Siege of Kalinjar (1545)
Hi User:Ponyo, I wish to create a page on the afformentioned topic when I learned you had deleted a similar page. May I know the reason and whether it would be alright for me to do so and if so, how to proceed? Johan Elijah (talk) 17:46, 30 September 2026 (UTC)
- @Johan Elijah: You've already created the page at Draft:Siege of Kalinjar (1545). Note that you still need to submit it for review.-- Ponyobons mots 16:12, 1 October 2026 (UTC)
- I am unable to do so. Johan Elijah (talk) 03:33, 2 October 2026 (UTC)
- @Johan Elijah: I'm not sure why? If it's just because you're missing the submission button, instructions can be found at WP:AFCREVIEW.-- Ponyobons mots 16:30, 2 October 2026 (UTC)
- Alright, Thanks. Johan Elijah (talk) 17:27, 2 October 2026 (UTC)
- @Johan Elijah: I'm not sure why? If it's just because you're missing the submission button, instructions can be found at WP:AFCREVIEW.-- Ponyobons mots 16:30, 2 October 2026 (UTC)
- I am unable to do so. Johan Elijah (talk) 03:33, 2 October 2026 (UTC)
Deletion review for Category:Filipino American sportspeople
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Category:Filipino American sportspeople. Because you closed the discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. RightCowLeftCoast (Moo) 00:03, 3 October 2026 (UTC)
- deletionists suck and are slowly killing Wikipedia like a cancer
- Plus the hypocrisy is predictable but still pathetic ~2026-42066-99 (talk) 02:15, 17 October 2026 (UTC)
re Welcoming IPs
Alright understood. I thought that by Bayesian logic if they were interested, they would see a welcome. But I hear you. Princessa Unicorn (talk) 22:27, 6 October 2026 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
 |
The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar |
| Thank you, Ponyo, for being nice and explaining things kindly with me. Your patience and your kind demeanor on this site, is appreciated. Princessa Unicorn (talk) 22:29, 6 October 2026 (UTC) |
Need edit summary canned
Can you hide an edit summary? On 2026 Yemen offensives, user Az-Zubaydi left a disgusting edit summary.
This is the one I'm asking to be removed. Linkin Prankster (talk) 21:42, 9 October 2026 (UTC)
- I've hidden the edit summary in article space, but it doesn't help that you have in turn repeated the slur both here and on the editor's talk page.-- Ponyobons mots 21:52, 9 October 2026 (UTC)
- My mistake, I only stated it so the matter got urgent attention by admins. Should I remove it from my comments? Linkin Prankster (talk) 21:56, 9 October 2026 (UTC)
- It's your call. I was just generalizing that if something is bad enough that revision deletion is required, it probably shouldn't be repeated elsewhere as well.-- Ponyobons mots 21:57, 9 October 2026 (UTC)
- I've deleted them. I apologise, I didn't intend to offend anyone. Linkin Prankster (talk) 22:47, 9 October 2026 (UTC)
- It's your call. I was just generalizing that if something is bad enough that revision deletion is required, it probably shouldn't be repeated elsewhere as well.-- Ponyobons mots 21:57, 9 October 2026 (UTC)
- My mistake, I only stated it so the matter got urgent attention by admins. Should I remove it from my comments? Linkin Prankster (talk) 21:56, 9 October 2026 (UTC)
October 2026
Was your username named after the 2008 Studio Ghibli anime movie? Cantthinkofanyusername (talk) 21:02, 13 October 2026 (UTC)
- @Cantthinkofanyusername:, No; I've been editing since March 2007.-- Ponyobons mots 18:46, 14 October 2026 (UTC)
- Okay Cantthinkofanyusername (talk) 17:42, 15 October 2026 (UTC)
Talk page revoke
Could you please revoke TPA from ~2026-54314-36? Thanks. Magitroopa (talk) 15:10, 14 October 2026 (UTC)
- (talk page stalker) Done. Ponyo ain't around. Bishonen | tålk 15:45, 14 October 2026 (UTC).
- I've now awoken from my turkey-induced coma.-- Ponyobons mots 18:48, 14 October 2026 (UTC)
Please don’t
Please don’t. I wasn’t trying to start anything. I’ve had problems with people before defending the actions, and I thought it was suspicious you were refusing for mass murder to be added. You ignoring me and not answering me furthered my suspicions more. If you go and request for a block, I request for one too, since, I tried to be reasonable, but you never once acknowledged my responses. The least you could do is acknowledge them.
Further more, also saying “Chances are running out” is disrespectful. You aren’t being civil and when I pointed it out, you decided to threaten me. ButteyFelicity (talk) 00:14, 16 October 2026 (UTC)
- Look. Im sorry. I’ve been adding categories and I was confused when you edited it out. I got frustrated when you didn’t acknowledge the articles stating it and stuff that prove it was a murder-suicide so that’s why I got suspicious of someone doing it. Like I said before I’ve had problems with people defending the actions. I thought you were one. That’s on me. ButteyFelicity (talk) 00:31, 16 October 2026 (UTC)
- I don't know why you are stating I was ignoring you or not answering you when I replied to you in the talk page discussion. If your concern is that I didn't engage with some of your emotionally-toned arguments and instead reiterated my P&G-based concerns regarding the category inclusion, that's how dispute resolution works. I never threatened you - I told you truthfully that if I see you respond to another editor the way that you responded to me in that discussion, I would request that you be blocked for casting aspersions. Insinuating that I'm somehow defending the actions of the pilot by stating "You showing similar bias to the father of the person who caused the crash which isn’t good. It isn’t good defending the actions of this" because I asked you if you could "please highlight the reliable sources within the article that call this a mass murder? WP:ONUS and WP:CATDEF apply in this case" is not acceptable, and I noted as such on your talk page (not on the article talk page so as not to detract from the content discussion there). Stating that you were attempting to somehow bait me into...I don't know what exactly, in that same discussion is also battleground behaviour that has no place in dispute resolution. This was a very minor content dispute that, as I noted on the article talk page, was resolved with reliably-sourced content supporting the inclusion of the category being added to the article to the benefit of Wikipedia readers. Please reassess how you react when other editors disagree with edits that you make or ask you to source them.-- Ponyobons mots 15:33, 16 October 2026 (UTC)
- I don’t really know how to highlight on texting. “emotionally-toned” That wasn’t the intention. Nah it’s fine, I had trouble with someone on Nidal Hasan’s article where they thought “it would be wrong to have mass murderer” Again, I did show it. Most of the links I showed were from the article itself which pointed to it, Genuinely what was wrong with it? I feel like Im not getting something honestly. Most of them don’t ask that half the time. You’re one of the few asking for sources, which I guess I should thank you for thay. ButteyFelicity (talk) 15:40, 16 October 2026 (UTC)
- I don't know why you are stating I was ignoring you or not answering you when I replied to you in the talk page discussion. If your concern is that I didn't engage with some of your emotionally-toned arguments and instead reiterated my P&G-based concerns regarding the category inclusion, that's how dispute resolution works. I never threatened you - I told you truthfully that if I see you respond to another editor the way that you responded to me in that discussion, I would request that you be blocked for casting aspersions. Insinuating that I'm somehow defending the actions of the pilot by stating "You showing similar bias to the father of the person who caused the crash which isn’t good. It isn’t good defending the actions of this" because I asked you if you could "please highlight the reliable sources within the article that call this a mass murder? WP:ONUS and WP:CATDEF apply in this case" is not acceptable, and I noted as such on your talk page (not on the article talk page so as not to detract from the content discussion there). Stating that you were attempting to somehow bait me into...I don't know what exactly, in that same discussion is also battleground behaviour that has no place in dispute resolution. This was a very minor content dispute that, as I noted on the article talk page, was resolved with reliably-sourced content supporting the inclusion of the category being added to the article to the benefit of Wikipedia readers. Please reassess how you react when other editors disagree with edits that you make or ask you to source them.-- Ponyobons mots 15:33, 16 October 2026 (UTC)
Hey there
Just noticed , unless you'd like me to list it on the investigation page. TonySt 20:15, 16 October 2026 (UTC)
Your "odd phrasing " critique
where was it and point out what the problem phrases were ....and there was no undoubted material " ponyo" ~2026-42066-99 (talk) 02:06, 17 October 2026 (UTC)
- unsourced not undoubted
- ~2026-42066-99 (talk) 02:16, 17 October 2026 (UTC)
- Well unsourced means not supported by reliable sources and 'odd phrasing' is just that. At Billy Howle, for example, you changed "His mother Allison was a school teacher and his father Tim was a music professor and composer" to "Born the second of four boys shared by his mother Allison, who was a school teacher and his father Tim who was a music professor and composer", which is 1) an unnecessary level of detail and 2) not supported by the accompanying source. You are doing this under multiple TA accounts, and if it continues you will be blocked from editing.-- Ponyobons mots 17:19, 20 October 2026 (UTC)
- And you're still doing it.-- Ponyobons mots 17:27, 20 October 2026 (UTC)
- Well unsourced means not supported by reliable sources and 'odd phrasing' is just that. At Billy Howle, for example, you changed "His mother Allison was a school teacher and his father Tim was a music professor and composer" to "Born the second of four boys shared by his mother Allison, who was a school teacher and his father Tim who was a music professor and composer", which is 1) an unnecessary level of detail and 2) not supported by the accompanying source. You are doing this under multiple TA accounts, and if it continues you will be blocked from editing.-- Ponyobons mots 17:19, 20 October 2026 (UTC)
Spider-Woman: Shifting Gears: redirect
Did you mean to extend protect Spider-Woman: Shifting Gears: redirect? ~2026-55230-13 (talk) 00:46, 21 October 2026 (UTC)
- Yes, as an alternative to create-protect full protection. This allows AfC reviewers to move a possible approved draft to article space without having to request unprotection (assuming the draft is unrelated to the LTA socking plaguing the redirect). -- Ponyobons mots 15:44, 21 October 2026 (UTC)
- I mean this. Did you mean to semi-protect or extend-protect? ~2026-55230-13 (talk) 18:38, 21 October 2026 (UTC)
Link must stay
The link proving Rhea Ripley's real name needs to be in the lede to stop others removing the change as has been done previously. Putting it in the external links is inadequate for an encyclopedia. ~2026-56404-44 (talk) 22:27, 21 October 2026 (UTC)
- It does not belong in the lede as a reference as 1) it's not referencing anything and 2) the 'EL' in WP:ELOFFICIAL
that you keep banging on aboutstands for 'External links". Stop edit warring to add a useless Instagram link smack dab in the opening paragraph of a BLP.-- Ponyobons mots 22:32, 21 October 2026 (UTC) striking bit that came off snarkier than intended-- Ponyobons mots 16:56, 22 October 2026 (UTC)- And between your multiple TAs, you're now at WP:3RR.-- Ponyobons mots 22:34, 21 October 2026 (UTC)
- Okay I'll take the correction on ELOFFICIAL (and the 3RR), but it's still a primary course for a BLP. It has been a source of controversy in this article for awhile, and this is why it needs to be in the lede, if anything under WP:IAR in order to put the brakes on that. Having the link in the edit summary of the user isn't enough. It's ironic in a way, but I'm trying to prevent an edit war over her real name. I hope you understand. WP:PRIMARY definite applies against reference spam, but I thought ELOFFICIAL was a better one. ~2026-56404-44 (talk) 22:41, 21 October 2026 (UTC)
- If the inclusion of the link has been controversial, then the WP:ONUS is on you to get consensus for its inclusion prior to restoring the link.-- Ponyobons mots 22:45, 21 October 2026 (UTC)
- The controversy isn't in the link alone. It's also in what Rhea Ripley's real name is. The lack of the link is merely symptomatic of the actual controversy, if you understand where I'm going. ~2026-56404-44 (talk) 22:53, 21 October 2026 (UTC)
- If the inclusion of the link has been controversial, then the WP:ONUS is on you to get consensus for its inclusion prior to restoring the link.-- Ponyobons mots 22:45, 21 October 2026 (UTC)
- Okay I'll take the correction on ELOFFICIAL (and the 3RR), but it's still a primary course for a BLP. It has been a source of controversy in this article for awhile, and this is why it needs to be in the lede, if anything under WP:IAR in order to put the brakes on that. Having the link in the edit summary of the user isn't enough. It's ironic in a way, but I'm trying to prevent an edit war over her real name. I hope you understand. WP:PRIMARY definite applies against reference spam, but I thought ELOFFICIAL was a better one. ~2026-56404-44 (talk) 22:41, 21 October 2026 (UTC)
- And between your multiple TAs, you're now at WP:3RR.-- Ponyobons mots 22:34, 21 October 2026 (UTC)
Created, new article, Mary Berenice Rice
Created, new article, Mary Berenice Rice.
I noticed it had been listed and requested, over at Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Religion.
There, it was given as name, Mary F. Rice, but I found more sources, and her Ph.D. dissertation, as Mary Berenice Rice.
So I noted alternate names in a footnote. That should also help with future research.
Enjoy, Princessa Unicorn (talk) 03:13, 22 October 2026 (UTC)
- Lovely! I've struck it from the shortlist. I'll have to add more!-- Ponyobons mots 16:54, 22 October 2026 (UTC)
- You're most welcome, happy to help with WP:WOMRED, yours, Princessa Unicorn (talk) 16:56, 22 October 2026 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Galfoy
Hi! Did something happen since you felt you had to lock it? Just to clear up i have nothing to do with the TotalTruthTeller24 you mentioned and i do not know why he seem so keen in that specific AfD--~2026-56416-04 (talk) 04:49, 23 October 2026 (UTC)
Andrew5 socks
Hiya! I've noticed this news account, Blackjackpokergofish requesting protection for 2026–27 European windstorm season as their first edit. I'm only vaguely familiar with this sock and I wasn't sure if I should add them to SPI? Many thanks, Knitsey (talk) 19:02, 23 October 2026 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
 |
The Admin's Barnstar |
| Ponyo--thank you for all that work on Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Oregoninmymind. You're awesome. Drmies (talk) 21:39, 28 October 2026 (UTC) |
ANI thread
Hi, I saw you've been reviewing ANI reports and was hoping you could review this one: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#Sockpuppetry_allegation_and_edit_warring. I haven't touched the draft since opening the thread, and I'd rather not get into an edit war. Thanks. ~2026-56752-60 (talk) 23:56, 28 October 2026 (UTC)
AFD Deletion
Hi Ponyo, I have re-opened an AFD discussion because the requester deleted sources from the page before nominating it for deletion for lack of sources/notability, I have reverted his edits and reopened discussion so that the full unedited sources can be read, please do not close the AFD discussion. Thank you! FestusBashara (talk) 22:15, 29 October 2026 (UTC)
- this is regarding page qamar muneer akbar FestusBashara (talk) 22:17, 29 October 2026 (UTC)
- For now I am reverting your deletion and edits till further discussion, please read my reasoning on: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Qamar Muneer Akbar FestusBashara (talk) 22:18, 29 October 2026 (UTC)
- @FestusBashara: See your talk page. I want to be clear that if you unarchive that closed AfD again I will block your account.-- Ponyobons mots 22:19, 29 October 2026 (UTC)
- Yes got it, thank you for letting me know, I will contact the admin : ) FestusBashara (talk) 22:24, 29 October 2026 (UTC)
- @FestusBashara: See your talk page. I want to be clear that if you unarchive that closed AfD again I will block your account.-- Ponyobons mots 22:19, 29 October 2026 (UTC)
- For now I am reverting your deletion and edits till further discussion, please read my reasoning on: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Qamar Muneer Akbar FestusBashara (talk) 22:18, 29 October 2026 (UTC)
Sorry to bother you
As you are the all seeing oracle of all thing sockpuppety, do we have an active sock that likes to ask a lot of questions at the teahouse etc? I can't think of the SP name. Is this a candidate? Wawario Knitsey (talk) 19:55, 30 October 2026 (UTC)
- You're never a bother Knitsey. I don't recognise the pattern, none of the motley group of ne'er-do-wells I track target the Teahouse and Village Pump boards. It looks like fairly obvious trolling to me though.-- Ponyobons mots 20:07, 30 October 2026 (UTC)
- Yeah, my memory is crap these days. I thought I had it on my user page as a reminder, but nah. Thanks for checking though. Knitsey (talk) 20:09, 30 October 2026 (UTC)
- I've blocked them. No good-faith editor hits on Michael Jackson, Jewish stereotypes, the N word, and Chris Chan within their first two hours of editing.-- Ponyobons mots 20:15, 30 October 2026 (UTC)
- That's...also wide range of subjects in a short time.
- I think this is who I was thinking of Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/ChronicleBooks885 WP:LTA/CB885 but I see another LTA has been impersonating them recently. They're blocked now so it's not really relevant now. I just get annoyed at my crappy memory. Knitsey (talk) 20:25, 30 October 2026 (UTC)
- I've blocked them. No good-faith editor hits on Michael Jackson, Jewish stereotypes, the N word, and Chris Chan within their first two hours of editing.-- Ponyobons mots 20:15, 30 October 2026 (UTC)
- Yeah, my memory is crap these days. I thought I had it on my user page as a reminder, but nah. Thanks for checking though. Knitsey (talk) 20:09, 30 October 2026 (UTC)
Sock puppetry
Thanks for intervening in the Panzer IV and Panther tank articles to stop the sock pupptery here. It would appear that the sockmaster is Szolnok95. I have an SPI almost ready to go, but can I please check whether you will be tagging Szolnok95 as a sockmaster? If so, I won't post the SPI given that doing so would be a waste of time and resources, especially as the sockpuppetry is very obvious. Regards, Nick-D (talk) 21:37, 30 October 2026 (UTC)