User talk:Ponyo

Invitation to Cornell study on Wikipedia discussions

Hello Ponyo,

I’m reaching out as part of a Cornell University academic study investigating the potential for user-facing tools to help improve discussion quality within Wikipedia discussion spaces (such as talk pages, noticeboards, etc.). We chose to reach out to you because you have been highly active on various discussion pages .

The study centers around a prototype tool, ConvoWizard, which is designed to warn Wikipedia editors when a discussion they are replying to is getting tense and at risk of derailing into personal attacks or incivility. More information about ConvoWizard and the study can be found at our research project page on meta-wiki.

If this sounds like it might be interesting to you, you can use this link to sign up and install ConvoWizard. Of course, if you are not interested, feel free to ignore this message.

If you have any questions or thoughts about the study, our team is happy to discuss! You may direct such comments to me or to my collaborator, Cristian_at_CornellNLP.

Thank you for your consideration.

-- Jonathan at CornellNLP (talk) 18:09, 3 October 2023 (UTC)

List of Dancing on Ice contestants

The protection template you added to this article one year ago came off today, and our favorite U.K. sockpuppet was right back at it within minutes. Please put back under extended protection when you have a chance. Bgsu98 (Talk) 17:07, 6 October 2023 (UTC)

Ok, blocked the range and reprotected the article for another year.-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 17:13, 6 October 2023 (UTC)

See you next year. 😉 Bgsu98 (Talk) 17:14, 6 October 2023 (UTC)

SPI airport vandal

As far as I know, CUs have very limited options regarding hammering IPs in a SPI. So I like your advice how to proceed with an SPI.

I have on my talk page a list of the identified problematic ranges. And on request of @HJ Mitchell:, I am now creating a list of the articles the vandal targets.

So please advice. The Banner talk 22:53, 6 October 2023 (UTC)

While it's true that checkuser can't be requested to link IPs to accounts, SPI is for all types of socking. (Often) the majority of reports there don't even have the CU field enabled (i.e. checkuser = no in the first field). Clerks and admins still review the reports, they just don't go into the checkuser queue.-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 23:01, 6 October 2023 (UTC)

Draft:Kwadarrius Smith

Hello, I see that you indefinitely blocked Zippyroe, a promotional SPA who created this draft, earlier today. I thought I'd bring it to your attention that a draft promoting the same non-notable individual is still up. Is this worth deleting on the grounds of advertising and promotion? JeffSpaceman (talk) 23:12, 6 October 2023 (UTC)

I saw that one, but it was at least somewhat neutrally written in comparison to Draft:Kwadarrius smith, which included gems such as his "celebrity status" with a list of random celebrities who he is "known to" and his "good following" on social media "even though he may not be ringing a lot of bells". Yes, that's a direct quote. You can tag the remaining draft if you want, or let it sail into the G13 sunset.-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 23:19, 6 October 2023 (UTC)

The more I look at it, the more I think the latter is the best bet. As barebones as this one might be, I think it might be for the best to just leave it be for now. And those direct quotes from the previous draft... wow. I've seen some pretty ridiculous puffery on here, and those are definitely up there. JeffSpaceman (talk) 23:26, 6 October 2023 (UTC)

Request to remove extended protection for the wikipedia page: "A-League Men records and statistics"

Request to remove extended protection for the wikipedia page: "A-League Men records and statistics". Page has not been updated significantly since the protection has been put up. 103.27.152.125 (talk) 18:22, 10 October 2023 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Please go to WP:RFPP/D to request the removal of protection. NW1223<Howl at me•My hunts> 18:29, 10 October 2023 (UTC)

The protection is working just fine, and the IP is now blocked as an LTA.-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 21:07, 12 October 2023 (UTC)

Remove TPA for blocked user Eduart nano

They've been posting non-English promotional stuff on their talk page for a while. I don't think they should have TPA. —asparagusus (interaction) ^sprouts! 17:26, 11 October 2023 (UTC)

 Done.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:30, 11 October 2023 (UTC)

Protected page

I saw that you protected the page Andrea Muzii a while ago. Some content looks outdated on the page. The problem is that memory sports is a small niche so people that can edit with the current protection probably don't know about that. What about reducing the protection? And if the vandalism start again, going back to the protection. 87.7.233.180 (talk) 15:29, 18 October 2023 (UTC)

Actually, Courcelles subsequently increased the protection duration to indefinite and widened it to ECB.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:44, 18 October 2023 (UTC)

For reasons beyong my understanding, this article has historically been, and continues to be, contentious. The protection remains necessary.-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 19:00, 18 October 2023 (UTC)

Ok, clear.

But the problem is that, apart from some outdated content, some information present on the page are still part of the attack that originated the protection.

When you protected the page these information were removed.

When Courcelles protected it again they were present, they were just an old version of it.

Imo it should be restored to the version that you oringinally protected. If you look at the cited sources of these infos you can see that they are not mentioned and so it's unsourced. 87.7.233.180 (talk) 19:15, 23 October 2023 (UTC)

You can request changes to the article by using the requested edits process on the article talk page.-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 20:03, 23 October 2023 (UTC)

Draft:WaffleTime

Could i convince you to suppress the past edits of this draft? Trade (talk) 17:59, 20 October 2023 (UTC)

 Done, but please email Oversight (via [1]) for future requests; I have the habit of dropping off the radar for days on end and stuff like this should get zapped with the least amount of eyes on it as possible.-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 19:05, 20 October 2023 (UTC)

@Trade: I've received your email and deleted the article in question, but I have to again request that you email the oversight team as advised at WP:OVERSIGHT to make such requests in the future.-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 21:30, 20 October 2023 (UTC)

Familiar?

Smoke Rack erryday (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) Waited 5 months, gamed autoconfirmed, and tried to vandalize Gender-affirming surgery. Racist user page. Ring any bells? ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 20:43, 23 October 2023 (UTC)

It's the same range as Architect 134. Don't bother tagging, just make sure to yank their tpa and email when blocking.-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 20:55, 23 October 2023 (UTC)

You've got mail!

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

Bloomingbyungchan (talk) 12:24, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

Bloomingbyungchan, I acted on your email yesterday. Is there something else you need? -- Ponyo^{bons mots} 15:43, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

No, I just didn't see that you had already solved the issue. Thank you again, Bloomingbyungchan (talk) 16:36, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

User شاب مراكشي

Hi Ponyo, mind taking a look at شاب مراكشي? They are creating quite a few likely non-notable articles about Moroccan musicians but the more immediate concern is it appears they tried to hijack Simon Martin (artist) by moving it to Simodmart (artist), a likely non-notable Moroccan musician. Shortly after the move a Moroccan IP came along and changed the date of birth from 1965 to 2004 so I thought CU might be helpful. Also, it seems you may know French and it looks like they have had issues also at fr. wiki (and ar.wiki). Not that you can do anything at another project but it might be helpful to understand their activity. S0091 (talk) 19:16, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

Except in extremely rare circumstances, a checkuser cannot connect accounts to IPs without their advance permissions being pulled, so being a CU isn't helpful in this case. That being said, the rapid creation of non-notable articles is an issue, and they have indeed been doing this cross-wiki. They've created a mess that's going to suck up a bunch of volunteer time, so I've partially blocked them from article space for a month. We'll see where it goes from here.-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 19:32, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

Thanks Ponyo. I understand about not publicly connecting an IP. Slowing them down I hope will be helpful. Thanks again. S0091 (talk) 19:42, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

If you suspect socking, SPI is still an option. -- Ponyo^{bons mots} 19:55, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

Another but different sock?

Thanks for blocking Puzzle Piece the Wikipedian. Did you actually recognize them behaviorally, or did something else trigger the check? Please look at Cupkake4Yoshi, new user that voted at both RfAs, one neutral and one oppose.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:40, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

Another checkuser ran a check. I'm guessing they didn't find anything. I didn't run a check myself as I'm not particularly familiar with the RfA trolls. This has all the hallmarks of an LTA but I'd personally like something more to bite on before digging deeper myself. Ponyo may well have an idea. --Yamla (talk) 18:21, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

Thanks, Yamla, we'll wait to see if our good friend Ponyo makes an appearance today.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:26, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

I knew Puzzle Piece was a frequent flyer CIR sock, but I thought they were setting up good hand/bad hand accounts and reporting them to noticeboards to boost their credibility, which is what led to my check. No clue on your Cupcake friend, but they're not related to Mr. Puzzle Piece.-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 20:02, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

I guess I should have phrased the section header differently. When I said "different", I meant potentially related to someone else.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:34, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

No, you were clear, my head's just all over the place; I really need to boost my multi-tasking abilities. I have no idea who Cupcake4Yoshi is.-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 20:42, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

I wouldn't fret overly much, my multi-tasking abilities were not much better than my mother's, and was terrible at it. Comes from being too intense...and too tense. I do occasionally manage to edit Wikipedia and sleep at the same time. Scary.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:46, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

Native American tribes in Wisconsin

I wish Wikipedia had an article about Native American tribes in Wisconsin; since you speedily deleted it for being created by a blocked or banned user, are we not allowed to undelete it? Jarble (talk) 18:53, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

@Jarble: You're welcome to create the article yourself. Note that the page I deleted consisted solely of a redirect to Wisconsin#Early history.-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 21:34, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Potential RY sock

Would you mind peeking at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Rickdaexplorer as he kind of smells like a socky/ducky of someone. I am not familiar enough to link to a master. ☾Loriendrew☽ ☏(ring-ring) 13:41, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

I thought I knew who this was, but I was wrong. There sure are a lot of sock-y accounts on the year articles!-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 16:43, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

User:German Guy2784

Hey Ponyo, you blocked German Guy 2784 for sockpuppetry 30 August 2023.

I have recently ran into two different editors(FedayiChristian (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) & Hungryarno1234 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)) doing the same edits as German Guy 2784 and wanted your opinion if this was sock or meat puppetry. Thank you for looking at this. --Kansas Bear (talk) 22:09, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

There are a bunch of socks to untangle...give me a few minutes.-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 22:15, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

The following are confirmed to each other technically and behaviourally: Hungryarno1234, Smilingshark376, Drastamat-Dro, HungryElephant346 and  Possilikely (a mix between possible and likely) to German Guy. I've blocked all of the accounts. FedayiChristian is  Unrelated.-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 22:23, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

Wow! Ok. Thanks Ponyo! --Kansas Bear (talk) 22:26, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

Regarding rowing pages

Hi, regarding rowing pages, more specifically Ashish (Rower) in which you intervened, I am currently waiting for several PRODs I initiated over the weekend to run their course, after which I will initiate a batch AfD process, as the articles in question categorically fail WP:GNG. I have a full proposal written out and ready to go, but as I say I'm waiting for the 7-day PROD grace period to run out before intiating the AfD. Rowing007 (talk) 19:35, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

That doesn't explain why you are wholesale blanking content and sources that speak to notability in the interim. -- Ponyo^{bons mots} 19:37, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Please, take a closer look at the edit; really take a minute to examine what was written beforehand, the actual sources used, and how I had attempted to clean things up. Being "part of a team" that took part in a championship, as well as the domestic results, are entirely unnotable. I'd invite you to look at other rowing BLPs. Not to mention, the lead in the article in question is a copy-pasted blurb with poor grammar. Much of the supposed "blanking" is actually just cleaning up that mess. Once you trim the fat, the version of the article I attempted to establish is what's left. Rowing007 (talk) 19:42, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Being part of a team that took part in a championship is not unnotable and should appear in a sportsperson's bio if sourced unless there is specific consensus to not include for some reason. What you are doing is akin to removing an entire filmography if each role didn't result in a notable award. In the same article where you wholesale blanked entire sections of sourced content, you left all of the unsourced personal information just sitting there. It's like you're trying to make the individuals appear as non-notable as possible for the PRODs and AfDs you're intending to start instead of actually being concerned with the actual issues with the article. Your edits at Neetish Kumar are equally problematic. I imagine that if other rowing articles are similar, it's because you've gutted them in the same manner.-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 19:55, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

I can never understand the expression "patience is a virtue", at least not on Wikipedia.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:13, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

That's highly presumptuous and accusatory. Once again, I would encourage you to reexamine what exactly I've done. I started off by cleaning the articles, then I realized, "hang on, these people aren't actually notable at all and these 'sources' don't support anything towards their notability." You can disagree if you wish, but even with blanket reversions of my clean-up edits, I strongly suspect the scrutiny of an AfD will find that most (if not all) of the articles I've initiated PRODs on fail WP:GNG. Rowing007 (talk) 20:06, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

The sources just have to verify the content added, they don't have to verify notability. It's like you're suggesting that no material can appear in articles, even if sourced, unless that specific material on its own would make the person notable. There is no policy supporting such a stance, if that's what you're stating. The article(s) could very well be deleted by consensus at AfD; that doesn't support your process of wholesale blanking of sourced content that could speak to notability beforehand.-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 20:18, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

I disagree with your assertions that I am "wholesale blanking" these pages, that I am suggesting that content must support a subject's notability to be included, and that content merely being verifiable is somehow sufficient for inclusion; WP:ONUS actually does support my position on the latter point, that not all verifiable information must be included, and that [t]he responsibility for achieving consensus for inclusion is on those seeking to include disputed content. In any case, it might interest you to read the full arguments I will present in the AfD next week. I won't touch the articles in question between now and then except to add AfD notices when the time comes. For now it seems my PRODs have stirred up a hornet's nest; I'm trying to abate the empassioned response from those opposing my PRODs. If my AfD fails, I will seek to improve the articles by cleaning them up in very precise and measured ways; I would appreciate a cessation of the blind reversions at that point, as I truly did bring about improvements with my previous edits, and there would have been a middle ground that maintains the cleaner sentences while potentially also keeping sources, but we'll cross that bridge if we get to it. I will say though, the sheer volume of nearly identical BLPs of disputed notability created by Davidindia (and perhaps others) throughout the past month makes this a challenging issue to tackle. Regards. Rowing007 (talk) 20:44, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

The point of WP:ONUS is to ensure that disputed content does not get restored before talk page consensus is reached for its inclusion. The intent is to ensure that content with disputed accuracy or harmful material is not left in an article while discussion is ongoing. It's not meant to be used as a cudgel where you get to gut everything you personally don't like in an entire series of articles and then gate keep its restoration. My reverts weren't blind. You used a misleading edit summary to restore your disputed blanking. I'm unsurprised that your PRODs are being reverted; they're intended solely for articles wherein no opposition to the deletion is expected. If they're "stirring up a hornet's nest" then they should never have been PRODs in the first place. Clearly we are not going to agree, so there's no need to post further here.-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 21:04, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Alright, even though I still disagree with your assertions about my actions, I'll agree to disagree; I guess you'll see my AfD next week. Thanks for the discussion. Rowing007 (talk) 21:12, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Block evading editor is back – pretty clear it's the same editor

Hello Ponyo. In February of this year you blocked 71.234.178.78 for block evasion. As you can see from their edit history, their main editing habit before being blocked was disputing what is a single and what is a "promotional single". Well, for the past several days, I'm quite sure this editor has returned on multiple addresses in the range 2601:180:0:0:0:0:0:0/32. Also, another giveaway this is the same editor: they tell anybody who posts on their talk page to "mind your business" [2]. They've done that again [3]. Ping @Ad Orientem: as they've just blocked them on one IP. Ss112 04:15, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

@Ss112 I've blocked the 2601:180:8200:63D0:0:0:0:0/64 range x 1 year and the /32 range x 3 months. -Ad Orientem (talk) 04:23, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

Thank you Ad Orientem.-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 18:26, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

About that IP 69

Thanks for blocking them; can you please remove their contributions so nobody else sees these disparaging contributions about me? 1033Forest (talk) 22:19, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

It's just silly vandalism that's already been removed. No one is going to dig through the massive sandbox history, stumble upon the IP's vandalism, and believe what they wrote.-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 22:23, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

Now I saw that the user created an account that's impersonating me, User:1034Forest. I think it's gotta be that IP considering their very similar contributions. Reported the username to WP:UAA. 1033Forest (talk) 22:44, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

I've blocked the impersonation account.-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 22:49, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

Blocked

Hi, you blocked an editor yesterday who had posted on my talk page. In case it makes any difference, I think the timing was a coincidence, and they were actually a sock of Soutut, rather than the person who keeps trying to impersonate me. Many thanks. Spike 'em (talk) 13:24, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

Hi Spike 'em! I didn't block them, I just revoked their talk page access.-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 16:14, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

Ah right, must have been a different admin who blocked them. Thanks all the same! Spike 'em (talk) 16:21, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

It was Nick Moyes, you can see it in the block log.-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 16:30, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

Glen Kamara

Hi. Can you advise why you're vandalising the page please? Also, you're removing facts about a racial abuser Ondrej Kudela. I'll be reporting your account if this violation remains. Please correct the page PoolPro99 (talk) 22:53, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

My notice to you was clear. As an administrator on this project, I will block your account if you continue to add unsoured personal information to any articles.-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 22:56, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2021/apr/14/slavia-prague-ondrej-kudela-10-match-uefa-ban-for-racist-behaviour-at-rangers-glen-kamara

Please see the attached proving Ondřej Kúdela was banned for racism towards Glen Kamara. Please restore the edit, or I'll report you to another administrator PoolPro99 (talk) 22:58, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

That information is already covered in detail at Ondrej Kudela and has nothing to do with the warning I gave you. Report away; you'll find every active administrator on this project holds this policy as a top priority.-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 23:04, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

Reported. PoolPro99 (talk) 23:06, 3 November 2023 (UTC)