Jump to content

User talk:Ponyo

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by SineBot (talk | contribs) at 13:37, 29 August 2017 (Signing comment by 67.142.203.140 - ""). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Stupid short bus snowflake riding anal retentive retard. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.142.203.140 (talk) 13:36, 29 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Talk page disruption

Hi Ponyo. The situation at Talk:Waqar Zaka, where you recently redacted copyright violations, has not improved. There have been further violations on the talk page, and there appears to be some socking or at least meatpuppetry going on. I'm not sure if any kind of protection is warranted, but the edit requests keep coming, and all of them are (properly) being denied. In the one I denied on June 26, I seem to recall the OP self-identified as being in the employ of the article's subject, but I can't check that because both the request and my reply were suppressed. RivertorchFIREWATER 05:10, 1 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Rivertorch: The subject appears absolutely determined to use the Wikipedia article as a hagiography and his fans continued to post the content of his website (a blatant copyright violation) to the article talk page and various user talk pages. There are repeated bogus declarations that the subject is being defamed by Wikipedia not including over the top promotional material about Zaka. I've semi-protected the talk page for a week to provide some relief. --Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 20:17, 1 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. I hope that will do the trick. RivertorchFIREWATER 20:24, 1 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Don't you know what day it is?

I always point to you as one of our healthier administrators who balances her life by taking weekends and holidays off from this glorious place. You've fallen off your pedestal. Who am I going to use now?--Bbb23 (talk) 20:24, 1 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Adminning on Canada Day? What is the world coming to? ​—DoRD (talk)​ 00:19, 2 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
...but who am I to talk? ​—DoRD (talk)​ 14:29, 4 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I only logged in to raise the flag. It's not my fault that some pesky socks got in the way of my patriotic fervour! --Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 17:19, 5 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ryan Drummond

Hi there! I'm somewhat new to Wikipedia so I wanted to know what you think about the page Ryan Drummond. When you go to the page, it redirects to Sonic the Hedgehog but he is no longer the voice of the character anymore. Should the article be restored to show that he is the former voice actor or removed? Thanks! Amir Abdullah 05:59, 3 July 2017 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by YemeniFriend (talk • contribs)

@YemeniFriend: It's an interesting situation as the Sonic series is what Drummond is notable for, the rest is one-off roles and bit parts. If you think you can demonstrate that he meets the notability criteria for more than the Sonic series and can find reliable sources supporting the notability you can create a draft page to work on it that can be moved to article space when it's ready. In the meantime I've updated the redirect to point to the article and section that mentions Drummond by name. --Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 17:30, 5 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Ponyo: Well? What do you think? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Ryan_Drummond Amir Abdullah 03:49, 8 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@YemeniFriend: I've removed the protection if you would like to move your draft to article space.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 20:30, 10 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The Sega Task Force Barnstar
Thank You for your help in making the page Ryan Drummond! This barnstar is for you!
this WikiAward was given to Ponyo by Amir Abdullah (talk) on 13:23, 11 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism only account

Various edits by User:Vickey Singh Jha make me believe that they are doing vandalism only. I don't know how to report, could you please help. Thanks. - Ind akash (talk) 05:06, 4 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked for vandalism, but tagged as a sock of Burbak, edits similar to the Damien account, so quacking. —SpacemanSpiff 14:49, 4 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@SpacemanSpiff: Hi, could you please take a look at User:Svetavaraha also. Thanks. —Ind akash (talk) 07:59, 8 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

THat one was obvious, this one not so, so I'll leave this for Ponyo who always manages to find a pair of matching socks, unlike me! —SpacemanSpiff 11:38, 8 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Ind akash and SpacemanSpiff: I've blocked and tagged the account.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 20:26, 10 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Potentially stale sockmaster

Hi P, do you have any non-stale data on Arnav19? I blocked him for widespread incompetence a couple of months back and I suspect that Thilakshan is a reincarnation. Arnav and this new guy were both super-prolific in article creation in the world of Indian television and I'm seeing some of the same mistakes that Arnav19 made being made by Thilakshan. One bit of a difference is that this new guy uses edit summaries, where Arnav didn't. I suspect paid editing here, so maybe that'll help? I also suspected Arnav19 of editing a great deal while logged out, but I can't remember which IP that might've been. Any looking you could do would be appreciated. Thanks! Cyphoidbomb (talk) 05:49, 4 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(tps) Cyphoidbomb, it doesn't look like there's anything available on Arnav19, unfortunately. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 14:32, 4 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
another (talk page stalker) This is more likely Jaswanthvijay, I've blocked quite a few suspected socks, not sure if there's anything not stale but I do have some old IP list should a CU want. cheers. —SpacemanSpiff 14:48, 4 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Cyphoidbomb and SpacemanSpiff: I agree that behaviourally Thilakshan looks like a Jaswanthvijay sock, but everything there is stale. It's interesting that the account was created in 2015 when the socking was most prevelant, but laid dormant until early this year when the coast was clear SPI-wise. They also appear to be editing exclusively through a webhost, so that's not promising either.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 17:51, 5 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, everyone above. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 02:13, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

copyvio advert sock on Waqar Zaka is back

I just had to revdelete the copyvio advert now, but I think you have experience with this sock farm (I have no idea who the master is) but in the history from the past couple of months, I see at least two socks. cheers. —SpacemanSpiff 11:57, 5 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't run a CU, but it's likely a bunch of WP:MEAT accounts editing at the behest of the subject (with a call to action posted on his official Facebook page) and blogs such as this that insist there is "wrong" information on the Wikipedia page without actually explaining what is "wrong" other than not allowing blatant promotional material to be posted. I don't imagine the problem will go away anytime soon, so the more eyes on the article (and it's talk page), the better. --Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 18:28, 5 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Project Ghazi

Aloha! FYI, Project Ghazi, which has a socky history, was recently recreated. There is an aroma of feet... Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:05, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Cyphoidbomb: They're editing all of Paid Editing's Greatest Hits, but I don't see a technical connection to any specific sock master. --Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 17:39, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

IP:86.140.68.51

Hello Ponyo, The TV contributor (82.40.178.163) you recently blocked for constantly adding unsourced, unreferenced material and refusing to explain on their Talk page - has resurfaced as 86.140.68.51 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) from the same area of Somerset, UK. Making the same edits as previous, I will leave a note on their Talk page, but on previous form - it will be ignored. Can I leave this with you please? Regards, David, David J Johnson (talk) 20:53, 10 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Taken care of.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 20:59, 10 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Many thanks for your help. David J Johnson (talk) 21:01, 10 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Biography of a living person Update

Hello Ponyo! I have updated Biography of a living person (Mohsin Khan (actor)) with citation but it has been removed by you because you were not convinced with the sources. Please check the links I have provided. My informations were not false. If you still think the citations were incorrect or did not follow APA or MLA format, allow me to fix that. Thank you. --JKL9

The majority of your edits included no sourcing at all (this link explains what is considered a reliable source on Wikipedia). The information you added that was sourced was gossip about who Khan is dating, which really isn't relevant unless it becomes a significant relationship. You also added odd links and <br> markup to the article, which makes it more confusing for readers and editors. These are all common mistakes made by new editors; you may find Help:Getting started useful as it includes a number of tutorials to help you understand some of the basic Wikipedia editing policies and guidelines.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 16:00, 11 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

I came across this user: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Jayanagas Who needs help and I'm not sure if I can do it (lord knows if I try and help I'll get hounded again) but I was wondering if you could? Dinah Kirkland (talk) 20:03, 11 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nevermind it has already been taken care of. Dinah Kirkland (talk) 20:18, 11 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

MehulWB

There is evidence that MehulWB, Anatha Gulati and ProudIndian007 are same sock masters and I can provide it. Do you think that there is a chance to merge these SPIs and treat them as one sockmaster? Capitals00 (talk) 03:01, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Capitals00: The best route is to open an SPI on the oldest account and present your evidence there. If there is a finding that the it's the same sockmaster then a Clerk can merge the cases upon closing.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 19:22, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Names

Hey, Ponyo, sorry to disturb you for a trivial matter, but I'm curious. Where does your username come from? I always just assumed it was from the Miyazaki film, but recently when looking at that movie's article, I was struck by curiosity about the movie's release date--2008 is fairly late to be the source of an established editor's username, unless one registered their account immediately after seeing it. So I looked at your your user creation date, and I see that it's over a year before the movie was first released. If not there, then where? Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 14:35, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Writ Keeper: Well the truth is, I'm a visionary. (Not really - see Question 6). It was a nickname my husband used for me when we were dating. It was a poor translation of the word "friend".--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 19:32, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Ha, okay, thanks for satisfying my curiosity! That's pretty cute. :) Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 19:36, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Clearly, I charmed my way out of the "friend" zone at some point.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 19:45, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
also, wow, reading some of those oppose/neutral votes on your RfA about your username/sig is...pretty weird. what a strange thing to be disapproving of. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 19:43, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
And only 7 questions! Things have changed...--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 19:46, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Padmalakshmi

Hey P, This edit came up right after you blocked Varasari who made this. I'm comfortable blocked as suspected but I think a check for others might be beneficial. Cyphoidbomb, any opinion? cheers. —SpacemanSpiff 14:07, 13 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@SpacemanSpiff: Has the general shape. Edit summaries and attempt to hid redlinked user page. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 14:10, 13 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@SpacemanSpiff and Cyphoidbomb:  Confirmed, along with Madhurgh and Joeroot. Note the oddball edits from Joeroot to get autoconfirmed...--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 20:33, 13 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

2 new disruptive users

Hi Ponyo. Please have a look at Special:Contributions/SunitaDev who and Special:Contributions/Madheshi123 who repeatedly changed ref'ed content in Madhesh. -- BhagyaMani (talk) 17:23, 13 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The first has been blocked meanwhile. Thanks for arranging this!! Now another one joined in who keeps deleting ref'ed content: Special:Contributions/Sujitkumarjha100 -- BhagyaMani (talk) 18:30, 13 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@BhagyaMani: Another checkuser had a look while I was away enjoying a tasty lunch. If there was a technical link between the accounts then additional blocks would have been made. You may want to request page protection at WP:RFPP as there does seem to be ongoing disruption at the article.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 20:40, 13 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Actually I see it recently came off semi-protection and then the disruption started up again. I've semi-protected the article for 3 weeks. --Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 20:44, 13 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks!! Semi-protection is highly appreciated!! -- BhagyaMani (talk) 06:39, 14 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Monitor the users

Dear Wikipedia Admin. Please monitor the users on Madhesh. This page reference to civil rights movement impacting region of Nepal. Few racist users could have been employed full time to control content on Madhesh. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ramny (talk • contribs) 19:44, 13 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You will need to make your argument on the article talk page, though I would suggest you refrain from throwing around the term "racist" if you want your discussions to bear fruit.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 20:45, 13 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

BBC edits by IP

Hello again Ponyo, I'm afraid the saga of unsourced IP edits on BBC News (TV channel) and BBC World News continues. This time under 86.167.178.65 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) and 81.152.198.79 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). The insertions all come from the same area of southern UK and no explanations, or answer(s) to Talk page warnings have been given. As this person appears to be travelling around the area and using different IPs, I wonder if a temporary page protection for the articles would be appropriate? As always, your help is appreciated. David J Johnson (talk) 09:51, 14 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It appears that 86.169.139.192 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) also belongs to the same person. Regards, David, David J Johnson (talk) 18:33, 14 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
And now 2A02:C7D:8439:B200:AC43:18E9:BF27:AFEF (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) Same "edits" in same area of UK. Obvious block evasion. ? Temp Page protection. Regards, David J Johnson (talk) 10:05, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I've semi'ed BBC News (TV channel) and BBC World News for two weeks. The IPs at BBC World News were including a link in their edit summaries, but when I checked the link it didn't support the content they were adding. I find this even more disruptive than not including a source at all as it's outright deceptive.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 18:31, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Many thanks for all your help. I initially thought that these edits, although wrong, were not serious disruption. Now, with the various IP's travelling around the south UK and incorrect occasional references - it seems like we have a seriously disruptive person. Regards, David, David J Johnson (talk) 19:47, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
They are now doing exactly the same unsourced "edits" on another BBC page: World News Today, using IP 2A02:C7D.8439:B200:F1D2:823:D127:2B12 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). Exactly the same location. Looks like another page for semi ? David J Johnson (talk) 20:19, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Got that one too...--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 20:23, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Shingling334

Hello. He's now using Special:Contributions/212.108.136.217, another /24 that is used only by him, and fits in with already rangeblocked 212.108.137.0/24 and 212.108.138.0/24 (see this; all three of those Turkish /24-ranges are owned by the same company, Sistem Co. Ltd., and for some reason used only by Shingling334, just like a few /24-blocks owned by the same company in the UK, IPs that I believe are still rangeblocked). - Tom | Thomas.W talk 19:11, 14 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Our newest Admin has wasted no time putting his tools to good use.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 18:22, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I've blocked the range for a month.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 20:46, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. - Tom | Thomas.W talk 20:48, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Thomas.W: Forgive me for being conservative with block lengths - I'd very much appreciate your input whenever possible on that issue. Thanks, GABgab 22:01, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
GAB The block length on the single IP was perfectly fine as they will likely not return to it. I extended the length on the range to prevent them from hopping around on it as they've done with other available ranges previously.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 22:03, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@GeneralizationsAreBad: Don't worry about it, I'm not criticising you in any way for it, because there's no way you could know about the history behind it (a very persistent sockmaster, Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Shingling334, who much of the time "only" adds claims on multiple articles about virtually everything beng Turkish, but every now and then totally flips and goes berserk with personal attacks, and pasting tonnes of user warnings and fake block notices on the talk pages of everyone who has ever reverted them...). - Tom | Thomas.W talk 22:15, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Acknowledged. As it happens, I am familiar with the case history, just not necessarily with the technical aspects of it. GABgab 22:16, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
OK. The multiple rangeblocks, in both the UK and Turkey, aren't noted in the SPI (pr WP:DENY), so you couldn't have seen them, but I'll fill you in when needed. - Tom | Thomas.W talk 22:24, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

User:Andy65443 ‎

Here's 2 more their accounts that you can block. Andy19999999998 (talk · contribs) and Andy222222 (talk · contribs). I believe this user is a long term vandal who has been adding false dates to articles for months primarily through IP edits on the 2607:fb90:/* range. --The1337gamer (talk) 20:56, 21 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@The1337gamer: Yup, definitely an LTA on a large and dynamic (i.e. unblockable) range. --Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 21:02, 21 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"The Dance Awards"

You were correct to remove this. This "award" is not of encyclopedic value. I note that their website actually misspells the word "prestigious". -- Ssilvers (talk) 22:26, 21 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I saw that in your edit summary; it gave me a chuckle. --Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 22:27, 21 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

RfA

File:New Zealand TW-17.svg Thanks for supporting my run for administrator. I am honored and grateful. ) Cullen328 Let's discuss it 00:24, 24 July 2017 (UTC) [reply]

Content issue

Hi P, may I please trouble you to look at this discussion? I objected to the content "On July 18, 2017, the director Sanjay Gupta declared that Kaabil may have a Hollywood remake." on the grounds that it's WP:CRYSTAL violating fluff that imparts nothing of value. User reverted, I engaged them in discussion, they've done little to participate, Alex the Whovian reverted them, they reverted again, Whovian reverted again, I am aman goyal reverted yet again. Given that the article has been a sockfarm for Barthateslisa and Ishq Hawa Mein, I'm getting the sense that some pernicious motivation may be going on here, and the user should probably be educated or sanctioned, since they appear to be tone deaf to my explanation of community policy and content guidelines. I'll also note that Goyal and Shimlaites (one of the last Bart socks) seem interested in category and template editing (which is unusual for new users) as well as several intersecting articles. Thanks! Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:44, 28 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Cyphoidbomb: I don't think it would be Ishq Hawa Mein as they create their accounts sequentially (account gets blocked, create a new one, edit until blocked...lather, rinse, repeat) and this one has been around since March. Their article targets and rapid editing does ring paid editing alarm bells however; I'll dig around their contribs and see if I can't figure out which promotional farm they're editing from. I'm not overly familiar with Barthateslisa, so I'll start there.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 16:56, 28 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, I can't make heads or tails of this one. The account will need to be judged based on the quality of their edits and their ability to collaborate with others as opposed to tying it to a specific sockfarm via checkuser (at least with regard to the proposed sockmasters so far).--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 17:12, 28 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Evlekis is on the loose again

See 45 Gamer (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), so maybe a range block or two needs to be renewed... - Tom | Thomas.W talk 23:09, 28 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Noted.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 23:17, 28 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
 DoRD dislikes this.
Thanks. I found this user talk page when doing a quick search, so would you mind deleting it? - Tom | Thomas.W talk 23:33, 28 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Done (mostly). I did a partial restore to separate the wheat from the chaff.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 20:21, 31 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Brentford1889 and Ardnashee2014

Hi P, might I please trouble you to look at Brentford1889 and Ardnashee2014? A user brought these to my attention on my talk page. They both have tons of minor edits, but what's most interesting are the user pages:

  • Ardnashee2014: "Hiya, I'm Charlie Reynolds, otherwise known as Ardnashee2014. This is my third Wikipedia account as I can't remember the password to my first one and my second was blocked. 'Nuff said. (drops mic)."
  • Brentford1889: "Hi. I'm Charlie and this is my fourth account, to be used only for editing football pages."

If the second account was blocked, then this is highly suggestive of block evasion. Not quite sure where a non-CU would begin to research this one, hence my pestering of you. Thanks and happy weekend, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:59, 30 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) Ardnashee School and College seems very likely. In general I don’t think starting a new account should count as “evasion” if the only reason for the block was a username violation.—Odysseus1479 18:02, 30 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Cyphoidbomb: The Brentford1889 account notes it's only going to be used for a specific purpose (i.e. football). Maybe asked them to link their accounts on their talk page per WP:VALIDALT? They appear to have run into some issues with the Ardnashee account, so it's important they know they can't just continue editing disruptively with the accounts interchangeably. --Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 20:47, 31 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=CITV&diff=793394663&oldid=793390684 Just look at that edit. --Crazyseiko (talk) 13:35, 1 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Dua Malik

Hi, can you please look at this article, Draft:Dua Malik, and get rid of sources that are not reliable please. I would do them but I don't understand how to know if a source is unreliable. I have read the Wikipedia page about it as well. Thanks! Plum3600 (talk) 19:37, 30 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Plum3600: What you are looking for when determining whether a source is reliable is whether it has a reputation for fact checking and accuracy. To be honest, the only source in that article that would meet the criteria is the Tribune. The rest look like celebrity gossip websites and blogs. If you can't find in-depth reliably-sourced coverage of Malik that focuses on her career as opposed to superficial gossip such as her clothing style and her more notable siblings, it is unlikely the protection on Dua Malik, which has been deleted 10(!) times for socking and notability issues, will be lifted. As it stands there are two sentences about her career (she hosts a program and her songs have appeared in a handful of shows) and the remainder is about her personal life. This does not demonstrate notability.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 20:58, 31 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Ponyo: Can you please look at the draft now? Plum3600 (talk) 22:17, 31 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The sourcing is better (though the style.pk site is not fantastic). A couple of things - only the number of the children should be included in the infobox per Template:Infobox person, and I would remove the last sentence about the pills in the personal section entirely as WP:UNDUE. It's really just gossipy trivia unrelated to her career.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 22:20, 31 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Ponyo: Now? Plum3600 (talk) 22:47, 31 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The article looks fine as far as the Manual of Style is concerned, but I don't see how Malik meets the notability criteria. She hosts one program and has a handful of songs; nothing meets WP:ENTERTAINER. All of the sources are superficial coverage. Sources 1, 4, 5 and 6 are about someone else, source 2 is a publicity release, and source 3 provides no information at all and should probably be removed. --Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 23:05, 31 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Steve Sandor

I understand. It was sort of a last resort option as there is for whatever reason no other sourcing out there to verify his passing. Rusted AutoParts 21:51, 31 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Rusted AutoParts: But, that's exasperating. The absolute bedrock of BLP policy is "We must get the article right. Be very firm about the use of high-quality sources.". I checked for reliable sources too and couldn't find any, so the information must stay out. We can't rely on a blogspot post by "Tom B." to verify someone has died. I know you know this; please resist the urge to fill in blanks as opposed to ensuring quality information is included. Also, where did this category come from? I'm not picking on you specifically, both articles are on my watch list.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 22:09, 31 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Find a Grave. It's sometimes linked in the External links sections, it seems with Carroll it wasn't so I'll do that. Rusted AutoParts 23:11, 31 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

BBC edits by IP

Hello Ponyo, trust you are well? Regret to report that the BBC IP 82.38.198.215 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is again inserting unsourced/unreferenced/unexplained edits on BBC News (TV channel) and World News Today from exactly the same location as before. Regret to say; is another page protection needed? Regards, David, David J Johnson (talk) 19:38, 1 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The IP has been static for a bit, so I blocked it. I also reapplied protection to a couple of the main targets.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 20:00, 1 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Many thanks for your help. Best to you and yours, David, David J Johnson (talk) 20:01, 1 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

107.17.133.155

Based on their edit summary on their last edit to Palmer Report, I'm suspecting a COI. Also, I'm obviously involved, but I believe that page needs protection for the moment. RickinBaltimore (talk) 20:02, 3 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I blocked the IP as I had already given them a 3rr warning and they made it readily apparent they didn't give a toss. If they IP hop or things get MEAT-y I'll protect the page. Cool? --Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 20:08, 3 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Iridescent beat you to that already it looks like, but thank you. RickinBaltimore (talk) 20:14, 3 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

edit:No_One_Ever_Tells_You

Hi there - if I understand the way this works, you retracted my edits to the credits page for the No_One_Ever_Tells_You article. I was the mix engineer on that project and know the personnel well - the corrections I made were correct, and can be verified by just looking at the actual liner notes on the CD/Vinyl releases.

Is there some reason these edits were retracted?

thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mixerman 23 (talk • contribs) 22:43, 4 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Mixerman 23: Content added to Wikipedia articles needs to be verified by the inclusion of reliable sources as opposed to personal knowledge. If you want to ask how to use album liners as a source, the talk page of Wikipedia:WikiProject Albums would be a good place to start.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 18:26, 9 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Help with Atomic Meltdown

Hi Ponyo, I was wondering if you could re-protect List of awards and nominations received by Family Guy as Atomic Meltdown will not leave the article alone. Thank you. Sro23 (talk) 22:27, 7 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Done by Acroterion.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 18:28, 9 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nagendra?

Hi P, any chance you could look into NagendraNJ socks? I see a lot of activity at Dandupalya (film) lately from IPs who seem to be making bizarre content changes including promotional language and random quotes about a nude scene. The IPs intersect with Hi! It's not a robot at Dandupalya and at 2 (film). The robot guy's second edit was to create a user page, which as you know is often suggestive of socking. Most of the IPs seem to be coming from ISP Jio, whereas the Nagendra socks tended to be from Tata, but Dandupalya was mostly edited by Nagendra socks and IPs from Karnataka, so it just seems fishy. Thanks, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:44, 8 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Cyphoidbomb: I can't say much regarding the IPs other than to note that I wouldn't put too much stock in the specific ISPs the Nagendra socks are using as I've seen them on at least seperate ISPs. I'll take a look, it may just be easiest to semi the articles.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 18:41, 9 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hi! It's not a robot along with User:Rakesh ponnappa are confirmed. I also semi'ed both target articles.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 19:39, 9 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you mucho. I probably shouldn't mention the IPs, I guess, but it's part of what makes me suspicious, even though I know you can't comment. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 02:13, 10 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

User:PerfectlyIrrational and User:Don1182

I'll try to pull something together later today, but in a nutshell it's behavioral: like PerfectlyIrrational, Don1182 has focused on trivial alt-right figures and on ginning up articles on alt-right events which haven't even happened yet (2017 Unite The Right Rally), and Don1182's account was created just days after PerfectlyIrrational was blocked by Bbb23 for sockpuppeting, At the moment, he's adding stuff to Richard B. Spencer about him "leading" that rally WHICH HASN'T EVEN HAPPENED YET. --Calton | Talk 19:36, 9 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Calton; as I'm not familiar with PerfectlyIrrational I would need to see the evidence laid out before I could run any checks etc. Creating an SPI will also bring more eyes on the situation. --Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 19:41, 9 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Trekker

You warned me and that's fine. But he is still commenting on my talk page when he wanted me to stop talking to him. I am moving on from that, but continually getting notifications from him posting on my talk page is not helping the issue. Mr. C.C.Hey yo!I didn't do it! 23:04, 11 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

My warning was firmly worded as there was pretty much zero chance that you wouldn't have ended up here and blocked if you didn't stop the blind talk page reverts. Now you can focus on the actual content dispute by following the steps at WP:DR. If you are no longer interested in pursuing the issue, perhaps just let *Treker know and ask them to stop posting to your talk page until you both cool down.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 23:10, 11 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

The Brilliant Idea Barnstar
I am very thankful to you for unblocking me when I thought there is no option. SahabAliwadia 10:20, 15 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Smile~

Hello Ponyo, ♠Dinah♠ 🎤 has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Go on, smile! Cheers, and happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

♠Dinah♠ 🎤 18:49, 15 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Question

Hello P. When you have a moment would you please take a look at this. It starts out as a justification for this edit. It ends with an airing of family grievances. I am wondering whether it is some form of a BLP (or bio anyway since the father is no longer alive) violation. To get a fuller view of what has happened you will want to see this thread User talk:Jim1138#.27An Unearthly Child.27 and the post by Ian.thomson here User talk:86.9.27.154. Any insight that you or your talk page watchers can provide will be appreciated. MarnetteD|Talk 23:27, 15 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

If it's really him, he's got a WP:COI agenda to disparage (in effect the goatee-universe version of WP:FANCRUFT). But (and this may admittedly be me wanting to goad him in response to his hoity-toity attitude) we don't truly know if it's really him (emails and phone calls are easy enough to fake), so it could be negative impersonation (yes, I have seen people on the internet who would do that). Either way, he claims ownership of the copyright to his father's contributions as if that's relevant and makes not exactly pleasant claims about some people who might still be alive. Regardless, post leaves me nudges me slightly toward blocking under WP:NOTHERE. Ian.thomson (talk) 23:50, 15 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the reply Ian.thomson - and the fun eggs in the links :-) I wonder if some or all of the post have rev/del applied? MarnetteD|Talk 01:01, 16 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The items in question now show up here User talk:Mermade. MarnetteD|Talk 12:08, 16 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I see that you are busy working on this. Thank you. I just discovered this Talk:Anthony Coburn#This page makes a pretentious mockery of peer-review from seven years ago which needs your perusal as well. MarnetteD|Talk 21:18, 16 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I've done what I can with the posts containing legal and personal allegations made by the editor and have blocked them to prevent any further inappropriate wall of text posts, with a pointer to OTRS. I'm not sure if I can do anything about the Anthony Coburn talk page as it doesn't have the overt legal and abuse claims that appeared on the other pages.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 21:31, 16 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I did notice that post was different but I thought it better if you double checked it to be sure. Many thanks for all your efforts in this situation. Regards. MarnetteD|Talk 21:37, 16 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

50.68.118.24

This IP address continued editing after your previous six month check user block. Would you mind checking to see if you think the edits from this IP address have been from the same person as before? Thanks. 172.58.43.106 (talk) 04:57, 17 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

 Done--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 16:00, 17 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You're at ANI

Hurry, or you'll miss it. I don't think the report is going to last long... --Floquenbeam (talk) 17:09, 17 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Not fast enough. You missed it. --Floquenbeam (talk) 17:15, 17 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Well that was quick. I was in a dark and dusty outbuilding shoveling out the muck.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 17:18, 17 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Eww. Better you than me. --Floquenbeam (talk) 17:19, 17 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I ruined a perfectly good pair of shoes in the stables. I'm thinking of starting a GoFundMe campaign.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 17:27, 17 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
That GoFundME site is a scam, it doesn't work at all. I used it to solicit funds so I can retire early, and all I got was $1.29 and a pledge of 2 pieces of used chewing gum. --Floquenbeam (talk) 17:40, 17 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
In that case, I want my $1.29 back...--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 17:43, 17 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Already spent it on fresh pack of gum. --Floquenbeam (talk) 17:45, 17 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Not a paid editor

Hi Ponyo, you recently undid my changes to Qurat-ul-Ain Balouch. I understand my mistakes about improper citations but I tried to find whatever websites I could. Would twitter be an acceptable source?

P.S. I'm not a paid editor, I have just read many wikipedia articles and wanted to give back to the community. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Whyiz (talk • contribs) 16:07, 18 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Whyiz: Twitter can be used as a reliable source in a narrow set of circumstances, such as when an individual makes uncontroversial statements about themselves and there is no reason to doubt its authenticity. WP:TWITTER explains this in more detail. What information were you planning on using Twitter as a reference for?--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 16:15, 18 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Reliable Sources Noticeboard discussion

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Is Hollywood.com a reliable source?. Thank you. --Eden5 (talk) 17:46, 18 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I've replied there.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 18:04, 18 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Shingling334 ...

... is obviously back in the UK again since he's now using the same ranges in Ipswich that he used before going to Turkey for the summer; see Special:Contributions/92.24.186.175, Special:Contributions/92.28.245.252 and Special:Contributions/92.28.243.168. - Tom | Thomas.W talk 22:42, 20 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Thomas.W: Looks like other admins have blocked the latest active IPs. Semi-protection had expired on a couple of his most common targets, so I've reprotected them.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 17:36, 22 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
New TalkTalk IPs from Ipswich pop up every day now, Special:Contributions/92.24.178.49 being the latest one, all of them being obvious Shingling334 socks. And if rangeblocks aren't possible, or desirable, then there are dozens of other articles that need to be protected too... - Tom | Thomas.W talk 15:28, 23 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
It's rare that we can block large mobile network ranges due to collateral. It appears that the IPs are being blocked in short order, and a few additional target articles have been protected. On a related note, reviewing the edits makes me very hungry. --Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 20:34, 23 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Best known for

Almost exactly a year ago, you blocked an IP as a long term abuser. That IP had been making edits to P versus NP, among other articles. If you look at the recent history of that article, you will see an edit war involving an IP address making essentially identical edits as the IP one year ago. I don't know if there is a formal reporting mechanism for this, but I thought perhaps you could help. Thanks, JBL (talk) 01:44, 22 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Joel B. Lewis: I've blocked the IPs as webhosts and semi'ed the article. --Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 17:46, 22 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Problematic user

Hi Ponyo, thank you for speedy deleting Talha Nadeem. On a different note, I wanted to draw your attention towards a Problematic user Shashank0022 (talk · contribs) who created several Wikipedia bios on non-notable Pakistani actors. I just wonder what kind of action could be taken against the user to prevent his further unconstructive contributions. --Saqib (talk) 04:45, 24 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it was me who filed the SPI. --Saqib (talk) 15:59, 24 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Aha! I'd somehow missed that tidbit. It's still rather early here :) --Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 16:05, 24 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Proxy you just blocked

This.[1] I'm working on an SPI right now that is relevant. Doug Weller talk 18:04, 24 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Lol. Yes, behavioral evidence definitely does the trick here. Doug Weller talk 18:09, 24 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Love is in the air...

Hey P, This appears to be a reincarnation of Ishq Hawa Mein (talk · contribs · logs), if it was just that I'd likely have blocked, but I think there are a few more around. Could you take a look please? —SpacemanSpiff 23:32, 24 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

 Confirmed. All their other socks on the range I checked are already blocked.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 23:36, 24 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, I was looking at the history at Saba Qamar and it looked like there may be a couple more, but then they don't follow the same naming convention so I wasn't sure that they were this group. cheers. —SpacemanSpiff 23:43, 24 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Goalball

Hello. The content you re-added with this edit I split into a new article at World Goalball Championships (overwriting a redirect). This material is clearly misplaced in the main Goalball article. --LukeSurl t c 18:05, 25 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @LukeSurl: Thank you for letting me know; please fix it as you see fit.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 18:16, 25 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

86.170.34.243

Hey,

This IP editor started editing again immedietly after your previous check user blocks ended. Is it the same person? Thanks. 2601:1C0:100:BB87:D9DC:10AD:E7A4:C34B (talk) 20:10, 25 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It sure is. That's one sticky IP. --Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 20:15, 25 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,ponyo?

I live in a dormitory in Auckland university now.So other people also use this computer.you don't need to be mucking about this problem.I think that i didn't do anything wrong.What i did is just corrected historical distortion.I'm very sadly disappointed in wikipidians actions.I'd never imagined that some wikipidians act like a chinese dictator.I will officialy protest againt Wikipedia with a interprete.Because i will visit the United States soon.I'll take a chance.Do you like animation ponyo? My wife is Japanese who is executive in 大成建設株式会社.She also likes ponyo very much.ponyo ponyo~.I will tell her about you.She will like.USAthegreatest (talk) 21:20, 25 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"Other people also use this computer" is a ludicrous position to take when 1) there's no technical indication that you're editing from Auckland 2) one of the accounts is a very close variation of your own name and 2) both accounts are so obviously you. I thought perhaps that you were just somewhat incompetent, but your reply here makes it obvious you're being actively deceptive, therefore I've blocked your account indefinitely.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 21:31, 25 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Ponyo. Andreas Philopater and 蒙古喇嘛教初夜权 just reverted the edits using the exact same edit summary (21:53 and 22:49). The second account was obviously duck and I have blocked it, but the first account is intriguing: the account is in good standing since 2009, with 9003 edits. The edit immediately after the suspicious revert was seemingly covering up the tracks. Is this a case of WP:COMPROMISED or WP:MEAT? Regards, Alex ShihTalk 01:31, 26 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
This is a case of not being impressed with removing one dubious recent edit to restore another dubious recent edit as the "status quo". Get out of the paranoia box. --Andreas Philopater (talk) 05:45, 26 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Antony1821 Rangeblock

Thanks for helping out - my rangeblock knowledge is pretty rudimentary at this point GABgab 22:22, 25 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No problem-0.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 23:09, 25 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A page without any WP:RS

Hi Ponyo, please take a look at the page titled "Karnataka (Nepal)". The contribution history of the creater of the page is reminding me of Admirenepal sockfarm. Thanks — Ind akash (talk) 11:22, 26 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Ind akash: It looks like there's confusion as to who the sockmaster may be. Once determined, please open an SPI for review.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 20:21, 28 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

recreation of Pinch A Penny Pool Patio and Spa

Hi Ponyo. I noticed that you had deleted an earlier version of Pinch A Penny Pool Patio and Spa. It still feels promotional to me, but I wanted to check with you if you thought the new version was substantially different from the one you deleted. The creator appears to be a new user without any prior contributions. Thanks for your advice, Mduvekot (talk) 14:32, 28 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) It's actually 100% identical to the version that Ponyo deleted; as such, I've done the dubious honors. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 14:35, 28 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
As always, thank you Writ Keeper.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 20:22, 28 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Ponyo&oldid=797840345"