Ponyo

Re: Sockpuppet Page Protection

Good day Ponyo!

I dropped by your talk page after seeing this edit wherein you placed a sockpuppet protection on the page True and the Rainbow Kingdom. It was almost heaven sent for me seeing that as I am dealing with a persistent sockpuppeteer by the name of Albe23413. The user was initially blocked for sockpuppetry by Berean Hunter in July 2019 for one week. The user would be slapped with an indefinite block on February 2020 after I reported a sockpuppet of his, AbstractAudition, to Bbb23. Since then, the user has amassed a long list of sockpuppet accounts, most of which I've reported to checkusers such as the aformentioned Bbb23, El_C and NinjaRobotPirate. I have recently just reported another Albe23413 sockpuppet, Cocisj455, but less than 2 days after the sock was blocked, he has created another sockpuppet Pamasawata0296 which I've already reported to NinjaRobotPirate. With the emergence of Pamasawata0296, the sockpuppeteer has now created 15 sockpuppet accounts between July 2019 and July 2020. I must admit that being on the lookout for Albe23413's sockpuppets and reporting them is getting tiresome, and in several occassions his sockpuppets have actually resorted to stalking my account to see if I've reported his new sockpuppet or outright harassing me on my talkpage. That's why I turned to you for help in perhaps, providing a more concrete solution to deter Albe23413 from creating further sockpuppet accounts.

It is for this reason that I would like to request that sockpuppet protection be placed on the pages that Albe23413 and his sockpuppets frequents. There is a catch to that request though. Unlike in True and the Rainbow Kingdom, Albe23413 does not confine himself to just one article. Rather, he edits a set of related articles. Generally, it is teleseryes from ABS-CBN that he edits, but he has a particular gravitation towards Ang Probinsyano and its allied pages (List of Ang Probinsyano episodes, List of Ang Probinsyano characters, List of Ang Probinsyano guest stars, Ang Probinsyano (season 1), Ang Probinsyano (season 2), Ang Probinsyano (season 3), Ang Probinsyano (season 2), Ang Probinsyano (season 3), Ang Probinsyano (season 4), Ang Probinsyano (season 5) Ang Probinsyano (season 6), Ang Probinsyano (season 7) and Ang Probinsyano (season 8)). I am hoping you could place a protection on the pages he frequents, I am also hoping that could at least deter him permanently from persistently creating sockpuppets. Warmest regards Gardo Versace (talk) 17:11, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

I'll take a look at whether semi-protection is viable at this subset of articles, but they'll probably just move on to something else.-- Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 18:04, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

@Ponyo: There's been a new development to this situation. Pamasawata0296 was blocked for disruptive editing by PhilKnight. The subject of his disruptive edits are these angry messages he left on the pages he frequents, all Ang Probinsyano allied pages:

Special:Diff/965317859, Special:Diff/965317859, Special:Diff/965318064, Special:Diff/965318251, Special:Diff/965318445, Special:Diff/965318676, Special:Diff/965318853, Special:Diff/965318912, Special:Diff/965319024, Special:Diff/965319280, Special:Diff/965319625, Special:Diff/965319737, Special:Diff/965319828, Special:Diff/965319921, Special:Diff/965319995, Special:Diff/965320091, Special:Diff/965320205 and Special:Diff/965320280

The text is in Filipino, here's an English translation:

(Redacted)

That is honestly unsettling. Gardo Versace (talk) 18:13, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

Ponyo Am sorry about putting that translation on your talkpage. Didn't mean to cause any trouble. Also, thank you for looking into my request. I just hope I never run into him again after the tirade he launched tonight against me Gardo Versace (talk) 18:27, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

I understand that it can be upsetting to see these types of messages and I'm sorry you've been a target of such abuse, I just don't need to see it every time I'm on this page. I will definitely take a look at this today, I just need to finish off a few other things first.-- Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 18:31, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

@Ponyo: Take your time, I understand, admire it even, that you wouldn't leave jobs unfinished to tend to something else. And I can't thank you enough for looking into this, because putting protection on the pages he watches might just be the deterrent I've been looking for these past 4 months that I've been actively reporting his sockpuppet accounts. Thank you very much Ponyo Warmest regards Gardo Versace (talk) 18:37, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

I've gone through and protected the majority of articles based on the length of disruption. There are a couple of the articles that the sockmaster has only edited once, so I left those open. Sometimes leaving a couple of target articles open acts as a honeypot to draw new socks in where they can be detected and blocked quickly.-- Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 20:08, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

@Ponyo: I understand, we can't leave everything tightly secured because then we wouldn't have a trap to spring for them. Thank you so much Ponyo. Now I can be at peace and get back to more productive endeavors knowing I might not see him for a very long time hahaha! Say I've got a question though. Since he all but confirmed himself as an Albe23413 sock just before he got taken down for persistent unconstructive editing, the subject of which was his angry messages directed at me, can you still tag him as a sockpuppet even though he has already been blocked? I mean he has an entire category of sockpuppets all to himself and Pamasawata0296 happens to be his 15th sock in a row. Regards Gardo Versace (talk) 00:33, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

I don't like tagging accounts that I haven't blocked or chekusered myself. Perhaps you can ask PhilKnight? Sometimes the less attention you give these persistent sockmasters, the better. -- Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 22:37, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

@Ponyo: Alright, will try asking PhilKnight. Again, a great big many thanks to you Ponyo for placing protection on the prime targets of Albe23413's socks Warmest regards. Gardo Versace (talk) 06:17, 2 July 2020 (UTC)

Haikyu (season 1)

Can you restore the page without the summaries or show me the history link from 17:54, 28 June 2020 so I can do it because this isn't right for other people. SpectresWrath (talk) 17:30, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

I'm not the deleting admin - you need to ask them to restore it. If they disagree you can take it to deletion review, but no admin will restore an article with copyright violations in it.-- Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 22:40, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

I contacted him and he said he was gonna look into whether he can fairly easily restore a version with no copyright infringements. But, I don't know what happened to him after that. If he can't do it, I'll do it. I just need that link uncrossed so I recreate the page without adding the infringed info. SpectresWrath (talk) 23:08, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

Battle of Paštrik

Hello,

I see you reverted my edits (backed by sources) of page "Battle of Paštrik" without much thought. I will provide just two examples: concerning casualties on Yugoslav side I already explained those numbers in edit summary here [1] and provided a source for those numbers. Numbers for Albanian losses are also backed by source but you have reverted it back to numbers which were added by a user without any explanation or source. Second, I provided several sources for claim in inforbox that KLA and NATO were defeated and some of those are: [2], page 53 ("Operation Arrow was limited to one sector, and even so, it was not a success. A US intelligence official, in fact, claimed the KLA was “creamed.” The KLA forces came under heavy Serb artillery fire, and while some areas changed hands, no major gains were claimed by the KLA.") and [3], page 201 ("UCK je postigao određene uspjehe primjenjujući gerilsku taktiku, međutim kad je 26. svibnja pokušao izvesti veliki frontalni napad, doživio je težak poraz"). I ask that you revert back my edits. Thank you. Peervalaa (talk) 20:14, 3 July 2020 (UTC)

As the blocking administrator I don't take sides on the content. Go to the article talk page to discuss your concerns and see if there is consensus for the changes you want to make.-- Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 20:16, 3 July 2020 (UTC)

In that case explain to me how can I have consensus with someone who claims my sources do not say what they say, even though it is verifiable, like those links that I gave you. How can I reach consensus if he simply says this [4] or this [5]? Peervalaa (talk) 20:28, 3 July 2020 (UTC)

Again, as the protecting admin I cannot comment on the content of the article. Please read these guidelines for how to proceed when you find yourself in a content dispute.-- Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 20:32, 3 July 2020 (UTC)

Payment card number - Revdel request

Hi Ponyo, will you please revdel [6] this edit due to edit summary? Thanks. S0091 (talk) 21:40, 3 July 2020 (UTC)

oversightable info should be emailed 96.250.86.126 (talk) 21:42, 3 July 2020 (UTC)

@S0091: I've oversighted it, but the IP above is correct, in the future these requests should go via email to Wikipedia:Oversight for quick (and private) removal.-- Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 21:52, 3 July 2020 (UTC)

Thanks Ponyo and IP. I debated and the reason I did not request oversight is there was identification attached to the number but will in the future. Thanks again! S0091 (talk) 21:56, 3 July 2020 (UTC)

The OS team will also perform rev-deletes if oversight is not needed, so don't worry about reporting borderline cases if you're unsure.-- Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 21:58, 3 July 2020 (UTC)

Ahh...good to know, Ponyo. S0091 (talk) 22:21, 3 July 2020 (UTC)

Personal attacks by user with a vulgar username

Hi, the user with the vulgar user name Popušimikurac has been targeting me for some time now. It seems to be the same user as 5.133.153.36, Hh11122 and probably many others. This user, by writing, seems to be from Serbia, but by the articles that she/he has been editing it is more likely that she/he is from Croatia. In the recent past I came into "conflict", on different articles, with users who express strong nationalistic and/or right-wing views, they are: Pjesnik21, Mikola22, Sadko, Tezwoo, Nbanic, Amanuensis Balkanicus and Koreanovsky. Can you please check if it was one of them? I am saying this because the edits by the blocked user are obviously made by someone who has strong nationalistic and right-wing views and they are personal attacks on me and I am her/his only target. The intent seems to be to scare me or I don't know what. Thanks in advance. --Tuvixer (talk) 09:04, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

This is so out of line and not the way it should be done. Do not label me od drag me into petty disputes. Do not ping me any more. Enough with this nonsense. Sadkσ (talk is cheap) 09:35, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

Tuvixer, can you please explain me (us, the users you pinged) what happend? You literally just pinged me without letting me even know what is going on and what it has to do with me?! Quote: "In the recent past I came into "conflict", on different articles with users who express strong nationalistic and/or right-wing views" ... Have we ever had a conversation? I personally do not remember anything, especially since I am not very active on en.wiki. Especially after reading the comment of Sadko I am even more confused. If you have problems with users, you should try to find a solution by talking with them. ---Koreanovsky (talk) 10:20, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

I saw the editor Tuvixer in two articles (if I remember well) and I’m not in touch with his editing on Wikipedia. It would be nice for him to solve his problems by talking to the editors who personal attacks him and not to ping editors with whom is in contact 2 or 3 times in a year. Mikola22 (talk) 10:43, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

Mikola22, wanna know what annoyed me a bit? The fact that he claims that I have "strong nationalistic and right-wing views" — I wonder where you get claims like this from, if you do not even know an user. I literally only found this [7] conversation and it is about the Coronavirus. Look at my recent edits and tell me, are there any "strong nationalistic and right-wing views"? Just because I edited paged of political parties in Croatia or Poland (there are currently elections there) does it automatically mean that I support any right-wing ideologies? I am sorry, but this is just becoming childish. I joined Wikipedia in January 2016 and I am well aware, how you have to behave in this place. Before someones accuses someone of being a sockpuppet, everyone should be mature enough to talk with users. Wikipedia:Civility --Koreanovsky (talk) 10:56, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

@Koreanovsky:, if the rules of Wikipedia are followed then everything is clean, and this shouldn't excite you too much. I was in contact with editor Tuvixer in one edit in Croatia article and one edit in Slavonia article(that's what I remember) a few months ago and I don't know what was "nationalistic and right-wing views" in this edits. I hope that he will be sanctioned for false reporting. What else can I say? Mikola22 (talk) 11:16, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

I believe that is a WP:PA "Using someone's political affiliations as an ad hominem means of dismissing or discrediting their views, such as accusing them of being left-wing or right-wing, is also forbidden." . Tezwoo (talk) 13:39, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

• @Tuvixer:, I'm not checking established editors with thousands of edits between them simply for having a difference of opinion with you. If you have credible evidence linking a specific account to another, please present it at WP:SPI.-- Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 20:14, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

Block evasion

User:LFC2020 is evading block as 82.132.185.162 (talk · contribs). SLBedit (talk) 19:48, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

Yup, saw it.-- Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 19:49, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

Same person had been blocked in June 2020 as 151.231.18.200 (talk · contribs) – it's from Blackpool, UK, and uses the same ISP. IP may be a sock belonging to Category:Suspected Wikipedia sockpuppets of 10alatham, as some of those IPs are also from Blackpool. SLBedit (talk) 20:11, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

Noted.-- Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 20:12, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

Kindred spirit

I like your edit summary here. I am always tempted to ping the editor and ask "my what"? JBW (talk) 21:27, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

If I had a nickel for every time I've seen "your dumb" on this site, I could buy enough libations to make me forget I'd seen the errors in the first place. At the very least I could cover the tab for Drmies' tequila and nachos.-- Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 21:35, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

Haha you beat me to that user name by no more than one second. Drmies (talk) 22:31, 8 July 2020 (UTC) -- Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 22:37, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

'ayup.-- Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 22:37, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

Page Move

I need help moving List of Gintama episodes (season 2) to Gintama (season 2) because for some reason when I did it, it was successful but then it turned into a redirect somehow. SpectresWrath (talk) 02:01, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

@SpectresWrath: A page move should leave a redirect unless you uncheck the "leave a redirect behind" box when performing the move. The redirects appear helpful, so I wouldn't worry about them. If I've completely missed what it is you're looking for, the fine folks at Wikipedia:Help desk can probably assist.-- Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 15:42, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

When the Phantom strikes, lightning stands still

You're fast! Thank you! Bishonen | tålk 08:39, 9 July 2020 (UTC).

There seemed to a be a higher percentage of absolute tossers about yesterday.-- Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 15:52, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

Thanks...

...for the very fast action on the Brockhold sock. Beyond My Ken (talk) 22:25, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

It was an easy one, so thank you.-- Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 22:29, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

Speedy Deleting User Talk Page

My CSD request for User talk:Morphdog was recently declined since user talk pages are exempt from deletion. I followed the steps on WP:VANISH, and am still waiting for my account to be renamed. The vanishing page says to contact a functionary or Arbitration Committee for user talk page deletions, so I emailed Arbcom about it and the reply was to make a speedy deletion request on the pages I need deleted. Thanks Morphdog^talk 18:09, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

Morphdog The reason why WP:VANISH states that only Functionaries/Arbcom should delete user talk pages is because they are generally only deleted due to valid privacy concern provided by email. The VANISH page also states that, as part of the vanishing process, "The account's user page and subpages are deleted. User talk pages are rarely deleted..." and the full content of the section you refer to above regarding Functionaries performing potential deletions reiterates that "community consensus is that user talk pages should be deleted only where there is a compelling reason to do so—related to serious privacy concerns and the potential for real-world harm." -- Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 18:20, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

Alrighty, well thanks for your help. Morphdog^talk 18:44, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Admin's Barnstar
	Thanks Ponyo! Drmies (talk) 18:22, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

...and on a Friday to boot!-- Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 18:40, 10 July 2020 (UTC)