| Revision as of 19:24, 17 January 2023 editBbb23 (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators271,593 edits →As long as you're not doing anything...: new section← Previous edit | Revision as of 19:34, 17 January 2023 edit undoPonyo (talk | contribs)Edit filter managers, Autopatrolled, Checkusers, Oversighters, Administrators171,969 edits →As long as you're not doing anything...: replyNext edit → | ||
| Line 98: | Line 98: | ||
| Continuing...are they just confirmed to each other, or is there an earlier master?--] (]) 19:24, 17 January 2023 (UTC) | Continuing...are they just confirmed to each other, or is there an earlier master?--] (]) 19:24, 17 January 2023 (UTC) | ||
| :Confirmed to each other. This wasn't Openshack creating Carbomax to get an upper hand in an edit war. They created both accounts back-to-back on one ISP, then hopped on to one of Evlekis' favourite ranges. I'm not saying they ''are'' Evlekis, but they definitely had the intent to sock right from the get go and winding up at ] within two days of account creation is not a good look. -- ~~ | |||
Revision as of 19:34, 17 January 2023
UTRS 67644
Hey Ponyo, I hope all is well and you're enjoying your vacation. Could I bother you to have a look at UTRS:67644 when you're back? See my comment there – I'd be interested in hearing your thoughts. Thanks, --Blablubbs (talk) 19:41, 3 January 2023 (UTC)
- @Blablubbs: I don't think the IP should be unblocked or the block modified. I also strongly suspect that the account making the request (Stuart at St Mungo's High) is related to the batch of socks and evading blocks (see the appeal at User talk:Haksataylor) for example.-- Ponyo 18:53, 6 January 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks – I figured as much, but wanted to double check. Stuart at St Mungo's High School and Stuart at St Mungo's High blocked accordingly. --Blablubbs (talk) 19:14, 6 January 2023 (UTC)
I'm back
But then I start my vacation after you end yours. Boo. At least Bbb23 is around. TonyBallioni (talk) 06:46, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
- Geez, it's almost like you planned it this way! You're like the Polkaroo (a reference for the Canadians in the room. Maybe Yamla gets it?).-- Ponyo 18:43, 6 January 2023 (UTC)
- Welcome back, Ponyo! I grew up in the UK so didn't watch Polka Dot Door myself, but it was certainly on t.v. here for my younger siblings to watch. :) --Yamla (talk) 21:30, 6 January 2023 (UTC)
- It's a gem, along with Mr. Dressup and The Friendly Giant (yes, I'm aging myself here).-- Ponyo 21:37, 6 January 2023 (UTC)
- Welcome back, Ponyo! I grew up in the UK so didn't watch Polka Dot Door myself, but it was certainly on t.v. here for my younger siblings to watch. :) --Yamla (talk) 21:30, 6 January 2023 (UTC)
The sock without a master
See User talk:Bbb23#Sock (but I don't know the master). I blocked the last one, but the latest one is a little different. I'm almost confident enough to block behaviorally, but a check would be nice. Might be some sleepers as a bonus. Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 21:41, 6 January 2023 (UTC)
Perpetual spammer
Hi, could you look at Special:Contributions/Maxgaucho? All their contributions appear to be spam. Thanks. BilCat (talk) 21:21, 7 January 2023 (UTC)
- BilCat, noted and blocked.-- Ponyo 21:50, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks! BilCat (talk) 22:24, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
Unblock the Shining Time Station episode list
Hello, Ponyo. If I need to delete some stuff on the Shining Time Station episode list (like Thomas stories that were never seen on some Season 3 episodes), should you unblock the page first? I still see some Thomas stories added in the Season 3 episodes that were never seen in any of the Season 3 episodes on YouTube. 209.169.194.23 (talk) 22:20, 8 January 2023 (UTC)
- You can make you argument for removal along with an edit request on the associated talk page.-- Ponyo 21:52, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
Film Notability Question
You missed the point to my question, unless you actually read the guideline on future films to state that. Please read it again if necessary. It states that films that have not completed filming are not notable. It says that films that have completed filming may be notable if production itself has satisfied general notability, although it says it very badly. My question was addressed to the blocked editor, who was being very aggressive in stating that any unreleased film should have an article.
If you actually read that guideline as stating that every unreleased film that has completed filming should be the subject of an article, then that is all the more reason why maybe I should try again to get the film notability guideline revised to clarify what it does and does not say.
Maybe I should have specifically addressed my question to the blocked editor, but I thought that followed because I was on their talk page. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:17, 17 January 2023 (UTC)
- You're correct that I did miss the point of your question. While reviewing their recent appeal and 331dot's decline, I noticed your question and responded with a link to the guideline, thinking it would be helpful. Obviously I was wrong.-- Ponyo 18:29, 17 January 2023 (UTC)
As long as you're not doing anything...
Dammit, I was just writing the below when you blocked.
Is Openshack, a rather suspicious new editor all by themself, the same person as Carbomarx (interesting username, eh?)? See, e.g., Solna and...stopped here.
Continuing...are they just confirmed to each other, or is there an earlier master?--Bbb23 (talk) 19:24, 17 January 2023 (UTC)
- Confirmed to each other. This wasn't Openshack creating Carbomax to get an upper hand in an edit war. They created both accounts back-to-back on one ISP, then hopped on to one of Evlekis' favourite ranges. I'm not saying they are Evlekis, but they definitely had the intent to sock right from the get go and winding up at on the naughty step within two days of account creation is not a good look. -- ~~