Archives

May 2007 – December 2010 2011 January 2012 - February 2012 March 2012 - May 2012 June 2012 - July 2012 August 2012 - September 2012 October 2012 - November 2012 December 2012 - January 2013 February 2013 - May 2013 June 2013 - July 2013 August 2013 - December 2013 January 2014 - March 2014 April 2014 - June 2014 July 2014 - August 2014 September 2014 - October 2014 November 2014 - December 2014 January 2015 - February 2015 March 2015 - May 2015 June 2015 - July 2015 August 2015 - September 2015 October 2015 - December 2015 January 2016 - March 2016 April 2016 - May 2016 June 2016 - July 2016 August 2016 - September 2016 October 2016 - December 2016 January 2017 - March 2017 April 2017 - June 2017 July 2017 - September 2017 October 2017 - December 2017 January 2018 - March 2018 April 2018 - June 2018 July 2018 - September 2018 October 2018 - December 2019 January 2019 - March 2019 April 2019 - June 2019 July 2019 - September 2019 October 2019 - December 2019 January 2020 - March 2020 April 2020 - June 2020 July 2020 - September 2020 October 2020 - December 2020 January 2021 - March 2021 April 2021 - June 2021 July 2021 - September 2021 October 2021 - December 2021 January 2022 - March 2022 April 2022 - June 2022 July 2022 - September 2022 October 2022 - December 2022 Janaury 2023 - March 2023 March 2023 - June 2023

Hi Ponyo. You did the last CU check on Blackknight1234567890 around Nov 2022. Would you be willing to take a look at DNAVIRAL? There's a big topic overlap with the prior socks and similar behaviors in the editing. -- ferret (talk) 01:01, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Drmies, @NinjaRobotPirate would either of you be willing to peak as Ponyo is currently busy IRL? -- ferret (talk) 23:48, 5 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

DNAVIRAL is probably User:TotalTruthTeller24. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 00:19, 6 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Ponyo, have fun IRL! Drmies (talk) 00:43, 6 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Drmies: I wish I had been having fun, but I pinched a nerve in my back and was out of service for nearly a week. Feeling better now though!-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 18:00, 6 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oh dear, I'm sorry to hear this. See, in my case old age is always an excuse. DYK I just had surgery for a hernia? Very exciting! I have a new scar! Take care, Drmies (talk) 21:06, 6 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oh no! No more skimpy bikinis for you!-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 21:12, 6 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, seeing as that you're an admin I thought I might ask you this, I was wondering if someone's birthday has a reliable source, but no source anywhere for the year, is it okay to put just the former down? Kcj5062 (talk) 08:01, 7 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

In my view, this is not an admin question. However, my answer is no. Just the month and day someone is born is generally not noteworthy (I suppose there might be some rare exceptions). Occasionally I have seen editors add this to BLPs, and I have reverted the edits. Thus far, I haven't clashed with anyone on the issue, but no doubt I've just been lucky. Not that your opinion matters, of course, but what do you think, Ponyo? BTW, I myself wasn't born in December, and I wasn't born on the 21st day of any month. I think that should be added to my article.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:46, 7 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Kcj5062: Just the day and month doesn't impart any notable information to a BLP, so my inclination would be to exclude it from the article. I would, however, likely make note of the day and month with the corresponding sourcing on the article talk page as it would be helpful to have the sources on hand should additional information regarding the birth year be published. Given that Bbb23 agrees with me, he's clearly linking to the wrong article in his post above.-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 16:11, 7 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Let's get this straight. I don't agree with you; you agree with me, which demonstrates a high degree of intelligence and perspicacity, whatever that means.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:22, 7 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm perspictastic!-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 16:30, 7 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You've been an admin since 2011 (comment at RfA)? Only one year before I became an admin? So, how come you're so much better at it than I am? And don't tell me it's because you're perspictastic. New sections require new humor. Seriously, for some reason I assumed you'd been an admin significantly longer than I have. [after self-imposed pause] Just looked at your RfA. Only one oppose. Pretty damned good. Should've been unanimous as the oppose was lame, not to mention a bit xenophobic, which is ironic, considering that Xeno closed your RfA as successful, or was it réussi?--Bbb23 (talk) 17:38, 7 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the oppose, I've thought about changing the bon mots bit in my signature a few times over the years and then I remember that I worked hard to keep to keep those two little words. That says a lot about me (mainly that I'm stubborn and can hold a grudge long past its 'sell by' date).-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 17:51, 7 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Those are certainly characteristics I look for in an admin. I'm holding off supporting the latest RFA until I'm more confident they, too, can hold a grudge for a long time. --Floquenbeam (talk) 18:01, 7 July 2023 (UTC) (p.s. you're both noob admins)[reply]

It comes in extra handy with the CU bit.-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 18:04, 7 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I was never able to talk you into running for somewhere your memory would be useful, though. Courcelles (talk) 18:13, 7 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There are only so many circles of hell I'm willing to tour.-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 18:15, 7 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Bah! I guess the old AUSC was the closest circle I could ever convince you to come and visit. You are definitely smarter than I am. Courcelles (talk) 18:22, 7 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

AUSC had a trap door in the floor that led to Circles #3 and #4.-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 18:41, 7 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ponyo, I wanted to ask if you or another administrator wouldn’t mind protecting the article “Disney Digital 3-D” to allow only extended registered users to edit it? There has been persistent spamming from unregistered users as of late. Any help would be appreciated. (Reposted because I forgot the title). Thanks,

DESERTSCHo0L20 (talk) 00:40, 10 July 2023 (UTC)DESERTSCHo0L20[reply]

@DESERTSCHo0L20: The level of disruption doesn't meet the threshold for protection. If this changes, you can make a request at WP:RFPP.-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 19:39, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your response. I saw that someone came to protect the page, so all as well!

DESERTSCHo0L20 (talk) 03:33, 21 July 2023 (UTC)DESERTSCHo0L20[reply]

Without disclosing anything you shouldn't, can you advise me concerning ScienceAdvisor who you blocked? The comment states reasons checkuser and UPE. I'd like the information to help me determine if their creations could be G5-eligible based on a prior block. ☆ Bri (talk) 21:29, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Bri: As ScienceAdvisor is tagged as the master account, G5 would not apply. The articles has to have been created in violation of a block or ban, and SA wasn't evading a block or ban (that we know of) when they edited. Any articles/pages created by ScienceAdvisor's socks would be eligible if they were created after SA's original block on March 2, 2023.-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 19:43, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oof, of course. For some reason I thought your comment meant that there was a *previous* master. Just tired when I posted, I guess. ☆ Bri (talk) 00:22, 12 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Followup - proxy

I'm a little lost who's who in this saga, but I noticed you blocked an IP as a proxy who edited this very same thread. I believe this is one of a VPN range and opened a WPOP case. Thought you might want to see. ☆ Bri (talk) 17:36, 12 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You blocked sock account [1] but looks like the same user is back with possibly two sock accounts and both editing same pages and interest in Afghan-Sikh Wars. These new sock account are [2] and [3].192.189.187.106 (talk) 20:48, 13 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You’re fast, Ponyo… I was looking at diffs and I notice they’re tagged! Courcelles (talk) 21:07, 13 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Pow pow!.-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 21:09, 13 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

He is back again with another sock accounts Surajsingh09 and RevolutionaryPatriot. The Contributions overlap with all previous sockaccounts of KamalAfghan01. See here. Clearly a duck.

[4] and [5] 71.27.92.193 (talk) 21:04, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There are two more RTC710 and Khekom. How both take interest in making their first edits on a newly created article by sockpuppet Surajsingh09. See here [6] and [7] 71.27.92.193 (talk) 21:10, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Courcelles: pinging Courcelles since Ponyo is on vacation.71.27.92.193 (talk) 22:01, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Courcelles: in addition to information i provided above, Surajsingh09 also moved a draft page as regular article, originally created by sock master Kamal Afghan01. It was reverted back to draft by admin after the indef block of sockmaster but Surajsingh09 moved it back again.

See here.[8]. It's quacking. 71.27.92.193 (talk) 22:11, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

RevolutionaryPatriot comes back as unrelated, otherwise sock drawer given a deep clean. Courcelles (talk) 23:15, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Ponyo: - Welcome back from vacation. Hope you had a great time. Back to sockmaster who has striked again. And the new sock accounts are Shiva912Semijan0[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Semijan0 of sockmaster [9]. Battle of Bannu was created by sockmaster Kamal Afghan01 and his guranteed newly created sock account Shiva912 has shown interest on this page with similar editing patterns as that of his sockmaster. Shiva912, an account created on 25 August 2023 created a new page Malik Dilasa Khan which was a draft and just like his previous editing habits, he moved page Draft:Malik Dilasa Khan to Malik Dilasa Khan [10]. While creating Malik Dilasa Khan, he also added exact same content from first paragraph of Battle of Bannu.
This is another account that is very curious, [11] because after account Shiva912 moved the page from Draft:Malik Dilasa Khan to Malik Dilasa Khan, Semijan0 went ahead and removed all the AFC draft tags from article Malike Dilasa Khan as seen here [12]. Semijan0 was created on 18 August 2023.
These two accounts are also very dubious as they are making same edits to the two pages created by sockmaster. These accounts are Shanglapar[13] created on 26 August 2023 and Naruto Muslim[14], created on 29 July 2023. The editing pattern is same here as well [15], [16] where the accounts just picks random unreliable and unverified sources to support the page.
Not sure if its sock or meatpuppetry but account Pukhtun zalmai[17] has taken sudden interest on article Battle of Bannu and especially Malik Dilasa Khan right after it was created as draft. Might want to look into this as well.
Battle of Bannu article is full on unreliable sources and failed verification and along with Malik Dilasa Khan which too follows same pattern, these two pages should be deleted, created by sock accounts.170.170.200.150 (talk) 22:22, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Grumpylawnchair, and I'm really sorry that I accidentially warned you while using Huggle. I will not be using Huggle until I gain more experience with semi-automated tools. Again, I'm sorry for any inconvenience that my actions have caused. Grumpylawnchair (talk) 19:02, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I understand, mistakes happen. I've never used Twinkle, Huggle, or any of the many anti-vandalism scripts; you learn a lot when you memorize templates and make decisions based on the situation as opposed to what's available in a drop down menu. Not dissing the scripts, they're just not my preference.-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 20:04, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page watcher) I learned a lot memorizing templates too: I learned I have a bad memory, so I use Twinkle. I have accidentally warned users, including admins, but thankfully it's quite rare. Most editors are understanding about it as long as you rectify it as soon as you discover it. BilCat (talk) 00:11, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

about you're message on my talk page, people can just check the page history. Notrealname1234 (talk) 18:20, 19 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Notrealname1234: Yes, they can check the history, but they shouldn't have to. The bot removes the report at a set time for a reason, please don't override it unnecessarily. There is no reason for you to be attempting to clerk AIV.-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 18:22, 19 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Also, explain this? Notrealname1234 (talk) 18:49, 19 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That was an admin removing stale declined reports after reviewing them as part of their process of reviewing cases. It was 40 minutes after my decline and there was plenty of time for the person who made the report to see why it was declined. -- Ponyo^{bons mots} 19:03, 19 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That is so it will stop showing there are pending AIV entries on my watchlist. I reviewed both of the reports, and as an uninvolved administrator agreeing with the declines I removed them for ease of patrolling. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 18:53, 19 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ponyo, thanks for the information regarding using level 4im and 4 warnings recently, and sorry if I conveyed some wrong information to the IP there.

Thanks, 𝑭𝒊𝒍𝒎𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔 (talk) 19:47, 19 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your advice was obviously made entirely in good faith. -- Ponyo^{bons mots} 19:49, 19 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I understand that social media websites are generally frowned upon as reflinks, although there are exceptions. (I read WP: INSTAGRAM.) In this case it appears there is a question regarding the Instagram account of Carlin Glynn's daughter, Mary Stuart Masterson.

The following URL is Masterson's confirmed Instagram account where she mentioned her mother's death on July 13. Is this not considered Masterson's confirmed Instagram account???

(https://www.instagram.com/p/CuukQr0uK5j/?img_index=1) (https://www.instagram.com/p/CuukQr0uK5j/).

I am sorry, I don't know how to take a screenshot but just want to be clear.

Thanks, 166.199.114.80 (talk) 17:56, 20 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed Instagram accounts have a blue check next to the account name; the account you provide is not a confirmed account. -- Ponyo^{bons mots} 18:06, 20 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, if someone is blocked from a page, does that include the talk page? I have List of tallest people on my watch list and found this [18] Knitsey (talk) 23:06, 20 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Knitsey: The article talk page is generally left open for partial blocks so that the blocked editor can still discuss content concerns and potential edits. If the disruption spreads to the talk page, then it can be added to the partial block.-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 23:09, 20 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Lovely, thanks so much for the reply. I couldn't remember if it automatically applied to talk page. Thank you! Knitsey (talk) 23:13, 20 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @Ponyo! Just wondering why you did not think my edit on the Sid McMath page was notable! An explanation would be appreciated and very very helpful :) LoudPorcupine797 (talk) 23:24, 20 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• A student body position doesn't merit an Infobox officeholder template. The information can be added to the relevant articles, assuming reliable sourcing criteria is met, but inclusion of an infobox intended for significant legislative positions is excessive. In addition, you added the infobox to articles where the information wasn't even included in the article itself. -- Ponyo^{bons mots} 17:43, 25 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

im not trying to do a edit war with him but it doesn't make sense that he is telling me to get a consensus to restore a page when there wasn't a consensus to delete it in tne first place when I asked him to talk because I wanted to know the whole reason why he ignored me I have no idea what to do so I have just resorted the pages Wwew345t (talk) 02:49, 22 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Wwew345t: So you returned to edit warring on the same set of articles as soon as your block expired? You are edit warring against multiple editors to restore content that was merged to the appropriate list pages long ago. If you continue to edit war instead of discussing your concerns on the individual talk pages, you will likely find yourself blocked again. -- Ponyo^{bons mots} 17:58, 25 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ponyo: Sorry to bother you here, but just for the record, and making use of my right to reply, I'd like to point out that, despite Wwew345t's accusation above, I was not wilfully ignoring him/her: I was blissfully sleeping since logging out late last night, local time. On logging on this morning, local time, I saw several alerts waiting for me and immediately replied to the user's two messages on my talk page. I then checked the remaining alerts, which led me to leave a final message on his/her talk page, the gist of which was that I considered those messages downright rude and that s/he had simply continued with the edit warring, despite several warnings. It was with that last message that I expressed my intention to have no further contact with this user. In other words, to "ignore" him/her. Regards, --Technopat (talk) 11:05, 22 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

New user which I believe is a sock of S201050066 (talk · contribs) who was blocked, has since harassed another editor. I'm so sorry that I don't have all the details yet as I'm just looking for the SPI report. Can you take a look please? Knitsey (talk) 23:02, 26 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, you're quicker than the speed of light. Knitsey (talk) 23:03, 26 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Those blooming brackets!!! Sorry Knitsey (talk) 23:04, 26 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ponyo, on the draft you deleted: From its creation in Feb 2020 until the sock edited it a week back, the draft saw no socking. The sock just made 4 minor edits in a space of one hour. G5 would not apply, however you may want to re-delete it back as a technical G13. In other words, as if the restoration never happened, and Gbesimi Samuel or anyone else should be able to ask for the refund. Jay 💬 04:41, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

My thinking on this is that it was restored at the request of a confirmed sock, which is akin to the sock having recreated the draft. I tried to be clear in my edit summary as well. To me it seems overly bureaucratic to restore and immediately re-delete the draft as G13. No worries if you want to do it, but I don't think it's necessary in this one specific instance.-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 20:04, 3 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have observed and shadowed multiple Wikipedia admins, and to be honest you are one of the few who sticks exactly to the rules, and doesn't pull underhanded tricks(like getting articles deleted by posting deletion notice in talk page of another linked article whose talk page has been inactive for years). So thanks, for contributing to the Wikipedia, and a thumbs up from an insignificant person! 117.197.254.209 (talk) 15:57, 3 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, I think? It doesn't read so much that I'm doing something good so much as insinuate that others are doing something wrong. But ok.-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 19:59, 3 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nice to be shadowed, huh? I mean, really, I hope you're not paying much money to get editors to lavish praise on you. I usually pay them conditionally, you know, like if you do a good job, I might send you a carrot.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:24, 3 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't been very praise worthy these days; incredibly busy preparing for a trip to the other Island (watch out Ivanvector, here I come!).-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 19:59, 3 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'll go sweep the bridge! Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 20:05, 3 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ha! I'll be sure to let you know if it passes inspection. NB: I expect a fresh pot of steamed mussels upon arrival.-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 20:38, 3 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ScottPuppete (talk · contribs), see user page. They're adding notability tags to articles. I could be wrong of course. Knitsey (talk) 19:51, 4 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like someone is on it. Sorry to have bothered you. Knitsey (talk) 19:54, 4 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Meow... Indeffed as LTA. Courcelles (talk) 19:58, 4 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Ponyo. I wanted to alert you to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Andrew5, where an editor (well-known sockmaster) you previously temp blocked for ban evading back in February 2023 has been re-reported for editing once again today on the IP-address without an appeal. Cheers! The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 22:59, 11 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Normally I'd call this stale as the IP hasn't edited in a week, but they've been active on that IP for 2.5 years, so I've reblocked.-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 20:50, 18 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

72.69.36.4 (talk · contribs · WHOIS)

Could you check on this IP's edits? They started editing straight after your 1-year CU block recently expired. IDK who they are, but I just came across some disruption from them in the filter log. Thanks. 2601:1C0:4401:F60:8567:519F:32E2:F52B (talk) 05:43, 14 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ponyo's on vacation (or holiday as she would put it), but I've blocked the IP for another year for block evasion. It took a lot of digging to figure out the named sockmaster whose block the IP is evading, but I'm fairly certain it's Browniesandicecreamcake.--Bbb23 (talk) 12:34, 14 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! @Bbb23: :-) 2601:1C0:4401:F60:7C72:5877:80EB:F896 (talk) 20:09, 14 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for everything you do you are awesome! 98.235.155.81 (talk) 22:02, 16 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I also see you are on vacation have a nice one. 98.235.155.81 (talk) 22:06, 16 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I struggled a bit with this, but I've blocked 98. for another year and, at the same time, blocked Special:contributions/2601:981:4401:1CC0:0:0:0:0/64 (same person) for a year, duplicating your blocks from 2022. They are very strange as editors go. Can you tell me whether they are related to a named account without telling me who? Or is it just a case of disruption and IP jumping? I know you won't be able to reply until you return. I hope you enjoyed your holiday.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:29, 17 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ponyo, unless you have special insight, checking that IPv4 address and IPv6 /64 will not be illuminating to anything. There’s nothing there. Courcelles (talk) 14:10, 17 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If there's one thing I hate, it's non-illuminating IPs. BTW, Courcelles, Ponyo has lots of "special insight", although perhaps not in this particular instance. :p Thanks for sharing the illuminating non-illumination.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:48, 17 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Believe me, I know she does. “Listen to Ponyo” ought to be on the list of Wikipedia laws. Courcelles (talk) 14:51, 17 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Awww, you guys said such nice things I came back early from my holiday just to say hi! I don't think my block on the IP was sock related, just standard disruption.-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 20:54, 18 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Some IP vandal placed a {{sock block}} on my talk page, accusing me of being your sock. It's nothing of consequence, just thought you might like a laugh. 〜 Festucalex • talk 12:53, 23 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, this sock is particularly ridiculous. Easy to spot, even easier to block.-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 16:07, 23 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page watcher) They even added a block notice to tneir own talk page. Strange. BilCat (talk) 16:29, 23 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@BilCat: It seems that this individual is well-versed in the ways of Wikipedia. Block evasion, probably. 〜 Festucalex • talk 19:18, 23 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Ponyo. Please see this last topic. Fade258 (talk) 16:23, 24 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Noted, thank you.-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 16:31, 24 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Ponyo.
Blocked user Rozayrex (talk · contribs) is clearly socking on 102.88.35.136 (talk · contribs · WHOIS). Br, Sam Sailor 18:54, 24 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Lovely. If they continue to overwrite articles, we could probably add the name to an abuse filter.-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 19:00, 24 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, can I ask for a rev/del for these edits please, [19] and [20]. Thanks, Knitsey (talk) 18:04, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I've Oversighted as potentially libelous/defamatory.-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 18:11, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Knitsey (talk) 18:12, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

...and ScottishFinnishRadish moved in for the block.-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 18:13, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, I was just going to check if there were more edits, lovely, thanks to both of you. Knitsey (talk) 18:14, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Given the edits BarneyCrumble has made, I really struggle to believe this isn't another sock. Rusted AutoParts 18:30, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yup, that's them. Thanks for the heads-up.-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 20:07, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

As long as you are, you might as well do something useful. Does Caleb Onyeabor (blocked by me, first unblock request declined by you) = PanAfricanCaleb? Editing the same page created by the master, username similarity, similar edit summaries. I also wonder if there aren't others, but that's all I have evidence of at the moment.--Bbb23 (talk) 21:51, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I do have another: LeaderGTZ. Edited the same page as PAC, edited Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Samson Arega Bekele, again similar edit summaries.--Bbb23 (talk) 21:54, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Bbb23 I think m6 block log will answer your question. Yes, these are all the same. Courcelles (talk) 22:04, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Courcelles: Cute typo (m6) - I kept thinking MI6 and wondering what they had to do with it. Can I tag all of the accounts as confirmed?--Bbb23 (talk) 22:49, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yep. This is blatantly the same person. Courcelles (talk) 23:04, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Geez, how am I supposed to do something useful now?-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 22:06, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I’m going to be on a ship for 3 weeks. You can do all the work, then. Courcelles (talk) 22:11, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, but you better bring me back lots of...(quickly Googles "Iceland" and "Greenland")...lichen.-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 22:14, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The US Dept of Agriculture may not like that! Of course, three Canadian stops await between Greenland and New York… Courcelles (talk) 23:05, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Make sure to pick yourself up a maple leaf emblazoned toque eh!-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 23:12, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Ponyo, Can you help review this case again when you have time? Thanks. Jamiebuba (talk) 22:30, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Checkuser is generally rubbish in UPE cases as coordination amongst separate individuals is so common. BradV's inclination to go with a behavioural check is likely the right call if the technical data doesn't provide a clear connection.-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 22:37, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Ponyo Does this page qualify for G5? seeing it was the blocked user who moved it to mainspace and also the other editor is obviously the subject of the article is the only other editor? Jamiebuba (talk) 07:20, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

G5 only applies if it's created by an account in violation of a block or ban, which isn't the case here. There's an argument to be made that it was repeatedly moved from draft space by a sock and should be draftified due to the socking/COI issues.-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 20:41, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You recently blocked Milighuh (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). They are now making the same edits as Palbouvelina (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). Thanks for looking at this. Sundayclose (talk) 15:19, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No I'm a different person Palbouvelina (talk) 15:19, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The handwriting is different Palbouvelina (talk) 15:20, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Never mind, blocked by another admin. Sundayclose (talk) 15:26, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, Ponyo, another missed opportunity to be useful. :p --Bbb23 (talk) 15:28, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Bbb23 Can you spare time to have a look above for me? Jamiebuba (talk) 15:49, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You can see what Ponyo thinks when she returns, but I don't think it qualifies for G5.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:59, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I saw you protected this page recently (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrea_Muzii) and protection is now over.

Unfortunately the problem keeps going and I saw that it's been going on for months.

The situation is that one user always adds informations which are unsourced and in fact, are wrong, or rather subjective.

Consensus was of course not reached for these statements (it's always the same anonymous user).

Me and other users tried to explain in the talk page why these statements are wrong from a purely technical point of view (beside being unsourced) but he always keeps adding them. It seems there's no way of having a logical conversation.

I think it's just hating because he keeps writing things like "fake champion", "non champion"...

What can we do? Franisko (talk) 09:56, 27 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Well, now you’re blocked as a sockpuppet and that page is protected. Lovely mess that was made. Courcelles (talk) 10:51, 27 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Ponyo,

On 27.09.22 during review process you deleted Space Port Israel content at Sandbox on ground "Unambiguous copyright infringement of https://www.israeldefense.co.il/en/node/55538". So, in order to clear that I turned to Israel Defense internet magazine and received their consent to make reference to their publications. See Link to E-Mail below: https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/#inbox/QgrcJHrnwhDnBRKmrsTcgDNNlqKjmMGDFQv Please, reconsider your approval for my Wikipedia article.

Let me know if more clarification needed Thanks in advance.

Orlovsky01 Orlovsky01 (talk) 21:04, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The copyright holder needs to release the material under an appropriate license. Please see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials as to how the process works.-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 21:10, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, what triggered your check? I had Pendrift on my watchlist.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:12, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It was BabsGinder that caught my eye. Pulled the thread and a bunch of socks flew out.-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 23:16, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

They should know better than to catch your eye. Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:18, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Another obvious sock, Special:Contributions/Xtwitter, all edits have been to readd sock edits. Lavalizard101 (talk) 11:08, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I've blocked and tagged as obvious. Ponyo can do whatever she thinks best when she gets here (it's kinda early in the morning, but I am blessed with insomnia). Looks like the new account was registered when Ponyo ran the check but hadn't edited yet.--Bbb23 (talk) 11:57, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]