor" has inserted incorrect information on the Robert Black (serial killer) on three occasions in the last two days, plus further wrong edits on crime articles, such as James Hanratty. I have have asked for reasons on their Talk page - to no avail and have now left a warning. Can I ask you to review and take some action please? Regards, David, David J Johnson (talk) 20:19, 27 October 2016 (UTC):

I've explained our policies and guidelines in detail; hopefully they read it and take it in. If they continue restoring the disputed material then a block may be necessary to gain their attention.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 20:33, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
Many thanks for your help, David J Johnson (talk) 20:42, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

Should I be concerned?

Hi P, so I came across Tsukuyo-yomi who has four unblock requests on his talk page. From the sound of things, he got caught up in an IP block. I guess the block has been released, but he's making edits like this, where he creates an article on a dub of a Hindi television series as Naagini (Tamil TV Series) and then he does it again only this time at the slightly-differently-named article Naagini (Tamil TV series) (lower-case "series" is the difference). Naagin is an area that the Vicky12333 socks were interested in. Incompetence was something Vicky12333 excelled at, but I think Tsukoyo-yomi's English might be better and I don't see the hallmark "plz". The user admits in his unblock requests that he has used multiple accounts, "So I create a new account many times." Worth a look? Thanks, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:52, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

I don't see anything obvious and I can't find the block that may have triggered the issue. --Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 16:28, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

Notice

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Hello71 3RR block review. Thank you. ⁓ Hello71 20:05, 29 October 2016 (UTC)

Blocked Sock back again

Hi,No doubt Momina Mustehsan is under continuous sock-editing. If you check the edit history, you will find that a particular user-Bach Ke Tu Rehna Re Bach Ke Tu Rehna (talk · contribs) incorporated almost the same edits in the article after the same were disbanded as sock edits a week back,by you,coming from one of the puppets - JanemanJah, of the master account on 25 October 2016.I have reported the account as a sockpuppet (courtesy Twinkle) which has subsequently created an investigation page here.Any help/advice on the issue from your side will be graciously accepted.ThanksAru@baska❯❯❯ Vanguard 14:01, 31 October 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for letting me know. I've updated the SPI.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 18:24, 31 October 2016 (UTC)

Undertrialryryr

Hi Ponyo! It seems like Silver Dragon Riders (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is Undertrialryryr (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). — JJMC89 (T·C) 04:52, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

Blocked now.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 16:23, 1 November 2016 (UTC)
Oooh, and we now have a master for John Jaffar Janardan. Good for you!--Bbb23 (talk) 17:13, 1 November 2016 (UTC)
I'll send you a couple notes. Better get out your secret decoder ring! --Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 17:15, 1 November 2016 (UTC)
Meh, last time I got one of those it was just a stupid commercial for Ovaltine. —DoRD (talk) 17:46, 1 November 2016 (UTC)
@DoRD: You need the Cracker Jack model to get the full effect.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 17:50, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

Continued disruption by blocked IP-hopper

Hi, Ponyo. Last month, you implemented brief blocks as you described here. Would a longer duration range-block be feasible? (Note the continued disruption resumed after your blocks expired, a small sample of which has been reverted here: [4], [5], [6], [7], [8], [9], [10], [11], [12], [13], [14], [15], [16], [17], [18], [19], [20], [21], [22], [23], [24], [25], [26], [27], [28], [29], [30], [31], [32]). The IP-hopper is now inserting various personal phone numbers into edit summaries, which may need to be RevDel'd at your discretion (See the last half-dozen examples in this list of diffs). Any assistance in this matter would be appreciated. Regards, Xenophrenic (talk) 20:37, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

I've reblocked the range (with the softest block possible) for another week, though I'm certain they'll be back as they are determined and (searches for an inoffensive word) unbalanced. I think I caught all of the phone numbers, though there were a lot of them.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 20:56, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

Lalit Bisht

Okay I found a page from July on the new page feed titled Lalet Bist (Lalit Bisht), I noticed that you did delete a page titled Lalit Bisht, do you know if this is the same one or what? (I'm not sure if this guy is notable anyway) Wgolf (talk) 02:54, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

@Wgolf: That's...odd. I don't think the accounts are related, just a confused editor making a wonky page move.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 19:45, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

User editing as IP

Hello, recently in the Battle of Cowpens the IP 81.101.124.6 has been trying to push an agenda and getting reverted by various users, when the page got blocked by his edits, an User appeared pushing the same edits. The WP guideline says to contact an admin in this case. Any advice? Tamagosh (talk) 01:19, 3 November 2016 (UTC)

Assuming you are referring to the addition of "decisive victory" to the infobox by RockDrummerQ, the edit is supported by several sources and appears to have a modicum of support in the associated talk page discussion. If you disagree then the argument should be taken up there.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 20:18, 3 November 2016 (UTC)
That IP is indeed myself. The only "agenda" I am trying to "push" here is historical fact. As you can clearly see, it is supported by both a slew of sources and the talk page discussion. (RockDrummerQ (talk) 00:41, 7 November 2016 (UTC))
It seems that Tamagosh has also been partaking in similar destructive edits to the Battle of Bennington infobox. Despite the source supporting a decisive victory, as well as common sense, it is continuously being reverted. (RockDrummerQ (talk) 00:45, 7 November 2016 (UTC))

User

User was warned by Titodutta

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/LaShelle_Shelle_Belle

And then created a userpage with message. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 1.39.56.221 (talk) 08:54, 3 November 2016 (UTC)

Unless there's some laundry to do here that I don't know of Ponyo this is addressed for now, I've left a note asking not to create absurd user pages and/or modify signatures and have deleted the user page of the unborn user. —SpacemanSpiff 09:52, 3 November 2016 (UTC)
"addressed for now" is good enough for me!--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 20:11, 3 November 2016 (UTC)

Disruptive blocked sock puppet

Hello Ponyo, Greetings and thank you for what you do. Please look at User:172.56.41.47. He is disrupting my work. I am in the middle of a contest, organised by User:Dr. Blofeld, the Wikipedia:WikiProject Africa/The Africa Destubathon. However before the judge can look at my work, this intruder comes in and redacts portions of the article, without comment. Please help. Thanks. Fsmatovu (talk) 13:04, 3 November 2016 (UTC)

@Fsmatovu: You mention that you believe the IP is a sockpuppet, but not of who. If you do believe the IP is being used contrary to WP:SOCK then please open an investigation with your evidence. Otherwise, I just see some grammar and layout changes, some of which appear beneficial at first glance. As the IPs talk page is a red link, perhaps you could trying discussing your concerns with the IP?--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 20:25, 3 November 2016 (UTC)

A beer for you!

Per your request here. I know it is a couple hours early but it will still be enjoyable when you get to it :-)

Enjoy your weekend!! MarnetteD|Talk 21:58, 4 November 2016 (UTC)

Thank you! This may just hold me over until the clock strikes the magic hour, assuming no one steals it in the interim (sideyes Drmies).--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 22:01, 4 November 2016 (UTC)
Ehh, it'll be warm before it turns 5:00, so I'll keep it safe for you. (so far as you know) —DoRD (talk) 22:11, 4 November 2016 (UTC)
@DoRD: I trust it will be just as cool and frothy in a couple of hours. I've seen some fine friendships and collaborations collapse over less (just sayin'). --Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 22:14, 4 November 2016 (UTC)
The beer should make a legal threat. First, by being blocked, it will temporarily stop the warming process. Second, a legal threat has a chilling effect. When you're read for your ice-cold beer, the beer can retract the threat.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:33, 4 November 2016 (UTC)
That sounds like a lot of work. I'm sure I could just entreat MarnetteD to buy me another round in due time?--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 22:36, 4 November 2016 (UTC)
Happy to oblige and make sure to get one for all the other people who have posted here and put it on my (virtual) tab :-) In fact this is starting to feel like the FAC that I was part of in college. MarnetteD|Talk 22:53, 4 November 2016 (UTC)
No beer for me, thanks. An OJ would be nice. Doesn't have to be ice cold. I'm not anywhere nearly as fussy as Miss Ponyo, and if you believe that ... --Bbb23 (talk) 23:04, 4 November 2016 (UTC)
  • Huh. What. Me? I'm drinking an IPA from Oskar Blues out of North Carolina. It's OK, but I prefer my homestate's Monkeynaut. I'm sure y'all got your six-packs cold and your bourbon at hand for Saturday evening, 6 PM my time. Roll Tide! Let's hope the Tide rolls. Drmies (talk) 23:24, 4 November 2016 (UTC)
Hmm...I didn't realize that Oskar Blues had expanded out of Colorado. My (formerly) favorite local brewery just sold its soul to the devil, much to my chagrin, so I'm glad to see that Oskar Blues has remained independent. —DoRD (talk) 01:22, 5 November 2016 (UTC)

Protection request

Ponyo, socks of Atomic Meltdown will not leave Trey Parker filmography and Matt Stone filmography alone. Would you consider temporary semi-protecting those pages? Sro23 (talk) 03:26, 5 November 2016 (UTC)

The editing is far too infrequent on those two articles to allow me to apply protection. It's simpler to just revert the sock edits in these cases.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 19:15, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

Blocked Sock back again

Sorry for disturbing!It is tedious given the nature Momina Mustehsan and a few other articles is under continuous sock-editing. If you check the edit history, you will find that a particular user-Aashka De Seene Vich Dil Naio (talk · contribs) incorporated almost the same edits in the article after the same were disbanded as sock edits a week back,by me,(and subsequently blocked by you)coming from one of the puppets -Bach Ke Tu Rehna Re Bach Ke Tu Rehna (talk · contribs) , of the master account on 31 October 2016.I have reported the account as a sockpuppet (courtesy Twinkle) which has subsequently created an investigation page here.Any help/advice on the issue from your side will be graciously accepted.Thanks.Aru@baska❯❯❯ Vanguard 14:48, 6 November 2016 (UTC)

As a side note--Is there any way to trace the IP and may be stop account creations from the address/enforce a total block?Aru@baska❯❯❯ Vanguard 14:48, 6 November 2016 (UTC)
Arubaska, I've upped the protection level on the article and extended it a month. I wish there was a simple range-block solution available, but this sock master operates on multiple highly dynamic (and busy) ranges.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 19:19, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
Yeah!I too think that's the only solution then.Cheers!Aru@baska❯❯❯ Vanguard 05:12, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

Blocking

Hi Ponyo, This is Caleb, I was using my chromebook at school. I bet my school district bought it from Amazon. So please on block me. Caleb Woods (talk) 17:26, 6 November 2016 (UTC)

I've replied here.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 19:25, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

Invitation to Training Modules design conversation

Hello! We are leaving you this message because you have previously indicated that you interested in helping the Wikimedia Foundation Support & Safety team in developing our training modules this year.

We appreciate all the help and thoughts users like you have offered thus far. We would like to encourage you, if you are interested, to participate in the next step of our development: a community consultation about the design and structure of the modules. Note that we're not yet getting feedback on the content of the modules - a separate consultation about that will be starting soon.

In this "design" consultation, we're looking for advice on things like the best place to host these modules, the accessibility of content, and other potential design decisions. Please feel free to leave any thoughts you have about these things on the talk page. Thanks! Joe Sutherland (WMF) (talk) 18:12, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

Join

Hello Ponyo, How was your day?. How can i be part of a project on wikipedia? --Music Boy (talk to me) 21:16, 10 November 2016 (UTC)

@Music Boy50: This page will be helpful.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 21:20, 10 November 2016 (UTC)
Thanks very much. I will take my time in reading that --Music Boy (talk to me) 21:24, 10 November 2016 (UTC)
There are also many helpful links and ideas listed here to keep you busy.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 21:27, 10 November 2016 (UTC)

Two-Factor Authentication now available for admins

Hello,

Please note that TOTP based two-factor authentication is now available for all administrators. In light of the recent compromised accounts, you are encouraged to add this additional layer of security to your account. It may be enabled on your preferences page in the "User profile" tab under the "Basic information" section. For basic instructions on how to enable two-factor authentication, please see the developing help page for additional information. Important: Be sure to record the two-factor authentication key and the single use keys. If you lose your two factor authentication and do not have the keys, it's possible that your account will not be recoverable. Furthermore, you are encouraged to utilize a unique password and two-factor authentication for the email account associated with your Wikimedia account. This measure will assist in safeguarding your account from malicious password resets. Comments, questions, and concerns may be directed to the thread on the administrators' noticeboard. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:34, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

Eric's World ECP

Hi Ponyo. Would you mind explaining why extended-confirmed protection was necessary on Eric's World? There was a single edit through semi over the course of a full for months, so I question whether it's strictly necessary. Thanks for your clarification. ~ Rob13Talk 22:13, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

It's a repeat target article for a particularly nasty LTA sockmaster with a penchant for BLP violations ranging from the ridiculous to the horrific. They moved to Eric's World when Eric Nagler was extended protected for the same BLP violations. Did you read the last rev-deleted edit? --Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 22:32, 14 November 2016 (UTC)
PS That edit stayed live in the article, about a children's television program no less, for nearly two weeks. --Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 22:38, 14 November 2016 (UTC)
I did, but given how infrequently it was targeted, I'd prefer that we try semi + keeping it on watchlists. I think it unlikely, especially after all this time, that they'll return to this specific article. It would seem more likely they will have moved on to targeting other similar ones, if anything. It's on people's radar now. ~ Rob13Talk 12:20, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
I know this LTA sockmaster and their actions extremely well. They will return to this article and continue the horrendous BLP violations that they are known for. --Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 16:50, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

Sent Email

Hello, Ponyo. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

A new user right for New Page Patrollers

Hi Ponyo.

A new user group, New Page Reviewer, has been created in a move to greatly improve the standard of new page patrolling. The user right can be granted by any admin at PERM. It is highly recommended that admins look beyond the simple numerical threshold and satisfy themselves that the candidates have the required skills of communication and an advanced knowledge of notability and deletion. Admins are automatically included in this user right.

It is anticipated that this user right will significantly reduce the work load of admins who patrol the performance of the patrollers. However,due to the complexity of the rollout, some rights may have been accorded that may later need to be withdrawn, so some help will still be needed to some extent when discovering wrongly applied deletion tags or inappropriate pages that escape the attention of less experienced reviewers, and above all, hasty and bitey tagging for maintenance. User warnings are available here but very often a friendly custom message works best.

If you have any questions about this user right, don't hesitate to join us at WT:NPR. (Sent to all admins).MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:48, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

Deleted userspace pages

Hi,

You deleted my userspace pages without warning. That was very rude.

OK, I can move them somewhere else, as in off Wikipedia. But I would like you to undelete them first so I can get the content that you deleted.

Kironide (talk) 00:09, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

I've responded on your talk page.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 00:16, 17 November 2016 (UTC)
Okay, now that I've received your emails, let me thank you for the "courtesy," and maybe you can stop and think about the consequences of your actions for a while, because this is the sort of rule-obsessed bureaucratic behavior that drives regular users away from Wikipedia. I was a committed vandalism reverter back in 2008 on a different account (one that's older than yours), I've made anonymous edits here and there over the years, and I could have conceivably continued to contribute to Wikipedia. But I assure you that any feeling of altruistic charitability that I may have had toward Wikipedia has completely and utterly vanished because of you.
You've just made Wikipedia an objectively worse place. Was it worth it? Is the little bit of bandwidth I used up for my couple of recipes such a detriment to Wikipedia that it was worth driving me away completely? You tell me. While your pitifully slow mind is churning away, maybe go fuck yourself as well. Kironide (talk) 00:30, 17 November 2016 (UTC)
I haven't read the offline blog post; if an editor would like to question my actions or judgment they are welcome to do so here. I removed content that was wholly unrelated to Wikipedia and that presented a potential copyright concern, leaving a welcome message and an explanation as to why the content was removed. I emailed the content to the user in question (who has made zero contributions to contribute to or improve Wikipedia outside of using it for a personal recipe bank) when they requested it be restored, and was told to go fuck myself for the effort.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 16:47, 17 November 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for responding. I don't want to criticize your efforts - I know administrative duties is typically thankless - but it doesn't hurt to give out warnings, does it? And Wikipedia has a declining number of users and frankly a bad reputation for its acceptance of newcomers. "Be open and welcoming to newcomers" is part of the 5 Pillars (see WP:5P4). Also, the user said that he has contributed vandalism reverts under another older account, and anonymous contributions. Is it really fair to conclude that he's lying? Ben Creasy (talk) 17:05, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
The account was created solely to post recipes in their subspace. In addition to the misuse of Wikipedia as a webhost, the recipes were cut and pastes of published material and constituted copyright violations. The content was removed with a note explaining why and I included a welcome message providing information with regard to how they could participate in the project. I then emailed the editor copies of all of the deleted material, even labeling each recipe and sending them in separate emails so that it would be easier for them to post them to an appropriate venue. At no point did I engage with them in anything but a polite manner and they lost absolutely nothing (except the use of Wikipedia server space as a free webhost). If you believe the deletions were in error then you are welcome to request a review at WP:DRV. If you believe I've misused the admin tools in any way then please begin a discussion at WP:ANI. Although I'm always open to discussing my admin actions, I believe this particular conversation had run its course. --Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 17:26, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

ICYMI

This may interest you. (I'm an editor but can't log in atm, would rather not say who I am so as not to disclose my IP.) Put some comments on his user page. 208.167.254.75 (talk) 02:27, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

Noted, thank you. Also, thank you for your efforts.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 17:03, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

SPI

I recommend doing an SPI check onuser:Glenn Richmond, user:I SO LOVE RHUBARB, and user: Hangman Jackson. 2602:306:3357:BA0:1CF7:A9B8:D082:F351 (talk) 22:59, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

Another checkuser has already blocked those accounts.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 23:00, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

Good job (in general)

I was going to comment in a thread further up the page, but I see you've implied you don't want to discuss it further. So, instead of a specific compliment and/or defense of your actions in one specific case, I'll just make it more general: you do fantastic work around here, all the time. I appreciate it. --Floquenbeam (talk) 17:48, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

Thank you. I can't overemphasize the value of a kind word now and then, especially when it comes from someone I respect as much as you. --Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 17:55, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
--Floquenbeam (talk) 18:00, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
I agree with this. I constantly feel guilty for imposing upon you for various CU business, but I know that if I go to you I'll get a diligent response and if my suspicions are warranted, (and let's face it, I'm pretty good at what I do...) a very thorough investigation! You're too damn good, Ponyo! Too damn good! The model CU. Also, please don't reciprocate any praise. MarnetteD gave me a nice barnstar today and I just want to soak that in. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 00:22, 19 November 2016 (UTC)

If these accounts ...

... (#1, #2, #3, #4) are who I think they are I suggest removing talk page access since he has started to re-use the talk pages of blocked socks that still have talk page access, creating attack pages on the talk page of about a dozen old socks so far this week... - Tom | Thomas.W talk 22:17, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for the reminder. I would have done so at the get go, but I didn't know who I was dealing with at the time. Cheers, --Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 22:22, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
Thanks. Here's another one with the same MO... - Tom | Thomas.W talk 22:30, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
There were a whack of socks blocked in that check by User:Jpgordon. I'm not sure whether back-tracking to modify all of them will be worth the time or effort at this point but will leave that for the blocking CU to decide. I'll try to remember to yank access on blocking in the future now that I know who it is.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 22:56, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
Check this edit made by one of the socks above on the talk page of another sock (you have to read the text carefully to see it...). A search on part of that text then yields this list, where the first nine accounts might be worth taking a look at, on both the accounts themselves and on the page history (to see who added it, because whoever that was is a sock...). I would have done it myself but it's night time here in Europe, so I intend to go to bed now... - Tom | Thomas.W talk 23:09, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
I took a look at the list and found an as yet unblocked account that is an obvious sock ( Loppylol ), plus a couple of accounts that had been blocked by Jpgordon. - Tom | Thomas.W talk 23:16, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
I've come across some additional socks and will run a few more checks to try to untangle the mess. Go to bed and rest, you deserve it!--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 23:26, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
I don't know if you've seen this, but it could be helpful when checking if the geolocation of IPs match (the geolocation part is in the infobox). - Tom | Thomas.W talk 23:32, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
Christ, I hadn't seen that but now can't unsee it. --Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 23:36, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you. Jesus Christ it's like pulling off a fingernail. Completely outrageous behavior. (If I may quote Judge Judy...) Cyphoidbomb (talk) 22:28, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

The attacks are completely OTT. My warning stands regardless of the IP used. I'll try to keep an eye out, but please let me know if it continues and I'll restore the range block. You have the patience of a saint.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 22:33, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
Range block applied. Since they've been launching attacks since at least August I imagine they will be back once the one week block expires...--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 22:57, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
Probably. Thanks for the praise on my patience! I probably would've semi-protected waaay sooner, but they got into the personal shit and I had to recuse myself. Though the geolocation doesn't quite work out, what with the IPv4 generally geolocating to Wichita, Kansas and the IPv6 geolocating to Valdosta, Georgia (if you trust IPv6 geolocation results) the 64.134.* range was producing tonally similar edits, which in my experience would would seem very strongly indicative of sockpuppetry or meatpuppetry. That the IPv6 editor accused me of being a sock farm is somewhat telling of someone familiar with the scene. Casual editors don't know about that stuff. The user seemed to deny the IP link at the ANI, "Cyphoidbomb conflates ip ranges in a variety of geographical locations to assume it is the same person", but see what I see:
Don't really know what to do here though. I'm at the point where my AGF has expired since I think we're into trolling territory now. I'm going to have a drink. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 00:18, 19 November 2016 (UTC)
I will join you. --Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 00:20, 19 November 2016 (UTC)

The Challenge Series

The Challenge Series is a current drive on English Wikipedia to encourage article improvements and creations globally through a series of 50,000/10,000/1000 Challenges for different regions, countries and topics. All Wikipedia editors in good standing are invited to participate.

List of programs broadcast by Geo TV

Hi Ponyo!

A few days ago, I had made some edits on the article, but you reverted, saying "rv to pre-sock copy (with header corrections)", including my this edit. On it, I had added names of Ramazan special transmitions and names of hosts along with the year of original airing. I also hid the name of movie Zindagi Kitni Haseen Hai, because it's a newly released movie and has not premiered on TV yet.

But for all, it is not cleared to me that why have you reverted? Please reply. thanks! And sorry for messaging too late, as I was not notified of your revision. M.Billoo2000 (talk) 21:19, 19 November 2016 (UTC)

@M.Billoo2000: There were a number of interspersed sock edits that I was attempting to revert. I tried to keep the beneficial changes, like the header fixes, but if I removed an edit of yours in error then please feel free to restore it.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 23:04, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

User talk:Prabhatjyani

Too many warnings. Don't let him get away this time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 1.39.57.53 (talk) 18:09, 20 November 2016 (UTC)

Already blocked by someone much more on the ball than me.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 23:05, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

2602:306:379d:1aa0::/64

Can you revoke talk page access for this IP range? Some IP talk pages in this range have been created with bogus speedy deletion templates that transclude other templates and user pages inside the speedy deletion templates ([33] [34]). —MRD2014 (talk • contribs) 01:15, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Done, with a link to WP:UTRS for any potential valid appeals.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 15:24, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

Brand-new account (10 edits)

And already mentions you by name. Account mostly edit-warring near-nonsense into Roman Empire (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). Coincidence? Dr. K. 00:02, 25 November 2016 (UTC)

Probably not a coincidence, but it could be just about anyone (I piss off a lot of ne'er-do-wells). Let me know if there is a likely master and I'll take another look.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 00:16, 25 November 2016 (UTC)
That makes sense. Unfortunately, the Roman Empire socks are not my forte. Thank you in any case Ponyo. Dr. K. 00:19, 25 November 2016 (UTC)
Well, the regulars at RE have someone in mind: Bernate to be exact. Dr. K. 00:44, 25 November 2016 (UTC)
Thank you for the update Dr.K.; I've noted the related socks/master at the SPI.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 02:02, 25 November 2016 (UTC)
You are very welcome Ponyo. Great work on the master. Quite a little operation, or should I say raft? Dr. K. 02:10, 25 November 2016 (UTC)

Vandal only block for PantherBF3

Please can you look into this?

Previously blocked for vandalism.

Returns.

Page blanks all prior warnings from his user talk page.

Edit-warring like over ten times at this point.

Appears to be vandal only account or by another definition trolling only account.

Thank you !

Sagecandor (talk) 00:24, 25 November 2016 (UTC)

I don't see outright vandalism, but they're edit-warring like mad, so I've blocked them for 72 hours.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 00:31, 25 November 2016 (UTC)
Thank you ! Sagecandor (talk) 00:35, 25 November 2016 (UTC)
Ponyo, if you have time, have another look at his edits and compare now with my improvements to the article, Fake news website. Now we have an independent section for footnotes, backing up and explaining each of the fact-checking websites. Hopefully that sufficiently bolsters each of the descriptions in the article body text of each of the fact-checking websites as "fact-checking websites". Better? Sagecandor (talk) 04:14, 25 November 2016 (UTC)
@Sagecandor: Admins who have taken administrative action in a specific topic area really shouldn't get involved in related content disputes in order to remain neutral. You can read more about the reasoning behind this policy here. --Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 17:00, 25 November 2016 (UTC)
Oh yeah I hear you I just was wondering if you thought article looked improve since then, don't worry about it. Sagecandor (talk) 17:10, 25 November 2016 (UTC)

New Evlekis sock

Orndorffo (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Same friendly messages as usual, but now translated to Swedish through Google Translate... - Tom | Thomas.W talk 19:21, 25 November 2016 (UTC)

Blocked now.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 19:28, 25 November 2016 (UTC)

User:Qayyum Ansari

I've just reverted a whole load of self promotional edits from User talk:Qayyum Ansari which QA has been using since you blocked him. Would you consider extending the block to cover the talk page as well? Thanks, Cabayi (talk) 12:24, 26 November 2016 (UTC)

@Cabayi: I've added the talk page to my watchlist. If they continue to add the promotional text I'll revoked their talk page access.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 19:17, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

FYI

Hello Ponyo. After several months away I just noticed that this Northern Ireland editor Wikipedia talk:Sockpuppet investigations/109.151.65.218 has returned as 81.154.209.39 (talk · contribs). They have not returned to their problematic editing - rather they are asking innocuous plot point questions. If you feel this is okay that is fine by me. I just thought I would let you know what I have found. Best regards. MarnetteD|Talk 22:04, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Thanks MarnetteD (talk · contribs), I've blocked the latest IP. Though they haven't returned to their favourite topic, it's still block evasion and the questions just suck up other editors' time.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 22:13, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
Personally, I think they should be deleted for block evasion. They were blocked before for asking innocuous questions which were quickly followed by the usual edits. Regards to all, David J Johnson (talk) 22:11, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
Thanks to you both for your comments and your action P. Just a week ago I was thinking this one might have decided to leave WikiP alone :-( Shoulda knocked on my wooden noggin to keep our luck from going bad. Cheers to you both. MarnetteD|Talk 22:20, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

SPI

I'll stop adding the template, but, just to be clear, I was re-adding the template after I caught them removing it. — Gestrid (talk) 03:36, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

@Gestrid: That's fine, I just didn't want you wasting any more of your time that could be more helpful elsewhere. The IPV6 IPs in this case are so dynamic and rapidly cycling that the chance they will return to a single IP address are negligible, so there is no benefit to tagging them.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 17:12, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

User:Polar Cup and the articles he created.

There's no need to remove all the content that Polar Cup added to the articles on episodes of Bob's Burgers. Although this might fall under block evasion, the content is well-sourced and completely reasonable. RedPanda25 19:50, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

We've crossed paths as I was leaving a message on your talk page. There is no "might", the editor who created the articles is checkuser confirmed to be evading their block. Also, this same prolific sock has a very long history of adding unverified content to articles as well as copyright issues. As noted on your talk page and in line with WP:BANREVERT, as long as you have reviewed the content and can vouch for it's accuracy and that it is free of any copyright issues, then you can restore it. --Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 20:03, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

REFUND: Born a Crime

Hello. I saw you were the one that deleted Born a Crime and was hoping you might weigh in here: Wikipedia:Requests_for_undeletion#Born_a_Crime. Thanks. --Odie5533 (talk) 22:32, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

Hi Odie5533; I would have been happy to discuss the deletion with you here, however as you have already opened a deletion review I have commented there.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 22:49, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Citation Barnstar
Thanks for the IMDb notice of unreliable on Christopher McDonald Eschoryii (talk) 03:02, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

SpaceGoofsGeekersBoy

Hi Ponyo, I recently indeffed SpaceGoofsGeekersBoy for a number of issues largely pertaining to competence. Here, out of nowhere a day after I redirected an unsourced article that SGGB was keen to reawaken, an IP editor from Houston, Texas (Houston Community College System) restored the article. Obviously I'm not asking you to confirm the IP. However, since you previously noted SGGB editing while logged out, if you could occasionally look into that, I'd appreciate it. I originally got a Kuhnstylepro vibe from him, but that kid was from Ohio if I recall correctly. Thanks, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 04:47, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

Noted, will do. (And they're not likely to be Kuhnstyle). --Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 18:39, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected

...your talk page for a week. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 11:35, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

Can we avoid the paperwork?

Hi Ponyo. It's such a big duck that I would like to avoid filing the whole report: Iaof2017 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). Last SPI: Here, where you had blocked the last named sock. Also see 3RRN report. Dr. K. 17:47, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

From a purely technical standpoint it's  Possible they are the same editor. Unfortunately, the behavioural component will need to be reviewed to determine whether a block is needed, so an SPI case will likely be needed.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 19:21, 10 December 2016 (UTC)
The MO is identical to the master. Large-scale, multiple edits same as master. Example: edit-warring picture uploaded by master Igaalbania: File:Lake komani 2016 Albania.jpg. This is just one of many examples. No pressure though. You don't have to block if you don't feel comfortable. Dr. K. 19:27, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

Rusky

Guardian of Democracy

Obvious sock is obvious. May be time for a generous helping of semi, depending on their level of persistence. TimothyJosephWood 20:50, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

Already got it. These are Kingshowman socks. I'll keep an eye on it for a bit, let me know if I miss anything.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 20:53, 12 December 2016 (UTC)
And now protected...--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 20:59, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

Request to look at an unblock request which I have put on hold

On 9 November you placed a CheckUser block on the range range 2602:306:8070:E850:0:0:0:0/64, as yo can see here. There's currently an unblock request at User talk:2602:306:8070:E850:190E:E3EB:1876:9FFE, and a couple of weeks ago there was one at User talk:2602:306:8070:E850:8D5:C10D:5FD4:BF41, which was declined by Jpgordon. I wonder if one or both of you would be willing to look at the new unblock request. I have no idea whether it is a good faith request or not. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 11:48, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

Hi @JamesBWatson: In the last three months this range has been used exclusively for block evasion and trolling and should not be unblocked. The request was made from the same mobile device as the globally locked sock accounts. Neither of the unblock requests are credible in the least. --Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 20:04, 14 December 2016 (UTC)
I thought that might be the situation. On reflection, when I wrote "I have no idea" above, what I had in mind was closer to "I am not sure", as I was strongly inclined to doubt the story given. Anyway, thanks for answering my question. I shall, of course, decline the unblock request. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 21:06, 14 December 2016 (UTC)
It would be a plausible story if they hadn't made the related "job interviewee" unblock request, and if the technical data didn't exist. You're a fantastic admin and one of your best (Wiki) qualities is the good faith you show to others when you're not certain. I could certainly try a little harder to emulate that.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 21:09, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

Page recreation

Hello,

In February, you deleted the page Megan Rain because it had been deleted first after a debate. But Rain received an award as Porn Next Superstar since that.[rain 1][rain 2]

Do you think I may recreate the page now? Greetings,--DBKPKD (t) 15:52, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

There were significant concerns regarding notability (especially WP:GNG) raised in the AfD discussion. The two links you provide are simply tertiary compendia-type sources that do not meet the independent reliable sourcing criteria one would need to overcome the consensus for deletion. If you're confident that you can demonstrate notability from independent sources, I would suggest working on the article in your subspace and then moving it to article space when it's ready.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 17:43, 16 December 2016 (UTC)
Thanks. I'll try.--DBKPKD (t) 17:51, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

Season's Greetings

Hello Ponyo: Enjoy the holiday season, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, North America1000 15:30, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Season's Greetings1}} to send this message

Merry Christmas!

Hello Ponyo: Enjoy the holiday season, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, Class455 (Merry Christmas!) 17:34, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Season's Greetings1}} to send this message

Merry Christmas!

Hello Ponyo: Enjoy the holiday season, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, 🎅Patient Crimbo🎅 grotto presents 20:26, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Season's Greetings1}} to send this message

Season's Greetings!

Hello Ponyo: Enjoy the holiday season and winter solstice if it's occurring in your area of the world, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, Mona778 (talk) 02:43, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Season's Greetings}} to send this message

Dear Ponyo,

This holiday season, may God fill your life with love, laughter and good luck. Best wishes to you and your family.--Mona778 (talk) 02:43, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

Jaredgk2008, again

I think I found a couple more socks to add to the collection: MetcalLaie and IzzyGabador. Also, LFO (American band) might need semi-protection. I don't know. Sro23 (talk) 02:55, 20 December 2016 (UTC)

There were a couple of additional unblocked accounts (ma)lingering about, all blocked now. I've also semi'ed LFO. Thanks for the head's up.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 16:43, 20 December 2016 (UTC)

Merry Merry

Season's Greetings, Ponyo!
At this wonderful time of year, I would like to give season’s greetings to all the fellow Wikipedians I have interacted with in the past! May you have a wonderful holiday season! MarnetteD|Talk 19:09, 20 December 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. The discussion is POV sockpuppetry by blocked user:Urchu at Japanese war crimes. 73.96.114.191 (talk) 05:07, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

Hey

Hey Ponyo,

Locked your page again as the socks returned and you didn't seem to be around. Hope you don't mind :)--5 albert square (talk) 01:15, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

Extra prezzies for you on Sunday!--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 02:03, 22 December 2016 (UTC)
Haha thanks I even logged in just now on my way to work just to make sure that they hadn't returned! 5 albert square (talk) 07:35, 22 December 2016 (UTC)
Just extended by a day. —SpacemanSpiff 13:56, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

Merry Christmas

Merry Cristmas everybody!!!
Merry Cristmas everybody!!!

"And the angel said unto them, Fear not: for, behold,

I bring you good tidings of great joy, which shall be to all people.

For unto you is born this day in the city of David a Saviour, which is Christ the Lord."

Luke 2:10-11 (King James Version)

CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) is wishing you a Merry Christmas.

This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove.


Spread the cheer by adding {{Subst:Xmas4}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 21:02, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

Merry Xmas!

Happy Yuletide!

Merry Yuletide to you! (And a happy new year!) --5 albert square (talk) 21:36, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

Season's Greetings

A hot chocolate for you!
It's cold where I am, but it's certainly even colder in BC. I hope you're having a good holiday, and I look forward to working with you in 2017! GABgab 23:04, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

Apology and Happy Holidays

Dear Ponyo

Over the course of February 2016-June 2016 I have been a very disruptive editor. I have created several socks, some of them actually made constructive edits, but others were vandals and mean people. I was wrong in what I have done. I was however rather upset when you blocked Snake Dude 2.0 and then my IP for 6 months as that account was not disruptive and it never will be. For the vandalism I apologize For messing up your wiki and trying to make it a miserable place to be. I am a wierd lonely guy from Central Florida who likes to seek attention. I have learned from many events that my ways of getting attention are counterproductive. I learned that the hard way in school. In September 2016 I got kicked out for 3 days for orally saying those sexual things, not unlike the edits my sockpuppets have made. I promise I will not do any of the things I did those 6 months. Also one more thing may I create a new account that will edit in a constructive manner. Have a Merry Christmas (if you celebrate it, do you get snow where we live, I mean I'm in Orlando we don't get white Christmas here, rather a green Christmas, not a problem for me as I love snakes and this is one of the few places where you can see snakes in Christmas) and a Happy New Years. I may not edit for those remaining days of 2016 instead I will start off with a bright start in January 2017. So once again I apologize for my bad behavior I will never let that continue ever again, and happy holidays Ponyo.

Sincerely 97.103.101.202 (talk) 02:52, 25 December 2016 (UTC) 

Saturday December 24 2016

Merry, merry!

From the icy Canajian north; to you and yours! FWiW Bzuk (talk) 19:47, 25 December 2016 (UTC)

Yo Ho Ho

Doug Weller talk is wishing you Seasons Greetings! Whether you celebrate your hemisphere's Solstice or Christmas, Diwali, Hogmanay, Hanukkah, Lenaia, Festivus or even the Saturnalia, this is a special time of year for almost everyone!

Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{subst:User:WereSpielChequers/Dec16a}} to your friends' talk pages.


Merry Christmas!


—MRD2014 (Merry Christmas!) is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Spread the Christmas cheer by adding {{subst:Xmas5}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

22:19, 25 December 2016 (UTC)

Samantha Smith

One month protection is too short, I fear. Paul Benjamin Austin (talk) 17:09, 29 December 2016 (UTC)

It's a start. I have no problems extending protection if there is disruption after the month expires.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 17:13, 29 December 2016 (UTC)

Sanam Saeed

Hi Ponyo! I have left a message on the talk page, hope for your kind response. Thanks! M. Billoo 17:33, 30 December 2016 (UTC)

I've left a note on the article talk page. Cheers, --Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 18:47, 30 December 2016 (UTC)

NI Troll

Hello Ponyo, I'm afraid our Northern Ireland troll has surfaced again, under 86.129.107.62 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). I have deleted the usual inane questions on the Entertainments page and warned other usual that this is a multiple block evading troll. Can you do the usual please? Whilst writing, thank you for your past help and a "Happy New Year" to you. Regards, David, David J Johnson (talk) 17:39, 30 December 2016 (UTC)

...and now blocked. On a happier note, Happy Holidays to you as well! --Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 18:48, 30 December 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for all your help. Best, David, David J Johnson (talk) 18:57, 30 December 2016 (UTC)

Happy New Year, Ponyo!

Happy New Year!

Ponyo,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
5 albert square (talk) 14:44, 1 January 2017 (UTC)

   Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

Happy New Year, Ponyo!

Happy New Year!

Ponyo,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
Class455 (talk | stand clear of the doors!) 18:30, 1 January 2017 (UTC)

   Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

Happy New Year, Ponyo!

Happy New Year!

Ponyo,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
—MRD2014 (Happy New Year!) 20:37, 1 January 2017 (UTC)

   Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

Happy New Year, Ponyo!

Happy New Year!

Ponyo,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
Donner60 (talk) 05:11, 2 January 2017 (UTC)

   Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

Archive 30←Archive 33Archive 34Archive 35Archive 36Archive 37→Archive 40


Cite error: There are <ref group=rain> tags on this page, but the references will not show without a {{reflist|group=rain}} template (see the help page).

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Ponyo/Archive_35&oldid=1190256427"