Jump to content

User talk:Ponyo/Archive 26

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 20←Archive 24Archive 25Archive 26

ANI case in need of attention

Hi Ponyo, hope you enjoyed your vacation! Would you, or one of your fine talk page stalkers please participate at this ANI discussion. I've only had about 25% response rate from ANI submissions lately, so I'm worried this one will go unaddressed. User has been edit-warring with Legobot, along with asserting his POV. He attempted to re-number the Phineas and Ferb episodes, which I rejected for no consensus, but he resubmitted them again here. Clearly he's getting caught up in an emotional fog. Thanks (and thanks to any of you talk page stalkers who participate.) Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:16, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

I left a short comment there. It looks like Ohnoitsjamie also has eyes on the situation now, so let's see how Hits hits responds. --Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 00:27, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

Lindenhurst Liberty

Please see the discussion here. I'm just pinging you because I see that you were trying to work with this user over a year ago. Every time they have a burst of editing, someone has to go through all their edits one by one and revert a bunch of them. I'm afraid we may have a WP:CIR issue. --Laser brain (talk) 00:16, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

I gave up trying to explain to Lindenhurst how their edits were irritating to others over a year ago. They just don't seem to care and I have no idea how to elicit a breakthrough regarding collaborative editing. There isn't really anything outright blockable however, unless there are still BLP issues with their editing (I haven't checked).--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 00:33, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

Help

Can you tell me about how to add a reliable source? Angelina Winget AW (talk) 04:54, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

@Angelina Winget AW: Once you have found a reliable source (e.g. magazines, journals or newspaper articles; not compendia-type websites such as IMDB, filmyfolk etc.) for the biographical material you wish to add to an article, you include the source alongside the material using an inline citation. Helpful instructions for adding inline citations can be found here. If you're unsure if the source you wish to use meets Wikipedia's reliable sourcing criteria or have trouble with the formatting, you can request assistance from the help desk or the Teahouse, both of which have friendly volunteers who will be happy to help you out.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 19:48, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

Page editing Madhura Naik

Hello, I am a new user and I represent Madhura Naik. I have made some changes and have cited appropriately. Please help me with the content. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Harsh Shailesh Shah (talk • contribs) 17:44, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

@Harsh Shailesh Shah: As a representative of Madhura Naik you should be using the article talk page to make suggestions and to request updates to the article as you have a conflict of interest. As I explained on your talk page, the changes you are making are inappropriate in that you are adding unsourced and poorly sourced personal information (websites such as filmyfolks do not meet the criteria for reliable sourcing) to the article. You are also adding promotional text and inappropriately-toned content such as "Madhura felt a little monotony in her roles and wanted to try something new and fresh and that's when Comedy Classes happened. She’s never done comedy before and as its her first time, she's enjoying the new challenges the show and the role brings.". Note that this is an encyclopedia, not a social networking venue to promote your client. If there is information in the article is inaccurate and/or requires updating please outline the individual changes you would like made to the article, along with a corresponding reliable source, and an uninvolved editor will make the changes if they meet Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion. The process for doing so can be found here.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 18:12, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

User: Omio Asad

Hello Ponyo, you blocked the above user for a short time last year. Since then this user has added incorrect information several times on the Chrysler Building article, as well as enlarging maps to unsuitable sizes. I have asked user to stop three times and have had no reply. Could you take further action please. Regards, David, David J Johnson (talk) 10:45, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

I've blocked them again, this time for two weeks. The slow motion edit-warring is not cool, but even more worrisome is their complete lack of communication with any editor who raises concerns. --Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 18:52, 12 January 2015 (UTC)
Many thanks for your help. Best regards, David, David J Johnson (talk) 19:32, 12 January 2015 (UTC)
Hello again Ponyo, Regret to say that Omio_Asad is up to the same tricks again, having made a large number of edits - all of which have been reverted by other editors. Explanations have been requested, but as usual - no answers. Can I leave this with you please? Regards, David, David J Johnson (talk) 19:08, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
Yeah, he's not even trying to communicate, and some of those edits make no sense at all. As timed blocks haven't had any impact, I've blocked them indefinitely and explained why on their talk.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 22:21, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
Thank you for your help and advice. Regards, David, David J Johnson (talk) 22:48, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

A carrot for you!

No cheeseburger, though.
Remember, we're on a diet. Drmies (talk) 01:37, 13 January 2015 (UTC)
File:Our house.jpg
A map of our house. Note how the artist's older sister, with whom she shares a room, is left out of the picture.

FWIW

You really convinced me to stop adding to Wikipedia. You cut a section I wrote on Kurt Weill because I didn't cite sources. While I do have a PhD in political musical theatre, citing sources can turn a 30 minute project into a several day project. If Wikipedia really wants to encourage women to write more, maybe you shouldn't just cut wholesale things we write. I do, still. occasionally do a little, but I have never spent the kind of time after that I used to. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alisar (talk • contribs) 21:57, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

I have only ever made one edit to Kurt Weill, and that was to the categories. I don't see anywhere in the history of the article that you have edited the article either (unless you did it via IP or another account). --Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 22:13, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

Two Brothers Tech

This has been deleted three times per A7, twice by you. Just created for the fourth time. I suggest salting - and maybe a word with the author? --MelanieN (talk) 22:53, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

I've blocked them for now as they were recreating the article within seconds of its deletion and quite obviously had no attention of stopping.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 22:57, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

Mehwish Hayat

Extend PC time? --Gh87 in the public computer (talk) 01:29, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

I extended PC to infinite - there continue to be significant BLP, sourcing and copyvio concerns with the article.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 18:36, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

KuhnstylePro

Hi Pongo, if you're around, could you please take a look at my KuhnstylePro SPIs? We've got an active flare-up from two sock accounts today. Also can we salt Phibian Mike? Thanx, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 19:15, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

Rahma Ali

Extend PC time? --George Ho (talk) 21:31, 19 January 2015 (UTC)

The disruption that led to PC has slowed down considerably. I'm going to let it expire and monitor it for a while.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 17:58, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
Actually, there was one revert within 24 hours. --George Ho (talk) 03:46, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Aldota

In your CU results, you marked Rimidogla as stale. But he's edited 3 days ago. Was that just after your CU data, or was the data that's available from that set inconclusive technically? DMacks (talk) 05:24, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

Rimidogla ended up in the "stale" column as I was cut and pasting my findings from the CU tool. They were also correctly included in the "confirmed" list, so I've stricken them from the stale column. Thanks for letting me know. --Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 17:58, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
I see. Thank you for all your CU work! DMacks (talk) 18:02, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
I haven't been able to be as active as I'd like lately. I'm balancing an unusually large number of plates at the moment, hoping I don't send them all crashing down. --Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 18:19, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
I don't think we've ever met, but if you drop one of the plates, save it for me and I will return it full of scones or other appropriate CU tribute:) DMacks (talk) 05:23, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
Now that's an offer I can't refuse.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 17:46, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

Please undo the article D. Y. Patil

I am Indian and i know very well what i did to article D.Y. Patil . Kindly remove "He was appointed as the Governor of West Bengal(Acting)." as it has now become past. It does not make any sense.

as of now,Mr. D.Y.Patil do not hold any kind of portfolio. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.212.159.167 (talk) 09:44, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

As I explained on your talk page, if information becomes outdated then you update it, you don't blank the outdated content. Think of it this way, every time Brad Pitt appears in a new film we don't blank the films he appeared in previously. If Patil held a position of note then that information should remain in the article as an encyclopedia article ideally includes the breadth of an individual's notable activities and accomplishments. Do you have a source that can be added to the article that verifies Patil no longer holds the role of Governor of West Bengal? If so, the article could be updated to state something along the lines of "He was appointed Acting Governor of West Bengal in 20xx and was succeeded by x in 20xx". --Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 17:45, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

Janagewen/Computerfaner

You might want to close the latest SPI case? Jeh (talk) 22:48, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the note. I've closed the report.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 23:05, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

Stale, checkuser

If you don't mind, may I ask how long can the chekuser go in the past? I mean in this investigation you were unable, since all, the master and socks are stale. And the last confirmed sock was active up to december of 2011, and the suspected one started on september 2012, so I am correctly thinking we are unable to go back more than a couple of years? If that is the case it could be a pitty, although I think the coincidences in this case are strong enough to state the connections. Sorry, if i am asking this in the wrong place. --ClaudioSantos¿? 00:20, 24 January 2015 (UTC)

Technical data is only held for a few months. Any sockpuppet investigations that extend beyond that timeline default to a behavioural investigation.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 17:48, 24 January 2015 (UTC)

RevDel

Can you please revdel this IP's edits from Talk:Larry Pickering? Thanks. --NeilN talk to me 14:45, 25 January 2015 (UTC)

Done.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 17:54, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
Thank you. --NeilN talk to me 17:57, 25 January 2015 (UTC)

Got another for you. I submitted it to the IRC yesterday but no action. If this is not a REVDEL issue, please let me know why. Thank you. Edit in question: [1] EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 20:45, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

Revdeleted under criteria #3. --Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 21:00, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
Thank you! EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 21:25, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

Another under criteria 3. Either the irc channel doesn't care about trans folks, or they're sleeping and missing my messages. User edits: [2]. EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 19:09, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

And also gone, this time under the BLP criteria.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 19:40, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

Please consider revdeling this under BLP. IRC refuses to do anything it seems. [3]. EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 19:11, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

Well, for starters I've blocked Frysay for a week. The level of tendentious editing they've displayed on that article talk page is overwhelming, especially given that they have been blocked for these same rants previously. Given the excessive accusations flying around on that talk page, could you email me the exact wording on the page that you believe merits rev-deletion? As you have had problems emailing me in the past, I will send you an email first, which you can simply reply to. Cool? --Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 19:55, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Oh wait, you don't have email enabled. Perhaps that's why you've had trouble emailing me in the past? --Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 19:57, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
I don't? That must be the problem. Let me try to fix that. EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 19:59, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Message sent! EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 20:03, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
I've redacted three instances wherein a specific individual was accused of a specific act of malice (purposefully vague) and have revdeleted the interim edits.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 21:39, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Thank you! Any idea why the REVDEL IRC channel isn't acting on these? The last 3 times they've not acted when you have and each has been a clear violation. EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 21:53, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
I have no idea how many admins are actually manning the fort on the IRC Channel. Perhaps it's just bad timing? Also, complicated cases involving many diffs take time to review, I know for oversight requests there is often a longer delay as discussion takes place.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 21:59, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
I did make the requests fairly late at night Eastern Time so maybe that's part of it. Anyway, thank you as always for your help! EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 22:46, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

Charley Webb

Extend PC time? --George Ho (talk) 04:45, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

Callanecc got this one.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 18:21, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

You've Been Emailed!

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.

David Cage

Extend PC time? --George Ho (talk) 10:32, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

No troublesome edits since July. I'll monitor.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 17:40, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Special Barnstar
For being awesome, dealing with the never-ending stream of requests, keeping Wiki free of haters, and being a pleasant person to work with! EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 01:21, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

In case you didn't see it

Hello P. I thought I would let ya know about this Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Block evasion by Claudia McHenry.3F. Since the IP didn't use on official ping template I don't know whether you got a little red dot or not. enjoy the rest of your weekend. MarnetteD|Talk 23:19, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

Ponyo, just a ping regarding this. A comment from you would be helpful, as I can't find the block which 199.101.61.190 was evading. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 12:57, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
@Callanecc: I've emailed you the info. --Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 22:02, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

CU

You're saved from pinging me. I just happened to see the edit posting the notice at WP:AN on my watchlist. Good thing too because I don't look at AN as often as I should. My gosh, the process is complicated. I don't seem to fit any of the special requirements, just the general ones. Good thing I turn 18 in a couple of days. --Bbb23 (talk) 02:09, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

Collingwood v Carlton- missing information

Collingwood v Carlton AFL rivalry page lists players who have played for both clubs but fails to list Ron Odwyer.

Cheers,

Tom Maggs (Redacted)

Hi Tom, do you have source (e.g. website or newslink) we can use to verify the name? If so, please feel free to add Odwyer to the article. If you don't feel comfortable doing so you can just post the link here and I can do it for you.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 22:12, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

ANI case needs explanation

Hi — could you please come to WP:ANI#Block evasion by Claudia McHenry? and provide an explanation there for what happened? This involves an unblock request on a set of blocks you made a week or so ago. I'm sure we're missing some important piece of evidence that you can give us, because what we've found so far doesn't make sense as a justification for a block. —David Eppstein (talk) 21:22, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

There is checkuser evidence involved, which is why you're missing some pieces. Though frustrating, revealing the "missing pieces" could potentially fall afoul of the Foundation's Privacy Policy, so I've emailed evidence to another Checkuser. That being said I've made a note at the AN/I thread. --Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 22:07, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

SPI no ping

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Admirenepal?action=view&diff=645784641 Could it be because of the way Twinkle auto-files the case? It could be the same thing with the SPI clerking gadget. Echo notifications require a signature and maybe the way that signature is applied via these tools makes it not-work with Echo? ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 19:32, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

Perhaps. It seems like a crap shoot as to whether I receive the ping or not. I'm sure there's some very orderly techie explanation, but I haven't had the time or inclination to investigate it further. I'm lazy and would rather complain at random :) --Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 19:36, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

A question

Hello dear User, please can I know the reason why those two files have been deleted by you - File:Turing at Sherborne.jpg and File:Christopher Morcom at Sherborne.jpg. Those two files were used in The Imitation Game article. Thanks in advance for your respond. M.Karelin (talk) 21:42, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

Certainly. The two images were uploaded by an editor evading a block and were deleted under the this criteria. There is abslutely nothing prohibiting you, or any other legitimate editor, from re-uploading the images under an appropriate license. --Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 21:45, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for your respond. Now I have a new question: those are 3 files I wish to upload to Wiki to use in articles about Turing - Morcom at Sherborne., Turing at Sherborne and Turing as a baby boy. Which one of those 3 files is possible to upload and use in Wiki? M.Karelin (talk) 12:59, 7 February 2015 (UTC)
As the pictures will be uploaded at Wikimedia Commons, the best place to ask would be here. Good luck!--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 15:59, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

Daustinc2 Odd Behaviour

Hi Ponyo,I just noticed Daustinc2 has deleted your warnings off his talk page. I remembered he has never responded to requests in multiple areas for clarification of his edits, often making what seem like odd bulk edits in many related pages that introduce typos or formatting anomalies—and he just keep going, never responding to anyone. I've never encountered behaviour like this and just wanted to let you know that it's not just you. If you're considering a block, please let me know and I can chime in. Lexlex (talk) 23:17, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

FTR, I have also encountered this with this editor, including Daustinc2 making the same grammar mistake edits again, even after I've corrected them the first time. I don't think anything merits a Block here, at least not at this point. But I'd say Daustinc2 is an editor that merits further observation, if outside mentoring is refused, as it seems to be in this case. --IJBall (talk) 21:55, 8 February 2015 (UTC)
I still keep an eye on them from time to time to ensure there are no outright WP:BLP-violations. Right now they seem content to mess about with placement of related musical acts in the infobox. I'm not sure how particularly helpful the changes are, but as long as they aren't outright disruptive I don't see a reason to block unless a case can be made that they're continually disruptive. --Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 16:00, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

CU policy query

Gooday. I recently came across a re-vitalised SPI where a very-new user who was suspected of being a new sock had been subsequently blocked within a space of 16 days in January. I only learned of this after closure. You added the comment: The master account hasn't edited since 2012 as is therefore beyond Stale for CU.

Is there a cut-off point denoted in policy? If so, would it be better policy to enable and record Geolocation comparators, or is there a technical reason why this is not possible? If the master was in another country to the alleged sock would this be reasonable evidence, on the basis that most people do not change country of abode or edit Wikipedia when on holiday? Is it simply impracticable due to the numbers of investigations? Thanks for taking the time - I'm sure there may be pages full of info, but I just don't know how to research this aspect.--Rocknrollmancer (talk) 01:16, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

An account going "stale" is a technical limitation. Private data is only retained by the Foundation for a limited period; therefore if the master (or one of their confirmed socks) hasn't edited recently there is no data for me to check the new suspected account against.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 01:29, 11 February 2015 (UTC)
OK, many thanks.--Rocknrollmancer (talk) 01:37, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi Ponyo, I hope you are well. You blocked an IP a few hours ago who had edited in Naver. Their connection appears to be a dynamic one in the same range. Would you semi the article, please. Thanks, -- Sam Sing! 02:48, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. I've protected the article for 3 days, hopefully enough time for them to find something else to entertain them (preferably not Wikipedia related). --Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 02:59, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

Çağatay Ulusoy

Extend PC time? --George Ho (talk) 18:48, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

Taken care of yesterday, forgot to note it here.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 18:27, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

Sockpuppet

Hello Ponyo! How are you? I am good. Anyways, there's a sock of User:Reer Woqooyi going against consensus on the Erigavo page. Do you mind doing something about this? A normal block won't do much since he has a static IP (at least that's what I think it's called). Here are some of his IPs: 83.110.229.178, 86.99.98.235, 92.96.134.5, 92.96.166.224, 92.96.164.236, 92.96.129.176, 92.96.176.42, and 217.164.186.190. The reason his IP changed from 217 is because he changed his connection recently, see here: [4]. He has also admitted to being a sock as well if you are wondering, "I tried on the talk page, but they got me blocked over another dispute" and I hope your happy after blocking me. It won't help though, am calling a mediator". Anyways, thanks! AcidSnow (talk) 04:44, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

As they appear to have access to multiple dynamic ranges I've gone the semi-protection route. The article is semi'ed for a month and the associated talk page for 3 days. I've also closed the DRN they opened. Let me know if they pop up elsewhere.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 18:24, 15 February 2015 (UTC)
I most certainly will! Thank you! AcidSnow (talk) 19:13, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

::: Now that is not cool User:Ponyo I am not using different IP's. I edit from my Laptop, the providing company is having technical issues and somehow that changed my IP address several times. Please note that I never pretended to be another person. I answer their questions continuously and as the same person. Please un bam the lock on that particular page and why on earth would you RV my contribution here? http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Erigavo&diff=647273186&oldid=647271690 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.99.111.163 (talk) 19:25, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

He is well aware of that User:Reer Woqooyi. AcidSnow (talk) 19:28, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

Can you please check this one?

Hi Ponyo, I see you've done plenty of checks involving Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/EstebanJals in its archives. Any chance you could take on this new request? This one seems to be a pretty frequent flyer, perhaps a page at CU-wiki might be an idea. Thoughts? Thanks, Risker (talk) 05:29, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

Hey Risker, I've left a note at the SPI.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 23:49, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

Concerning a Sockmaster you've recently dealt with

Hi there Ponyo; it seems you're the admin who blocked User:Kevinschaffer and various of his numerous socks. I thought you might want to know that it seems that he's active again using two new IDs -- the IP User:68.236.255.40 and a likely new sock at User:Alekuser123. The IP is trying to force a trolling edit at Johnny Cash that was made via one Kevinschaffer's previous socks (User:aintitfunny) right before it was blocked, while Alekuser123 has shown up at the same page making tiny vandalizing edits, which are that account's only edits so far. I couldn't find an SPI request for this vandal, despite his list of confirmed socks, so I assumed you ran across him at some other page and ran the checkuser yourself. In any event, I thought you might want to know. Snow talk 19:31, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

There isn't much to go on, however magic eight ball The CheckUser Magic 8-Ball says: Alecuser123 is  Possilikely (a mix between possible and likely) Kevinschaffer and I've blocked the account as a suspected sock. Not sure about the IP, it will need to be monitored.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 00:04, 17 February 2015 (UTC)
Heheh -- well, thank you to you and your 8-ball for your work in the vein of socksters and vandals. I'll keep an eye on the article in question, though judging from his M.O., he's likely busy churning out other accounts just to make a handful of vandalizing edits with each. The things some people view as an entertaining or worthwhile use of time... Snow talk 04:35, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

For your consideration

I'm not familiar enough with the situation to act, but you may be interested in this, this and this. Looking at the revision histories it would appear that you might have some reason to be involved. Regards Tiderolls 20:00, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

FYI - I did create a WP:Sockpuppet investigations/Swarupskd.wiki report for the new user. Exact same edits as Bappa.skd who you blocked as a sock a few weeks ago. Ravensfire (talk) 22:01, 17 February 2015 (UTC)
I've just blocked the account and closed the SPI. Thanks guys! --Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 23:50, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Newbie

Hi Ponyo. A just registered account has popped up out of nowhere in a heated Rfc discussion on disputed material [5]. When I pointed out his remarkable timing, the editor asserted that, of the tens of thousands of different topics on Wikipedia, he just so happened to be an expert on the very topic at hand [6]. He also said that he "left" the website some time back, only of course to return at this uncanny moment ("I'm reminded of why I left now" [7]). When I then asked him what was his original handle, he rather conveniently developed amnesia ("it was years ago and I cannot remember my old username" [8]). One would think that he would have remembered at least some of the pages that he edited given his adeptness around Wikipedia, but apparently not. Yet, he didn't seem to have any trouble finding the discussion, making sense of it when none of the two veteran Third Opinion editors there could [9], and even reverting for the other party. Given all this, could you please check to see if there are any other sleepers lying around? I think it's possible that there may instead be some meatpuppeting, but I'd just like to make sure. Best regards, Middayexpress (talk) 19:31, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

Unless you can show there is actual evidence that the new account is being used to evade a block, or is a current user who created a second account to sway consensus or skirt a topic ban, I don't see how a check is warranted at this time. If there is a specific editor that you believe may be the master account, let me know, I didn't see anything obvious in the history.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 21:03, 18 February 2015 (UTC)
Ok thanks; I'll keep you posted on this. Cheers, Middayexpress (talk) 21:15, 18 February 2015 (UTC)
Hi Ponyo. Another single purpose account created a few hours later has since vandalized my userspace [10]. I think there may be a connection, as the troll also coincidentally vandalized (with the same Jimmy Savile barnstars) the userspace of three other editors involved in the discussion, before being indefinitely blocked for trolling [11]. Best regards, Middayexpress (talk) 18:09, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

How would you know I don't remember what pages I edited when you didn't even ask me, Middayexpress?BrumEduResearch (talk) 13:45, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

I didn't need to. You claimed that you could not remember your username, while all usernames are in fact found in the page histories ("it was years ago and I cannot remember my old username" [12]). Middayexpress (talk) 18:09, 20 February 2015 (UTC)
That's odd, didn't he also state that he knew why he left: "What a lovely welcome back. I'm reminded of why I left now"? AcidSnow (talk) 18:28, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Hello again?

@Ponyo: Hi it's been a long time I was wondering when can you unblock me I been really good I didn;t use any of my other accounts because I truly understand I can't not have things my way Reply to me when you get this Sincerely, lilk846 thank you.? Lilk846 (talk)15:13, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

You're evading your block right now, and have been on various articles throughout the day. At this point your best bet is to abide by the standard offer. Each time you edit via an account or IP, the clock resets on the standard offer.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 20:47, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

Elizabeth Ratliff‎‎ Redirect Comment

Thanks Ponyo! Nice solution. Will keep that route in mind :) --Haruth (talk) 16:34, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

It doesn't merit a stand-alone article, but it's a valid search term. Redirects are cheap!--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 16:35, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

ygm

You've got mail EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 04:23, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

Replied. Better late than never? --Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 17:42, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

Question

Hi Ponyo. A number of puppets were blocked in the past who were editing Indiggo the same way, after User:Ian.thomson opened an investigation. See here. We seem to have missed one, who just edited again here. It's edits are few, but match edits of the puppets that were reverted. Do I need to open a new case for it to blocked per wp:duck? Tx. --Epeefleche (talk) 06:58, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

It's a  Confirmed sock; I've gone ahead and blocked and tagged the account.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 17:53, 24 February 2015 (UTC)
Many thanks. Best. --Epeefleche (talk) 18:06, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

Mawra Hocane page

Hi, you reverted an edit on "Mawra Hocane" page citing that http://www.magmedianews.com/ is not a reliable source. Would you please explain why? Seems legit to me. THank you. And even if the reference does not check out, the name that is written on that page, "Urwa tul wusqa" goes to the wiki page "Urwa Hocane", so why can't we change "Urwa tul wusqa" to "Urwa Hocane"? Thanx. Sohebbasharat (talk) 20:00, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

@Sohebbasharat: In order for a source to be considered reliable for use in biography articles it needs to be a source "with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy.". The website that you linked to includes user-generated content (scroll down to the bottom of the webpage and there is an "about the author" blurb) and therefore runs afoul of WP:USERGENERATED. --Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 20:12, 24 February 2015 (UTC)
Ok. Thank you Sohebbasharat (talk) 20:18, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

Wrong revert

Hello! I just noticed that you have reverted an edit on Sophie Hunter's page because of the grounds it was made by a sock. The edit was not made by a sock but by Lady Lotus and Mr. Granger, who are definitely not socks (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sophie_Hunter&diff=648489387&oldid=648177364). It should be restored as it is also a necessary parameter on Hunter's page. 186.23.251.148 (talk) 00:20, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

The edit was made at the behest of a sock and was reverted accordingly as it was a proxy edit. I'm sure Mr. Granger never would have made it if the person had said "hey, I'm a sock, please make this edit for me".--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 00:26, 25 February 2015 (UTC)
An you are also now blocked as well.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 00:28, 25 February 2015 (UTC)
I just made a change to the Sophie Hunter page on request of an IP editor. I wasn't clear why I was being asked as I don't think I've ever taken any interest in this article. But, as far as I could see, the information requested for the info box did check out against the article's content so I went ahead and made the edit. However, it looks like I have restored the information that you just reverted as being a sock, so I thought I'd let you know. I'll revert it again. I had a bit of a look and it seems I was not the only person asked to make this change. Kerry (talk) 06:21, 25 February 2015 (UTC)
Sorry, I cannot revert it, there's been another edit. I'll leave it to you to work out what's the right thing to do here. Kerry (talk) 06:23, 25 February 2015 (UTC)
I've removed it again with a note that if any user in good standing wishes to confirm the information and add it to the article under their own volition to go ahead and do so. It may seem like a minor bit to revert over, however if this sockmaster realizes that appealing to random editors to proxy for them is a successful way to get around the block and the article semi-protection, they will continue to do so. It's certainly not your fault :) --Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 21:38, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Indraneil Sengupta

Hi Ponyo, could I please trouble you to revisit the page protection at Indraneil Sengupta? The disruptive user from 180.234.* has been persistently adding useless links and other garbage since November and while the current protection brings more eyes to the article, homeboy's still blowing up my watchlist. Alternatively, if you have a sweet rangeblock scheme in mind, I'll take it! Thank you, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 13:48, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

Ok, switched to semi-protection as the range is too large to block. Whenever I see this guy pop up I just rollback all of their edits - there are too many BLP violations and incorrect info being added to take a chance on something slipping through.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 19:11, 26 February 2015 (UTC)
I never got my mass rollback tool to work. I'll have to follow up on that. Thanks for the assist. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 19:22, 26 February 2015 (UTC)
Archive 20←Archive 24Archive 25Archive 26
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Ponyo/Archive_26&oldid=1190255408"