Wikidata

Wikidata:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive/2020/12

< Wikidata:Administrators' noticeboard‎ | Archive‎ | 2020

Ananislam sock

G Than M (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL (for IP: GUC)) Ananislam is back. @Jasper Deng: You might be interested in this.--CrystallineLeMonde (talk) 08:12, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

  Likely; please add this to Wikidata:Requests for checkuser/Case/Ananislam138 in the future.--Jasper Deng (talk) 08:10, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. --CrystallineLeMonde (talk) 08:42, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protection of Q1052281

Vandalism--Trade (talk) 15:27, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

  Done Bovlb (talk) 18:10, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Hasley+ 20:47, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

Self-promo account

Vanitystardom (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL (for IP: GUC)) Started creating promotional items, some are already deleted but have been recreated. --CrystallineLeMonde (talk) 08:02, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

  Done Blocked indefinitely and message left on user talk. -- Fuzheado (talk) 17:10, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. Fuzheado (talk) 17:10, 2 December 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protection of Q173399

Consistent vandalism on Elliot Page (Q173399) from multiple IPs and new accounts. gobonobo + c 06:18, 2 December 2020 (UTC)

  Done Protected for one month. -- Fuzheado (talk) 17:01, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. Fuzheado (talk) 17:10, 2 December 2020 (UTC)

Semiprotect Ricardo Palma (Q562178)

Please semiprotect Ricardo Palma (Q562178) since there are constant vandalism edits by IP users. Thanks. --Ovruni (talk) 17:29, 2 December 2020 (UTC)

  Done Semi-protected for three months. -- Fuzheado (talk) 17:32, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. Fuzheado (talk) 17:32, 2 December 2020 (UTC)

Report concerning User:Rogelio Puto Martínez

Rogelio Puto Martínez (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL (for IP: GUC)) — Reasons: Abusive username (and his edits are purely vandalism, although old). —MarcoAurelio (talk) 22:27, 2 December 2020 (UTC)

  Done —MisterSynergy (talk) 22:32, 2 December 2020 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Hasley+ 12:07, 3 December 2020 (UTC)

Report concerning 31.42.51.66

31.42.51.66 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL (for IP: GUC)) — Reasons: Spam--Trade (talk) 10:21, 3 December 2020 (UTC)

Blocked, 1 month. Lymantria (talk) 10:35, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Hasley+ 12:05, 3 December 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protecting mount everest

I think Mount Everest (Q513) could benefit from semi-protection as a highly visible page which has recently had a few IP addresses trying to change the elevation value in particular --SilentSpike (talk) 12:43, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. SilentSpike (talk) 21:23, 6 December 2020 (UTC)

Requesting Semi-Protection for project:how to contribute (Q22981346)

I am very confused at this pages revision history. It's not super high visible, but apparently it's attracted all sorts of test edits in the past. It's a one statement item with currently 77 revisions. Perryprog (talk) 21:05, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

  Done Bovlb (talk) 03:31, 5 December 2020 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Hasley+ 13:55, 6 December 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protection for Q4616

Please semi-protect Marilyn Monroe (Q4616) - persistent IP vandalism, popular theme.--Jklamo (talk) 12:29, 6 December 2020 (UTC)

  Done for a year--Ymblanter (talk) 18:20, 6 December 2020 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Hasley+ 01:16, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

User:Dkfzhf123

Needs to be blocked. Thanks --[[kgh]] (talk) 12:58, 6 December 2020 (UTC)

  Done--Ymblanter (talk) 18:23, 6 December 2020 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Hasley+ 01:15, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

Notification of request for Oversight access

Hi. As instructed, I'm notifying the community of my request for Oversight access: Wikidata:Requests for permissions/Oversight/DannyS712. Thanks, --DannyS712 (talk) 03:19, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

Report concerning User:125.161.136.233

125.161.136.233 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL (for IP: GUC)) — Reasons: Vandalism CrystallineLeMonde (talk) 07:45, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

  Report was good at the time, but is now stale. Re-report if this user resumes vandalising. --Esteban16 (talk) 04:54, 7 December 2020 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. --Esteban16 (talk) 04:54, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

Report concerning User:RomeoJuliette1980

RomeoJuliette1980 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL (for IP: GUC)) — Reasons: Spamming. Q102858835 is self-promotion for a non-notable person.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 11:37, 6 December 2020 (UTC)

  Done. --Esteban16 (talk) 04:50, 7 December 2020 (UTC)
@Esteban16: Thanks!   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 07:57, 7 December 2020 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. --Esteban16 (talk) 04:50, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

Report concerning User:سميه الشمري

سميه الشمري (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL (for IP: GUC)) — Reasons: Vandalism on Wikidata talk:Administrators, User:Dexbot, and Q4131621. Also creates spam. Please nuke. Pandakekok9 (talk) 04:20, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

  Done --Esteban16 (talk) 04:45, 7 December 2020 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. --Esteban16 (talk) 04:45, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protection of Saint Nicholas (Q44269)

Multiple IP are trying to change some statements on this item. It's not really vandalism per se, as statements aren't really ludicrous, but they are not sourced - despite asking for it three time in a row. It would be nice if the item was semi-protected for a few weeks/months to deter such behaviour. --Jahl de Vautban (talk) 14:29, 6 December 2020 (UTC)

  Done semi-protected for 1 month -❙❚❚❙❙ GnOeee ❚❙❚❙❙ ✉ 17:41, 6 December 2020 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Hasley+ 20:07, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

Please block User:124.253.55.20

Thanks. --- Jura 13:41, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

  Done —MisterSynergy (talk) 13:57, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Hasley+ 20:08, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

Please blok user:92.66.6.50

Constant vandalism from this ip. Ciell (talk) 14:55, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

Done. Rafael (stanglavine) msg 15:08, 8 December 2020 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Hasley+ 20:09, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

Report concerning User:107.77.198.54

107.77.198.54 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL (for IP: GUC)) — Reasons: Vandalism. LiberatorG (talk) 02:01, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

  Blocked. Hazard-SJ (talk) 02:37, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Hazard-SJ (talk) 02:37, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

User block request : Damiltrevl

Damiltrevl (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL (for IP: GUC))

The user/marketing company has created its own as well as other items , all are promotional . Reporting here so that each and every item should get deleted and user should be blocked Rockpeterson (talk) 13:18, 3 December 2020 (UTC)

Strange political edits by MorkForid (talk • contribs • logs)

https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/86.12.55.132
https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/MorkForid

Unsure if this qualifies as vandalism, but fresh user with only these political edits seems strange. Not clear if the IP edit is related, but seems likely given the timing. --SilentSpike (talk) 21:22, 6 December 2020 (UTC)

They are certainly strange, and besides, such sensitive data should be referenced. Esteban16 (talk) 04:49, 7 December 2020 (UTC)
Reverted the edits and left a note on their user talk page. Lymantria (talk) 07:48, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. Lymantria (talk) 17:38, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

User:ZeR0101MiNt

ZeR0101MiNt (talk • contribs • logs) should IMO be taken out of the Autoconfirmed group. They have removed sourced coordinates of dozens of objects (example[1]) - after I notified them on their talk page, again an object wrongly moved by 100 km[2]. Every of their edits needs to be checked manually. --Dealerofsalvation (talk) 05:40, 3 December 2020 (UTC)

Autoconfirmed cannot be removed. I blocked their account awaiting communication on the problems you've brought under their attention. Lymantria (talk) 10:42, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
@Lymantria: Thanks, seems this was the right decision, I can hardly think this[3] was good-faith. --Dealerofsalvation (talk) 06:05, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

Alavijeh

Hello I live in Alavijeh city in Isfahan province. This is my father city. The name of this city is Alavijeh, but someone changed the name to Alavicheh. This is a big problem Because the name of the city is changing on all sites Please address this issue. Thankful  – The preceding unsigned comment was added by 151.240.71.130 (talk • contribs).

Are you talking about Alavijeh (Q2613921)? Which language has a wrong name? --Pasleim (talk) 17:21, 4 December 2020 (UTC)
CC selected recent editors @Amsh94, Toghrul Rahimli, Tubezlob. Bovlb (talk) 17:34, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

Full protection of Elliot Page (Q173399)

Editing war. As both editors are confirmed users a full protection will be necessary--Trade (talk) 22:52, 5 December 2020 (UTC)

I have added full protection. Normally I would only have done so for only a week, but in this case I chose to retain the existing duration of the semi-protection to avoid leaving this page unprotected. I have no objection to another admin shortening this protection, but I encourage the reinstatement of the semi-protection. Bovlb (talk) 03:46, 6 December 2020 (UTC)

Wikidata Page Deleted - Why?

I created a Wikidata page for my company Become.co

I see many other Wikidata pages for companies like LendingTree, Fundbox, and OnDeck that have even less information that I provided for my company - yet they remain up and live, and my entry is deleted.

Please explain why that is.  – The preceding unsigned comment was added by BenAtBecome (talk • contribs).

At least those others have an article on Wikipedia which is one requirement for notability as said on Wikidata:Notability. Stryn (talk) 13:35, 6 December 2020 (UTC)
@BenAtBecome: Can you come up with "serious and publicly available references" for this company, for example independently-written articles in major newspapers with the company as main focus? I could not find any, but the company name is hard to search for. Bovlb (talk) 21:46, 6 December 2020 (UTC)

198.14.240.72

Hey, could you please nuke (and maybe also block) special:Contribs/198.14.240.72? --Martin Urbanec (talk) 18:31, 6 December 2020 (UTC)

I did some merging. Doesn't seem worth blocking a transient IP. See also 173.191.202.142 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL (for IP: GUC)) and search the archives for "Singleton". Bovlb (talk) 22:05, 6 December 2020 (UTC)

TemplateStyles pages

Right now there are some 100 TemplateStyles items. These should not have items per WD:N 1.1. These pages seem like good ones to have some sort of edit filter to prevent creation or addition of links. (And the existing ones should probably be deleted.) --Izno (talk) 22:17, 2 December 2020 (UTC)

Deleted. Hasley+ 13:49, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
Added to #36. --Matěj Suchánek (talk) 10:15, 5 December 2020 (UTC)
It's still blocking links it shouldn't be blocking - Wikidata:Project chat/Archive/2020/11#Template subpage to be used as language link? Peter James (talk) 15:53, 6 December 2020 (UTC)
Wikidata:Notability/Exclusion criteria mentions those. --Matěj Suchánek (talk) 17:01, 6 December 2020 (UTC)
I removed it, as it had been added without discussion and contradicted the list at Wikidata:Notability. These could be useful as unlike sandbox, documentation and TemplateStyles pages the page names are not always the same. Peter James (talk) 17:26, 6 December 2020 (UTC)
(Corrected the link.) Your edit can't be accepted for several reasons:
  1. You are supposed to [...] discuss any amendments to or deletions from this list first on the talk page.
  2. It was added in Special:Diff/72879481 after Wikidata:Requests for comment/Exclusion criteria in Wikipedia namespace (it has been considered for 7 years).
  3. Contradiction with Wikidata:Notability is irrelevant. In fact, most of those criteria will contradict it. They only make sense if they take precedence over Wikidata:Notability.
--Matěj Suchánek (talk) 08:49, 7 December 2020 (UTC)
There's no reason to have an incomplete list of excluded subpage types in the main page and only mention that there are others in a subpage. In the discussion there are only two comments relevant to that page, which is "Any subpage in general"[4] and "pages like /header or /footer in WP and Help-namespaces" [5]. There's a difference - in WP and Help namespaces, headers and footers are usually to be transcluded in specific pages; template subpages can be for more general use, rather than to be transcluded in the template pages. There are also some that are not typical subpages - an example of this is Template:ISO 15924/footer (Q14467699), a navigation template used in articles. Peter James (talk) 12:25, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

Report regarding User:201.215.15.23

201.215.15.23 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL (for IP: GUC)): continually adding joke or test-like edits to articles after final warning. Perryprog (talk) 14:05, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

Oops—accidentally published this early. At this time they have not made any non-constructive edits past their final warning, but it's possible they will soon. Perryprog (talk) 14:06, 7 December 2020 (UTC)
It's been a good bit now, so it's probably this is (somewhat) resolved now. Perryprog (talk) 14:50, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protection of Q55696321

Reason: IP user vandalism since 13 June 2020‎, for example creating claim spouse (P26): Wang Yibo, which is wrong information and not sourced. --SCP-2000 (talk) 16:46, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

Report 171.33.192.159

171.33.192.159 (talk • contribs • logs) vandalism since 3.12.2020 --WikiBayer (talk) 11:46, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

  Done Blocked for 2 weeks. Bovlb (talk) 18:51, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Hasley+ 15:15, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

requesting protection of Hanan Ben Ari (Q22956259) from vandal

A pertinent vandal has been incorrectly changing the number of children (P1971) of Hanan Ben Ari (Q22956259), a famous Israeli singer, several times since March 15th, including 5 times in the last two and a half weeks, all from changing IP addresses (The signer had a sixth child a few weeks ago). Please protect the item from unregistered users for a lenghty amount of time. Thanks, DGtal (talk) 00:39, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

  Done Bovlb (talk) 01:13, 11 December 2020 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Hasley+ 15:18, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

Reporting 195.221.155.11

195.221.155.11 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL (for IP: GUC)) was blocked for 6 months in 2018. 1 warning earlier this year. 1 bad edit today and 1 in late november. No good edits. --Hjart (talk) 14:56, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

  Done for a year--Ymblanter (talk) 20:50, 11 December 2020 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Hasley+ 15:21, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protection for Q312

Please semi-protect Apple (Q312) - persistent IP vandalism, popular theme. --Jklamo (talk) 20:08, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

  Done for a year. ‐‐1997kB (talk) 06:26, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Hasley+ 15:23, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

Report concerning User:2806:2F0:60C1:A0F4:79E2:6DA3:D92A:3526

2806:2F0:60C1:A0F4:79E2:6DA3:D92A:3526 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL (for IP: GUC)) — Reasons: vandal IP DarwIn (talk) 20:03, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

Done. Hasley+ 20:14, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Hasley+ 21:41, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

Edit war on West Germany (Q713750)

Can a (preferably German-speaking) admin have a look at this debate and take appropriate action? User:MovieFex keeps on setting the German label to a value that only he thinks is correct; all other users consider it wrong. I consider the repeated action, ignoring the fact that nobody else agrees, as vandalism. -- H005 (talk) 18:34, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

"Geschichte der Bundesrepublik Deutschland bis 1990" is exactly the German label and this object is about a historical period of Germany (Q183). A change is a label swindle. Germany was founded in 1949 and still lasts on. User of Wikidata don't invent a new German history and if a German user uses this object as state he should be ashamed. -- MovieFex (talk) 18:49, 7 December 2020 (UTC)
The object is not about the history (then it would be instance of (P31)aspect of history (Q17524420)) but about a state. Additionally, there's a consensus on the talk page against the name you choose. MovieFex, please stop editing labels on this item. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 20:08, 8 December 2020 (UTC)
@ChristianKl:May be you have a deeper look at the object. It is NOT a state (deprecated because of incorrect value (Q41755623)) it is historical period (Q11514315). And it is not me who has to search for a consensus if there is a label wanted different from the arctikel in the wiki. But this discussion isn't finished yet and German contemporary history is nothing that is available to elect by some editors of wikidata. -- MovieFex (talk) 20:25, 8 December 2020 (UTC)
Okay, I'm sorry for getting the P31 wrong. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 20:27, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

Report concerning User:151.24.77.229

151.24.77.229 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL (for IP: GUC)) — Reasons: Continues to remove current logos and replace them with old versions. LiberatorG (talk) 16:44, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

Protection

I think it could be helpful to protect Q641211 for a week or two. Cheers, Achim (talk) 23:34, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

  Done Semi-protected for 2 weeks. Pamputt (talk) 06:49, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Hasley+ 12:12, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protection for Q43444

Please semi-protect Q43444 (Gustave Flaubert) due to persistent IP vandalism. Thanks a lot! --M2k~dewiki (talk) 10:38, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

Done by MisterSynergy. Hasley+ 12:11, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Hasley+ 12:12, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

Special:Contributions/79.33.126.146, Special:Contributions/82.53.68.156

block needed--GZWDer (talk) 17:07, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

  Done. Please let me know if you need a talk page semi protection for a while. —MisterSynergy (talk) 18:21, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Hasley+ 19:05, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

And a lof of mistakes again and again ...

Sorry fo so-so English. And again a lot of big mistakes from @Infovarius:. He adds the name Artyom to people with the name Anatolii, even Anatolii Tymoshchuk suddenly became... Artyom Tymoshchuk [6]. Well, of course, the Ukrainians will ascribe Russian names... More see f. e. [7] not to mention his many previous mistakes, when he attributed Russian names to many Ukrainians [8]... He does not understand that Belarusian Zinkievich (Зінкевіч) [9] and Ukrainian Zinkevych (Зінкевич) [10] are two different things... --Бучач-Львів (talk) 08:43, 3 December 2020 (UTC)

@Infovarius: ascribes Russian citizenship to people who have nothing to do with it at all, f. e. [11]... --Бучач-Львів (talk) 08:49, 3 December 2020 (UTC)

I don't understand who is right or wrong here, but just a note that Infovarius has been made aware of this thread but has not responded, despite making hundreds of edits since. Bovlb (talk) 20:31, 7 December 2020 (UTC)
Bovlb. I'm right, he's wrong. Because I know Ukrainian, Russian, some English. Infovarius don't know Ukrainian. --Бучач-Львів (talk) 09:09, 8 December 2020 (UTC)
Bovlb. Please, see here. --Бучач-Львів (talk) 09:10, 8 December 2020 (UTC)
I've fixed all "Artyoms". That was a dumb mistake, sorry. As for Russian-Ukrainian-Belorussian equivalents... this is more subtle question. I am ok with differentiating strings Зінкевіч and Зінкевич, but I am not ok with differentiating Ксенія and Ксенія (they have the same string and the same pronunciation and thus the same transliterations). So you sometimes (often?) create name items with identical labels and properties, which is not good I suppose. Note also, Бучач-Львів, that you are consistently making mistake with the using different from (P1889) between names, you should use said to be the same as (P460). The most important question: which people should have Ukrainian equivalent and which Russian? I have not seen any passport scan of such people proving their nationality (ethnical, not juridical) and of course any document proving their native language. I just add Russian equivalent for USSR citizens (all Ukrainian Soviet citizens had official Russian-spelling name, can you disagree?) and never remove Ukrainian equivalent (even often add myself). In contrary, you replace Russian with Ukrainian without providing sources. Who is disrupting Wikidata neutrality here? P.S. What do you mean "don't know Ukrainian"? I can read and understand it, I know the difference in pronunciation and of course I can distinguish one letter from another. --Infovarius (talk) 11:03, 8 December 2020 (UTC)
Until I say I think that in this case it is better to use different from (P1889) not said to be the same as (P460), because the confusion is big. And I think that it is not any necessary to attribute Russian surnames to Ukrainians - this is what creates confusion. --Бучач-Львів (talk) 14:56, 8 December 2020 (UTC)
The crucial question: who are "Ukrainians"? And how to distinguish them from "Russians"? Please don't be a nationalist... --Infovarius (talk) 18:28, 8 December 2020 (UTC)
If you don't want to read articles at least in wikipedia - I can't help. You went personal, so you broke the rules. Please read what is a state, ethnos, people, nation, chauvinism, occupation, national culture, traditions, customs etc. are ... --Бучач-Львів (talk) 11:20, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
@AmaryllisGardener, Ymblanter: Can you assist here? Thanks, Bovlb (talk) 19:38, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
I made sure that Бучач-Львів got indefinitely blocked on the English Wikipedia so I would better not be involved here.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:40, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
Thank you. ENWP is a separate project, of course, and a block there does not affect Wikidata directly. Having read some of those discussions (1, 2, 3, 4) however, they do seem to me to touch on issues related to the behaviour here. The ideal resolution going forward would be that we could find a way for participants to reach a consensus on issues. Bovlb (talk) 20:43, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

Hello. Apologies if this isn't the best place for this, I'm an enWP editor with little experience here. We have had a bit of a problem on Q725958 with the official link being hijacked for a link that redirects to an affiliate link. User:Rodeolexus has been the main editor doing this [12][13][14][15][16][17]. It was semi-protected to stop it, but Rodeolexus was dedicated enough to make enough edits to become auto-confirmed and reinsert their fake link. I am not auto-confirmed, so would somebody mind taking a look into this and reverting their fake link? Thanks. Apparition11 (talk) 12:21, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

Spam removed, and warned user. —MisterSynergy (talk) 12:42, 8 December 2020 (UTC)
I have added that domain to the "spam blacklist".  Bovlb (talk) 19:48, 8 December 2020 (UTC)
Mind adding some more links to the list? @Bovlb:--Trade (talk) 14:20, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
@Trade: I'd like to say that MediaWiki_talk:Spam-blacklist is the correct place to request this, but I see there are several unhandled (but possibly now stale) requests there. I note that requests there often lack links to evidence of the problem, which probably does not encourage a rapid response. Compare with the way proposals are made at meta:Talk:Spam_blacklist. What are you looking for specifically? Bovlb (talk) 18:49, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
Meta is not WD. A lot of spam comes in the form of self promotional items that gets created over and over again by different socks and IP's over a period of severalspam weeks if not months.  As there is no way to search deleted items by their labels it becomes almost to prove without knowing the item's specific QID's. Anyways, please look at my request.  @Bovlb:--Trade (talk) 19:29, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

Special:Contributions/Baptiste_de_Lusignan

This user removed a large number of statements without reason. Please check this user's edits and restore them if needed.--GZWDer (talk) 09:20, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

I have notified the user of this discussion. Before I did so, the user's talk page was a redlink. Bovlb (talk) 18:50, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

Q513

Requesting temporary semi-protection of Q513. Persistent disruption. ( – The preceding unsigned comment was added by [[User:|?]] ([[User talk:|talk]] • contribs).) Tbsock (talk) 20:11, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

Let's leave it for now. We blocked an ip yesterday. --- Jura 20:10, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protection of Kurt Cobain (Q8446)

Vandalism--Trade (talk) 12:10, 16 December 2020 (UTC)

I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. DannyS712 (talk) 18:16, 16 December 2020 (UTC)

Report concerning Khatri 22

Khatri 22 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL (for IP: GUC))


The user has done many spam edits , a block is necessary Rockpeterson (talk) 13:12, 16 December 2020 (UTC)

I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. DannyS712 (talk) 18:16, 16 December 2020 (UTC)

80.30.189.223

80.30.189.223 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL (for IP: GUC)) Blanking. --GryffindorD 18:15, 16 December 2020 (UTC)

Blocked 31 hours --DannyS712 (talk) 18:16, 16 December 2020 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. DannyS712 (talk) 18:16, 16 December 2020 (UTC)

User:2402:1980:2B6:C1C5:AD3A:A212:45CE:1C72

Hello, please have a look at 2402:1980:2B6:C1C5:AD3A:A212:45CE:1C72 (talk • contribs • logs). --Ameisenigel (talk) 19:09, 16 December 2020 (UTC)

Blocked. Hasley+ 20:48, 16 December 2020 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Hasley+ 20:49, 16 December 2020 (UTC)

Report concerning User:192.166.2.63

192.166.2.63 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL (for IP: GUC)) — Reasons: Repeated vandalism over the years CrystallineLeMonde (talk) 09:48, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

Using RfC for small questions

https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Requests_for_comment/how_to_manage_software_versions and https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Requests_for_comment/Artists_Rights_Society_(Q4801318) both seem small questions that stay open as RfCs in the RfC list.

I'm not sure how to best deal with them. They don't seem the kind of thing people are looking for when looking through the list of past RfCs. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 23:26, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

Gigi Hadid (Q16843706)

Request semi-protection for Gigi Hadid (Q16843706) due to ongoing vandalism from unregistered users. Senator2029 03:53, 16 December 2020 (UTC)

  Done Semi-protected for 3 months. --Okkn (talk) 06:20, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Wiki13 (talk) 11:17, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

Report concerning User:88.26.151.147

88.26.151.147 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL (for IP: GUC)) — Reasons: Continuous unconstructive edits on David Helfgott (Q431128), Franz Liszt (Q41309) ViktorQT (talk) 15:53, 16 December 2020 (UTC)

Stopped. Please report again if they persist. —Hasley+ 13:05, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Hasley+ 13:06, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

Report concerning User:Angelillo2021

Angelillo2021 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL (for IP: GUC)) — Reasons: Repeated vandlaism, likely block evasion of Special:Contributions/Javiermiller2003, Special:Contributions/Angelillo28, Special:Contributions/RoulMiller30, Special:Contributions/EmilioMiller2004, and others, based on behavior. – LiberatorG (talk) 19:35, 16 December 2020 (UTC)

A   Likely match. @LiberatorG: Please file this at Wikidata:Requests for checkuser/Case/LiliaMiller2002 in the future.--Jasper Deng (talk) 21:50, 16 December 2020 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Hasley+ 15:17, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protection of Q445882 (a disambiguation page)

Ichikawa (Q445882) has been vandalized by IPs since October. Please consider semi-protecting it. whym (talk) 12:57, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

  Done, by ChristianKl for 6 months. ‐‐1997kB (talk) 03:10, 18 December 2020 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Hasley+ 12:30, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

Block Alekhkumarr

Alekhkumarr created several promotion only items, see his deleted contribs. --Martin Urbanec (talk) 13:18, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

Blocked indef as promo only account. ‐‐1997kB (talk) 14:48, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Hasley+ 12:31, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

Report block evasion of Payalsingh1 / Khojinindia

132.154.227.205 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL (for IP: GUC)) This IP user has recreated the item Q104213740(Khojinindia). It was deleted when all of its socks were g-locked, as a part of the sock clean-up was made. --CrystallineLeMonde (talk) 18:03, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

  Done for a month. ‐‐1997kB (talk) 03:08, 18 December 2020 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. CrystallineLeMonde (talk) 09:52, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

Q347418

Please semiprotect Gabe Newell (Q347418), persistent vandalism from several IP ranges. -- Dr.üsenfieber (talk) 22:39, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

  Done Bovlb (talk) 23:32, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Hasley+ 12:29, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

Report concerning User:MzzLemonLime

MzzLemonLime (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL (for IP: GUC)) — Reasons: Spammer. LiberatorG (talk) 08:15, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

Non-admin comment:   Globally locked --Martin Urbanec (talk) 15:46, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. --Martin Urbanec (talk) 15:46, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

Report block evasion of Slartlkt / රචකයා13

2407:C00:5005:14F6:F815:4F49:CD15:370F (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL (for IP: GUC)) This IP user has recreated the item Q104236399 (Tharaka Mahesh) and it was deleted when sock cleanup was made. --CrystallineLeMonde (talk) 09:46, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

  Blocked /64 for a month. ‐‐1997kB (talk) 15:15, 18 December 2020 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. CrystallineLeMonde (talk) 19:07, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

OCLC wants to help more on properties and constraint maintenance

Hi Admins, OCLC would like to be a bit more participatory in Wikidata and to help Libraries and GLAM institutions in Wikidata. Yeah!!! Towards that effort, Jeff Mixter Jmixter87 (talk • contribs • logs) from OCLC and myself Thad Guidry thadguidry (talk • contribs • logs) have been brainstorming on ways to help with maintenance of the OCLC Authority ID's and their properties, for example FAST ID (P2163). Jeff often has first hand knowledge on the constraints around any OCLC property since he maintains them on their side. One problem we discovered is that he wasn't on the watchlist for some of them, which he is now, so that's fixed, and he'll get the communities talk about any of them. The other problem has to do with editing and making constraint changes on a few of them, since over time, those constraints on OCLC's side have indeed changed and become looser or "more relaxed" and should correspondingly be updated on Wikidata's side.

Whom shall we coordinate with going forward to more quickly resolve some of the constraint issues currently lurking? (both Jeff and myself know SPARQL and could assist with constraint maintenance for the OCLC properties, but might need some initial hand-holding, or coordinate with an admin)

Jeff Mixter - Yes that seems correct. Since FAST is a Faceted derivation of LC Vocabularies a single authorized pre-coordinated LC heading could convert into multiple FAST IDs

Jeff Mixter - and yes, FAST also get derived from a variety of LC vocabs so there are the two headings for 'Horror television programs':

http://id.worldcat.org/fast/1710430/ - derived from LC Form Genre

http://id.worldcat.org/fast/960449/ - derived from LCSH

https://ld4.slack.com/archives/CGS1Q2WP9/p1607635378123800

Since as shown above, We have consensus and agree on Adam's request on the talk page of FAST ID (P2163) that the constraint should be an OR clause essentially, to allow either an LCCN or LCGFT ID.

--Thadguidry (talk) 22:41, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

  • Both of you should write about your OCLC affiliation on your user page as the Wikimedia Terms of Service require such disclosure.
Solving content issues in Wikidata is not about coordinating with admins. Admins are needed when there are conflicts that can't be resolved without admin involvement.
When you have consensus from a talk page, and understand the domain you can change the constraints of the property yourself. The power of changing constraints is not limited to admins. If you don't know how to do something, Wikidata is a community and different members of the community have different knowledge. Wikidata has different Wikiprojects that you can ask for help WD:WikiProject Source is a good address to ask for input related to OCLC. Both it's talk page and pinging it's project are useful. If you have concrete questions about how constraints work Wikidata:WikiProject property constraints is a good address. The project chat is also always a good place to ask questions.
From the information you and Adam provide it's not 100% clear to me what you want. Writing more clearly about the issue you care about would help getting things done. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 01:50, 11 December 2020 (UTC)
@ChristianKl: I am not affiliated, only Jeff is an employee there. Thanks for the tips. The issue is that I saw semi-protection somewhere regarding the FAST ID, but now it's no longer there (weird!), or I cannot find it again. And Jeff didn't have his email fully registered, but that's fixed. Anyways, because of that protection I saw, I assumed there was something fancy going on around Authority IDs in general and their constraints. Sure, I'll take our constraint questions to that page Wikidata:WikiProject property constraints Again, thanks so much for pointing us into the right direction!
@ChristianKl: Is the WD:WikiProject Source where Authority's and there related properties should be ideally discussed? --Thadguidry (talk) 17:05, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
@Jura1: Sure, I think that makes sense, and @Jmixter87: could provide an approximate count of the number of FAST ID's onto its page, probably for any of the OCLC ID's (Some of the OCLC API's do not provide counts directly, but Jeff or someone can get them and fill them in on Wikidata. --Thadguidry (talk) 17:05, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
Sounds good. Thanks. --- Jura 18:30, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
  • @Thadguidry: what's OCLC view on Help:Conflation of two persons? Sometimes we come across VIAF ids that conflate several people. Sorting the VIAF component IDs between relevant, (ideally new) items generally solves it once VIAF does it magic, monthly re-clustering. There is a residual risk that this repurposes the VIAF Id when VIAF id is also added to an actual item. --- Jura 18:30, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
    • @Jura1: Sure, sometimes VIAF clusters things wrong, just like us humans do. :-) Why it sometimes clusters wrongly, that would be a Jeff question, or someone still on the VIAF service team to answer. Keep in mind that Authority Cluster is not the same as Authority Source (the records contributed from 37 agencies in 29 countires, for example, BNF, Bibliothèque Nationale de France). The Authority Cluster (the service and endpoint) is responsible for holding the linked names for the same entity coming from those Authority Source's. Officially, the "Merging of Clusters" notes are down at the bottom of the developer page which says:
      Authority clusters can be merged together over time as additional data is received and algorithms are updated. When an authority cluster is merged into another the client will receive an HTTP 301 redirect to the new cluster URI.
      Also note from this page:
      VIAF records are available either as cluster records or source records. Cluster records aggregate the various authority files from the international contributors into one authority record for a given authority topic.
      --Thadguidry (talk) 20:21, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
      • @Thadguidry: That it happens isn't much of an issue. The question is if our way of dealing with it works out for the VIAF algo. Obviously, if it adapts itself magically to whatever approach people deliberately choose (or just happen to "do"), all the better. Occasionally, some users try to "sync" values with VIAF and this can compound errors. --- Jura 23:41, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

Vandalism

Hello (please forgive me for the errors in this text, I'm french) : IP 152.86.164.35 vandalises more or less many pages about comics. Each time, he presents Batman and/or Spider-Man as the only important super-heroes (ex. : type of stock character usually possessing "supernatural or superhuman powers" and dedicated to protecting the public, Batman and Spider-Man are way cooler and popular replaced type of stock character usually possessing "supernatural or superhuman powers" and dedicated to protecting the public on Q188784). Could you block this IP and explain to him that WD is not the place to add your admiration on heroes ? Thanks, --Olivier Tanguy (talk) 22:38, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

The vandal is still active and has been warned several times. The IP-address appears to be more-or-less static, the first vandalism of this kind (in the same area) has been performed in july and the ip has only contributed vandalism ever since. Please consider blocking for an extended period. Thank you -- Dr.üsenfieber (talk) 02:30, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
  blocked Special:Contributions/152.86.164.35 for a month. ‐‐1997kB (talk) 02:44, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

Reporting ERICK GIFT

Reporting User:ERICK GIFT. Every edit is vandalism. Jc3s5h (talk) 17:07, 19 December 2020 (UTC)

  Done--Ymblanter (talk) 19:21, 19 December 2020 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Hasley+ 21:53, 19 December 2020 (UTC)

Vandal report

It's ages since I have used WikiData, so I am not sure if this is the correct way to report a vandal, but here goes:

2001:44C8:4593:BDB3:C8CD:A3B8:4A2C:97FB (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL (for IP: GUC))

Thanks, Zazpot (talk) 22:55, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

No edits after the warning, so no point in blocking. ‐‐1997kB (talk) 04:59, 20 December 2020 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Hasley+ 12:42, 20 December 2020 (UTC)

Investigation required

Please can any administrator help me to check contributions(deleted wikidata items made) made by this user's

I have a doubt if they are socks of Aakashdesi and by confirming here I can directly report it at WD:CHECK Rockpeterson (talk) 18:27, 19 December 2020 (UTC)

@Rockpeterson: I see amply sufficient evidence in the deleted contributions to justify checking them. They are using proxies but with behavioral evidence taken into account, it's   Likely they are related. These users are part of a long-term "entrepreneur" spamming ring that involves multiple sockmasters; don't hesitate to report to WD:RFCU in the future.--Jasper Deng (talk) 20:23, 19 December 2020 (UTC)
@Jasper Deng: Yes I was gonna report it there but just for reconfirmation I needed advice , Thanks ! Rockpeterson (talk) 06:24, 20 December 2020 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. Trade (talk) 19:11, 20 December 2020 (UTC)

Deletion of user page

Hi Admins, would it be possible to delete my user page User:ZabeMath so that it is copied from metawiki. --ZabeMath (talk) 23:35, 19 December 2020 (UTC)

  Done by Jasper Deng. ‐‐1997kB (talk) 04:57, 20 December 2020 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Hasley+ 12:34, 20 December 2020 (UTC)

FA promotion

Hello, the English-language version of "Kaikhosru Shapurji Sorabji (Q527936)" was recently promoted to FA status, but apparently I do not have the authorization needed to add this information to the entry. Could somebody please update the article badge as needed? Thank you. Toccata quarta (talk) 08:46, 20 December 2020 (UTC)

Done. Hasley+ 12:38, 20 December 2020 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Hasley+ 12:41, 20 December 2020 (UTC)

Merge/deletion request for Q22695668

Hi. Currently Q22695668 doesn't have any kind of purpose. It's an old Qid for disambiguation, but all the interwiki that were attached (ja, ka, ru) are now on Mithridatic Wars (Q1616064). Merging would probably be best, but in its current state it will result in a lot of mess to clean ; perhaps deletion is preferable, but I leave the final decision to you. --Jahl de Vautban (talk) 19:55, 20 December 2020 (UTC)

You can use WD:RFD for deletions.--CrystallineLeMonde (talk) 20:02, 20 December 2020 (UTC)
True enough. --Jahl de Vautban (talk) 20:16, 20 December 2020 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. Jahl de Vautban (--Jahl de Vautban (talk) 20:16, 20 December 2020 (UTC))

Report concerning User:45.65.88.112

45.65.88.112 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL (for IP: GUC)) — Reasons: ~10 accounts of vandalism over the past 2 years. 1 today. No good edits. --Hjart (talk) 12:43, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

Not blocked, given that there were no more edits since this report and prior edits were a few months old, given the nature of IPs and IP blocks. Hazard-SJ (talk) 01:06, 22 December 2020 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Hazard-SJ (talk) 01:06, 22 December 2020 (UTC)

Protected edit requests (Dec 3, Dec 19)

Please see MediaWiki_talk:Wikibase-SortedProperties. ty --- Jura 15:19, 19 December 2020 (UTC)

Has been handled. ‐‐1997kB (talk) 04:57, 20 December 2020 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Wiki13 (talk) 10:41, 21 December 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protection of Q85203089

Vandalism--Trade (talk) 19:10, 20 December 2020 (UTC)

  Done Semi-protected for 3 months. Pamputt (talk) 15:41, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Hasley+ 20:14, 21 December 2020 (UTC)

user Sxtex

Sxtex (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL (for IP: GUC)) in addition to being another Rakesh Joshi sockpuppet. his edits are vandalism/hijacking. please block, delete his creations, and revert his edits. Quakewoody (talk) 12:22, 21 December 2020 (UTC)

  Done --Esteban16 (talk) 13:41, 22 December 2020 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. --Esteban16 (talk) 13:41, 22 December 2020 (UTC)

Q62372907

Please semiprotect Luisito Comunica (Q62372907) infinitive or for at least a year. The item has been protected for a week, a month, 3 months before ([Log]) and whenever the protection ended, the vandalism went on -- Dr.üsenfieber (talk) 19:32, 22 December 2020 (UTC)

  Done for a year. ‐‐1997kB (talk) 01:55, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Hasley+ 02:10, 23 December 2020 (UTC)

Category:Requests for unblock

There are three requests waiting. Can this be looked into by independent admins?--Jasper Deng (talk) 21:46, 16 December 2020 (UTC)

Deletion requests

Dear admins, can one of you please close the deletion discussions about Q483409 and Q15118694? (Both have a WP article, one initiated by me.) BTW I would like to ask, can no-admins close "keep" discussions here? I do a lot of such work in Commons and would also like to do it here, from time to time, of course not at cases where I would be involved. --E4024 (talk) 15:30, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

  Done --Lymantria (talk) 14:53, 18 December 2020 (UTC)
Thanks, Lymantria; Q6070707 also, please. --E4024 (talk) 18:59, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protection of Pornhub (Q936394)

Vandalism--Trade (talk) 12:20, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

  Done for 3 months. ‐‐1997kB (talk) 15:09, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

Or at the least block the accounts mentioned on Wikidata:Requests for checkuser/Case/Ngnl00 and add the items they have vandalized to your watchlist @1997kB:--Trade (talk) 15:39, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

Trade, I have warned them and watchlisted the items, so if this will continue, we can block later. ‐‐1997kB (talk) 05:01, 20 December 2020 (UTC)

I would like to add a "featured article" icon to my German language article "H. H. Asquith".

Unfortunately, this edit was blocked, since it should be done only by administrators or trusted users. It was recommended to contact an administrator. Kind regards,--Michael G. Lind (talk) 17:23, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

@Michael G. Lind:   Done in Special:Diff/1329283590. Based on Help:Badges, I expect that it failed for you because you are not yet autoconfirmed. Hazard-SJ (talk) 18:20, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Hazard-SJ (talk) 18:20, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

Report concerning User:2601:152:4b00:91d0:b0f4:8c9b:3014:3a72

2601:152:4b00:91d0:b0f4:8c9b:3014:3a72 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL (for IP: GUC)) — Reasons: Changing data in article to mislead. Pierre cb (talk) 17:47, 23 December 2020 (UTC)

@Pierre cb:   Done Local and global blocks were made and all vandalism cleaned up.--Jasper Deng (talk) 19:52, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Wiki13 (talk) 12:39, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

Restauration of Q55664147

Please restore it, as it is notable as per https://austria.tmembassy.gov.tm/en pinging MisterSynergy. Thanks Bouzinac 💬●✒️●💛 14:41, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Wiki13 (talk) 12:39, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

Restoration of Q103898945

Instead, should be merged to Jerusalem syndrome (Q1124410). Thanks MisterSynergy Bouzinac 💬●✒️●💛 14:42, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Wiki13 (talk) 12:39, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

User block request : Devexpertik

Devexpertik (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL (for IP: GUC))
The User is creating items which are just promotional as well as not notable , A block is necessary and each and every Items created by him should be deleted Rockpeterson (talk) 07:36, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

  Done except that Jim Tananbaum (Q104445078) meets a structural need.--Jasper Deng (talk) 07:46, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Wiki13 (talk) 12:38, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protection for Q34812

Please semi-protect New Year (Q34812) - high level of recent vandalism, popular theme (at least temporary). --Jklamo (talk) 01:02, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

Jklamo,   Done for 1 week. ‐‐1997kB (talk) 04:09, 27 December 2020 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Wiki13 (talk) 12:38, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

User block request : MovieFex

MovieFex (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL (for IP: GUC))

Missbrauch des Revertbuttons, um Geschmacksedits durchzusetzen. / Abuse of the revert button to enforce personal-taste edits.[18] vs. original, [19], [20], [21], [22], [23], [24], and more. Ansprache erfolglos. / Talking to other party fruitless. Only more misuses. User talk:MovieFex#URL can change --Kolja21 (talk) 22:25, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

MovieFex was at least 20 times reported for vandalism on German Wikipedia ("Du wurdest auf der Seite Vandalismusmeldung gemeldet") and already blocked this year. No change in behavior. --Kolja21 (talk) 23:02, 14 December 2020 (UTC) Mein Gott ist das billig...
To have a look at the real original version check the history, it was Kolja21 who changed the item (October 8, 2020). He did that in every object I've created. Besides this the discussion about the use of described by source (P1343) and described at URL (P973) has already been made. In summary Kolja21 tries to get his will and has no scruples to lie to achieve that. This is an extreme example of mobbing and incredibly uncooperative and for that it is him who has to be blocked. -- MovieFex (talk) 00:39, 15 December 2020 (UTC)
I've explained to you why I've made the improvements. I didn't insist on the changes and of cause I don't use the reverse button, unless it's IP vandalism. "An extreme example of mobbing"? Indeed. For your aggressive behavior you have been blocked on German Wikipedia. --Kolja21 (talk) 01:19, 15 December 2020 (UTC)
Undo? -- MovieFex (talk) 07:05, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

Reverting specific genres for more broad genres

I have been creating new items that correspond to Library of Congress Genre/Form Terms not yet represented in Wikidata. Among recently established terms in LCGFT, I created items for body horror film (Q102260466), intersex film (Q103888910), and transgender film (Q104097073). After creating the items, I identified films that belonged to those genres, based on their LCGFT authority records and other web sources. It is a basic cataloging principle that catalogers assign only the most specific appropriate subject and genre/form terms, not both broader and more specific terms. If the more specific term is recorded as a subclass of the broader term, a query for the broader term should also easily retrieve all the entities that have a narrower term recorded. So for body horror films, intersex films, and transgender films, I changed the broader genre horror film or LGBT-related film to the more specific terms that I had created. I gave references to support this. On every one of these items MovieFex reverted my change and told me I was wrong. You can see my questions to them about this on their talk page. After the reversions of intersex and transgender film terms, I asked on the Wikidata Telegram and Wikimedia LGBT+ Telegram channels about whether I was correct to have changed the broader term to the more specific term. Both admins and other editors on both channels said that they agreed that changing the broader term to the specific term was correct, rather than adding the specific term in addition. They told me that I should undo MovieFex's reversions and explain why. I did that, and MovieFex promptly reverted them all over again, and called me a liar and accused me of being a man on a mission. My only mission is to record the best, most appropriate data in Wikidata that can be recorded. I do not want to make these changes another time, unless I know for certain that they won't be undone once more. And I would like to confirm whether my understanding that only the most specific value should be given if that item is a subclass of an item for the broader concept. UWashPrincipalCataloger (talk) 07:25, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

  • When it comes to deciding about an issue like this, community consensus is what matters and that can only be found on-Wiki. In this case a conflict about what data genre (P136) should hold, the venue for the question would be genre (P136)'s talk page, https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata_talk:WikiProject_Movies or the project chat (pinging WikiProject_Movies can be useful to get attention when the issue is raised on the properites talk page or the project chat).
Generally, only the most specific value should be given if that item is a subclass of an item for the broader concept but there are sometimes local expections. It's for example a custom that items that are instance of (P31) historical country (Q3024240) usually still state instance of (P31) country (Q6256) or state (Q7275) so it's still worthwhile to have the discussion.
Given that I have now banned MovieFex, I wouldn't expect you getting reverted further in this case but for similar cases in the future I would recommend to simply ask the question on-Wiki in a suitable place. It's more complex to ask a question on-Wiki then to ask a telegram channel but it builds community consensus that can be later referred back to. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 16:25, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

Block

Misuse of adminrights

I need to clarify a few things. First I wasn't informed of this report and had no chance to respond. Second: I am NOT blocked on dewiki. Besides this would be not relevant because here is wikidata.

Fact is that UWashPrincipalCataloger created some subgenres and to get them into wikidata he replaced a valid and established main genre which is used in all main databases. The user claimed that he has green light to do so because it was discussed in a channel chat. I've checked the talk pages before and found no discussion or any consensus. This would have been the correct way that this is understandable for everyone. And this is exactly what User:ChristianKl said. I told UWashPrincipalCataloger that he can add his subgenre but should not replace a valid entry. Normally everything would have been fine. I'm here for more than 5 years now and have more than 125.000 edits on wikidata without using a bot or any scripts. An admin has not to decide about a content, that's what the community does. So the decision of ChristianKI to block me is absolutely not understandable and in my opinion a misuse of adminrights.

I request to unblock my account. - MovieFex

I was also a little surprised by the block. Personally I'm fine having two genres where one is a subclass of the other. Genres are often subjective. BrokenSegue (talk) 20:21, 15 December 2020 (UTC)
The issue at hand isn't about the content decision regarding genres but about the behavior. In this discussion opened by Kolja21 he wrote: "In summary Kolja21 tries to get his will and has no scruples to lie to achieve that." That's a serious personal attack with strong language.
A bit above on the same page he wrote "User of Wikidata don't invent a new German history and if a German user uses this object as state he should be ashamed". Calling for other users to feel ashamed is again a serious personal attack instead of having a constructive conversation that searches for consensus.
Those are two examples found on this page.
In the discussion with UWashPrincipalCataloger he said "What you're doing here is man on mission, classical vandalism"
The fact that he was banned earlier on DeWiki (even if only for a day) illustrates this this isn't just MovieFex having a bad week. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 02:40, 16 December 2020 (UTC)
Three month ago there was an episode where edit-warring lead to another post here: https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Archive/2020/09#Edit_war_with_User:MovieFex ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 02:55, 16 December 2020 (UTC)
  • @Jasper Deng: with those examples listed, do you still think the block should be time-limited? ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 03:02, 16 December 2020 (UTC)
    • @ChristianKl: I still do, only because it's their first block here. 3-6 months would have been my choice.--Jasper Deng (talk) 03:13, 16 December 2020 (UTC)
      • @Jasper Deng: I'm not remembering us using bans with lengths of 3-6 months for behavior issues like this before, do you remember us using them to good effects? What I do remember is you blocking people permanently for having sock accounts without an allegation that they otherwise engaged in disruptive behavior.
There's no expression of a desire for MovieFex to change his behavior in the unblock request (he rather seems to be doubling down "Das ist schwach"). If you believe that we would change his behavior after 3-6 months, can you explain why you believe that would happen? ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 11:01, 16 December 2020 (UTC)
It might be worth considering two other incidents:
  • In summary, MovieFex has a history of edit warring, refusal to discuss, and personal attacks. In particular, they do not seem to be able to perceive personal attacks in their own actions, and they seem unable to collaborate. The current unblock request is classic IDHT. I might entertain an unblock request that shows some understanding of why their behaviour is disruptive and offers a commitment to improve. Bovlb (talk) 04:44, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
  • After seeing Bovlb's additional evidence, I now agree with the decision to block them indefinitely. @ChristianKl: Indefinite blocks for conduct issues usually aren't warranted on the first "offense". I consider socking to be a really serious offense, hence why I almost always block the master indefinitely.--Jasper Deng (talk) 07:17, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
  • @Jasper Deng: Our rules don't don't indicate that socking is a more serious offense then the other one's listed and I'm not aware of any consenus that was found on the notice board towards treating socking without any other content issues being more serious then behavior that's more directly disruptive. Calling behavior that doesn't violate EnWiki policy a really serious offense when users might not know that we have a different policy, seems also questionable. It sounds to me like a potentially controversus decision and thus not something to be done without raising a case for the user on the admin noticeboard. Why do you believe that infinitive blocks for users with a long history on Wikidata for behavior that only Wikidata forbids but not EnWiki raise to the level of being uncontroversial? ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 13:11, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
  • @ChristianKl: Nor do our policies not specifically indicate how it's not serious. None of my indefinite blocks for socking (of masters) have been contested by others, and as per Wikipedia:Silence and consensus (Q11249042) I have good reason to think that's accepted practice. If you want to change this, please enact a new policy via RfC and I will comply. However, in the great majority of cases the socking is of abusive nature that does warrant indefinite blocks. It's not controversial at all when I am specifically allowed to "block the master indefinitely" at WD:SOCK, and am well within my discretion to choose indefinite blocks. Also, as for finite-length blocks for other issues, there have been multiple cases (Jura1, Succu, Brya, to name a few). In my opinion, MovieFex's admission of the problem is alone enough to warrant reducing to a finite length.--Jasper Deng (talk) 20:01, 19 December 2020 (UTC)
To the extend that you believe that 3-6 bans for conduct issues like personal attacks are warrented, which prior cases of people we banned give you this impression that this is how we do things on Wikidata? ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 13:15, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
  • MovieFex has written a response (permalink) to some of my points. This response goes into some detail about the content issues in the two cases I cited, and the history of the interactions. As I understand it, MovieFex is explaining that their failure to comply with my requests for discussion were because discussion is time-consuming, some discussion had already taken place (here on AN), and dropping the issue leads to "peace everywhere". My primary concern at the time and now is with not with the specific content issues, but rather the behavioural issues, which the response does not really address. MovieFex says they "don't run away if there is conflict", which is fine, but edit warring and personal attacks are not acceptable in place of collaborative discussion. I'm afraid that I'm still not seeing any recognition of this last point. Bovlb (talk) 15:06, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
  • While I do agree that's it's more encouraging, admitting a problem is not enough to show behavior change. The way to change behavior is to actually changing behavior. Given that he can still participate on DeWiki we can see how he believe over there. In would say that in a year he can make an unblock request and we look into how he behaved in the meantime. If he managed to keep a cool head in conflicts in DeWiki we can grant the request.
Besides that it's also worth thinking about how we can get people in similar situation not to escalate their personal conflicts by having 1-on-1 fights and instead bringing the conflict to a community page to seek consensus. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 01:57, 19 December 2020 (UTC)
Hi @ChristianKl, Jasper Deng, Bovlb: (and all the others), I'm not an admin, so I'm not sure if it is legitimate for me to post here, but in case it is, I would like to comment on the infinite block for @MovieFex:. I am also a user who has had numerous frustrating interactions with MovieFex, mostly on the German WP, less here in Wikidata. His/her communication style is indeed often abrasive, combative, dismissive and contrarian-for-the-sake-of-it. MovieFex quite frequently reverts without even a minimum of discussion, and has quick-deleted (without response) numerous constructive discussion attempts by me, when placed on his personal discussion page. So yes, I agree that MovieFex needs to seriously address these behavior patterns and change for the better.
But still I feel that infinite is far too excessive for a first time block on Wikidata; especially considering the offenses being debated here. They are serious, but nowhere near as serious as something like sock puppetry for instance. So I would side with Jasper's first instinct towards a limited block. MovieFex's work here is for the most part very constructive, and he certainly has a lot of passion for Wikidata, as an overview of his/her edit history shows. I fear an infinite block leaves MovieFex too frustrated and aggrieved to actually address his/her behavior, instead leading to more entrenchment of patterns. I believe the punishment should be a bit painful, but proportional to what it wants to achieve, namely an improvement of behavior. So my instinct would be a first block for a week or a month – and only go higher once that shows no effect. That would demonstrate to MovieFex that things are getting serious, and the risk for an infinite block is there – but it offers him/her a realistic chance to be motivated towards positive advancement. Greetings from --Sprachraum (talk) 10:59, 19 December 2020 (UTC)
@ChristianKl: Their behavior on the German Wikipedia is not particularly indicative of how they'd behave here if they were unblocked. Wikidata is a multicultural project to a far greater degree than any individual language edition of any other project (excluding Commons). I suspect that MovieFex does not understand that their behavior comes off as aggressive, as it may be the case that in their original community, being blunt and forceful is typical in discussions. I agree in principle with Sprachraum.--Jasper Deng (talk) 20:04, 19 December 2020 (UTC)
@Jasper Deng: I'm a native German and as such I do have an understanding about the difference between being blunt and being aggressive in German culture. While German culture is often more blunt then US culture, the behavior at question here doesn't fall into that category. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 19:00, 22 December 2020 (UTC)
(e/c) @Sprachraum: This board is for discussion of matters that (likely) require some action by an administrator, but we welcome input from everyone. On a technical note, MovieFex is blocked indefinitely, not infinitely. In many cases, these end up being the same thing, but sometimes an indefinite block is merely waiting for some event. As administrators, we are tasked with applying blocks (and protections) as a way to prevent future disruption, not as a punishment for past behaviour. We always have to weigh the disruption-prevention benefits of such interventions against their costs. An indefinite block (or any block, really) can end as soon as an administrator believes it is not necessary. Cases like this one, where we have a strong contributor with intermittent behavioural problems, are the hardest for us to deal with. While such editors appear to be a net positive, it's hard to estimate the invisible cost of other potential contributors that have been driven away from the project by their behaviour. The ideal resolution here would be if we could find a way to unblock them that did not lead to future disruption. Bovlb (talk) 20:41, 19 December 2020 (UTC)
As a general comment, indefinite does not mean infinite. With consensus the user could be unblocked at a later date. --Rschen7754 07:34, 20 December 2020 (UTC)

Please nuke Kuripansaiyoh

Hello, could you please nuke Kuripansaiyoh's contribs? His items are basically empty, with no indication of meeting the notability policy. Thanks, --Martin Urbanec (talk) 15:44, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

  • @Martin Urbanec: There's no reason to nuke anything here. Museums in Japan can be notable for Wikidata. It would likely to make sense to fill out more information, but I see no reason for direct admin intervention. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 15:55, 18 December 2020 (UTC)
    Hmm, perhaps should've googled better prior to posting. On the other hand, I do feel that items that don't contain anything that would let a machine to identify the subject of the item can be deleted as "The item contains no data, or is blank." per the deletion policy. Best, Martin Urbanec (talk) 16:00, 18 December 2020 (UTC)
    The user in question seems well intentioned at producing a list of museums (which can be identified given the information of name+address+website). To the extend that you wish for the information to contain more data, speaking to the user in question seems to me like the much better alternative to simply deleting their contributions. Pushing a GLAM person who wants to contribute away, doesn't seem wise. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 19:03, 22 December 2020 (UTC)

Wikidata:Requests for permissions/CheckUser/1997kB

As required by policy, this is a notification regarding my request for CheckUser permission. ‐‐1997kB (talk) 06:48, 22 December 2020 (UTC)

Noctuoidea

I didn't know where to report this, so I'm commenting here. I created an article of Noctuoidea on Wikipedia Jp, but I can't link between languages as the page of Q133240 is locked. What should I do? --森津 (talk) 04:06, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

I added it for you. Lymantria (talk) 08:05, 24 December 2020 (UTC)
Thank you for your work. --森津 (talk) 09:48, 24 December 2020 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Hasley+ 02:02, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

I want to add a "good article" icon to the Russian language article "Mitrospingus" (Reed Tanagers), since it was selected.

I want to add a "good article" icon to the Russian language article "Mitrospingus" (Тростниковые танагры), since it was selected. I am a new voter and I need to get the status of a trusted user in order to add icons, how can I do this? --Good Joker 777 (talk) 12:59, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

Good Joker 777, I have given you confirmed right, so you should be able to add these icons now. ‐‐1997kB (talk) 13:34, 24 December 2020 (UTC)
1997kB, Thank you! --Good Joker 777 (talk) 13:40, 24 December 2020 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Hasley+ 02:05, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protection for Selena Gomez (Q83287)

Vandalism--Trade (talk) 20:13, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

  Done semiprotected indef. Lymantria (talk) 07:54, 28 December 2020 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Hasley+ 01:54, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protection for Mia Malkova (Q15576453)

Vandalism--Trade (talk) 13:49, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

Done. Rafael (stanglavine) msg 14:38, 28 December 2020 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Hasley+ 01:53, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

Vandalism by Special:Contributions/82.78.75.241

The IP accounts spotted at Special:Permalink/1282350642#unsourced_junk/vandalism_entries_by_IP continues to add junk to Wikidata or change statements chaotically. Please consider blocking. @Zaccarias: Ping for you. Gikü (talk) 22:34, 23 December 2020 (UTC)

Report concerning User:42.113.93.156

42.113.93.156 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL (for IP: GUC)) — Reasons: Spam. SCP-2000 (talk) 10:18, 23 December 2020 (UTC)

IP has been warned. ‐‐1997kB (talk) 12:30, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. DannyS712 (talk) 11:08, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

DenesFeri

Hi! Could someone explain this user that he should not remove or change sourced statements. For details please see User_talk:Succu#Odontoceti_-_Toothed_whale. Thanks. --Succu (talk) 11:06, 23 December 2020 (UTC)

And could someone explain to Succu that classifications change from time to time. If a genus belong to a certain subtribe or tribe is not a viewpoint, but a fact. Same thing can't have multiple viewpoints. The Earth is round not flat; can't be both. Thank you. DenesFeri (talk) 11:26, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
Yes: „classifications change from time to time“. That's exactly what we record here (=taxonomic viewpoints/opinions/circumscriptions) preferably with a reference. But this is nothing an admin can jugde. The repeated removal or change of sourced statements is an issue for our admins here. --Succu (talk) 19:54, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
@DenesFeri, Succu: I fixed it the way it should be (I think). DenesFeri, the way you edited the item, it suggested that the sources indicated support the point of view "parvorder", while they don't. Therefore, as Succu suggested, you should add a second statement for the rank being "parvorder", apart from the already existing "suborder". Please, bear in mind that in taxonomy especially in the higher taxon ranks there are hardly any "facts", but almost always "opinions" that may be widely shared, or be different among authors. It is perfectly fine to have different ranks with one taxon here on wikidata. Please, be a bit patient with each other. Lymantria (talk) 21:31, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
In addition to what was said above, using {{Ping project|Taxonomy}} to get additional editors to look at a discussion like this where two people have different opinions would be a useful when there are disagreements. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 13:40, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

Report concerning User:2804:D55:5247:4400:5EE:7CED:6663:EB68

2804:D55:5247:4400:5EE:7CED:6663:EB68 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL (for IP: GUC)) — Reasons: Vandalism--Trade (talk) 23:30, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

Trade,   Done Blocked /64 for a week. ‐‐1997kB (talk) 04:00, 27 December 2020 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. DannyS712 (talk) 11:08, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

Requesting deleting an item I created in error as well as some empty batches of items I made by mistake.

https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q104531613

Please delete Jtm-lis (talk) 09:19, 28 December 2020 (UTC)--

  Done Pamputt (talk) 10:38, 28 December 2020 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. DannyS712 (talk) 11:08, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

Repeated creation of this item Q104540759 , needs investigation

In this month I have noticed repeated creation of wikidata item (atleast more than 10 items) for this entity named Aakash Kumar Jha . After deletion its created again the next day . Here is recently deleted item by his name Q104520690 .I want Administators to look for socks . Here are few more Q104535539 , Q104539856 Rockpeterson (talk) 04:49, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

All items created by this user are for promotional purpose only with no sitelinks and which does not require structural need . The items created must be deleted as well Rockpeterson (talk) 06:03, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

  Done Request filed at Wikidata:Requests for checkuser/Case/Robertphilip4772, items deleted. Lymantria (talk) 08:41, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. DannyS712 (talk) 11:09, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

37.134.152.126

37.134.152.126 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL (for IP: GUC))

Please, block it, all its edits are vandalism. --FogueraC (talk) 09:24, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

  Done Blocked for a week. Lymantria (talk) 10:55, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. DannyS712 (talk) 11:09, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

Report concerning User:Twitch_thots_shouldn't_be_senators

Twitch_thots_shouldn't_be_senators (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL (for IP: GUC)) — Reasons: Various bad-faith edits, vandalism Nicereddy (talk) 03:59, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

Blocked and locked by revi --DannyS712 (talk) 11:09, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. DannyS712 (talk) 11:09, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

Report concerning User:24.228.70.207

24.228.70.207 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL (for IP: GUC)) — Reasons: Vandalism: inserting letter 'Q' into descriptions. WhitePhosphorus (talk) 05:27, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

Was blocked by Andreasmperu --DannyS712 (talk) 11:10, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. DannyS712 (talk) 11:10, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

Vandalism at Ha Seok-jin (Q485784)

I do not know why Ha Seok-jin (Q485784) is vandalized regularly, but there is at least one user with changing IP who always removes almost all content and most interwiki links. The user also comments that he doesn't like so many language links, suggesting that he doesn't like when being on wikipedia to see so many links to other wikipedias. Anyways, user:Wiki13 already protected the page for three months, but apparently, now after the protection is gone, the user came back: https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Q485784&action=history --Christian140 (talk) 12:36, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

These IPs are probably by the user:만드는사람, who got banned from wikidata two years ago. --Christian140 (talk) 12:40, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
  Done Semi-protected for six months. Bovlb (talk) 22:02, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: —‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 23:43, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

Please delete Q104528635

Q104528635 appears to be a fake princess. No sources are given in neither itwiki or dawiki and no references to her are found in the sources we have access to (see da:Diskussion:Maria af Danmark). Please delete. --Hjart (talk) 14:31, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

  Done--Ymblanter (talk) 20:53, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: —‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 23:44, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

Semiprotection of Roblox (Q692989)

Vandalism--Trade (talk) 16:38, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

  Done--Ymblanter (talk) 20:52, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: —‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 23:44, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

Report concerning User:عمراحمد_صالح_النمر_عبدالله

عمراحمد_صالح_النمر_عبدالله (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL (for IP: GUC)) — Reasons: Repeated vandalism. LiberatorG (talk) 00:57, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

Sock of Rakeshbariha6

Rakeshbariha4 (talk • contribs • logs) is a sockpuppet of Rakeshbariha6 (talk • contribs • logs). Evidence is the username and edits on enwiki. I've blocked a number of these sockpuppets on enwiki, but these two are the only which have edited on wikidata. See w:en:Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Rakeshbariha5 for a list of socks, some of which have local accounts here but have not edited. Dreamy Jazz talk to me | my contributions 10:59, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

@Dreamy Jazz: Please file this at Wikidata:Requests for checkuser.--Jasper Deng (talk) 11:02, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
Will do. Thought there was only for checkuser requests, but I was mistaken. Dreamy Jazz talk to me | my contributions 11:04, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: —‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 20:08, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

Report concerning User:Texaner

Texaner (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL (for IP: GUC)) — Reasons: I'd like to ask help. Even though he was warned by me and Máté, Texaner still add unnecessary disambiguation information to Hungarian labels. When we had undid some of his edits and pointed out that “disambiguation information belongs in the description”, he only called us assholes and questioned our intellectual capability, but he did not stop. As I'm involved in the matter, I'd ask someone else to act, if it's needed, before the mess becomes even greater. Thank you! Bencemac (talk) 10:24, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

Indeed, both his actions and tone are very problematic. – Máté (talk) 13:01, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
I just responded in that thread. Hazard-SJ (talk) 19:02, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

Semiprotection of Frida Kahlo (Q5588)

Vandalism--Trade (talk) 15:07, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

Trade,   Done for infinite time, hope that's not too much, but protection history shows that this is happening since a very long time. ‐‐1997kB (talk) 15:12, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. DannyS712 (talk) 03:33, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

Special:Contributions/Sylvain Ribault

Tracked in Phabricator
Task T270843

User created thousands of empty items. Kindly nuke. Ping @Multichill, Mahir256: --Minorax (talk) 06:20, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

Partly done, but the rest will have to wait until they show up in Special:Nuke.--Jasper Deng (talk) 08:11, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
Those remaining item creations seem to be missing in the recentchanges table completely. I don't think they will show up on Special:Nuke at all. —MisterSynergy (talk) 08:43, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
That would seem to be a bug. I thought replication lag was the issue but evidently the items were made so quickly that they didn't make it into the table. A script might be necessary... otherwise we'd have to delete the >1k remaining items manually.--Jasper Deng (talk) 09:09, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
Yes clearly a bug. I think we should file a bug report for the devs and maybe keep the items for a while in order to allow an investigation. —MisterSynergy (talk) 09:35, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
Ah, just saw this after I posted at Wikidata:Requests_for_deletions#Bulk_deletion_request:_Blank_pages_created_by_Sylvain_Ribault. Bovlb (talk) 01:47, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

Special:Contributions/Arturo_Shakur are vandalism only

I checked some of their diffs and they are here simply to vandalize wikidata: Special:Contributions/Arturo_Shakur 1 , 2, 3, 4, 5 Please block 'em. --The Eloquent Peasant (talk) 15:37, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

  • I agree that those examples look bad, but other recent edits seem OK. In such a case, it is better to engage with the user first. I have notified them of this discussion. Bovlb (talk) 00:04, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

unprotect Elliot Page (Q173399)

No discussion is ongoing. Was mostly resolved before the protection was done anyways. BrokenSegue (talk) 01:32, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

  • @GreenComputer, Silesianus, Minerva97: You are correct that there is no discussion ongoing. Since the protection was added, there does not appear to have been any discussion on the talk page about the subject of the edit war, nor have any of the four editors I called out (OP included) participated in any discussion there. I'm afraid that this is not strong evidence that the edit war would not continue were the protection to be lifted. Also, while I do not "own" the protection, it would have been polite to ping me when raising the matter here. Cheers, Bovlb (talk) 20:54, 28 December 2020 (UTC)
    • Last comment should have been @BrokenSegue and CC the others. Bovlb (talk) 20:56, 28 December 2020 (UTC)
      • I haven't added to the conversation there because I already agreed with what was said and think the current situation is fine. Plus the unfulfilled requests for edits suggests the protection is doing some harm. BrokenSegue (talk) 22:31, 28 December 2020 (UTC)
        • @BrokenSegue: If I understand you correctly, you are saying that you have not participated in the discussion because you like the version that was protected. Supposing we lifted protection, and someone immediately reverted this change, how would you respond? I'm afraid that liking the frozen version is not a good reason to avoid discussion. And I agree that the protection comes with a cost. The protection could have been lifted three weeks ago if some discussion had taken place, so it is my view that the blame for the ongoing harm lies with those who fail to discuss (including you). My alternative would have been to block the edit warriors instead, which would also have come at a cost. CC @Bluerasberry Bovlb (talk) 23:00, 28 December 2020 (UTC)
          • Nobody in the comments has expressed an opinion I disagree with. BrokenSegue (talk) 23:04, 28 December 2020 (UTC)
            • OK. I have downgraded the item to semi-protection, on the grounds that, although there has been a disappointing lack of discussion, it has already been protected for longer than would be normal for an edit war. (It's typically one week.) I'll keep an eye on it and, if the edit war restarts, will consider further protection or blocks. Cheers, Bovlb (talk) 23:57, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

Seems cool! Thanks. Blue Rasberry (talk) 02:35, 29 December 2020 (UTC) And now people are starting to vandalize it... @Bovlb:

Report concerning User:2804:D55:5200::/40

2804:D55:5200::/40 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL (for IP: GUC)) — Reasons: Repeated vandalism. Only vandalism in this IPv6 block. LiberatorG (talk) 17:14, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

Out of concern that an IPv6 /40 is a bit large, I blocked Special:Contributions/2804:d55:524d:4500::/64 (and 1997kB already blocked Special:Contributions/2804:d55:5247:4400::/64 2 days ago). Those 2 ranges should cover the majority of the edits so far. I've also blocked Special:Contributions/2804:D55:5253:D700:0:0:0:0/64 and Special:Contributions/2804:D55:5250:6C00:0:0:0:0/64. Let's continue monitoring to see if that helps, or if a larger range will be needed. Hazard-SJ (talk) 03:31, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
@LiberatorG, Hazard-SJ: The collateral damage of blocking the whole /40 is minimal (as I verified with CU) and so I've applied a /40 rangeblock for a week.--Jasper Deng (talk) 04:38, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
Thanks. Every anon edit that has ever been made from that /40 is vandalism, of the same type. –LiberatorG (talk) 05:35, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

Edit warring

Q206820 --Vlixes (talk) 17:02, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

You forgot to include our conversation. Andreasm háblame / just talk to me 17:05, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
This is a content issue and it looks like both of you rather engage in edit-warring then bringing up the issue somewhere where other users can weigh in to find consensus about which image should be used. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 18:38, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
Always a pleasure to read you, ChristianK1, more reasons to be around here. I first reverted this editor because it looked like vandalism. Once he reverted to his edit, I took a closer look. As a result, I told him to stop edit-warring and after that I restored the status quo. Despite my warning, he reverted to his edit once again. For that reason, now another administrator needs to take action. Andreasm háblame / just talk to me 19:33, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
@Andreasmperu: It's unclear to me why you consider the edit to be vandalism. An image of a portrai was replaced by one with higher resolution and brigher color. Why is that vandalism? ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 20:10, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
I didn't say it was vandalism. I said that at first glance it looked to me like vandalism because an unconfirmed user was changing a file named commons:File:Anders Zorn - Självporträtt i rött (1915).jpg for another one named commons:File:Zornself.jpg. The first image has a lot of information, whereas the other one not so much. I just found that the user nominated the original file for deletion instead of uploading a new version of the image. And before you ask, I have no personal interest in this item nor in either of the images. Nonetheless, I think it's better to let other administrator deal with this user's behaviour. Andreasm háblame / just talk to me 20:54, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
From my perspective it appears that Vlixes made a content decision and you undid him. Then you undid him again without engaging in a discussion on the content issue. I don't think not engaging in the content question but threatening a user with getting blocked is a good way to handle the issue. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 15:13, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

What was the first

Regardless of Q72618772 being earlier it was merged into the Q73760983. This is recurrent with the same editor. GualdimG (talk) 16:37, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

  • Why do you consider this a problem? Where did you discuss the issue with the editor previously (if you didn't it's the next step and not the admin noticeboard)? ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 01:42, 2 January 2021 (UTC)
Whenever I try to merge two items, I get prompted to merge from the oldest. If "this is not a problem", why is there this rule to merge? But whenever I notice, in the case of the items created by me, the editor merges from the item that I did not create. This is the behavior of the editor and I cannot change it. Perhaps an administrator. GualdimG (talk) 07:12, 2 January 2021 (UTC)
This is the third time that I have presented the same type of question here, always due to the same editor. The first time, the editor was called into the discussion, but gave no answer. An administrator, at my request, reversed his action. The second time, as far as I know, nothing was done. This time, the subject goes the same way. I would say that crime pays off. For some (the majority) the rules apply, for others it is discretion. GualdimG (talk) 10:56, 3 January 2021 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Wikidata:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Archive/2020/12&oldid=1338708086"