Wikidata

Wikidata:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive/2019/04

< Wikidata:Administrators' noticeboard‎ | Archive‎ | 2019

Вандализм

@Ymblanter: 2a00:1fa1:42ca:699b:750d:a7e3:9afb:857b. Kalendar (talk) 19:05, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

Слишком поздно, едва ли ещё раз появится.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:06, 1 April 2019 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: -- Kalendar (talk) 05:35, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Вандализм

@Ymblanter: Tatevosyan21 Kalendar (talk) 05:35, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

  Done--Ymblanter (talk) 06:35, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: -- Kalendar (talk) 10:43, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Please block again same IP

IP 139.192.134.160, immediately after a 3-day block, resumed vandalizing items and user talk pages. Behaviour is similar to recurrent vandal Guntur Subayigo, affecting same items. LaddΩ chat ;) 02:03, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

  Blocked for one week. Esteban16 (talk) 02:08, 1 April 2019 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Regards, ZI Jony (Talk) 10:20, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

November 21 User:LarendoValdez

Wikipedia [[Owner]][[W:P]] [1]LarendoValdezhttps://discord.com/invite/gTkxBf42WT, already permanently CEO [[^]] on ilowiki and enwiki, vandalism only account. Thanks. --Larendo Valdez (talk) 04:56, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

  Done Blocked. Pamputt (talk) 05:04, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Regards, ZI Jony (Talk) 10:20, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protection for Q312556

Please semi-protect Jeff Bezos (Q312556) - living person, popular theme, persistent IP vandalism from various IP addresses.--Jklamo (talk) 14:19, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

  Done by Mahir256. -- Ajraddatz (talk) 19:48, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Regards, ZI Jony (Talk) 10:20, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

Spam-only account

See this edit. Tsumikiria (talk) 21:01, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

  Done by Ymblanter. Esteban16 (talk) 21:55, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Regards, ZI Jony (Talk) 10:20, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

Please block

https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/59.16.208.153

Seems to be the usual nonsense around Koreans. --- Jura 04:47, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

@-revi: could you have a look? Pamputt (talk) 06:10, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
Don't recall who that is but I recall there was some troll doing similar thing. Blocking for about a week. — regards, Revi 12:43, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Regards, ZI Jony (Talk) 10:20, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

I think this IP need a cooldown period

195.221.62.1 done some dammage to among other Q926 and Q8768 Special:Contributions/195.221.62.1 Andber08 (talk) 08:53, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

  Done —MisterSynergy (talk) 08:59, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Regards, ZI Jony (Talk) 10:20, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

And another

[2] GMGtalk 01:54, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

  Done --Lymantria (talk) 05:25, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Regards, ZI Jony (Talk) 10:20, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

Just vandalism/edit war

95.90.188.161 Would be nice, when this user gets stopped. --Wurgl (talk) 09:20, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

  Done Blocked 1 month. Lymantria (talk) 10:37, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Regards, ZI Jony (Talk) 19:45, 7 April 2019 (UTC)

85.14.186.86

Above ip is vandalising. Please block.--BRP ever 11:38, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

  Blocked, thanks! --abián 11:48, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Regards, ZI Jony (Talk) 19:45, 7 April 2019 (UTC)

Judaism

Could somebody review Talk:Q48685#Judaism? The way it is now it's just bogus information. Reality was far more complex than that. Tgeorgescu (talk) 19:51, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

@Tgeorgescu: It is not a request for administrator. You should ask on the project chat. Pamputt (talk) 08:26, 6 April 2019 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Regards, ZI Jony (Talk) 19:45, 7 April 2019 (UTC)

Vandal rollback request

Hi, sysop on the french WP, could you block & rollback Tacocured contributions ? Thx OT38 (talk) 15:22, 7 April 2019 (UTC)

  Done Jianhui67 talk★contribs 15:28, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
@Jianhui67: Why didn't you block Tacocured indefinitely ? He insulted several french sysops. OT38 (talk) 15:39, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
I have changed the block settings. Thanks for the notice. Jianhui67 talk★contribs 15:44, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Regards, ZI Jony (Talk) 19:45, 7 April 2019 (UTC)

Вандализм

@Ymblanter: 31.6.116.109. Kalendar (talk) 17:43, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

Поздно, нет снысла блокировать.--Ymblanter (talk) 17:46, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: -- Kalendar (talk) 17:53, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

Вандализм

@Ymblanter: 178.134.56.2 Kalendar (talk) 05:11, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

  Done--Ymblanter (talk) 05:30, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: -- Kalendar (talk) 09:58, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

links to en-wv draft: namespace

There are numerous invalid links to pages in en-wv Draft: namespace.

there are quite a few other examples, too many to list here

These links are unacceptable per 1.1 at Wikidata:Notability. Is there an automated way to remove and/or prevent these links? --Mu301 (talk) 11:52, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

This was discussed here and as a result I believe these are allowed, though I'm a little dubious at the moment. ArthurPSmith (talk) 16:12, 1 April 2019 (UTC)
Thanks for the link, I'm just returning from a rather long wiki-break and was unaware of that discussion. I had interpreted wikidata notability as explicitly excluding pages in user and draft spaces. The inclusion of wikidata links to pages in those spaces has important implications for en-wv local policy decision making. --Mu301 (talk) 01:04, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
@Mu301: Rereading the previous discussion I get the impression we didn't really get to the bottom of what was going on or what good reason there may be for including these. Can you point us to a relevant wikiversity discussion that explains this better? If en-wv as a whole thinks Draft pages shouldn't be here I think Wikidata should simply return to banning sitelinks to Draft pages on any site. ArthurPSmith (talk) 16:18, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
@ArthurPSmith: The proposal for draft space is archived here: v:Wikiversity:Requests_for_Deletion/Archives/16#Draft_namespace. My personal thoughts at the time are in an essay that was discussed as part of the community review: v:User:Mu301/Learning_blog/2018-01#Interconnections. Wikidata played a large part in my thinking about the creation of draft space. --Mu301 (talk) 19:13, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
@Mu301: I think I'd seen the voting before but that doesn't really clear up much. The link to your essay is broken? ArthurPSmith (talk) 20:08, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
So from the list above, I think any items that have ONLY a sitelink to a Wikiversity "draft" namespace, and are not used by other items, should just be deleted. Having a "Draft" Wikiversity page definitely does not make a topic notable in itself. However there are some that do have lots of sitelinks to regular wikipedia pages - an example is neutrino (Q2126). The consequence of having the Draft wikiversity page sitelink there is that any of the language wikis for that topic have a link to Wikiversity that goes to the "Draft" namespace - is that likely to be a cause for concern? ArthurPSmith (talk) 20:15, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘@ArthurPSmith: tl;dr The consensus to create draft space was made with the understanding that wikidata wouldn't crosslink to those pages.

(e/c) To clarify your questions: I'm not aware of any en-wv discussion that includes a "good reason there may be for including these." (ie. links to drafts.)

Above the draft namespace discussion there was an AfD to consider removing a number of pages. The outcome was create draft space and move the pages there instead. We opened the discussion on creating a draft space specifically to prevent incoming links (from sister prjects, search engines, etc.) to en-wv pages that are problematic. v:Neutrino was moved to draft because it was confusing. It is common practice to move pages that need work instead of outright deleting them. Single author pages are moved to userspace and multi-contributor pages to draft.

(essay link fixed, though some of the links within have rotted due to content deletion) I specifically wrote the essay about wikidata links as part of the draft namespace proposal.

I agree on the narrow definition of deletable items - a single project that hosts a title is non-notable. --Mu301 (talk) 21:12, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

@Mu301: Sorry, what is the link to the "essay"? The "Learning_blog/2018-01" link above is unchanged and still broken?? ArthurPSmith (talk) 15:21, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
Sorry, the linkfix must have gotten lost in an edit conflict. See v:User:Mu301/Learning_blog/2018-01#Interconnections. --Mu301 (talk) 18:22, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
@Marshallsumter: You might be interesting on this thread. --60.26.9.220 08:48, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
Just FYI referring to Wikidata:Notability 1.1, here's footnote number 4. "Drafts are excluded per Wikidata:Project chat/Archive/2013/12#Draft name space and Wikidata:Project chat/Archive/2014/05#What do do with Wikipedia:Draft articles." Both discuss Wikipedia draft namespace so WikiData policy applies to only exclusion of Wikipedia drafts. Wikidata:Notability 1.1 states "To be valid, a link must not be a talk page, MediaWiki page, special page, file, translations page, pages in User or Draft namespace, pages used by LiquidThreads (i.e. pages in Thread and Summary namespace), pages used by Structured Discussions (i.e. pages in Topic namespace), subpages of Portal namespace, or any pages that are intended for TemplateStyles (i.e. suffix that contain ".css" and/or ".js").[1][2][3][4][5] Note that a single Wikimedia page cannot have more than one sitelink in Wikidata and that a sitelink cannot point to a redirect.[6]" Lone entries even of Wikiversity Drafts that have different meanings than say a Wikipedia entry are not excluded. --Marshallsumter (talk) 14:14, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
  Comment So there are four opinions that may or may not resolve the problems here:
  1. Disallow all Draft namespaces (which as I've checked InitialiseSettings.php, this can include Hebrew טיוטה, Estonian Mustand, Kannada ಕರಡು, Urdu مسودہ and Literary Chinese 稿), on all Wikimedia Projects, and even disallow on Wikiversities (not only enwikiversity, but also Hindi Wikiversity निर्माणाधीन);
  2. Modify the Notability policy a little, to allow only Draft namespace on Wikiversities (and then to reflect this, modify the AbuseFilter 106 and create an item called "Wikiversity Draft page")
  3. Modify the Notability policy on a middle size, to allow selected wikis (not just Wikiversities) linking Draft namespace pages (then modify AF 106 and create an item called "Wikimedia Draft page")
  4. Largely modify the Notability policy, to re-allow all Draft namespace pages on all wikis linked (and then, not only modify AF 106 and create item, but also some code changes must be happened in the Wikibase extensions).

Still, I need users who joined former discussions (and likely discussions on other wikis) to share what they're thinking about this. Note that I have no specific opinion here, so PLEASE do not count my comments as one of these 4 opinions. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 15:47, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

To avoid duplicate pinging: @Ymblanter, The Anonymouse, YMS, Jakec, -revi:@Jasper Deng, GerardM, Millosh, StevenJ81, MF-Warburg:@Amire80, Maor X, Filceolaire, John Vandenberg, Multichill:@Romaine, Ricordisamoa, Jura1, TomT0m, Giftzwerg 88:@Totemkin, Sannita, Mushroom, CutOffTies, AmaryllisGardener:@Cohaf, Green Giant, Stang, LNDDYL, Shizhao:@Liangent, Jusjih, Jimmy Xu, Bencmq, Artoria2e5:@C933103, WQL, ‎Tigerzeng, Jc86035, Deryck Chan: (I really don't know which more should be pinged here). --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 15:56, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ Before deciding, we need to know what the Wikiversity community considers to be the purpose of their Draft: namespace. I've asked there and notified them of this discussion. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:27, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Just FYI: A summary of the Wikiversity situation can be found here v:Talk:Craters by radiation. --Marshallsumter (talk) 16:37, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
Note: the above link is an essay written by a single contributor and should not be regarded as a consensus summary. --Mu301 (talk) 18:40, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
Since I'm pinged, as a Chinese Wikiversity Sysop, I will say that we don't have a Draft Namespace and will not have one soon. As a Wikimedian, I don't see a value in having draft namespaces personally (why not userspace). --Cohaf (talk) 17:20, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
For an example of how we use the namespace please see v:Draft:WikiJournal of Medicine/Rotavirus which has since been moved and redirected to mainspace after a review, as explained at the landing page. This usage was described by Guy at our Community Review in the 3rd comment here. We are explicitly using draft: and user: spaces to review material before it is ready for mainspace. Wikidata links to draft are contrary to an intuitive understanding of what draft space is. I don't understand why draft links would be allowed for any sister project, much less why en-wv is treated differently. I strongly disagree with opinion #2 above and have much support for #1 as I've commented above. Opinions #3 and #4 are probably best discussed widely, perhaps on meta. --Mu301 (talk) 19:13, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
Just FYI, all three WikiJournals' Potential upcoming articles, e.g., v:WikiJournal of Science/Potential upcoming articles use v:WikiJournal Preprints, not Draft: namespace. --Marshallsumter (talk) 22:50, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

The original discussion here on Wikidata was from https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Wikidata%3AAdministrators%27_noticeboard&type=revision&diff=726069517&oldid=725521568 . As User:Mahir256 noted then, it is unfortunate that this cannot be resolved internally as a discussion between admins at the English Wikiversity. However, the consensus of the community is noted at https://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Wikiversity:Requests_for_Deletion/Archives/16#Main_Page_%22Lectures%22 . If you drop to the bottom and review the outcome, it was unanimous that these resources were not suitable as main page resources, and there was consensus to move them to a new Draft space to remove them from main space. The intent was that they would not be indexed by Wikimedia software on Wikiversity, and by extension not indexed or referenced on Wikidata. I thought this had been resolved last August, where, my understanding was that Draft space was not to be indexed, and that only changed by a request from Marshallsumter. Speaking now on behalf of the Wikiversity community, and confirmed/supported by Mu301 above, Marshallsumter's comments in this matter must be discounted as speaking only for Marshallsumter, and not on behalf of the wider Wikiversity community. Please do not allow links to Wikiversity Draft: namespace on Wikidata. If an article is suitable for linking, it is suitable to be moved to the main namespace there. Thanks! -- Dave Braunschweig (talk) 02:43, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Dave has succinctly summarized the en-wv consensus. I am willing to open a new Community Review to demonstrate a strong preference to not index these pages. However, the local community can't conduct an informed discussion if we are unclear about wikidata notability policy. We are asking for clarification on the issue of wikidata linking to our draft namespace pages. If wikidata insists on linking to pages that we consider under review and not ready for mainspace we may need to consider alternatives such as bulk deletion to break those links. We have been making decisions based on the assumption that these pages will not be linked, but if that assumption is incorrect we'll need to review and revise our standard practices. We have gone to great lengths to accommodate learners who are pursuing unconventional projects. See for example this "Proof that the universe is intelligent..." or this attempt to identify the location of Atlantis based on earthquakes in the Azores. If I had known that wikidata would consider these linkable I would have outright deleted them instead of performing a page move. W:History is not the same topic as V:Draft:History as implied by the history (Q309) link. (The correct link should be V:Portal:History.) The presence of these cross-links is circumventing our local curation of content. --Mu301 (talk) 14:56, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
@Mu301: Just FYI, but the Portal namespace is also not included in the default search index on Wikiversity. Only the main namespace is included. As a policy for Wikidata, perhaps it should be to only link to default search namespaces. Search indexing can only be changed by community consensus, so this would give Wikidata a consistent way to determine what namespace links a given community supports. See mw:Manual:$wgNamespacesToBeSearchedDefault for details. -- Dave Braunschweig (talk) 03:13, 6 April 2019 (UTC)
Hmm. It does show up in search in a roundabout way {as a drop-down suggestion) due to v:History redirecting to v:Portal:History though an explicit search fails to return the result. We really need to have an extended conversation with the wikidata community to ensure compatibility of our local namespace and naming scheme with their design. Search defaults is an important consideration. Many of those early decisions that we made (to create School: and Portal:) might need to be revisited or redefined. The conventions that we adopted before wikidata launched might not be so appropriate now. At the very least we need to clarify and communicate how we prefer incoming links. Some of the unique aspects of our project appear to be incompatible with larger WMF initiatives. --Mu301 (talk) 20:21, 6 April 2019 (UTC)
Just FYI: deletion of these resources was unanimously opposed on Wikiversity! --Marshallsumter (talk) 15:20, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
The decision to not delete was contingent upon the creation of the draft namespace and the subsequent moving of those pages there.[3] Given that we effectively no longer have a draft space due to circumvention of that consensus we will now need to review the decision to keep those pages. Please stop claiming to speak on behalf of the community. There is clearly no local support for your singular opinion. I am currently conducting a straw poll to confirm that the community has long understood what the definition of the word 'draft' is. I consider this a futile effort as the meaning and intent was/is obvious. We specifically created draft space to remove those pages from mainspace and your linking to them on wikidata is disrupting the efforts of the en-wv community to manage our content per concensus decision making. --Mu301 (talk) 12:12, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Even from what's just been posted at en-wv it seems clear at Wikidata we should return to @Liuxinyu970226:'s option 1 - disallow Draft pages as sitelinks. ArthurPSmith (talk) 14:37, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
  • There are two directions to this question, of course. With respect to links out to en-wv so that others can see the pages there, I can't favor that, because these pages are drafts, not finally vetted Wikiversity content. On the other hand, for related pages elsewhere to appear on the draft pages, you can use arbitrary access and a module like Module:Interwiki (Q20819069) to accomplish that.  – The preceding unsigned comment was added by StevenJ81 (talk • contribs) at 14:43, 5 April 2019 (UTC).
  • If your decision is not to have the links here, I will remove them. I have a complete list. --Marshallsumter (talk) 15:50, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
  • I will start removing links to Wikiversity Draft:s now per Wikiversity. Are there any concerns before I begin? If no response I will begin momentarily. Should there be ones you wish to keep, I believe the restore command will work. --Marshallsumter (talk) 21:54, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
  • All of my Wikiversity Draft: namespace resources have been removed! Google currently searches Wikiversity Draft: namespace resources. If it is the case that Wikidata is a search engine then all Wikiversity Draft: namespace resources should be here. Having them here causes no harm and increases the chances of users positively contributing to and objectively evaluating Wikiversity Draft: namespace resources. --Marshallsumter (talk) 20:10, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

Update: we have an ongoing review of v:Wikiversity:Drafts (orginally an informal informal straw poll linked above; now announced in sitenotice) to clarify our position on wikidata links to en-wv draft space and our policy on managing content within that namespace. Given that this is, by definition, a cross-wikimedia topic of interest we welcome contributors at our sister projects to participate in the discussion. --Mu301 (talk) 18:21, 6 April 2019 (UTC)

On the question of Wikidata links to en-wv Draft: namespace there is community consensus to oppose linking to resources in the draft namespace. We understand that there could be exceptions (arbitrary access noted above) where such a link might be appropriate and we welcome a discussion on the specifics of how and when to do that. In general: we request that wikidata apply the same best practices for draft links to en-wv that you would for any other sister project. --Mu301 (talk) 13:46, 7 April 2019 (UTC)

  • I have requested deletion of the items in the above list that didn't have sitelinks or other usage. If there are more they can be deleted. I think all that remains here is to re-instate the filter to prevent these sitelinks from being added in future. ArthurPSmith (talk) 17:55, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
  • I don't recall adding additional links since about October of last year before user:Mahir256 reset the filter. I can run a test if you wish. --Marshallsumter (talk) 18:41, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
  • I tested adding Draft:Vela X-1 to Vela X-1 Q2631346 and received this error notice: "Could not save due to an error.

The save has failed. Warning: Per Wikidata notability policy adding links to article drafts is not allowed. Therefore this edit cannot be completed. If you think you are correct, contact an administrator." Before conscriptionary Draft: ns, 01:24, 29 November 2016‎ Marshallsumter ‎Added link to [enwikiversity]: Vela X-1. Then, 23:34, 26 October 2018‎ Marshallsumter ‎Changed link to [enwikiversity]: Draft:Vela X-1. --Marshallsumter (talk) 20:06, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: ArthurPSmith (talk) 19:30, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

Вандализм

@Ymblanter: 128.0.132.37 Kalendar (talk) 09:59, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

  Done still in the morning, forgot to mention here--Ymblanter (talk) 19:00, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: -- Kalendar (talk) 06:50, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

Вандализм

@Ymblanter: 91.193.178.190 Kalendar (talk) 06:51, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

Поздно, вряд ли ещё вернётся.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:54, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: -- Kalendar (talk) 09:17, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

Вандализм

@Ymblanter: Serg777 tr первая блокировка не помогла вправить мозги. Kalendar (talk) 09:18, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

  Done--Ymblanter (talk) 10:20, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: -- Kalendar (talk) 11:26, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

Please do not delete Q62569414 and other contribution by Apanig

Hello,

I'm a new Wikidata contributor and a contributor to a book chapter in Q62569414. This book is brand new - just published this month. The book should be valid to be in Wikidata if you are to include ORCID's information that will also feed into SCHOLIA. It is also a part of the project I will be presenting at the Linked Data for Libraries Conference in May. This is also my research data.

Please DO NOT delete anything added by Apanig, unless the request(s) will come from me.

All of my contribution is my data for this project. Please help me protect my data in Wikidata and related tools especially in SCHOLIA.

Any recommendation on how to protect my data in Wikidata will be much appreciated too.

Best regards,

Apanig  – The preceding unsigned comment was added by Apanig (talk • contribs) at 05:14, 30 March 2019‎ (UTC).

This section was archived on a request by: Regards, ZI Jony (Talk) 05:17, 13 April 2019 (UTC)

Vandal

Jbarrius --Foguera (talk) 21:42, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

  Not done. It was not vandalism, however, the previous information was more precise. Foguera, in cases likes this it's useful to let the user know why they have been undid by placing an edit summary or a message. Esteban16 (talk) 23:23, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
@Esteban16: Bear in mind that the creator of this discussion section drove away another contributor when dealing with this same topic. Mahir256 (talk) 22:08, 6 April 2019 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Regards, ZI Jony (Talk) 05:17, 13 April 2019 (UTC)

188.138.137.197

Please mass delete their creation and block above ip. They were blocked twice before for creating inappropriate pages. Thanks--BRP ever 03:44, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

  Done Blocked for a month. Jianhui67 talk★contribs 04:27, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Regards, ZI Jony (Talk) 05:17, 13 April 2019 (UTC)

156.67.173.189

156.67.173.189 Vandalism. Please stop. --Wurgl (talk) 10:51, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Regards, ZI Jony (Talk) 05:17, 13 April 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protection for Q16285

Please semi-protect Mario Benedetti (Q16285) - popular theme, persistent IP vandalism from various IP addresses.--Jklamo (talk) 14:22, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

  Done Jianhui67 talk★contribs 15:05, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Regards, ZI Jony (Talk) 05:17, 13 April 2019 (UTC)

Vandal 2

85.196.179.151--DiMon2711 15:49, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

  Done Blocked for 31 hours. Jianhui67 talk★contribs 16:36, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Regards, ZI Jony (Talk) 05:17, 13 April 2019 (UTC)

Excessive vandalism

Could an admin either block 183.98.184.57 (persistent vandalism) or protect Hirobumi Itō (Q174971) (persistently vandalized)? The IP has also vandalized other items, if it matters. Thanks, Jc86035 (talk) 07:14, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

Unrelated, but could Ursidae (Q11788) also be protected? It was vandalized and no one noticed for more than a week. Jc86035 (talk) 07:16, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

  Done--Ymblanter (talk) 17:49, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Regards, ZI Jony (Talk) 05:17, 13 April 2019 (UTC)

Mikakorkalainen, description vandal

https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Mikakorkalainen author  TomT0m / talk page 15:52, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

Blocked and reverted. Stryn (talk) 15:56, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Regards, ZI Jony (Talk) 05:17, 13 April 2019 (UTC)

Vandal

Asm3a-yahya--DiMon2711 06:53, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

@Jianhui67: also please 146.227.0.14. Thanks!--DiMon2711 16:28, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
Also 128.70.202.217--DiMon2711 16:35, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
  Done Jianhui67 talk★contribs 16:45, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Regards, ZI Jony (Talk) 05:17, 13 April 2019 (UTC)

Edit requests

Would an administrator mind accepting my edit requests at Template talk:Welcome/text and MediaWiki talk:Wikibase-SortedProperties? I believe both should be uncontroversial. (In addition, the edit requests category has a fairly large backlog which could use some clearing out.) Jc86035 (talk) 15:47, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Regards, ZI Jony (Talk) 06:29, 13 April 2019 (UTC)

Two vandals

{Please see history of edits on Q62852 and block 2 anonim vandals. Thanks!--DiMon2711 18:52, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

@Ymblanter:--DiMon2711 18:52, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
  Done; range blocked for 31 hrs. Thanks for reporting, —MisterSynergy (talk) 18:56, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Regards, ZI Jony (Talk) 05:17, 13 April 2019 (UTC)

Please block User:ASAPR2016

Please block User:ASAPR2016 because of his edits of Q431393. דוד שי (talk) 04:18, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

  Done--Ymblanter (talk) 18:34, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Regards, ZI Jony (Talk) 05:17, 13 April 2019 (UTC)

186.11.100.122

Block 186.11.100.122--DiMon2711 08:49, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

@Jianhui67:--DiMon2711 08:51, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
Also 85.192.82.177--DiMon2711 08:55, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
  Done Don't know why I did not receive the ping. Jianhui67 talk★contribs 09:52, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
Thanks! Also 95.249.96.51 please--DiMon2711 14:35, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
  Done blocked for 24 hours. Jianhui67 talk★contribs 14:36, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Regards, ZI Jony (Talk) 05:17, 13 April 2019 (UTC)

Arthur Conan Doyle

Could an admin please lift protection of Arthur Conan Doyle (Q35610)? The protection was supposed to be lifted already. - 2600:1702:31B0:9CE0:8DC:C80A:A9DC:348 19:11, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

It is not currently protected. -- Ajraddatz (talk) 19:43, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Regards, ZI Jony (Talk) 05:19, 13 April 2019 (UTC)

Вандализм

@Ymblanter: 194.9.239.100. Kalendar (talk) 18:59, 13 April 2019 (UTC)

  Done--Ymblanter (talk) 19:05, 13 April 2019 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: -- Kalendar (talk) 19:16, 13 April 2019 (UTC)

Вандализм

@Ymblanter: 188.18.231.113. Kalendar (talk) 18:59, 13 April 2019 (UTC)

Этот уже всё--Ymblanter (talk) 19:07, 13 April 2019 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: -- Kalendar (talk) 19:16, 13 April 2019 (UTC)

Вандализм

@Ymblanter: 85.26.232.196. Kalendar (talk) 19:03, 13 April 2019 (UTC)

  Done--Ymblanter (talk) 19:07, 13 April 2019 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: -- Kalendar (talk) 19:17, 13 April 2019 (UTC)

Вандализм

@Ymblanter: 176.104.128.225. Kalendar (talk) 19:09, 13 April 2019 (UTC)

Поздно, одна правка, скорее всего, динамический айпи--Ymblanter (talk) 19:11, 13 April 2019 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: -- Kalendar (talk) 19:17, 13 April 2019 (UTC)

Вандализм

@Ymblanter: 80.83.235.66. Kalendar (talk) 19:15, 13 April 2019 (UTC)

  Done--Ymblanter (talk) 19:19, 13 April 2019 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: -- Kalendar (talk) 19:21, 13 April 2019 (UTC)

More ORCID unique value constraint violations by GerardM

@Pintoch: GerardM appears to be running problematic SourceMD batches again. We previously had a lengthy discussion about this issue but the constraint violations shown in this query suggest it has recently reemerged. For example, see Gianantonio Pezzullo (Q62724305) and Gianantonio Pezzullo (Q62724308). Simon Cobb (User:Sic19 ; talk page) 22:03, 6 April 2019 (UTC)

As discussed, I use queries provided to me that do a whole set of people in one go. The basics of the query are by Daniel Mietchen, I use it in one go and then move on to a different scientist, different field to work on. Thanks, GerardM (talk) 22:11, 6 April 2019 (UTC)
Both items were created at the exact same minute in the same batch, so it appears that there is something wrong with your tools or how you're using your tools. William Graham (talk) 23:04, 6 April 2019 (UTC)
This is the concern that was raised previously - you do not seem to be allowing sufficient time between your edits and it results in the creation of duplicates. Apologies if I have overlooked something in a previous discussion but you have not provided specific details of how you are using SourceMD, which would helps us to understand what causes this to happen. Can you give us an example of the queries you are using please? Simon Cobb (User:Sic19 ; talk page) 10:10, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
You seem not to understand what it means when duplicates happen within the same batch. At issue is that Wikidata as a relational database is broken because you cannot reliably test if a given value exists. In relational databases the constraint is in the database itself, it does not rely on an external tool like the query service is for Wikidata. The queries that I use at this time are like this one. They process co-authors of an author. The point is that in this way many more papers and authors on associated subjects find their place in Wikidata. Particularly in the non-medical sciences, there is no other process that imports papers and co-authors for people who are of interest (eg because they are important for a subject or because they have a Wikipedia article (any language)).
The issue is in and of itself not really problematic. In a day you can reliably find any and all duplicate authors and papers. Their DOI or ORCID-id are the same, they may be merged. One clean up job is needed; find duplicate authors in the papers. One of them may be removed. This removal process may reliably be run when linked items are linked to the lowest QID. Thanks, GerardM (talk) 10:56, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
In that case, please take responsibility for your duplicates and merge them so we don't need to have these discussions. But, ideally, check whether a batch is going to create duplicates and, if so, don't run it. Simon Cobb (User:Sic19 ; talk page) 11:11, 7 April 2019 (UTC)

@Sic19, ArthurPSmith, William Graham: I would love to help but I have no idea what to do, I just find it impossible to communicate with GerardM (not that I did not try). Maybe someone who knows him personally can explain him in better words that he his not helpful? Daniel Mietchen maybe? Failing that, should we have a formal vote on a "topicban", forbidding him the use of the tool? A complete block? (which length would be appropriate?) It's sad to have to use that sort of solution, but if that is the only thing he understands… − Pintoch (talk) 17:21, 7 April 2019 (UTC)

Actually, another possible solution is to block SourceMD with an abuse filter… maybe it is the simplest solution and the least confrontational one as it does not target a specific user. We can re-enable it if Magnus Manske finds a way (and the time) to fix it. − Pintoch (talk) 17:59, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
Perhaps it is easier to discuss the SourceMD data quality issues separately? The problem here is GerardM continuing to run batches that create duplicates despite being aware of the potential for that to happen and having previously being asked to desist from this behaviour. Relying on others to identify and fix the problems doesn't help either. However, I believe GerardM responses in this thread show he is willing to engage and work with us - obviously, that would be his choice not ours. Unfortunately, if this continues to happen then, yes, we will have to consider appropriate actions to prevent these problems from reoccurring.
Ask Lydia, technically this is NOT an issue with SourceMD. It is an issue with the Wikidata architecture and allowing query to fall behind the edits of Wikidata. Thanks, GerardM (talk) 05:28, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
@GerardM: do you understand that you are putting us in a difficult situation? Personally, I think you can make a valuable contribution to work to identify and resolve the data quality issues caused by SourceMD batches. Are you willing to work with us? That would mean you stop running these batches until we agree that the underlying problems are resolved. Simon Cobb (User:Sic19 ; talk page) 19:12, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
Ask Lydia how software can mimic relational constraints when the query system we are to use lags behind. This is a failure of the architecture. Thanks GerardM (talk) 20:24, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
I'll take that as a no, so I'm enabling the filter now. Just ping me when we can disable it. − Pintoch (talk) 20:26, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
@GerardM: please do not retrospectively change what you wrote in a discussion if people have already replied to your messages. You are welcome to add other messages and sign them individually. − Pintoch (talk) 21:00, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
I was working the message and had an edit conflict. It was an addition to what I wrote, to make it abundantly clear. Also I did not say no, it is what you make of it. GerardM (talk) 04:42, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
This is what you removed... rather telling "I have changed the way I work. I use one specific query that is less likely to create doubles. But the bottom line is that without proper architecture we can only mop up and we will find more situations that will have the same issues. Thanks, GerardM (talk) 20:30, 7 April 2019 (UTC)"

Вандализм

@Ymblanter: 217.118.93.103. Kalendar (talk) 19:09, 15 April 2019 (UTC)

Тут уже поздно.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:28, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: -- Kalendar (talk) 10:05, 16 April 2019 (UTC)

Вандализм

@Ymblanter: Html genius. Kalendar (talk) 19:12, 15 April 2019 (UTC)

  Done, 31h--Ymblanter (talk) 20:32, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: -- Kalendar (talk) 10:10, 16 April 2019 (UTC)

Вандализм

@Ymblanter: 176.223.101.10 Kalendar (talk) 10:11, 16 April 2019 (UTC)

Слишком поздно--Ymblanter (talk) 12:55, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: -- Kalendar (talk) 19:30, 16 April 2019 (UTC)

Вандализм

@Ymblanter: 83.220.236.154 Kalendar (talk) 10:12, 16 April 2019 (UTC)

Слишком поздно--Ymblanter (talk) 12:55, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: -- Kalendar (talk) 19:31, 16 April 2019 (UTC)

Вандализм

@Ymblanter: 85.140.4.125. Kalendar (talk) 19:31, 16 April 2019 (UTC)

  Done--Ymblanter (talk) 19:37, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: -- Kalendar (talk) 19:41, 16 April 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protection request

Persistant vandalism from trolls; as a trolling organization, highly susceptible target. Ebe123 (talk | contributions) 22:00, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

There is not enough vandalism to protect the item. Esteban16 (talk) 03:07, 18 April 2019 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Esteban16 (talk) 03:07, 18 April 2019 (UTC)

181.15.118.155

Persistent vandalism. — Mike Novikoff 19:28, 17 April 2019 (UTC)

  Done - 1 month block. -- Fuzheado (talk) 02:28, 18 April 2019 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: — Mike Novikoff 02:42, 18 April 2019 (UTC)

Description vandalisms

Hi all! These descriptions in Thai language seem to be vandalisms (but I'm not 100% sure, I'm using Google Translate). Could someone check and, if necessary, rollback them all? Thank you, --Epìdosis 11:13, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

@Epìdosis: of course it is vandalism. Please block this user as vandalism-only account. Regards, DiMon2711 20:54, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

Coinbase (Q16972754) should be perma protected to prevent the insertion of referral link as the entry of official website (P856)

Recent an ip user had inserted his referred link to Coinbase (Q16972754) . Same problem was also observed en:Coinbase but the article was perma locked from new user and ip. It seem Coinbase (Q16972754) in wikidata need the same treatment. Matthew hk (talk) 18:25, 17 April 2019 (UTC)

  Done - Trying 3 months semi-protection. -- Fuzheado (talk) 02:30, 18 April 2019 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Fuzheado (talk) 09:10, 18 April 2019 (UTC)

93.182.104.141

93.182.104.141--DiMon2711 20:38, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

93.106.87.95 also--DiMon2711 20:57, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
@Ymblanter:--DiMon2711 21:03, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
  Done--Ymblanter (talk) 19:10, 13 April 2019 (UTC)

MySociety's User:Oravrattas and references

From the discussion above, it seems that the user doesn't understand how to add references to Wikidata items. I keep getting comments mentioning "there are plenty of references" for statements and even links to some talk page, but none are actually added to statements on Wikidata items.

Worse, despite there supposedly being plenty of references, the user re-adds statements without references to Wikidata, adds lengthy explanations to talk pages about references, protesting about the user questioning their documentation practice, and draws other users outside the website into the discussion.

Neither of this seems particularly productive use of talk pages, the Wikidata site in general nor adding value to Wikidata items. Maybe someone else can make it clear to the user and their employer.

@Oravrattas: --- Jura 08:02, 13 April 2019 (UTC)

Block request

Please block 88.114.240.220 (talk • contribs • logs) and 93.106.87.95 (talk • contribs • logs) for vandalism. --Shinnin (talk) 10:38, 13 April 2019 (UTC)

Shinnin: They have stopped. You can always warn vandals before reporting them, so they may stop vandalizing. Esteban16 (talk) 16:57, 13 April 2019 (UTC)

User:Pigsonthewing

Wasn't the user requested not to move/edit etc. other people's comments? --- Jura 10:56, 13 April 2019 (UTC)

You'd better provide a link clarifying his move/edit'ing other people's comment, I think? — regards, Revi 14:48, 13 April 2019 (UTC)
This page, five edits earlier. --- Jura 15:21, 13 April 2019 (UTC)
https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Wikidata:Administrators%27_noticeboard&diff=912321432&oldid=912321251&diffmode=source and these two consecutive edits https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Wikidata:Administrators%27_noticeboard&type=revision&diff=912320300&oldid=912303102&diffmode=source William Graham (talk) 15:39, 13 April 2019 (UTC)
The restriction as written (see Wikidata:Editing restrictions) only restricts him from editing the comments of Byra and Succu, though I agree that the restriction should be expanded. --Rschen7754 16:08, 13 April 2019 (UTC)

Numangoof

Numangoof

Probably Tacocured. This user replaces French descriptions and labels by charming names : contributors' username + the word "dictator"... --BeatrixBelibaste (talk) 20:40, 13 April 2019 (UTC)

  Done A été bloqué par Nikki. Pamputt (talk) 09:37, 14 April 2019 (UTC)

Neus Català Pallejà

I think the "validated" badge on the German page of this item is wrong. Could anyone remove it? --Redrobsche (talk) 11:22, 14 April 2019 (UTC)

  Done--Masegand (talk) 14:37, 14 April 2019 (UTC)

User:BandiBot

BandiBot (talk • contribs • logs) has ~100k edits but isn't using the bot flag. The bot doesn't have User or User Talk pages. A search on Wikidata:Bots doesn't indicate the bot is approved. --William Graham (talk) 19:35, 13 April 2019 (UTC)

Left a comment on the talk page. --William Graham (talk) 19:37, 13 April 2019 (UTC)
Got in touch with the owner and directed him to Wikimedia:Bots and its talk page. I guess no action is needed. Most of the edits look like they're importing "ast" language names from the ast Wikipedia. William Graham (talk) 20:04, 13 April 2019 (UTC)
@William Graham: They're most likely not coming from astwiki, but rather copied directly from some other language. Mahir256 (talk) 21:11, 13 April 2019 (UTC)
I'm using QuickStatements to add labels of person names and localities that are not translatable in Asturian and therefore coincide with the use in the rest of languages. Also to add generic descriptions in Asturian. --BandiBot (talk) 14:28, 15 April 2019 (UTC)

Nikaivanishvili

Nikaivanishvili

Please block this user for indifinite period.--DiMon2711 12:42, 15 April 2019 (UTC)

  Done--Ymblanter (talk) 15:58, 15 April 2019 (UTC)

Reporting user

Persistent vandalism on Q180733

Seby1541 (talk) 15:26, 15 April 2019 (UTC)

The vandalism has stopped now. I can block if they start up again. Thanks, -- Ajraddatz (talk) 17:52, 15 April 2019 (UTC)

Vandalism

Please block 46.24.213.151) for excessive vandalism on this item. Kirilloparma (talk) 20:25, 15 April 2019 (UTC)

  Done, 31h--Ymblanter (talk) 20:32, 15 April 2019 (UTC)

Vandalism

@Ymblanter:

Thanks!--DiMon2711 20:38, 15 April 2019 (UTC)

  Done--Ymblanter (talk) 20:45, 15 April 2019 (UTC)

181.168.208.199

User has been vandalizing pages persistently

Seby1541 (talk) (contributions) 21:34, 15 April 2019 (UTC)

  Done -- Ajraddatz (talk) 22:57, 15 April 2019 (UTC)

Q33129158‎: unreferenced statements addition

One or two users affiliated with a partner paid by WMF to contribute content insists on adding statements without references to an item. The users had ample time to add these references, but have not done so.

Please delete the statements on Q33129158‎ and protect the page until references have been found and reviewed on the item's talk page. --- Jura 16:03, 7 April 2019 (UTC)

User:Jura1 is showing a persistent behaviour of edit-warring on this item, to the degree that a topic ban may be advisable to bring him to his senses.
He put his objections to membership of the Estonian Riigikogu being modelled through items like member of the Riigikogu (Q33129158) to RfD in July 2018, where his objection was unanimously rejected 4-1.
Despite that ruling, he has continued in an ongoing campaign of low-level edits to try to undermine the item, and create constraint violations if it is used as a value of position held (P39), reaching a low point of active edit-warring on the item today.
Since apparently he views any third-party attempt to caution him about this conduct as a "personal attack" [4] (diff), regrettably I believe admin intervention is now necessary.
This is not acceptable, and cannot continue. Jheald (talk) 16:39, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
Pinging @Oravrattas, Andrew Gray, Deryck Chan, VIGNERON, Pasleim: as the participants in that RfD. Jheald (talk) 16:46, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
It seems that you omit reading the linked discussion to avoid having to provide the requested reference for the statement you insist re-adding. Similarly contributors employed by or affiliated with the former WMF grantee have problems to provide requested references for their statements. Maybe it's not unsurprising that a further WMF grant was denied given concerns with documentation practices. --- Jura 16:48, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
+1 with Jheald if any admin action is to be considered, it's seems it should be whether or not Jura should blocked than to block uses of this item which is globally consensual. Cheers, VIGNERON (talk) 17:03, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
  • As the numerous promised references aren't or can't be provided, we suggest blocking the questioning user? Seems like a problematic point of view, for Wikidata in general and an administrator in particular. --- Jura 18:10, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
Do you have a better proposal, Jura, for a user who is edit-warring dspite consensus about the legitimacy of that which you are warring against? --Tagishsimon (talk) 18:45, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
@Jura1: yes, I'm suggesting to question if you should be block or not as in general, you are quite regularly in conflict with other users and unable to have a collaborative attitude (or even listening to others contributors, a good example among many other is that I already told you that I'm not an admin here!). In this particular case, you asked for a deletion that was denied and now you keep insisting to delete statements on this kept item despite several people on the talk page that this statement shouldn't be deleted (and ranting about non-related facts), this is what is really problematic here. Cheers, VIGNERON (talk) 21:00, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
Oh, didn't know that. Anyways, you should still be aware that deleting statements and deleting items are different. It's possible to have an item for "death and funeral of Douglas Adams", but that doesn't make it an item that would have P31=Q5. --- Jura 21:08, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
  • I am one of the users Jura1 is referring to. Over the last two years, Jura has often challenged the detailed per-term data model used for politicians in many countries. He listed this item for deletion last year, along with a similar item; the deletion request was rejected. Other discussions about similar items (eg here) have not found consensus for his proposed changes.
He always tries to make these discussions about MySociety's involvement in developing the EveryPolitician project, which uses and helped develop this model (eg the "partner paid by WMF" complaint above). I understand he does not like that project, and that is fair, but he seems to write as though the data model is purely for an external service's benefit. It was developed because it was the best approach for Wikidata, and all my work on these topics has been focused towards making sure things are represented in a way that works for us and for people reusing our data. (For the record, I have never been affiliated with MySociety in any way, and I have said so before.)
In this case, he has already indicated he does not think the items/system should exist at all, so I don't know what references he thinks would be enough - and I don't think it's appropriate for him to be acting like this given his past involvement. There is certainly a broader question about how we can provide appropriate references for P31/P279 statements like these, as they are ultimately linked to how we choose to model the data - I'd love for us to have that discussion, but I don't think we should be doing it by one person removing statements on individual items they don't like. Andrew Gray (talk) 19:03, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
    • The problematic statements added/readded on Q33129158‎ are lacking references. In the deletion request the creating user promised that there are plenty of references for these statements. The problem about unreferenced statements being added to Wikidata is unrelated to the question of the deletion of an item (or the non-deletion) or whether Andrew Gray likes it or not.
      We could debate about having an item for the "death and funeral of Douglas Adams" and conclude that we should, but adding P31=Q5 to that without a reference wouldn't be helpful. (edited) --- Jura 19:35, 7 April 2019 (UTC)

I concur with Andrew Gray's observation. The opening "One or two users affiliated with a partner paid by WMF to contribute content" apears to be ad hominem. It's not at all relevant to the issue at hand. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:30, 7 April 2019 (UTC)

  • Multiple references have previously been provided to show that that this position is described exactly in this manner by both the Estonian Parliament and the Estonian Government, and that Estonian Wikipedia overwhelmingly uses exactly this formulation in the introductory paragraph of members' bios. None of this, however, has been enough for Jura. Others have also noted that even if the position were not to "exist" in some very formal sense, then it is still entirely acceptable where it provides a structural purpose. Jura is also on record as accepting exactly the same model and underlying items for membership of the UK Parliament, with no justification as to why it would be OK in that case, but not Estonia or others.
Further, although I do not see how is it at all relevant to the issue at hand, I also cannot let the snide remarks about mySociety to pass unchallenged, especially as they now seem to be expanding into being used to even attack people with no affiliation with mySociety, as if disagreement with Jura's position could only be explained by being somehow tainted by association.
The "partner paid by WMF to contribute content" is yet another entirely baseless claim trotted out repeatedly by Jura. As has previously been explained multiple times, WMF provided mySociety with a grant, but that was not for contributing content — it was used for producing tooling, running events, etc as described at w:meta:Grants:Project/mySociety/EveryPolitician. None of the grant funding was ever spent on editing. As an organisation, mySociety has been very generous by enabling and encouraging staff and partners to contribute to Wikidata (and disclosed as such, of course), but none of that was ever paid for with WMF funds. Similarly, many current and past members of mySociety staff (myself included) have also contributed, and continue to contribute to Wikidata entirely on their own time, completely independently from any ongoing or former organisational involvement. My interest in making Wikidata the best source of political data in the world largely aligns with mySociety's, but is separate from it, and certainly not subservient to it. Repeatedly attempting to discredit people's contributions on spurious grounds of involvement or association with a project is simply abusive, and serves mainly to drive people away from wanting to be involved here.
I, like Andrew Gray above, am very happy to continue discuss ways of evolving and harmonising the different approaches to this sort of data, and work towards models that are as simple and consistent as possible whilst being flexible enough to cope with all the variations that exist. But that needs to happen through reasonable discussion, not by these sorts of structural attacks. --Oravrattas (talk) 19:45, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Why not add the references to the item? You should be aware by now how to add references to statements. We would all happily review them.
    Maybe it's worth discuss further what WMF actual paid for or got out of its generous grants. Whether it lead to paid employees of MySociety editing here or not. --- Jura 21:03, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
    • You are demanding references for the statement , which is rather ridiculous, as this should be entirely self-evident. Virtually no subclass of (P279) statements across all of Wikidata include references. But even worse than that, you clearly reverted a version of it that did have a reference provided, and have been abusing Rank:Deprecated as part of an edit war based on your perverse insistence the item has no value — a claim that, as has been pointed out several times, was unanimously rejected when you previously attempted to have the item deleted. Marking the instance of (P31) and/or subclass of (P279) values of a structural item like this as deprecated, thus preventing it (or anything using it) from turning up in most queries, is certainly an innovative response to failing to get any support for deletion, but your wide-eyed innocent claims that this is solely about references is stretching credulity, especially when wrapped up in clear personal animus against mySociety and multiple repeated attacks across many channels against anyone and anything tainted through association. If you want to have further discussion on what WMF got from their grant, then there are obvious places where you can go do exactly that. But that should have no relevance whatsoever here. --Oravrattas (talk) 07:39, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

Proposed topic ban

Unanimity and arguments

I do not follow all those moves to delete or keep whatever item; typically I do not care. However, had I known about this "vote", there would have been no unanimity. Typically a "member of parliament" is seen as a position in the same way as a "president" is a president. The position of mr Trump is "President of the United States" not "45th President of the United States". This is true for parliamentarians as well. In addition with parliamentarians you can deduce in what session of a parliament they were participating because they have as a qualifier a from date and to date.

The problem with votes is that they suggest a consensus where it is not obvious that the position actually makes sense. I fail to understand why this position was taken, what the upsides are. I only see the downsides. Thanks, GerardM (talk) 17:01, 16 April 2019 (UTC)

Vandal

37.42.173.109) vandalising and massive removing of several items. Kirilloparma (talk) 09:56, 16 April 2019 (UTC)

  Done--Ymblanter (talk) 12:54, 16 April 2019 (UTC)

Null edits

Could an admin check Special:Contributions/Torogertu? The user seems to have made thousands of null edits at a rate of almost 30 per minute. Jc86035 (talk) 12:06, 16 April 2019 (UTC)

Hasive

On 6 November 2018 at User talk:Hasive#Request, I requested that Hasive cease and desist from editing any WMF project in violation of m:Terms of use#paid-contrib-disclosure, and disclose paid editing activities. He has ignored that request and continued his paid editing here. Please stop him.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 12:57, 16 April 2019 (UTC)

  Done indef'd, though it has been three months since the user's last edit on Wikidata. Mahir256 (talk) 15:01, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
@Mahir256: Thanks!   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 15:03, 16 April 2019 (UTC)

Вандализм

@Ymblanter: 178.133.17.48 Kalendar (talk) 09:44, 17 April 2019 (UTC)

Поздно, вряд ли ещё появится.--Ymblanter (talk) 10:00, 17 April 2019 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: -- Kalendar (talk) 13:29, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Вандализм

@Ymblanter: Sand soul Kalendar (talk) 13:28, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

  Done--Ymblanter (talk) 13:32, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: -- Kalendar (talk) 13:38, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Vandal

167.128.81.174 Regards, --DiMon2711 20:55, 16 April 2019 (UTC)

They seem to have stopped, so I guess a block is not necessary. Jianhui67 talk★contribs 04:56, 17 April 2019 (UTC)

Q20653742

Please semi-protect this item--DiMon2711 04:37, 17 April 2019 (UTC)

@Jianhui67: and Q58640952 too--DiMon2711 04:43, 17 April 2019 (UTC)
  Done Jianhui67 talk★contribs 04:52, 17 April 2019 (UTC)
@Jianhui67: also Q27786579 please--DiMon2711 04:58, 17 April 2019 (UTC)
  Done by Pamputt--Ymblanter (talk) 10:02, 17 April 2019 (UTC)

Q27786579

Page needs temporary protection due to persistent vandalism

Seby1541 (talk) (contributions) 04:54, 17 April 2019 (UTC)

  Done Semi-protected for 1 week. Pamputt (talk) 05:52, 17 April 2019 (UTC)

Jacqueline Wong (Q41333)

Page needs temporary protection due to persistent vandalism due to the said celebrity cheating behavior in Hong Kong Blacktc (talk) 14:30, 17 April 2019 (UTC)

  Done Semi-protected for 1 week. Pamputt (talk) 14:55, 17 April 2019 (UTC)

Alan García Pérez (Q167211)

Please semi-protect this. Persistent vandalism of a recently deceased politician. --Ovruni (talk) 16:53, 17 April 2019 (UTC)

  Done by Abián--Ymblanter (talk) 18:49, 17 April 2019 (UTC)

Vandal

Again 46.24.213.151, persistant vandalism on this item, need semi-protection or block him. Kirilloparma (talk) 18:06, 17 April 2019 (UTC)

  Done--Ymblanter (talk) 18:51, 17 April 2019 (UTC)

87.219.154.241

Above ip is vandalising. Please block.--BRP ever 18:10, 17 April 2019 (UTC)

  Done by MisterSynergy--Ymblanter (talk) 18:51, 17 April 2019 (UTC)

186.136.77.92

186.136.77.92 could use a timeout. --Kam Solusar (talk) 18:23, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Edit: forgot to change IP in the template. But since the vandal was only active yesterday, I guess there's no more need for a block now. --Kam Solusar (talk) 12:28, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Kam Solusar (talk) 12:29, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

Explanation request for Q57643977

It was (almost certainly, I am unable to look at its history) created to document existing convenience shop chain as part of https://github.com/osmlab/name-suggestion-index project.

Shop chain passes "clearly identifiable conceptual or material entity. The entity must be notable, in the sense that it can be described using serious and publicly available references." (Wikidata:Notability), so I guess that either entry was missing some mandatory parts.

What are minimal requirements for Wikidata entry describing shop/restaurant/hotel chain that were not met for this entry?

I asked initially person who deleted it (at Topic:Ux8dwrn1pixolm7a) but for over week I got no reply as (s)he is currently not editing Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 08:40, 13 April 2019 (UTC)

Per this page it seems to have been "Tiger Mart". Andrew Gray (talk) 19:27, 13 April 2019 (UTC)
Yes, it was supposed to be about Tiger Mart Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 08:26, 18 April 2019 (UTC)
Q63109465 a restaurant chain called Якитория and also Q63109159 a hair dresser chain Marco Aldany were both deleted recently to, very quickly after both of their creation. I'm not sure how nobility can determined or not by an admin when an article is deleted before someone has time to add the necessary information to it. I also think it would be hard to the notability in the first place, of a none English brand by an English speaking administrator. So if the administrator who deleted Якитория isn't a Bulgarian speaker, I think the deletion should be reversed for someone who is to determine its notability or not. As it is the chain has 86 stores that we know of and there could be more. I think that's more then notable. Maybe just not to an administrator in America or somewhere else outside of Bulgaria who hasn't heard of it before. --Adamant1 (talk) 00:26, 14 April 2019 (UTC)

Please block 47.15.239.58

Persistent vandalism on Q9535 after final warning. -LiberatorG (talk) 18:32, 18 April 2019 (UTC)

  Done —MisterSynergy (talk) 18:38, 18 April 2019 (UTC)

User:Shwahni

Shwahni vandalism-only account--DiMon2711 20:23, 18 April 2019 (UTC)

  Done--Ymblanter (talk) 18:50, 19 April 2019 (UTC)

Donatello (Q37562)

Persistent vandalism: Please semi-protect it. Kind regards, — Tulsi Bhagat (contribs | talk) 17:25, 19 April 2019 (UTC)

  Semi-protected for 1 month. Esteban16 (talk) 18:29, 19 April 2019 (UTC)

Block of User:73.108.140.237

This guy has only one intention: sabotage. He had several chances to change his mind, but he did not. Now it's time to block him forever. -- MovieFex (talk) 23:03, 19 April 2019 (UTC)

  Blocked for six months. Esteban16 (talk) 00:46, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

Wikipedia (Q4390943)

Persistent vandalism: Please semi-protect it for a month? Kind regards, — Tulsi Bhagat (contribs | talk) 09:25, 20 April 2019 (UTC)

  Done Jianhui67 talk★contribs 09:47, 20 April 2019 (UTC)

Naima Salhi (Q12248733)

There have been several vandalisms in the French label for this page in the last month, I believe it should be semi-protected. Ælfgar (talk) 10:44, 20 April 2019 (UTC)

  Done, 3 months--Ymblanter (talk) 21:25, 20 April 2019 (UTC)

74.121.121.147

74.121.121.147 has been vandalising Eugène Guillevic (Q733125) for months. Montgomery (talk) 11:54, 20 April 2019 (UTC)

  Done--Ymblanter (talk) 21:24, 20 April 2019 (UTC)

Regarded : Pakistani Director& Editor Farhan Rana Rajpoot

Regarded : Pakistani Director& Editor Farhan Rana Rajpoot  – The preceding unsigned comment was added by Farhan Rana Rajpoot (talk • contribs) at 12:29, 20 April 2019‎ (UTC).

@Farhan Rana Rajpoot: It's unclear what you're asking. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:58, 20 April 2019 (UTC)

Manuelle Franck (Q18201646)‎

Please protect Manuelle Franck (Q18201646) as ‎&beer&love repeatedly added a death date to this living person. --Frenouille (talk) 17:15, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

Frenouille: I have warned the user about their behavior. They have done lots of mistakes and seems to ignore the warnings. As the item has been dispruted by a single user, protection isn't required, instead actions should be applied to the user. If they continue to act this way, they will be blocked. Esteban16 (talk) 17:38, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
I did these changes in the article in cywp. Maybe that will stop the user from repeating the insertion of date of death (P570) in Wikidata. --Larske (talk) 17:56, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

User:Voduytien

vandalism-only account--DiMon2711 21:02, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

I have warned the user for now. Esteban16 (talk) 23:38, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

Sock vandalism at Q17223371

See page history, persistent vandalism by socks of globally banned user いせちか. Latest account today was プロ枕営業選手の佐倉薫. Please block the account indefinitely and consider protecting the page. -★- PlyrStar93 →Message me. 🖉← 23:28, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

  Done. User blocked and item semi-protected for a month. Esteban16 (talk) 23:42, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

Request for page protection

Persistent transphobic vandalism (changing gender identity in the description) of anonymous users:

Q201204 Dana International
Q31197437 May Peleg
Q20726316 Stav Strashko

Thanks, Staval (talk) 23:32, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

COMPLETE LIES Please take a look at this guy's edits: He deleted information from Dana International (Dana's birth name and changed name) with no reason. The vandalism is by this editor only. Please ask him: why did he removed the names??? His other claims are manipulative, as well 2.53.143.23 23:57, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
I've attached proofs of your repeat vandalism targeting trans people. While you deliberately and adversely changed their gender identity (actor instead of actress) - I've removed their previous "deadname" which they aren't known by (for example: removing 'Yaron Cohen' from "Also known as" section at 'Dana International' page). I do hope you'll find more useful and productive ways to pass your time. Staval (talk) 00:33, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
Dead what? What are you talking about?! Please answer: why did you remove information from Dana International???? 2.53.143.23 00:41, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
And spare me your patronizing advices. I undid your destructive edits, and protected the information. 2.53.143.23 01:10, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
Please google "deadname" & educate yourself. also, as I already explained, the section on Dana International's page is called "Also known as" and not "Birth name". International was NEVER publicly known as 'Yaron', only as Dana.
Another example for the tasteless vandalism: Strashko's description section was changed from "Israeli Model & Actress" to "Just a nice guy". Staval (talk) 01:21, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
(ec) @Staval: I've semi-protected the three items for a month. While I do not otherwise condone the vandalism, I will note that some people do have deadnames as Wikidata aliases. Mahir256 (talk) 01:25, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
Thank you Mahir256 for the page protection. you're right, of course. there are trans people who had been known in their previous names, and in such situations it should be noted. but, as I explained, International was never known publicly as 'Yaron', she gained fame only as 'Dana' (Unlike The Wachowskis, Chelsea Manning, Caitlyn Jenner and others) so there is no reason to specify her birth name under the "Also known as" section. By the way, all three (The Wachowskis, Manning & Jenner) suffer from vandalism in the Hebrew description. I will fix it now and hopefully no further protection will be needed. Staval (talk) 01:57, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
Mahir256, please see the message the anonymous user left on my user talk page. rough translation: "The three castrated men (in regard to International, Peleg & Strashko) are perverts, miserable and repulsive creatures. They will be men from birth Until the day they die. enjoy your temporary victory." I'd ask you to block him but I doubt that will help. it's obvious that he plans to come back and corrupt the pages at the end of protection period. If he does, could you protect the pages for longer? Staval (talk) 03:26, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
Well, that's a ROUGH translation. She didn't mention the most important things i wrote. Nevermind. מלשנית (That's INFORMER in hebrew. I refer to Stav, of course). Good evening 2.52.79.12 00:28, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

Q1771188

Plsase semi-protect this item--DiMon2711 14:02, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

  Done. --Epìdosis 14:31, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Handling anon comments on property proposals

Several IP address users have commented on Wikidata:Property proposal/Pakistan Railways station code with roughly the same argument (namely that Pakistan is a "war zone" or "unsafe"). This seems both unwarranted and irrelevant to the proposal. Should these comments be deleted? Should some other action be taken? The proposal seems otherwise moribund so it might perhaps just as well be closed, but I'm not comfortable with these anonymous comments standing as they do not reflect the concerns of registered users who have commented there. ArthurPSmith (talk) 17:02, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

At least two of those IPs (60.26.9.13; 125.38.13.47) geolocate to the same city: Bejing, China. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:48, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
Those don't seem like good faith edits and more like cheap political attacks/propaganda. I think that the Wikidata community should hold itself to a higher standard of discourse and I would support the removal of such comments. --Kam Solusar (talk) 14:18, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
Thanks, I cleaned up the proposal. ArthurPSmith (talk) 15:26, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

Q365144

Plsase semi-protect this item (transphobic vandalism in the Hebrew description) and permanently block 190.160.21.173. Staval (talk) 00:28, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

  Done. Semi-protected for one week. The IP hasn't edited since March 27, and no action is required. Esteban16 (talk) 23:10, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

158.99.2.94

158.99.2.94 vandal--DiMon2711 08:52, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

  Done Blocked for 31 hours. Jianhui67 talk★contribs 17:47, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

95.121.29.202

95.121.29.202 @Jianhui67:--DiMon2711 11:38, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

  Done Jianhui67 talk★contribs 17:49, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

Q20747616

Semi-protect this item--DiMon2711 16:15, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

Done by MisterSynergy. Jianhui67 talk★contribs 17:47, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

193.236.73.30

193.236.73.30 @MisterSynergy:--DiMon2711 16:26, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

  Done by MisterSynergy. Jianhui67 talk★contribs 17:48, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

Wikidata:Copyright vs. Wikidata:Licensing

Wikidata:Copyright should be redirected (and content merged, if not already present) into Wikidata:Licensing, but the former is protected. Can an admin either do this, or unprotect so that I can? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 09:58, 19 April 2019 (UTC)

(1) Not sure that we should redirect a policy page to an essay page.
(2) Isn't Wikidata:Copyright the text that gets transcluded below every page? Jheald (talk) 10:25, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
If I understand correctly, the footer text came from MediaWiki:Wikidata-copyright and/or MediaWiki:Wikimedia-copyright in the past, but nowadays there is a MediaWiki extension WikimediaMessages installed (per Special:Version) which controls the footer text. Wikidata:Copyright has a different content than what is displayed in the footer anyways. —MisterSynergy (talk) 10:38, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
Who says Wikidata:Copyright is a policy page? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:06, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
The first sentence in the first major section of Wikidata:Licensing says: 'The statement of Wikidata's policy is at Wikidata:Copyright'. Please note there's a currently open RFC that refers to both pages: Wikidata:Requests for comment/Non-free content. ArthurPSmith (talk) 18:26, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
Formal policies are not made in throwaway lines on non-policy pages. The RfC is unrelated to this request. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:57, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

WGWoonejo

WGWoonejo vandalism-only account--DiMon2711 20:22, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

@Okkn: please block him--DiMon2711 10:39, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
@MisterSynergy: can you block him? Also please block 107.77.209.208--DiMon2711 14:10, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
and 149.54.5.180--DiMon2711 14:11, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
all   Done (I'm now offline, you need to wait for some other admin now) —MisterSynergy (talk) 14:13, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

24.37.129.34

Above ip is vandalising. Please block.--BRP ever 20:26, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

  Done by Sjoerddebruin. --Okkn (talk) 09:32, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

Nitish sahani

Nitish sahani vandalism-only account @MisterSynergy:--DiMon2711 08:46, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

  Done by MisterSynergy. --Okkn (talk) 09:34, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

Q81058 "Homöopathie“

Please halfprotect, 3 edits, 3 reverts is enough. --Wurgl (talk) 09:42, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

  Done —MisterSynergy (talk) 10:45, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

fever (Q38933)

Please semi-protect this item--DiMon2711 10:46, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

  Done —MisterSynergy (talk) 14:03, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

2A02:2F0D:BC11:1D00:7480:3863:5399:9696

2A02:2F0D:BC11:1D00:7480:3863:5399:9696 @Epìdosis:--DiMon2711 13:56, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

  Done, blocked 31hrs —MisterSynergy (talk) 14:03, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

Ninasmith35

Ninasmith35 vandalism-only account--DiMon2711 14:26, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

  Done--Ymblanter (talk) 19:32, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

200.69.103.254

200.69.103.254 @Ymblanter:--DiMon2711 16:50, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

  Done--Ymblanter (talk) 19:34, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

2A00:23C4:8F77:6001:9903:5701:1F18:ADB7 

2A00:23C4:8F77:6001:9903:5701:1F18:ADB7 @MisterSynergy:--DiMon2711 17:55, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

  Done —MisterSynergy (talk) 18:16, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

217.118.78.97

217.118.78.97 also please do my previous requests--DiMon2711 18:48, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

  Done--Ymblanter (talk) 19:35, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

Boovjdvjosd

Boovjdvjosd vandalism-only account--DiMon2711 18:51, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

  Done by Ymblanter. Thanks! --abián 20:42, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

南武線で痴漢を起こした津田美波

南武線で痴漢を起こした津田美波 vandalism-only account--DiMon2711 12:54, 25 April 2019 (UTC)

  Done--Ymblanter (talk) 13:43, 25 April 2019 (UTC)

Вандализм

@Ymblanter: 195.91.237.70 Kalendar (talk) 12:57, 25 April 2019 (UTC)

  Done--Ymblanter (talk) 13:44, 25 April 2019 (UTC)

85.49.196.2

85.49.196.2 vandalism--DiMon2711 15:52, 25 April 2019 (UTC)

  Done Jianhui67 talk★contribs 16:18, 25 April 2019 (UTC)

user:BinAayan

User has only been spamming here in [5], also in other wikis like en.wp and Commons, and the only edit on MediaWiki wiki has been deleted. On Commons, almost all edits and uploads have been deleted, user talk page with no reaction there and a temporary block. Please tell him about correct editing here or whatever else. --2A02:908:D83:E460:216:CBFF:FEAD:FF9 17:41, 25 April 2019 (UTC)

Sirup1337

Sirup1337 vandalism-only account--DiMon2711 19:20, 25 April 2019 (UTC)

  Done —MisterSynergy (talk) 19:30, 25 April 2019 (UTC)

132.219.143.154

132.219.143.154 vandalism--DiMon2711 19:34, 25 April 2019 (UTC)

  Done, I protected the item for a month--Ymblanter (talk) 12:20, 26 April 2019 (UTC)

167.142.60.238

167.142.60.238 vandalism--DiMon2711 19:55, 25 April 2019 (UTC)

Too late--Ymblanter (talk) 12:21, 26 April 2019 (UTC)

185.197.89.32

185.197.89.32 vandalism--DiMon2711 11:48, 26 April 2019 (UTC)

  Done--Ymblanter (talk) 12:23, 26 April 2019 (UTC)

Вандал

@Ymblanter: 176.105.206.22 добавление в различные элементы нецензурной брани на русском языке, просьба разобраться. Заранее спасибо. Kirilloparma (talk) 12:01, 26 April 2019 (UTC)

  Done--Ymblanter (talk) 12:16, 26 April 2019 (UTC)

193.144.97.65

193.144.97.65 vandalism--DiMon2711 12:12, 26 April 2019 (UTC)

  Done--Ymblanter (talk) 12:22, 26 April 2019 (UTC)

Eduardo Pondal (Q867025)

semi-protect this item--DiMon2711 12:15, 26 April 2019 (UTC)

  Done--Ymblanter (talk) 12:18, 26 April 2019 (UTC)

Arint

Arint vandalism-only account--DiMon2711 12:36, 26 April 2019 (UTC)

  Done Jianhui67 talk★contribs 12:40, 26 April 2019 (UTC)

Vandalism by IP

37.24.55.249

Blocking this IP is IMHO not a bad idea. -Wurgl (talk) 21:18, 26 April 2019 (UTC)

  Done by MisterSynergy. Esteban16 (talk) 00:37, 27 April 2019 (UTC)

Wrong edits (vandalism?)

Hi! I've just detected, that AngelVicks (talk • contribs • logs) (is it a bot?) did a lot of edits, and I'm afraid, that all of them are vandalism (I've just taken some blink to them). Can you check them? Thanks in advance! --Sphenodon (talk) 10:50, 27 April 2019 (UTC)

I reverted its all the 56 edits, because every were wrong (birth time and dead time of vary persons). I presume it's a machine. I think, it's worth following its action with attention. --Sphenodon (talk) 15:49, 27 April 2019 (UTC)

I blocked them as vandalism-only account--Ymblanter (talk) 20:03, 27 April 2019 (UTC)

Bug on Q729048

Repeat transfer by Pi bot on page Q729048 (controversial subject) of entry: 'Other sites' : 'commons category’ to (Q32398192) = Topic category - thus removing wikidata link on commons category page and perverting Reasonator. Please correct or stop bot's intervention(s) on that page . Thanks.--DDupard (talk) 08:53, 26 April 2019 (UTC)

Background is at User_talk:DDupard#Category_items, and discussion now seems to be at User_talk:Mike_Peel#Category_items. tldr: there was a bug in the resonator link in the infobox on commons, which is now fixed, I'm currently waiting for DDupard to explain what the problem is, if there is a new one. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 20:21, 26 April 2019 (UTC)
I think this is resolved, see my user talk page for the conversation. A second opinion on that before closing this would be good though. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 20:05, 27 April 2019 (UTC)
Bug seems to be resolved. Y--DDupard (talk) 07:18, 28 April 2019 (UTC)

voice (Q17172850)

Persistent vandalism: Please semi-protect it for a month. Kind regards, — Tulsi Bhagat (contribs | talk) 06:39, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

  Done by Mahir256 --Alaa :)..! 12:06, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

Juanitolopez04

Juanitolopez04 vandalism-only account--DiMon2711 09:13, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

  Done --Alaa :)..! 12:08, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

日本第一党原田ひとみ

日本第一党原田ひとみ vandalism-only account -- Afaz (talk) 14:05, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

Already globally locked--Ymblanter (talk) 21:06, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

Mikhail Gorbachev (Q30487)

please semi-protect this item--DiMon2711 19:46, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

  Semi-protected for a month. Esteban16 (talk) 20:11, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

Please undelete Q57643977

It was deleted as not notable, but it represents Tiger Mart convenience shop chain. That entry was created as part of name-suggestion-index (see https://github.com/osmlab/name-suggestion-index/search?q=Q57643977&unscoped_q=Q57643977 ). If it was not described properly I will improve it once undeleted. U attempted to contain admin who deleted it but without result - see https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Topic:Ux8dwrn1pixolm7a 14:51, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

  Done —MisterSynergy (talk) 15:06, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

Spratly Islands (Q215664)

Some IP users are repeatedly adding hoax claims into that wikidata entry. C933103 (talk) 02:35, 27 April 2019 (UTC)

  Semi-protected for one month. Esteban16 (talk) 02:54, 27 April 2019 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 04:38, 7 May 2019 (UTC)

Ramesmurmu214

disruptive editing in:

The airport's official name is "Birsa Munda Airport" (verifiable by Airport Authority India at [6]). The user repeatedly changes valid information to their preferred, false name "Birsa Munda International Airport", damaging related data and project links. Similar disruptive activities against sourced consensus (edit-warring, copypaste moves, vandalism) in en-Wiki (currently blocked), hi-Wiki and Commons. See also en:Talk:Birsa Munda Airport (first and last thread) and the user's global contributions for more background info about the disruptive editing. GermanJoe (talk) 18:56, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

Please block the user and semi-protect Q598231 for a while (further disruption is likely). GermanJoe (talk) 18:50, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

Google finds plenty of sources using "Birsa Munda International Airport", not least the Times of India. Also, I see no attempt to raise the matter on Ramesmurmu214's talk page, nor the tem's talk page. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 21:03, 29 April 2019 (UTC)
On a ratio of 10:1 against "International", just like many other informal usages of terms can be found in a quick Google search. The official airport name is "Birsa Munda Airport", as listed by the AAI - the AAI is India's statutory body for civil aviation infrastructure and should know what they are listing on their official website. I have also asked the user 3 times on en-Wiki for a response to start a discussion (2 times on user talk, once on article talk) - granted that was on en-Wiki, but 3 attempts should really be sufficient for exactly the same question to the same person. Regarding the Times of India: they have reported about the issue at "Birsa munda airport fails to get international tag". You'll find more details in the links provided in my first message, if you'd like to research the issue in a bit more depth. GermanJoe (talk) 21:56, 29 April 2019 (UTC)
Update: The user has created another copypaste page Q63389888, project links there are invalid. The en-Wiki link is a redirect from misnomer, the hi-Wiki page is an invalid copypaste mirror of the original article (the original article under the correct name still exists here). I have now left the user a 4th request to discuss the issue on their user talkpage. GermanJoe (talk) 12:22, 30 April 2019 (UTC)
The suggested messages on user and article talk have been ignored, vandalism continues (invalid copypaste moves in various projects, removal/replacement of valid project links in Wikidata). I'll leave the mess as is for now, but it would be great if an experienced admin could look into this to handle the disruptive editing. GermanJoe (talk) 17:31, 1 May 2019 (UTC)
He is also vandalising other Wikipedias. For example he has today created es:Aeropuerto Internacional Birsa Munda when es:Aeropuerto Birsa Munda is the correct version which already exists. It looks as if he needs a global block. --David Biddulph (talk) 17:53, 1 May 2019 (UTC)
How long does one normally have to wait for an admin to reply on this page? --David Biddulph (talk) 08:46, 7 May 2019 (UTC)
Blocked for a month, with the stipulation in the block log that "if you respond on your talk page to the concerns raised by others, then you may be unblocked earlier". @Ramjit Tudu, Manik Soren:, as sat-N speakers who may be able to make this user understand what the problem with his actions is, should a language barrier exist between this user and the rest of us. Mahir256 (talk) 09:19, 7 May 2019 (UTC)
@Mahir256: personally I have contact with Ramesmurmu214, I will talk with him regarding this. Thanks Ramjit Tudu (talk) 16:17, 7 May 2019 (UTC)
@Mahir256: Thanks for the information. We will look after the issue. So far my understand user Ramesmurmu214 is not doing the vandalism with an intention. He actually not well known with the function. However, we will see it seriously. Ramjit Tudu please communicate him over phone as soon as possible and let him know the issues and tell him that what he can do or not to do. --Manik Soren (talk) 15:03, 8 May 2019 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Regards, ZI Jony (Talk) 08:56, 14 May 2019 (UTC)

URL shortener

Given today's launch of the WMF URL shortener, prompt closure of Wikidata:Property proposal/WMF short URL would be appreciated, please. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:43, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

Weird to decide that a property is ready while you are the proposer of it. I'll rather see someone uninvolved taking a decision based on the given arguments by other people. Sjoerd de Bruin (talk) 17:48, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
That's not in the least bit weird, and is on the contrary perfectly normal and reasonable. Stop your baseless sniping. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:58, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
I marked the above discussion as ready for assessment by a property creator, but I have been reverted, even though it clearly is ready. The edit summary for the revert was "It's up to unbiased property creators or administrators to make that decision" which is clearly (and with much precedence) nonsense; not least as no "unbiased property creator or administrator" ever need set the flag: they would just create the property. As I said above, prompt closure would be appreciated. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:54, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

A week after my suggestion that "prompt closure of would be appreciated", the discussion - which was last edited four days ago - is still open. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:10, 18 April 2019 (UTC)

Tumbleweed Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:42, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

Now two weeks. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:46, 25 April 2019 (UTC)

Now over three weeks. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:10, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

One month. Good work everyone! Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:17, 11 May 2019 (UTC)

It seems to me that few people are interested enough in the property to bring the discussion forward as far as whether this property will be used as qualifier or in references. To me that seems like a discussion that has to happen before the property can be created. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 08:27, 15 May 2019 (UTC)
"few people are interested enough in the property" the proposal has eleven supporters; that more than take part in total, in the majority of our property proposal discussions. You are the only person who has raised the question "Will this be used as a qualifier for links to wikimedia sites? It seems the current proposal doesn't address whether or not that's intended."; There is nothing on the proposal to suggest this intention. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:02, 16 May 2019 (UTC)
Andy, once again this is not the appropriate place to discuss this. Property creation is a matter for the Wikidata:Property creators and it does not require any administrative action. Any comments about the proposal should go on its own page. Flooding the administrators' noticeboard is neither an acceptable nor a judicious way to encourage property creators to close your proposal. − Pintoch (talk) 14:25, 18 May 2019 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: − Pintoch (talk) 14:25, 18 May 2019 (UTC)

Please undelete this entries about brands

Following entries represent real brands and were created as part of work on name-suggestion-index (see https://github.com/osmlab/name-suggestion-index/ ). Pleas let me know if any of this entries require some improvements to protect them from becoming deleted again

  • Q62054564 - Bank in a Paraguay (should be fixed now, if still eligible for deletion please mention it in comments below)
  • Q57980752 - fuel station chain (should be fixed now, if still eligible for deletion please mention it in comments below)
  • Q57588452 - fuel station chain (should be fixed now, if still eligible for deletion please mention it in comments below)
  • shop/beverages|Edeka Getränkemarkt: Q57450576 (author notified at https://github.com/osmlab/name-suggestion-index/pull/1950 )
  • shop/beverages|Rewe Getränkemarkt: Q57519344 (should be fixed now, if still eligible for deletion please mention it in comments below)
  • shop/butcher|Foani: Q60183335 (should be fixed now, if still eligible for deletion please mention it in comments below)
  • shop/convenience|Hasty Market: Q58022603 (should be fixed now, if still eligible for deletion please mention it in comments below)
  • shop/hairdresser|Sport Clips: Q7579310 (should be fixed now, if still eligible for deletion please mention it in comments below)
  • shop/pet|Global Pet Foods: Q57985699 (should be fixed now, if still eligible for deletion please mention it in comments below)
  • shop/sports|Aktiesport: Q57546889 (should be fixed now, if still eligible for deletion please mention it in comments below)
  • shop/supermarket|Ahorramás: Q58221883 (should be fixed now, if still eligible for deletion please mention it in comments below)
  • shop/supermarket|Cargills Food City: Q58353955 (should be fixed now, if still eligible for deletion please mention it in comments below)
  • shop/supermarket|Condis: Q57417581 (should be fixed now, if still eligible for deletion please mention it in comments below)
  • shop/supermarket|FoodMaxx: Q61894844 (should be fixed now, if still eligible for deletion please mention it in comments below)
  • shop/supermarket|La Plaza de DIA: Q58904673 (should be fixed now, if still eligible for deletion please mention it in comments below)
  • shop/supermarket|Suma: Q58012362 (should be fixed now, if still eligible for deletion please mention it in comments below)
  • shop/supermarket|Покупочка: Q58003270 (should be fixed now, if still eligible for deletion please mention it in comments below)

Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 19:09, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

@MisterSynergy: do you want to comment?--Ymblanter (talk) 19:59, 30 April 2019 (UTC)
Seems like most of them were deleted by me, and their form qualified them for deletion. I have no objection against undeletion, but please make each of them compliant with WD:N (probably with external identifiers). —MisterSynergy (talk) 21:01, 30 April 2019 (UTC)
Thank you. @Mateusz Konieczny:, would you be prepared to add external identifiers withing a reasonable time period? I could undelete the items tomorrow, but they are indeed empty, and I do not want them to hang empty forever.--Ymblanter (talk) 21:08, 30 April 2019 (UTC)
"would you be prepared to add external identifiers withing a reasonable time period" - yes, external identifiers will be added by myself (or potentially some other editors) within days. Hopefully it is a reasonable timeframe Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 12:48, 1 May 2019 (UTC)
I would be willing to pitch in on this. Note that brands will continue to be added due to OSM's "name-suggestion-index" project. It is the responsibility of contributors to make sure the additions benefit Wikidata and the wider public also (I am confident this collaboration can be quite fruitful in that respect). Arlo Barnes (talk) 00:26, 2 May 2019 (UTC)

@Mateusz Konieczny, Arlo Barnes, Ymblanter: I have restored all listed items. —MisterSynergy (talk) 13:05, 2 May 2019 (UTC)

Great, thanks.--Ymblanter (talk) 13:09, 2 May 2019 (UTC)
@MisterSynergy: almost all entries should be fixed now. Is it possible to undelete also Q63109465 (from https://github.com/osmlab/name-suggestion-index/pull/2572 ) and Q63109159 (from https://github.com/osmlab/name-suggestion-index/pull/2570 )? Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 14:09, 2 May 2019 (UTC)
I am not yet convinced by the fixes. We usually expect third-party, i.e. subject-independent sources, which are furthermore optimally not user-generated content. Otherwise we are quickly in a position where "everything is notable", a situation which we cannot really maintain and which makes it difficult to verify information. Can you try to find real identifiers? The next admin could otherwise mistake them as promotional content and delete them again. —MisterSynergy (talk) 20:13, 2 May 2019 (UTC)
Looking at Wikidata:Notability - it is passing "clearly identifiable conceptual or material entity" but failing "serious and publicly available references", right? So Wikidata has lower notability criteria than Wikipedia ("significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject"), but "reliable sources that are independent of the subject" are still required as shop website is not enough to count as serious reference? Probably it is possible to track down entries in official registries of companies but I am not sure is it actually sufficient. @MisterSynergy: Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 21:47, 2 May 2019 (UTC)
(Sorry for the delay.) Yes, roughly like that. I have no doubt about the fact that the entities represent "clearly identifiable conceptual or material entities". However, the references/identification in the notabiliy policy practically ensure two things:
  1. Identification: any random Wikidata editor/administrator as well as data user is immediately able to understand what an item is about, without having to guess and without having to conduct further research about the item content.
  2. Verifiability: the provided references/external database entries are useful to verify a substantial amount of data about the entities found in the items; here, we generally do not want to rely on sources under control of the item subjects themselves, we thus need third-party sources.
Particularly in the field of (small and medium-sized) businesses we have a lot of spam coming in, such as items created by the business owners and so on. They largely rely on self-published sources, which is why the items you have reported came to my attention.
Since these items are somehow related to OSM activities, do you have OSM identifiers for them? (I know that OSM is user-generated content, which many do not consider as "serious sources" here as well, but it would help to indicate the need of those items if there was a link to OSM, or a reference to the "name-suggestion-dashboard" where it was imported from).
—MisterSynergy (talk) 12:18, 7 May 2019 (UTC)
"OSM identifiers" In every case there are several (or more) objects mapped under a given brand but there is no identifier for brand as an entity. Wikidata id for company is supposed to be one what went well for brands with already existing Wikipedia pages. For example Q817139 is currently explicitly referenced in node 6258224001 (see brand:wikidata tag) and node 6225128157 and 14 other elements. Would it help in deleteproofing to add some property like "this id is referenced in https://github.com/osmlab/name-suggestion-index/ " If yes, what would be preferred method for adding it?
"Identification" - here self published sources (website link) and proper P31 are probably sufficient
"Verifiability" - is it enough to have some third party confirmation "it actually exists" in form of source for one of claims like at https://wikidata.org/wiki/Q60097339 (confirmed restaurant count) or is Q60097339 also at risk of deletion?
Basically it would be useful to know what the minimum threshold is - to (1) check whatever newly created Wikidata appearing in incoming pull requests meet it (2) give some useful feedback to people creating entries and getting them deleted - see for example confusion in https://github.com/osmlab/name-suggestion-index/pull/2572
Thanks for a reply! Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 16:19, 7 May 2019 (UTC)
I don't really understand what this "OSM lab name suggestion index" really is. Would it be appropriate to consider it a work by its own which deserves an item? It could then perhaps be used with stated in (P248) in references, or as main value with described by source (P1343). I am not yet sure about that, however.
Re. notability: if identification and third-party verifiability (not based on user-generated content) are granted, there shouldn't be a problem with deletions. It does not matter whether this is achieved with an external identifier, or references on critical claims. It would additionally also be useful to somehow indicate that an item appears in the "name suggestion index". Wikimedia-internally we have lots of tracking options how and where an item is used and this is also respected by Wikidata admins while considering an item for deletion, but there is basically no chance to track external usage.
Another question: how many items appear in the "name suggestion index" right now, and how many are planned to be integrated there? Is there some way to maintain a list with used items within Wikidata itself? —MisterSynergy (talk) 09:40, 8 May 2019 (UTC)
"I don't really understand what this "OSM lab name suggestion index" really is" - it is a part of OSM (the Wikipedia of maps). name suggestion index is a list of branded object with information what is recommended way to map it in OpenStreetMap. For example mapper may start typing "McDonald's" name and editor may help to complete name and suggest `amenity=fast_food` as object type and add wikidata link.
"Would it be appropriate to consider it a work by its own which deserves an item?", maybe in this case there is certainly no third party-coverage. Is it OK to create Wikidata item for random Github project or is it maybe justifiable by "structural needs" clause here as I want to add item tracking usage of Wikidata?
"how many items appear in the "name suggestion index" right now 3723 items, with 3102 confirmed and linked to Wikidata.
"how many are planned to be integrated there" - at this point it grows slowly, two months ago it had 3689 items, with 2802 confirmed and linked to Wikidata
"Is there some way to maintain a list with used items within Wikidata itself?" - in principle it would be possible, but it would not be too useful. What makes sense is offloaded to Wikidata. For example, linking to Facebook/Twitter/etc was done by editing Wikidata. But preferred OSM tagging is both a bit subjective, needs to be reviewed and in many cases objects are not fitting 1:1 to Wikidata items, for example COOP Jednota (Q41629254) convenience shops and COOP Jednota (Q41629254) supermarkets have separate entries.
For now I opened https://github.com/osmlab/name-suggestion-index/issues/2603 and https://github.com/osmlab/name-suggestion-index/issues/2604 to add automatic detection of linked items that are clearly below minimum Wikidata quality standards. I will look over undeleted items to add some external references Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 17:31, 8 May 2019 (UTC)
In my opinion, the "name suggestion index" should have a separate item. Can you please create one and link it from here? We could then use it in references with the web page source model (carefully, e.g. only on P31 claims). —MisterSynergy (talk) 06:37, 14 May 2019 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ Name Suggestion Index (Q62108705) was created for name-suggestion-index a little while back. Besides citations, I wonder if it would even make sense to fashion some sort of identifier based on the tag-name combinations you see at e.g. [7]. It would be akin to Flags of the World ID (P3089), which is also based on user-generated content. – Minh Nguyễn 💬 21:26, 18 May 2019 (UTC)

Entries that should be now fixed

Please comment if any item listed below is not passing minimal Wikidata requirements Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 18:56, 9 May 2019 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Regards, ZI Jony (Talk) 14:17, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Wikidata:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Archive/2019/04&oldid=2129339296"