User talk:Ponyo

I just want to know why why you delete my article Berava (website)

Hi

I tried to do my best to prove that the images i used into my article and the website is totally mine, do you want me to give you my passwords to check if i am the real owner of the website and i have design the logos and images??? Just tell me !! i cant register my website as an official company because i have to pay taxes and my website is still new so i did not even earn one dollar from it and to provide you what you want i have to register it as a company and pay a lot to the government were as i mention i did not earn even 1 dollar till now. — Preceding unsigned comment added by WiliamH (talk • contribs) 00:58, 1 April 2016‎ (UTC)

The reason for the deletion is trifold. First, Wikipedia is not a directory of companies. There was nothing in the article that explained why Berava is significant or notable in any way. Second, the article consisted of marketing jargon clearly designed to promote the company which is contrary to our policies. This leads us to the third reason, the article was a copyright violation as it was a verbatim copy of what appears on another website (hence the marketing jargon noted in reason two). As you clearly have a conflict of interest with regard to Berava, please do not continue to attempt to recreate the article.--Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 16:26, 1 April 2016 (UTC)

@WiliamH: I'll leave your question for Ponyo to address, but please see the note that I left on your user talk page. You will need to request a change in user name. Best ​—DoRD (talk)​ 02:54, 1 April 2016 (UTC)

1 : Wikipedia is not a directory of companies well what about: Blocket.se and Mudah.my are those A charity or companies ???!!!! 2: the article consisted of marketing jargon clearly designed to promote the company which is contrary to our policies. Have you read Mudah.my and if you read it why you dont delete it because it also contain and designed to promote for the company ??!! 3: About copyrights, could you tell me how i can provide you evidence that images i use it in Wiki that i have design it and did not stolen from others, how i can give you evidence that the website is mine not for others.— Preceding unsigned comment added by WiliamH (talk • contribs)

@WiliamH: Wikipedia has over 5 million articles in varying stages of review. That you are able to point to other articles that may or may not violate our policies and guidelines in no way negates the fact that your article contained promotional material, provided no evidence of significance and included text taken from another website and was subsequently deleted for these reasons. With regard to your copyright questions, instructions for donating images can be found Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. --Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 21:51, 4 April 2016 (UTC)

Bangwiki

Hi again, Ponyo. I just noticed that Bangwiki's user page was edited by ಲವ್ ಯು ಪೂ. Could they be the same guy? This is related to [[1]]. Gracias, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 23:53, 1 April 2016 (UTC)

That thought crossed my mind as well, but the behaviour would need to be evaluated to determine if there is a connection and the evidence presented at SPI.--Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 21:56, 4 April 2016 (UTC)

A brownie for you!

Thank you for granting IP range exemption for me! Agboh (talk) 02:16, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

Thank you!--Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 21:31, 4 April 2016 (UTC)

Nuestra Belleza México issues

Hi, thanks for your work. Please note my changes to quite a few of the series on this topic. It would help in the future if you didn't capitalise titles. Years and dates should not be linked. Note also: "Contestant notes", not "Contestants Notes". Tony (talk) 07:56, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

@Tony1: My only edit on that article was to revert a blocked sock a month and a half ago. Can you point me to where I capitalised a title or linked a date or wrote "Contestant Notes" in this edit?--Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 21:30, 4 April 2016 (UTC)

A Dobos torte for you!

Mona778 (talk) has given you a Dobos torte to enjoy! Seven layers of fun because you deserve it. To give a Dobos torte and spread the WikiLove, just place {{subst:Dobos Torte}} on someone else's talkpage, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

Thank you Mona :) --Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 22:10, 6 April 2016 (UTC)

Revdel

Thanks for that, but could you please get the edit summary on User talk:Andy Dingley too, thanks Andy Dingley (talk) 17:41, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

Sorry about that, 'tis gone now.--Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 17:49, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

Request

Hello, Can you please delete my userpage. Thank you--Opdire657 (talk) 21:00, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Done. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 21:09, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

Thanks Greased Lightning!--Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 21:11, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

Talk page revision history

Dear Ponyo,

May I ask you to delete my talk page revision history?---Thanks (Mona778 (talk) 21:49, 7 April 2016 (UTC))

User pages can often be deleted on request, but not user talk pages. Is there a specific edit in the history you would like removed?--Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 21:54, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

Yes. Especially those made by User Taichi, whom was condemned for his actions (illegal revert, cross-wiki hounding, etc.) by Administrators' Noticeboard/Incidents. (Mona778 (talk) 22:19, 7 April 2016 (UTC))

Although you are free to blank their comments to you on your user talk page, there is nothing within policy that would allow me to use revision deletion in this case.--Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 22:24, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

Have you seen his edits? (Mona778 (talk) 22:42, 7 April 2016 (UTC))

This, this and this from January? If so, there's nothing that meets WP:REVDELETE in that content.--Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 22:47, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

Well, if I'm asking you to do something for me that might put you in trouble, then I don't need it.---Bye, and have a beautiful afternoon (Mona778 (talk) 23:18, 7 April 2016 (UTC))

Using revision deletion in cases where it's not required is definitely a no-no.--Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 23:20, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

Sock

[2]. Thank you, GAB^Hello! 22:34, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

Got it. A rangeblock isn't possible, so I've laid down some short-term protections.--Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 22:38, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

Any look-see possible?

Hi P, is there any way to look into this announced socking? What would you recommend? SPI would be kinda fruitless, I think. ? Thanks, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 03:56, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

I don't see anything obvious as far as CU goes, but with that attitude I'm sure any sock will be as obvious as a flashing neon sign stating "I'm a 5rtfgvb sock".--Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 15:53, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

OK, thanks for looking. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 22:52, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

CU check

Hi! Can you check this account: ThePlatypusofDoom? The account was registered yesterday and they claim to be "frequent at AfDs" today [3]. When asked about that, gave no answer (link). Also, they voted "keep" at WP:Articles for deletion/European Graduate School (3rd nomination), a highly controversial discussion that attracts many meat/sockpuppets [4]. Vanjagenije (talk) 20:44, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

I have my concerns as well, but without a corresponding master for comparison I can't make any connections.--Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 21:08, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

Hazal Kaya

• @Ponyo:

Dear Ponyo,

Those IPs from Pakistan are back at it again, removing content, adding religion (Islam) into infobox.. Plus, this time they refer their edit to a source (Biography), which was added by me many months ago, and does not say anything about the subject's religion (Islam) or parents! Can you take a look? I think now the page should be semi-protected as you did with Cagatay Ulusoy sometime ago. Best regards (Mona778 (talk) 14:59, 10 April 2016 (UTC))

I'm confused. Hazal Kaya is semi-protected and no IP has edited it for ages. Is it another article perhaps?--Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 20:54, 4 May 2016 (UTC)

Don't be dear! 'cause it's an old post from last month that you forgot to reply I guess, but like you said the page is semi-protected now, so no further action needed at the moment. BY the way, the new pic added to her infobox is a copyvio. I already asked the Commons for its speedy deletion. Here, in English Wiki is your job to delete it (cross-wiki uploaded), I think? Best regards.--Mona778 (talk) 20:44, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

I'm not sure how I missed that! Regarding the image, at it's hosted on Commons it needs to be deleted from there (I'm not an admin on Commons, so I can't speed the process along). Once the image is deleted a bot will come through and remove the redlink.--Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 21:02, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

Yet another new one

Hello P - I hope that Spring has sprung nicely in your part of the world. 31.53.67.189 (talk · contribs) is the most recent version of the problem editor that we have been following here User talk:109.151.65.218. Best regards. MarnetteD|Talk 20:54, 10 April 2016 (UTC)

Update: the list has been moved to Wikipedia talk:Sockpuppet investigations/109.151.65.218. MarnetteD|Talk 22:17, 10 April 2016 (UTC)

It appears they've moved on while I enjoyed my weekend. Spring has definitely sprung and the weather is lovely. Let me know if when they pop up again.--Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 21:23, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

This IP has started editing again P. A heavy wet spring snow has just started here - one of those tree branch breaking ones so my back is already aching and I haven't even shoveled yet :-) Cheers. MarnetteD|Talk 14:54, 16 April 2016 (UTC)

Blocked for two weeks. Sorry to hear about the snow. It's 21°c here today, but I'm not sure that will make you feel any better. I'll send warm thoughts your way!--Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 19:57, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

Many thanks they do help - well when combined with some liniment :-) Cheers. MarnetteD|Talk 20:13, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

Nagendra again

Hi P, could I please trouble you to take a look at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Nagendra NJ? One of my suspects has started creating other accounts [5][6], so my guess is that he's gotten hip to the SPI and is setting up for another quantum leap. I need the CU to confirm that Kiran is a Nagendra sock before I can block the other accounts as policy violations. (Why am I explaining this to you? You're a pro!) Thanks! Cyphoidbomb (talk) 05:02, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

All done. Results noted at the SPI.--Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 21:42, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

You rock! Wish you didn't have to keep working so hard, but thank you. :) Cyphoidbomb (talk) 22:14, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

Another batch of sock attack on Windows articles

Hi.

I am calling you because you were the admin who attended to this case last time. We have another batch of attacks on Windows articles (Windows XP, Windows Vista, Windows 7, Windows 8, Windows 8.1, Windows 10), some by brand-new editors (definitely socks) and some by IP editors. The attacks have come just as the protection expired.

Would you mind taking a look? Thanks.

Best regards,
Codename Lisa (talk) 05:33, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

Looks like Materialscientist zapped them all.--Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 21:44, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

Another thanks

Hello again P. This for your work on the Bigshowandkane64 SPI. the IPs usually stop and the person moves on after being sussed out. Cheers. MarnetteD|Talk 22:47, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

We shall see...--Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 22:50, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

Well the talk page for Thomasandfriendsnumber1 (talk · contribs) is going to be where they post there new round of rants. I removed it a couple times per WP:BMB but will let you decide on the final way that things should wind up. MarnetteD|Talk 00:45, 12 April 2016 (UTC)

I should have revoked it from the get go; there's nothing constructive that ever comes of allowing tp access to this particular sock.--Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 15:19, 12 April 2016 (UTC)

You are right about that. Thanks. MarnetteD|Talk 15:52, 12 April 2016 (UTC)

Scranton

Your Ponyoship, there seems to be a possible recurrence of a previous troll on Scranton Pennsylvania. (It adds fictitious characters to the "people from..." section.) Anmccaff (talk) 22:21, 12 April 2016 (UTC)

PS: I started this as a new section, but it initially wound up as part of the previous one. Dunno why, but it's possible i hit "save" before adding the section title. Is that what would happen then? Anmccaff (talk) 22:26, 12 April 2016 (UTC)

Yes, if you add new material without including a header title it will just mush the various discussions together. And the editor has been warned for edit warring - they're well past WP:3RR.--Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 22:39, 12 April 2016 (UTC)

Thanks. I suspect their login might line up with a usual suspect from the past, but I dunno how wide a net you can cast when doing that. Anmccaff (talk) 22:45, 12 April 2016 (UTC)

I did take a look through the article history for any obvious suspects, but alas the width of the net available to me is quite limited.--Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 22:48, 12 April 2016 (UTC)

Hazal Kaya

Hi,

I think the User finally accepted that he had been wrong all along! [7] Now, will you please readmit the official site to the page? Thank you (Mona778 (talk) 01:39, 13 April 2016 (UTC))

My edits carry no extra weight. Anyone can replace the Facebook link with the Official website link if the consensus on the talk page is that it should be restored. --Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 16:40, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

Dear Ponyo, I understand. You don't want to take sides, but he said he leaves it to your judgment. I can restore the link myself, but I think it would be more appropriate if you do it, especially after you said that "though the guidelines do lean towards the inclusion of the official site". Regards (Mona778 (talk) 17:45, 15 April 2016 (UTC))

Please have a look at the official site of this one [8], the other actress at least had a picture and couple of more other sites linked to it, so much for the Wiki policy! (Mona778 (talk) 22:37, 15 April 2016 (UTC))

The external links page is a guideline that outlines current consensus and common practice, which is different than policy (such as WP:BLP and WP:NPOV for example). If you think something needs to be changed, be bold and change it. If your changes are reverted, then you can discuss the changes with the other editors involved.--Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 22:42, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

• I have presented my conclusion on the talk page of the article, and want to see what other editors think of it? (Mona778 (talk) 00:46, 16 April 2016 (UTC))

SPI/Matthew7878

Hello Ponyo. Since you did the CU for WP:Sockpuppet investigations/Matthew7878 last year, please take a look. The private evidence that I mentioned is an email header, which links to a user's real life identity via the account's email address. If you would like it emailed to you, please let me know. — JJMC89 (T·C) 03:56, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

That took quite a bit of clean-up. I've noted my findings at the SPI, protected a number of redirects and salted some titles, and closed the AfD.--Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 17:29, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

Thank you! — JJMC89 (T·C) 18:30, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

They keep recreating the article under various spelling combinations and permutations. Please let me know if you see them pop up again.--Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 18:34, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

Sure thing, will do. — JJMC89 (T·C) 19:32, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

Regarding Deletion of a page

Regarding Deletion of a page

Hey user Ponyo, sir you recently deleted a page called Param Singh from the wikipedia. Param Singh is a reputed actor on Channel V India and I am the member of his PR team. I want to request you to please remove his name from Articles deleted discussion as we are not able to create a wiki page for him again because every time we create a page some user keeps on deleting it. Can you please give me a solution how can we create a wiki page for Mr. Param Singh and can prevent it from deletion. Thankyou sir. Hope to get a solution from you. CreativeNerd (talk) 19:19, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

• You'll probably want to take your trophy back when you read my response. The article was deleted based on community consensus here and again here. The article continues to be recreated with promotional prose and no regard for the lack of notability noted in the previous deletion discussions. As a member of Param Singh's "PR team", you should not be creating or editing an article on him at all as you have a clear conflict of interest in doing so. If he becomes notable enough that an article would be accepted by the community an uninvolved editor, one whose is not being paid to promote the subject, will eventually create an article.--Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 20:07, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

Gadri socks

Hello Ponyo, I hope you are doing well. Should your schedule permit, I wanted to ask if you could review Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Gadri for potential sleepers. In particular, there is a concern that Singhsardarji (talk · contribs) may be a related sock. The account was registered and began editing in between two known instances of related socking, but there is also the possibility that this was coincidental. Would it be possible to take a look? Regards, Yamaguchi先生 (talk) 23:14, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

When socks are continually being created regardless of their accounts being blocked, quite often they have access to several ranges across multiple ISPs making sleeper checks nearly impossible. I'll see what I can do.--Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 23:23, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

ANI

If the IP is acting in good faith, he doesn't need you to speak for him. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 23:18, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

I'm not speaking for them, I'm speaking as an admin responding to a valid request for admin assistance at an administrator's noticeboard.--Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 23:24, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

Tell ya what - retract your attacks on me, and I'll retract my questions to the IP. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 23:26, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

I made no attack whatsoever, I only noted that "Your comment...was unhelpful, rude, showed bad faith and served no purpose other than to cast aspersions" (emphasis mine) which is bang on accurate and I stand by it. I'm certain there are more constructive things you can do than continue on in this vein, which will lead nowhere. --Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 23:36, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

In that case, I stand behind my questions as being fair and appropriate to the situation. See ya. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 00:04, 16 April 2016 (UTC)

What business is it of any non-admin as to why some other user was given a particular block length? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 18:04, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

Because when an IP is blocked indefinitely it is often an error, as it was in both cases the IP brought to the attention of Admins.--Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 18:10, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

That doesn't make it the business of some other user. How would he even know about it? Typically, these kinds of complaints are raised by socks. As regards SPI, don't pull that nonsense on me. You and I both know that checkusers are forbidden from doing anything with IP's. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 18:26, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

The IP has done nothing wrong and your continued insinuations otherwise every time they bring up a valid point is disruptive. Have as many suspicions as you want, but unless you are willing to present evidence of policy violations you need to keep those suspicions to yourself. Editors are blocked for repeated accusations of socking without evidence. As I noted at ANI, checkuser requests make up the minority of cases at SPI, the remainder are handled by admins and clerks. --Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 18:37, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

I had already conceded the point to another user, but then you stuck your nose into it again. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 18:45, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

"Stuck your nose in". The irony! I know you can do helpful things here, please spend your time on those rather than posting here.--Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 18:51, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

I have asked a trusted admin to tell me if I'm off base with the questions I've raised about the IP. As for you, since I had already conceded, your followup post served no purpose except to inflame the situation. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 18:56, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

A trusted admin (in bolding and italics no less!), as opposed to the shitty untrustworthy admin that I am I suppose? Jayron32, good luck.--Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 19:05, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

No, I just don't know you, and I got an initial negative impression. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 19:14, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

I would hope that the fact that we have had no negative interactions despite both our long "tenures" here, and that I'm also a checkuser tasked with enforcing WP:SOCK, would provide you with some insight that you are being too forceful with your interactions with this editor who has done nothing to deserve your derision. Raising a suspicion once is fine. Continuing across multiple AN/I (and here) threads when there is zero evidence of wrong-doing is unhelpful and veering into disruptive territory. In the words of my father, you're putting too much mustard on the bun.--Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 19:35, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

Rev/Del question

Hello again P. I am wondering if these three [9], [10], [11] items meet the "potentially libelous" criteria for R/D. Thanks for your time in looking into this. MarnetteD|Talk 20:26, 16 April 2016 (UTC)

All rev/deleted and editor blocked.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:45, 16 April 2016 (UTC)

Thanks Bbb23. Very nice to have you back in the Wikipedia salt mines :-) MarnetteD|Talk 21:48, 16 April 2016 (UTC)

Well look who's back! :)--Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 20:21, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

Basic category for biographical article

I'd like to reiterate that, per policy, you cannot add ethnic or descent categories to biography articles unless the category is supported by sourced article content. I've reverted your edit here for this reason. Please do not continue to add such categories.

I know that you have a lot of time only to revert my edits since last year, just because the category I put is unsourced?? Actually, I don't simply put this individual's descent, individual's religion, individual's birthdate without looking around in Google Webs, Google Books.. It is just about I don't put reference link in the article after google. If you see the article don't have necessary sources, why not you simply google and put reference link in that article. Why you have to make that article without basic category (e.g. birth year, birth place, descent, religion)? Alexander Iskandar (talk) 01:30, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

This book, titled Southeast Asian Personalities of Chinese Descent: Glossary and index is a good reference to support the Chinese descent category. Alexander Iskandar (talk) 01:46, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

@Alexander Iskandar: I still don't think you've read the links I provided as your message here contradicts it entirely. WP:BLPCAT (which is a included as part of one of Wikipedia's most brightline policies) states "Category names do not carry disclaimers or modifiers, so the case for each content category must be made clear by the article text and its reliable sources." (emphasis mine). The source that you are using is a tertiary source and does not meet the requirements of WP:BLPSOURCES; it's just a glossary of terms and cannot be used to support the ethnicity of specific individuals. The burden is completely on you to ensure the material and categories you are adding to our biography articles are reliably sourced and meet WP:BLPCAT, and as a Wikipedia administrator the burden is on me to ensure our core policies are upheld. So again, do not continue to add categories to articles unless the category is specifically supported by reliably sourced article content.--Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 15:48, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

What did you mean by asking WP:BLPSOURCES? Is it original MyKad (identity card), passport, original birth of certificate, official data from National Registration Department?? These are primary sources. It is imposibble to be accessed publicly (maybe possible for some cases). So, we have to rely on secondary sources and tertiary sources.. I don't know which sources is satisfiying for you and Wikipedia policy. Is it exclusive interview from the public figure is relevant source to verify information? Alexander Iskandar (talk) 17:35, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

An online glossary/index does not meet the criteria for the inclusion of personal information, nor are primary sources such as birth certificates and passports per WP:BLPPRIMARY. What is required is for secondary sources, specifically those with a reputation for fact checking and accuracy, to have published the information. Self-published sources can also be used as long as the source is controlled by the subject and there is not reason to doubt its accuracy. If you cannot find such sources then the material is likely not relevant enough to be included in the article.--Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 18:28, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

Template:Birth based on age as of date

You reverted an edit that I made to Template:Birth based on age as of date way back in November 2015. Your edit summary is rather unhelpful: test - the template is not working, change may have affected it? How is the template not working? Did your revert fix it? Show me an example of how it is not working.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 01:05, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

@Trappist the monk: Sorry, I meant to leave a message on your talk page however, as you can see from my contributions, I was called away right after making the change. Whatever you did to the template caused an unknown parameter that broke the display. When I attempted to use the template at Mira Sethi it gave an unknown expression error. When I undid your change from November 2015 the template worked fine again.--Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 15:32, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

Ok, thanks. When I made that change, it was an import from the sandbox. The sandbox has not changed since then so it is an exact copy of the template that you assert was causing an error at Mira Sethi. Here is the live version using the data from Mira Sethi followed by the sandbox version with the same parameters:

1986 or 1987 (age 37–38) – live

1986 or 1987 (age 37–38) – sandbox

These look identical to me. When I edit Mira Sethi to use the sandbox, and click 'Show preview', I do not get any visible error (I don't know how that's possible because the template doesn't have any error reporting capability). But, {{Infobox person}} does have error detection. Is it possible that you saw something like this:

Warning: Page using Template:Infobox person with unknown parameter "birth_dat" (this message is shown only in preview).

(I forced this error message by breaking the name of the infobox parameter |birth_date=)

Because I cannot get {{birth based on age as of date/sandbox}} to misbehave, I am going to revert your revert. Let me know if you see something amiss.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 00:24, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

@Trappist the monk: Thanks for testing it before reverting. It was difinitely an expression error that was occurring (either with an exclamation point or a question mark), however all appears to be fine now. I'll let you know if I see the same issue pop up again. Cheers,--Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 15:44, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

Dato Vijay Eswaran listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Dato Vijay Eswaran. Since you had some involvement with the Dato Vijay Eswaran redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Alexander Iskandar (talk) 01:33, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

O(+>

re: [12] Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:46, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

.--Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 19:33, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for calling bogus report

Thanks for that, Linguist1111 is a troll I guess. I'm new here, if you have a second, do you have any tips I should know about? --M0N57R0517Y (talk) 23:18, 22 April 2016 (UTC)

Help:Getting started should have plenty of info to keep you busy for a while.--Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 23:22, 22 April 2016 (UTC)

Any thought given to a CU to find out whose sockpuppet this was?

I am having very strong flashbacks to an incident where User:Cuchullain wrongly believed a vandal account that was hounding me at the time, MeNoLike123 (talk · contribs), was my then-nemesis JoshuSasori (talk · contribs), but I only realized far too late that it was almost certainly Ysfan (talk · contribs), and now the latter's having used a sockpuppet is unverifiable. (CU was requested but denied because of the technicality that MeNoLike123 was already blocked and the other user admitted to being JoshuSasori. My reason for saying it was Ysfan is because I called the latter user's edits "unencyclopedic" and he honed in on this, and then shortly thereafter an account appears and reverts all my edits as being "unencyclopedic"; I don't blame Cuchullain for not having known this background, but I was a fool not to immediately realize who it was.)

Clearly this was someone with a bone to pick with Linguist111 and probably a bunch of the editors whose talk pages he vandalized, and it's quite possible it was someone who was recently indefinitely blocked but has not been formally site-banned yet...

Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 12:38, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

Or, worse still, someone who hasn't even been blocked yet. Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 12:39, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

I have no idea who the master is, nor does it really matter in cases where the disruption is this blatant. A quick block and a dose of WP:DENY often works, though it may take repeated applications to be effective.--Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 20:49, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

Need your input

Dear Ponyo,

May I have your input on this [13]. Thanks and have a great weekend (Mona778 (talk) 23:44, 22 April 2016 (UTC))

Hello @Mona778: you can have my input on it :)

The date format is different depending on which version of English is being used, WP:ENGVAR says that so long as the article is consistent and there is not a particular national variant of English which the article should take, then the default is to stay with the variant used by the original author of the article. So you were right to change back the change made by the IP address.

But on the other hand, it was not totally correct to tell the IP address that they had made a test edit, because that is not what they were doing. It would have been better to explain on their talk page that we do not change formats to someone's preferred version if there is no reason to do so.

Also "Your edit mean nothing!" is not a very helpful or welcoming edit summary when dealing with an apparently new editor. Their edit did mean something, it was changing the date format to what they thought was correct. MPS1992 (talk) 18:12, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

Technically there is no reason that the dates needed to be changed, however given that the subject is Italian and the IP was changing the only dates in the article body to European format, it was unnecessary to revert them (though within the guidelines of MOS:DATERET to do so). The last thing you want to do is get in an edit war over something that makes no difference to the article whatsoever. --Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 20:58, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

Oh right, I did not realise that was a European format, I thought it was just British. Thanks. MPS1992 (talk) 18:23, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Anti-Impostor Barnstar
	Thank you for blocking the impostor! Linguist 111talk 00:25, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Snehilsharma

It seems like I still haven't accepted that 2015 has given way to 2016 (the second account on the SPI)! Also, I was just wondering if something came up on the account listed in my response to Vanjagenije. I hadn't noticed that account earlier and just came across it after the clerk endorse. cheers. —SpacemanSpiff 02:08, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

I've updated the SPI.--Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 21:07, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

Curious about decision to hide content from revision history

Was looking at revision history on Michael Sarrazin's page and noticed something I've never seen before where the edit was entirely crossed out and unclickable. Description said "Add some infromation about mikes life, will more then likely piss you guyes off but the truth is the truth, I am just glade to know that Mikie had full and propserious life." Was there any good faith to this edit or was it outright hijacking? Kind of curious to know what it said, and I see in the log that you changed the visibility. Do you remember what it said? Iistal (talk) 08:04, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

If an item has been revision deleted or suppressed from a page it means that it is entirely inappropriate for inclusion. Copying it here in order to satisfy your curiousity would defeat the purpose of the deletion.--Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 21:12, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

Talkpage

Hi Ponyo - just spotted that deletion on my talkpage. Thanks! Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 09:22, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

NP. It was complete garbage.--Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 21:14, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

Unknown editor

Sorry to bother you, but I've just noticed that that unknown editor is back again. He comes back every weekend and adds in sound information and unsourced information in the infoboxes and other random edits and then adds in random quotes in the edit summaries. I see that you keep on blocking him and he keeps on coming back reverting things without sources with his annoying wit. It's embarrassing. Any tips on how to deal with him? I am just a random editor editing my favorite shows like All Star Mr & Mrs, but he keeps on doing this. Should I continually revert? I'm also curious about what part of his edits are unWikipedic. I know that certain things like who created the theme song are unsourced and unneeded, but what about the sound additions? I must admit that I am getting a little tired of this thng continually happening on Wikipedia. Any help would be appreciated. Thanks.66.130.12.185 (talk) 15:46, 23 April 2016 (UTC)samusek2

They mistakenly believe they're being funny and witty, so I decided I would no longer provide them with an audience in any way, shape or form and I'm simply ignoring them altogether. Feel free to revert them (per WP:BANREVERT) if you see any issues as they're a persistent block evader. --Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 21:19, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

Copyvios again

As a follow-up to this block, it appears the same user is uploading and inserting more image copyvios [14], [15]. Since you were the admin to twice block this user for same [16], thought you might like to know. -- WV ● ✉ ✓ 21:48, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

Yamaguchi先生 has blocked them indefinitely.--Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 21:21, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

A page I found on the new page patrol that I was going to move to its proper title but it apparently says it was done by a blocked user before

Parasparam(tv series) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs), bringing you up to this as you did delete the page of Parasparam (TV series) before. (Which I was going to move to that). Not sure if this is a sock puppet or what though as I'm not familiar with this one. Wgolf (talk) 17:18, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

Rudhanani (talk · contribs) Here are some links to save you some mouse clicks P. MarnetteD|Talk 17:33, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

@Wgolf: This is not the same user the article was protected against. I've removed the salting so you can move the new article to the correct target page.--Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 21:33, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

I love you Jejebel Ponyo

That's a new username from the user creation log. It could be anyone. I mean, we're all terrible spellers and we all love you. :) Anna Frodesiak (talk) 02:06, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

They created the account through an open proxy in order to thank spam me. I'm all for a genuine thanks or two, but this was obviously created for trolling. In the words of Eric Clapton, "No more bad love". --Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 15:50, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

I figured that was likely. I watched for a while, saw no contribs and nothing in the filter log, so I thought I'd just dump it in your lap. Best, Anna Frodesiak (talk) 22:09, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

I have a feeling that this one is related to Indian film/TV, they seem to love our women editors. I feel very neglected by them! —SpacemanSpiff 05:12, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

Clock

As a sometimes-resident of Baja BC, which is on the same time as your Alta Washington, I am wondering why your page's clock's time is so different from the rest of West Cascadia's. Anmccaff (talk) 21:48, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

Because I always forget to adjust it for daily savings time. Every.single.time. --Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 21:54, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

I'd thought of that, but it was still different, and wondered if you were on actual sun time. Right now it shows a four minute lag, but I think it was @ 20 when I first looked...well, an hour and twenty, since it wasn't daylightized. I guess the clock is speaking literally when it calls itself approximate. Anmccaff (talk) 22:03, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

About the page Zain Imam

Hi, You just deleted my edits on the page Zain Imam. I'd like to mention that after seeing that the page didn't provide sufficient information I went to listen to audio and video interviews of the actor. Thus all the information I added on the page was from the interviews of the person himself. How could I have added the source to the edits? Aisha2084 (talk) 17:03, 28 April 2016 (UTC) Aisha2084

If it's information that you have heard personally then it cannot be added to the article (as original research) unless you are also able to include a corresponding reliable source. You can learn how to include references here.--Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 17:27, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

Meghna Vincent

On the new page feed I found Meghna Vincent which said it was deleted twice by you it appears, looks like this probably is a SPI to do. Wgolf (talk) 18:01, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

We're well into WP:DUCK territory now, thanks for letting me know.--Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 18:33, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

SPI/Adrian2526

Thanks for taking care of Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Adrian2526 and dealing removing the history on the hijacked article content. I didn't notice the activity of the IP address originally. Might it be a good idea to remove the web host content in the history of Miss Mexico International? Cheers. -- Whpq (talk) 19:37, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

Done.--Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 19:41, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

Jessica Lucas

Ponyo, could you please have a look at Jessica Lucas for me? I've got a couple of newbie-ish editors (or are they the same?...) who keep adding unsourced or poorly sourced bio info. I've discussed my concerns about this with at least one of these editors, but I don't seem to be making much headway... Thanks in advance! --IJBall (contribs • talk) 05:05, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

@IJBall: Per the section below, I've blocked one of the socks active there and warned the master account.--Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 21:06, 4 May 2016 (UTC)

Thanks! --IJBall (contribs • talk) 21:48, 4 May 2016 (UTC)

Confusing ne with "zeedavis"

Who the hell is a zeedavis???! I only use one account and one user name, zhyboo. I don't know of a zeedavis. And isn't it very wrong for you to block someone for no reason??? Who do you think you are, the wik-curity guard??? Lol. You should unblock him, I'm sure he uses a single account like everyone else Zhyboo (talk) 05:12, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

Not only is the account an obvious behavioural match, you are also confirmed to be technically the same. Deny as much as you want, but you will be blocked if the use of multiple accounts continues.--Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 21:00, 4 May 2016 (UTC)

IP edits when the account is blocked

Hello Ponyo. I wanted to ask about about GTVM92 (talk · contribs), whom you blocked for persistent addition of unsourced content. Today, three IPs 5.211.35.51 (talk · contribs), 37.129.183.232 (talk · contribs) and 5.74.0.223 (talk · contribs) are editing articles he was active on, the same way. One of the edits in my talk page suggests that the IP is the same user. Can a blocked user edit with IP? Pahlevun (talk) 10:16, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

The IP has called me a "stupid" (نفهم) and signed as "GTVM" in another user's talkpage. I think you should see this oo. Pahlevun (talk) 12:04, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

At this point GTVM92's block has expired and they have not yet edited; if I blocked them now it would be punitive. The IP editing also appears to have abated. If it flares up again, please let me know.--Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 21:21, 4 May 2016 (UTC)

Sock

User:Bhand Bhaiya looks like another sock of User:Ishq Hawa Mein.Managerarc™ ^talk 14:38, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

Who the hell is User:Ishq Hawa Mein, I only use one account and one user name, Bhand Bhaiya. I don't even know who the crap Ishq Hawa Mein is. Just because you are using Wikipedia for a long time, that doesn't mean that you will blame anyone with no reason or no prove. I have read other user's messages on your talk page and I think that you just want to bother people. I think that Wikipedia should block you because you are bothering other users. Next time, blame me with a prove..understand... You better understand:- Bhand Bhaiya™ ^talk 13:30, 2 May 2016 (UTC)

• (talk page stalker) Anyone other than me who sees the last part of that post as something of a threat? And it's unfortunately not that editor's only post of that kind, as can be seen here. Thomas.W ^talk 20:46, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

Thomas.W its not a threat, its a message, and a kind of noble and polite warning to those who falsely blame others without any prove..I have just said him not to blame anyone with prove. it is a message to refrain them from doing wrong and suspicious activities. It's just your perception that it is a threat, and i can't say anything, because everyone has their own perception. And the message that I have send to user here is not a threat too. You mentioned it as a threat but it is not.. It is completely seen that i have warned him not to edit any article in a wrong way. By the way, you didn't mentioned here that I have also created a page for the lovely user here. Bhand Bhaiya ^talk 13:57, 2 May 2016 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Saying you "will take serious actions toward your account" is a threat. If nothing else, you, not being an admin, can only at most ask someone who is to do something. And you may see it as merely assertive, it comes across threatening. Unless that's your goal, you should try to avoid giving that implication--especially important to treat new editors as mildly as possible (see WP:BITE). Consider the standard WP:WARN2 messages, that have been word-smithed by many experienced editors to begin mildly and then only escalate for repeated problems. DMacks (talk) 21:13, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

I didn't know that it would be such a big issue...Ok, I'm sorry, it won't happen again...right know I just want to know that how can I upload pics on Wikipedia common?? Bhand Bhaiya ^talk 08:05, 2 May 2016 (UTC)

• @Managerarc: Thanks for catching that.  Confirmed sock blocked and tagged. There's some significant clean-up to do, I'll see what I can get done in the bit of time I have.--Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 20:34, 4 May 2016 (UTC)

I think Emraan Hashmi needs to be semi protected. Persistent sock-puppetry going on.- Managerarc™ ^talk 20:23, 6 May 2016 (UTC)

Got it.--Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 20:26, 6 May 2016 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The UTRS Barnstar
		For absolutely being a cornerstone on this project and single-handedly ensuring it's success by resolving a full 1/3 of all tickets, I hereby award you this barnstar :).--v/r - TP 20:36, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

• Thank you @TParis:! I haven't been as active as I would like lately, but will hopefully have more time in the near future.--Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 21:22, 4 May 2016 (UTC)

Copyvios

Dear Ponyo,

This user from India has embarked on changing infoboxes pics with copyvios![17] This must be stopped at once. Thank you.--Mona778 (talk) 21:55, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

I've cleaned up what I can and left them a template regarding copyright.--Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 22:17, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

You are one of the best admins Wikipedia ever had! Have a good afternoon.--Mona778 (talk) 22:54, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

The user is back in full force![18] Mona778 (talk) 20:06, 6 May 2016 (UTC)

I've already given them a final warning for the copyvios. Hopefully they'll see whether they listen...--Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 20:24, 6 May 2016 (UTC)

They're being blocked for two weeks by Commons.[19] Have a nice weekend.--Mona778 (talk) 21:55, 6 May 2016 (UTC)

That will hopefully help keep the copyright violations out of articles here. You have a good weekend as well.--Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 21:57, 6 May 2016 (UTC)

Our mutual friend, Sockie.

user:verita.miner appears to be user:St_o'hara. Where should I take this? Anmccaff (talk) 18:06, 7 May 2016 (UTC)

----Hi Sockie. I am new to Wikipedia and am not sure I am adding this contribution on the talk section correctly. I am not the user you mention above, however. Please let me know if you have suggestions for me. This will be my first contribution also to the Talk section so I'm not sure I've done this right.Verita.miner (talk) 18:14, 7 May 2016 (UTC)

Let me amend that to "or Meatie..." Anmccaff (talk) 18:32, 7 May 2016 (UTC)

Hello Anmccaff. I don't know what you mean by this. I am not user:St_o'hara and I don't know what you mean by "or Meatie." Maybe I am missing something in the lingo here? I am happy to take any suggestions you have to improve my efforts. As I've said, I just started about one week ago. Thank you. Verita.miner (talk) 22:20, 8 May 2016 (UTC)