Wikidata

Wikidata:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive/2022/12

< Wikidata:Administrators' noticeboard‎ | Archive‎ | 2022

Report concerning User:Larendo Valdez Help not judge try to understand get

Larendo Valdez Help not judge try to understand get (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL (for IP: GUC)) — Reasons: Making large nonsense edits of pasted content. Sam Wilson 04:15, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

  Done LTA: Indeffed, global lock requested. Lymantria (talk) 07:52, 1 December 2022 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. Lymantria (talk) 07:52, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

Report concerning User:BigBoobsandWetPussy

BigBoobsandWetPussy (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL (for IP: GUC)) — Reasons: They added a section to the project chat that was inapproriate — The Erinaceous One 🦔 07:05, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

  Done Indeffed. --Lymantria (talk) 07:54, 1 December 2022 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. Lymantria (talk) 07:54, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

Report concerning User:Mimi7654321

Mimi7654321 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL (for IP: GUC)) — Reasons: Making spam pages with nonsensical political content, please nuke all of their created pages. RPI2026F1 (talk) 19:31, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

  Done nuked and blocked. --Ameisenigel (talk) 19:58, 1 December 2022 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. Ameisenigel (talk) 19:58, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

Vandalized item

Victor Vasarely (Q154448) item was repeatedly vandalized in November, and had to be restored or withdrawn four times in one month. I'm asking for protection so that anons can't edit for a while. Thanks Pallor (talk) 01:49, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

  Protected for one year Estopedist1 (talk) 07:04, 2 December 2022 (UTC)
Thank you! Pallor (talk) 08:36, 2 December 2022 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. Pallor (talk) 08:36, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

Report vandalism

194.158.78.188 and 194.158.78.189

vandalism.

Please protect « Chrétien de Troyes » (Q4302)

Chouette bougonne (talk) 15:41, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

  Done Semi-protected for a week. --Ameisenigel (talk) 21:41, 2 December 2022 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. Ameisenigel (talk) 21:41, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

‎Semi-protection for Q96240525

Please protect Eni Plenitude (Q96240525) as a permanent target of LTA Vodafone vandal. Jklamo (talk) 14:19, 3 December 2022 (UTC)

  Done Semi-protected for a month --Ameisenigel (talk) 16:05, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. Ameisenigel (talk) 16:05, 3 December 2022 (UTC)

Help with Q20980826

Please take actions in Q20980826, such as a semi-protection or any other measure. The species is being systematically changed from Felix catus to Bovichtus variegatus, which is wrong. Thanks in advance. Gusama Romero </talk> 02:42, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

I pinged the user that keeps causing the problem on the talk page Talk:Q20980826. BrokenSegue (talk) 04:29, 1 December 2022 (UTC)
  Protected for one year Estopedist1 (talk) 06:33, 2 December 2022 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. Ameisenigel (talk) 15:54, 4 December 2022 (UTC)

Vandalized item

Hui Ka Yan (Q1454895), The content of this item has been damaged because there are rumors that the real character died, and there was a scandal with him, so it needs a temporary protection until further source information is confirmed. Cwek (talk) 08:35, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

  Done one week semi --Emu (talk) 09:55, 2 December 2022 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. Ameisenigel (talk) 15:54, 4 December 2022 (UTC)

Report concerning User:Mohammad44377mM

Mohammad44377mM (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL (for IP: GUC)) — Reasons: per GoogleTranslate most of the descripions tell us about a singer but not about the item itself. Raymond (talk) 08:03, 4 December 2022 (UTC)

  Done --Ameisenigel (talk) 20:31, 4 December 2022 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. Ameisenigel (talk) 20:31, 4 December 2022 (UTC)

‎Semi-protection for Q30933054

This is a page for Japanese soccer player. Perhaps they want to criticize him for making a mistake in the recent match against Costa Rica, but there is rampant vandalism such as putting "Costa Rican player" in the description column, so please protect this page.--匿名100 (talk) 22:47, 3 December 2022 (UTC)

  Done semi for a month BrokenSegue (talk) 23:00, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. DannyS712 (talk) 12:14, 7 December 2022 (UTC)

Repeated vandalism by the same IP

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

--Push-f (talk) 01:50, 4 December 2022 (UTC)

  Blocked for three months Estopedist1 (talk) 07:51, 4 December 2022 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. DannyS712 (talk) 12:14, 7 December 2022 (UTC)

Report concerning User:240F:7A:F72D:1:9D5C:9057:BA99:292B

  Done Blocked for 31 hours. Jianhui67 talk★contribs 16:23, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. DannyS712 (talk) 12:14, 7 December 2022 (UTC)

Request for semi-protection for Q382677

Please semi-protect Kazuhide Uekusa (Q382677) due to persistent vandalism. IP users add aliases that defames the person. Some aliases added are creation-semi-protected on jawiki such as w:ja:Special:Redirect/logid/6242713 and w:ja:Special:Redirect/logid/6242714. --郊外生活Kogaiseikatsu (talk,contribs) 12:49, 6 December 2022 (UTC)

  protected for three months by MisterSynergy Estopedist1 (talk) 20:04, 6 December 2022 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. DannyS712 (talk) 12:14, 7 December 2022 (UTC)

Report concerning User:Stastnasm11

Stastnasm11 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL (for IP: GUC)) — Reasons: vandalism-only account Jan Myšák (talk) 14:56, 6 December 2022 (UTC)

Blocked —MisterSynergy (talk) 00:17, 7 December 2022 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. DannyS712 (talk) 12:14, 7 December 2022 (UTC)

Report concerning User:Tarik Over

Tarik Over (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL (for IP: GUC)) — Reasons: vandalism. Madamebiblio (talk) 23:40, 6 December 2022 (UTC)

I have blocked them from editing the data item in question, and talked to them on their user talk page. Not sure whether this is vandalism or an inexperienced user who is up to something just with the wrong behavior. They are active on Commons as well. —MisterSynergy (talk) 00:16, 7 December 2022 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. DannyS712 (talk) 12:14, 7 December 2022 (UTC)

Report concerning User:JOHNZEE69

JOHNZEE69 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL (for IP: GUC)) — Reasons: No constructive edits have been made; all five edits made (on two different days) would be classed as vandalism. Dogfennydd (talk) 10:08, 7 December 2022 (UTC)

indef blocked —MisterSynergy (talk) 10:13, 7 December 2022 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. DannyS712 (talk) 12:14, 7 December 2022 (UTC)

Item Deletion

Hello, I am new to Wikidata and all that concern it when i started creating item on wikidata but I have read a lot about wikidata and i realized that i made a lot of mistake with all the item i have created so far. I want to appeal appeal for undeletion of the iems so that i can correct the mistake i made and the identifier, references, sources and sitelink to the items.

i dont know the item numbers but i know they name and they are; Rachel Sanders, ExploreMyPC, Norbert Simonis, Parbhis Rehan, Airconist and Jazmin Yvette Gonzalez Luna.

looking forward to a response, Best Regards. Afolabi bisola (talk) 10:26, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

You are still in violation of Wikidata:Disclosure of paid editing. --Emu (talk) 10:29, 2 December 2022 (UTC)
How please Afolabi bisola (talk) 10:40, 2 December 2022 (UTC)
To facilitate discussion:
Bovlb (talk) 21:17, 2 December 2022 (UTC)
Thanks for this, I really appreciate.
Most of the item has been restore, i have two item left to restore which are Q115189646 and Q115122596 and i have drop a message for the deleting admin on their talk page but they yet to reply
looking forward to a response from them. Afolabi bisola (talk) 21:33, 2 December 2022 (UTC)
@Afolabi bisola At first glance, they all seem to be not notable. It’s very likely that they all will be deleted (again) in due course. It might be a good idea to gain more knowledge about Wikidata before selling services related to it. --Emu (talk) 22:44, 2 December 2022 (UTC) User now indef’ed. See Wikidata:Requests_for_deletions#Bulk_deletion_request_Afolabi_bisola for the rest. --Emu (talk) 22:52, 2 December 2022 (UTC)
They have used many different accounts to abuse their editing privileges across multiple wikis. CatLover1, Geniusavatar82, Vipper0, Preciousee11, OliviaBenjamin are some of their other accounts based on my checks and the checks done by Enwiki checkusers.--BRP ever 23:05, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

Request for semi-protection for Q860940

Please semi-protect Masashi Tashiro (Q860940) due to persistent vandalism. IP users add aliases that ridicules or defames the person. --郊外生活Kogaiseikatsu (talk,contribs) 14:49, 7 December 2022 (UTC)

  protected for six months Estopedist1 (talk) 18:28, 7 December 2022 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. Syunsyunminmin (talk) 13:07, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

Repeated vandalism by same IP

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

--Push-f (talk) 20:39, 7 December 2022 (UTC)

  Done blocked for 24h BrokenSegue (talk) 20:42, 7 December 2022 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. Syunsyunminmin (talk) 13:08, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

Report concerning User:2600:1700:1968:5110:100a:37aa:77f7:d8a6

2600:1700:1968:5110:100a:37aa:77f7:d8a6 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL (for IP: GUC)) — Reasons: repeating vandalism Syunsyunminmin (talk) 05:20, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

  Blocked for three months Estopedist1 (talk) 07:17, 8 December 2022 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. Syunsyunminmin (talk) 13:06, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

Request for semi-protect

Shintarō Ishihara (Q38849), Shinzō Abe (Q132345) — Reasons: Excessive vandalism. Syunsyunminmin (talk) 13:06, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

  Done Both semi-protected for a month --Ameisenigel (talk) 15:47, 8 December 2022 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. Ameisenigel (talk) 15:47, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

Report concerning User:TheParvezAli

TheParvezAli (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL (for IP: GUC)) Reasons: Cross-wiki spam. Created three items under their own name. Also added own name by changing other items. –– Yahya (talk) 16:13, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

I noticed, there are some constructive contributions as well at Joymontop High School (Q64347988). So, we can wait. –– Yahya (talk) 20:30, 1 December 2022 (UTC)
yes, we will wait Estopedist1 (talk) 06:42, 2 December 2022 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. Estopedist1 (talk) 07:04, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

Backlog in Category:Wikidata protected edit requests

There are things in there over a year old. I think some of these should finally be resolved. RPI2026F1 (talk) 19:35, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

@RPI2026F1 I fulfilled some of them. Some are very difficult and possible to fulfill only by interface administrators. Some are related to lexeme-stuff, but I personally think that whole lexeme-stuff should be deleted from Wikidata as pretty obvious infopollution Estopedist1 (talk) 06:56, 2 December 2022 (UTC)
in future, if this category will be "cluttered" with technical and lexeme-related requests, it may be rational to create special categories, e.g. "Wikidata protected edit requests (technical, for interface admins)" Estopedist1 (talk) 05:25, 3 December 2022 (UTC)

Please block 94.189.42.198

94.189.42.198 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL (for IP: GUC)) has vandalized Anne Cathrine Christiansdatter (Q4575564) several times over the last few months. Hjart (talk) 12:32, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

  Done and item semi-protected for a month --Ameisenigel (talk) 15:00, 9 December 2022 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. Ameisenigel (talk) 15:00, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

Report concerning User:185.193.232.133

185.193.232.133 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL (for IP: GUC)) — Reasons: vandalism at Utupua Island (Q2081472), Edward Elliot Synge (Q75870229) and Isaac Jackson Hurt (Q36775532); also as 185.193.232.134, 185.193.232.135 and 185.193.232.136, so might be worth an IP range block. TweetsFactsAndQueries (talk) 19:53, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

  Done /28 for three months. --Ameisenigel (talk) 20:08, 9 December 2022 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. Ameisenigel (talk) 20:08, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

keep an eye on User:IntrovertAnonymous

I temporarily blocked them until they respond on their talk page. Looks like their were using automation to edit. A lot of their edits probably need to be reverted (no references, nonsensical qualifiers). And a lot of their new items need to be deleted. BrokenSegue (talk) 06:10, 4 December 2022 (UTC)

@Ebrahim, Ladsgroup: in case there is a language barrier with that user. Mahir256 (talk) 06:58, 4 December 2022 (UTC)
I unblocked them in the hope that they go back and fix the items they made. We should still keep an eye on them. BrokenSegue (talk) 15:30, 4 December 2022 (UTC)

Unlock Protection Q6113289

The article is wrong and nickname is wrong and troll, I tried to change the photo and it won't let me. Please Help A.toledano82 (talk) 10:11, 4 December 2022 (UTC)

@A.toledano82 I edited the item in a number of ways. I don’t think that my interference as an admin is necessary at the moment. --Emu (talk) 10:47, 4 December 2022 (UTC)

Increase in anonymous participation in Wikidata project chat and property proposal discussions

Recently, it seems like there's a sharp uptick in participation in Wikidata project chat and property proposal discussions. Have we banned someone who decides that they are still going to comment and who now just comments anonymously? ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 23:27, 4 December 2022 (UTC)

Report concerning User:2.139.230.122

2.139.230.122 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL (for IP: GUC)) — Reasons: Persistent vandalism. Dorades (talk) 10:59, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

Does not seem to require a block for now. The edits are rather sporadic. Jianhui67 talk★contribs 16:25, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
Hm, so vandalizing Maryam Mirzakhani (Q1771279) every monday 3 weeks in a row is not often enough? --Dorades (talk) 17:05, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
  Protected for six months. If he will continue to vandalize other items as well, we will block him Estopedist1 (talk) 07:01, 6 December 2022 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. Ameisenigel (talk) 07:33, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

[Q15909572] quadratic formula: link to es.wikipedia

i'm trying to add an entry for [es] in https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q15909572#sitelinks-wikipedia, corresponding to https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fórmula_cuadrática, which should redirect to https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecuación_de_segundo_grado#Soluciones_de_la_ecuación_de_segundo_grado. however, if i add it directly i get this error: 

Could not save due to an error.
The save has failed.
Site link eswiki:Ecuación de segundo grado is already used by item Q41299. Perhaps the items should be merged.  Ask at d:Wikidata:Interwiki conflicts if you believe that they should not be merged.

if instead i try to add the entry while adding the badge 'sitelink to redirect' (to match the entry for [de]), i get this error: 

Could not save due to an error.
The save has failed.
Warning: You are trying to add/remove badges to this item. At local Wikipedias adding or removing badges are done by consensus. Saving this edit was blocked and should be done only by administrators or trusted users. If you think you are correct, please contact an administrator.

so now i'm asking an administrator to do it. thanks! 31.165.216.80 11:26, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

Done. Special:AbuseFilter/52 has prevented you from doing this. —MisterSynergy (talk) 11:32, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. Ameisenigel (talk) 07:34, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

Hide disclosure of personal data (POV)

https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Q113510216&diff=1785080006&oldid=1784153037 Iniquity (talk) 15:49, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

  Done - But it seems the same user keeps adding more info of questionable quality. - Fuzheado (talk) 18:41, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
Thanks! Yes, it seems to me too :( I will explain this to him. Iniquity (talk) 08:23, 6 December 2022 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. Ameisenigel (talk) 07:35, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

Problematic RFD

Could someone want to comment Wikidata:Requests for deletions#Q108874939. It is a wider question, do we need any museum's entries? Or we keep only those museum's entries which have supporting other sources? Estopedist1 (talk) 19:14, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

The poem by that author could be included in a Wikisource project, as it would meet inclusion criteria so long as it is not under copyright. Since the work could be included in Wikisource, it is worth having the data item for the author as well. The person might not meet Wikipedia criteria for inclusion, but they would meet Wikisource criteria. --EncycloPetey (talk) 19:49, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. Ameisenigel (talk) 07:35, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

Remove rollbackers from the following accounts

These accounts are globally banned by WMF. GZWDer (talk) 08:09, 7 December 2022 (UTC)

  Done--BRP ever 09:20, 7 December 2022 (UTC)
It does not appear that any of these accounts ever attempted to use wd-deleted. Bovlb (talk) 21:45, 7 December 2022 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. Ameisenigel (talk) 07:36, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

Persistent political non neutral edition

Please semi-protect Cristina Fernández de Kirchner (Q40649) and block Template:IP due to persistent political non neutral editions.

--Roblespepe (talk) 23:06, 7 December 2022 (UTC)

  Done another year semi --Emu (talk) 23:21, 7 December 2022 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. Ameisenigel (talk) 07:37, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

Report concerning User:2A03:E600:100:0:0:0:0:27

2A03:E600:100:0:0:0:0:27 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL (for IP: GUC)) — Reasons: Vandalism: [1]. This is a persistent vandal, blocked permanently on the Bulgarian Wikipedia, that came here to do the same. Sent threats to vandalize to 4 contributors here: [2], [3], [4], [5]. He's usually vandalizing with different IP addresses, as he's using open proxies, vpns, etc. StanProg (talk) 08:17, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

  Done --Ameisenigel (talk) 09:34, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
Thank you, Ameisenigel. Please also consider protecting the item (Q12272465) itself as the reported user is acting through different registered and unregistered accounts [6]
Pelajanela (talk) 11:54, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
  Done Semi-protected for a month --Ameisenigel (talk) 12:01, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. Ameisenigel (talk) 09:34, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

Report concerning User:205.167.55.205

205.167.55.205 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL (for IP: GUC)) — Reasons: vandalism Saroj Uprety (talk) 18:42, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

  Blocked for three months Estopedist1 (talk) 07:18, 9 December 2022 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. Lymantria (talk) 18:24, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

Report concerning User:195.221.156.37

195.221.156.37 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL (for IP: GUC)) — Reasons: Persistent vandalism. Dorades (talk) 11:32, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

  Blocked for one year (fifth block) Estopedist1 (talk) 06:46, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. Lymantria (talk) 18:24, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

Report concerning User:24.153.41.117

24.153.41.117 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL (for IP: GUC)) — Reasons: Continuing disruptive editing after the block expired. Dorades (talk) 12:23, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

  Blocked for one yar (fourth block) Estopedist1 (talk) 06:51, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. Lymantria (talk) 18:24, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

Report concerning User:197.203.71.60

197.203.71.60 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL (for IP: GUC)) — Reasons: Vandalism. Karim185.3 (talk) 14:22, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

  Blocked for three months Estopedist1 (talk) 06:57, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. Lymantria (talk) 18:24, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

Report concerning User:109.107.243.253

109.107.243.253 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL (for IP: GUC)) — Reasons: vandalism Saroj Uprety (talk) 17:37, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

  Done Blocked for 31 hours. Jianhui67 talk★contribs 17:39, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. Lymantria (talk) 18:24, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

Block User:213.129.55.190

Please block 213.129.55.190 (talk • contribs • logs) as soon as possible. They are vandalizing several pages on WD. Kacamata (talk) 01:38, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

  Done by Mahir256 --Ameisenigel (talk) 08:08, 11 December 2022 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. Ameisenigel (talk) 08:08, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

Repeated vandalism by the same IP

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

--Push-f (talk) 08:33, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

  Blocked for three months Estopedist1 (talk) 08:44, 11 December 2022 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. Lymantria (talk) 18:24, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

Report concerning User:41.207.18.11

41.207.18.11 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL (for IP: GUC)) — Reasons: Harassment and spam, probably LTA Ruy (talk) 17:20, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

  Done Blocked for 3 months. Lymantria (talk) 18:28, 11 December 2022 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. Lymantria (talk) 18:28, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

Report concerning User:81.180.74.152

81.180.74.152 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL (for IP: GUC)) — Reasons: Bad-faith item creations ranging from duplicate topics (Blurryface (Q115520517), Fight Club (Q115520836), etc.) to outright vandalism (Q115433017, Q115432939, etc.). Gikü (talk) 23:01, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

@Gikü why do you think that bad-faith? Although I concede that it should be elementary skill even for beginners to find already existing items Estopedist1 (talk) 07:01, 2 December 2022 (UTC)
I wouldn't state that if I did not notice the apparent multi-IP campaign practicing the same disrupting behavior: 94.243.71.171, 80.245.85.249, 94.139.154.138, 2A00:1858:1022:8788:870C:8090:AB84:7871, 94.243.70.111 and possibly a couple others I could've missed. Gikü (talk) 20:58, 6 December 2022 (UTC)

YE SIQI

Can someone check out user YE SIQI, who has merged several objects today. J 1982 (talk) 12:21, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

There seem to be some terrible and completely wrong merges. For example, these are different, but have been merged.
YE_SIQI - Can you please explain these actions? Thanks.
- Fuzheado (talk) 05:16, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
In general, I recommend to disable possibility for new users and IPs to merge items. To clean up merging messes is quite annoying Estopedist1 (talk) 05:29, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
That wouldn't be a bad idea. There are projects that restrict moving pages to autoconfirmed users; a bad merge here is as damaging as moving a WP article to an incorrect title. –FlyingAce✈hello 01:38, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
@Fuzheado I have gone through the rest of @YE_SIQI's edits and reverted all of the merges: as far as I can tell they are all on different topics. Most were Chinese villages with identical names but located in quite different areas. Looking at the reports for China administrative division code (P442) this seems to have happened with a few other users as well - the clue that there's been a bad merge is that the codes have very different initial sequences (eg 61... and 32... are going to be in completely different regions) Andrew Gray (talk) 22:10, 6 December 2022 (UTC)

Report concerning User:87.11.108.146

87.11.108.146 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL (for IP: GUC)) — Reasons: LTA/Repeated disruptive editing and block evasion. – LiberatorG (talk) 07:15, 6 December 2022 (UTC)

block evasion? user kinda seems like they might be well intentioned. nothing looks terrible just weird BrokenSegue (talk) 07:33, 6 December 2022 (UTC)
They've been making nonsense and disruptive edits, creating nonsense items, removing statements, etc. for over a year using various IP addresses and do not respond to feedback. They've probably been blocked over 100 times by now; I think the most recent block was 95.235.101.155. –LiberatorG (talk) 08:03, 6 December 2022 (UTC)

Mass-deletion

About 1200 items to be deleted. Because of the scale, maybe someone also wants to check it as well at here Wikidata:Requests_for_deletions/Archive/2022/12/12#Q115584692 Estopedist1 (talk) 06:53, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

  Done --Ameisenigel (talk) 16:08, 12 December 2022 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. Ameisenigel (talk) 16:08, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

Report concerning User:167.88.225.18

167.88.225.18 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL (for IP: GUC)) — Reasons: Persistent vandalism. Dorades (talk) 20:14, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

  Blocked for three months Estopedist1 (talk) 08:42, 11 December 2022 (UTC)
Continuing as 2600:1700:7430:79C0:9112:E43:523:F5E8 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL (for IP: GUC)). --Dorades (talk) 12:50, 12 December 2022 (UTC)
  Blocked for three months. @Dorades: maybe some of his edits should be reverted yet Estopedist1 (talk) 05:37, 13 December 2022 (UTC)
Thank you! I think I have checked all of their edits, do you have any particular in mind? --Dorades (talk) 10:55, 13 December 2022 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. Lymantria (talk) 06:19, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

User Voicerabin posting pornographic images

See https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Wikidata:Project_chat&oldid=1788069847, which I reverted Vicarage (talk) 18:33, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

blocked and hidden —MisterSynergy (talk) 18:52, 11 December 2022 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. Lymantria (talk) 06:18, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

Report concerning User:77.135.220.162

77.135.220.162 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL (for IP: GUC)) — Reasons: repeating vandalism Syunsyunminmin (talk) 14:12, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

  Done Blocked 2 weeks. Lymantria (talk) 15:45, 13 December 2022 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. Lymantria (talk) 15:45, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

Revision deletion

Content and summary of this edit contains Turkish swearing content. Please do revision delete. Uncitoyen (talk) 12:07, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

That is probably unnecessary and does not meet criteria for WD:REVDEL — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 12:57, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

Please protect Ed Sheeran

Ed Sheeran (Q47447) over the last few weeks appears to have become a popular target of vandalism. Hjart (talk) 17:55, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

  Done 3 months semi --Emu (talk) 19:03, 12 December 2022 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. DannyS712 (talk) 02:37, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

Report concerning User:Vnfdfnfdnmf

Vnfdfnfdnmf (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL (for IP: GUC)) — Reasons: Vandalism only account. –FlyingAce✈hello 19:01, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

  Done indef --Emu (talk) 19:04, 12 December 2022 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. DannyS712 (talk) 02:37, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

Protection for Q4391915

Jorge González (Q4391915) has been attracting vandalism from IPs and new accounts recently. –FlyingAce✈hello 19:03, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

  Done 6 months semi (vandalism spaced out) --Emu (talk) 19:05, 12 December 2022 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. DannyS712 (talk) 02:37, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

Report concerning User:62.99.66.52

62.99.66.52 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL (for IP: GUC)) — Reasons: vandalism for years. Madamebiblio (talk) 20:54, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

  Done - Blocked by BrokenSegue for 31 hours - Fuzheado (talk) 03:33, 13 December 2022 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. DannyS712 (talk) 02:37, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

Request for protection from LTA

Please protect Q10363699, which is being vandalized by a WMF-banned LTA. He uses throwaway IPs through a P2P proxy service/VPN. The most recent is 142.255.100.129 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL (for IP: GUC)). If you could revdel the libelous rubbish in the edit summaries I'd appreciate that too. Antandrus (talk) 23:43, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

  Done - Protected by MisterSynergy - Fuzheado (talk) 03:35, 13 December 2022 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. DannyS712 (talk) 02:37, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

Report concerning User:Hao Khao

Hao Khao (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL (for IP: GUC)) — Reasons: Sockpuppet of Eiskrahablo‎, vandalizing Q5250962. CU confirmed on Commons. Paul 012 (talk) 00:15, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

  Done - Blocked indefinitely as per sock puppet/checkuser at commons:Commons:Requests_for_checkuser/Case/Eiskrahablo - Fuzheado (talk) 03:52, 13 December 2022 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. DannyS712 (talk) 02:37, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

Report concerning User:2A02:85F:F0E6:2F6F:6161:3E3:EADA:3D66

2A02:85F:F0E6:2F6F:6161:3E3:EADA:3D66 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL (for IP: GUC)) — Reasons: Vandalism only Tryvix1509 (talk) 03:20, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

  Done blocked the /64 for a week. Mahir256 (talk) 03:32, 13 December 2022 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. DannyS712 (talk) 02:37, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

Report concerning 5.144.186.210

5.144.186.210 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL (for IP: GUC)). Adding of obscenities on pages. Wolverène (talk) 08:59, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

  Done Blocked for 3 days. Jianhui67 talk★contribs 09:24, 13 December 2022 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. DannyS712 (talk) 02:37, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

Report concerning 87.3.97.73

87.3.97.73 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL (for IP: GUC)). Well-known LTA (see here for example). Horcrux (talk) 11:10, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

  Done Blocked for one week. Jianhui67 talk★contribs 18:52, 13 December 2022 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. DannyS712 (talk) 02:37, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

Vandalism by a registered user

Nguyenphutrong2 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL (for IP: GUC))

--Push-f (talk) 11:39, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

  Done Blocked indefinitely. Jianhui67 talk★contribs 12:51, 13 December 2022 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. DannyS712 (talk) 02:37, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

Q131505 - please change redirect entry en:Esotericism to redirect target

en:Esotericism is a redirect now, this entry shall be changed to point to redirect target en:Western esotericism directly. --Drahkrub (talk) 15:51, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

en:Western esotericism is already connected to the data item Western esotericism (Q7988482). It cannot go to both places at the same time, so which one is more suitable? —MisterSynergy (talk) 16:35, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
To be honest - no idea. A wikidata item linking to a redirect page makes no sense, so which mechanism are provided to resolve such conflict? --Drahkrub (talk) 19:20, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
There is Wikidata:Sitelinks to redirects meanwhile, mainly in order to improve interwiki links when articles do not fit 1:1 in different projects as in this case. Formally there is nothing wrong with the current setup. —MisterSynergy (talk) 20:33, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

Interwiki prefix for https://hub.toolforge.org/

I think it would be nice to have a hub prefix for Wikidata Hub (Q63379538) so that e.g. https://hub.toolforge.org/Q35432171?property=P953 can be linked via hub:Q35432171?property=P953.

Admins can create interwiki prefixes at Special:Interwiki.

I am not sure if this is the right page to request a new interwiki prefix.

--Push-f (talk) 12:01, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

Not a big fan of interal links to external resources. Anyways, apparently toolforge:hub/Q35432171?property=P953 works already. —MisterSynergy (talk) 13:03, 13 December 2022 (UTC)
Ah ... that's neat, thanks! :) --Push-f (talk) 13:05, 13 December 2022 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. Ameisenigel (talk) 16:06, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Report concerning User:188.173.117.116

188.173.117.116 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL (for IP: GUC)) — Reasons: Persistent vandalism. Dorades (talk) 17:55, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

  Done Blocked for 2 weeks. Jianhui67 talk★contribs 18:48, 13 December 2022 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. Ameisenigel (talk) 16:07, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Request to unblock IP 158.99.0.0/16

When trying to log in in Wikidata we get a message:

Editing from 158.99.0.0/16 has been blocked by Ymblanter for the following reasons: Vandalism

I request the unblocking for the following reason:

I am teacher in the high school of El Parador de las Hortichuelas

I have a project to improve the content of our city both in Commons and in Wikidata with my 12th grade students (6 students)

I think the "vandalism" was because we tried to create all 6 accounts in the same day MdeVicente (talk) 10:45, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

@MdeVicente: I unblocked the range. I am sure this was real vandalism, but I can not easily check this now. Ymblanter (talk) 11:27, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
Special:Contributions/158.99.0.0/16 —MisterSynergy (talk) 11:45, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
Thank you so much. Hope there was no real vandalism. If you need some more information about our editions, please let me know. MdeVicente (talk) 12:37, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
@MdeVicente: there was some vandalism back in May/June, so I'm guessing it was not your group of students but someone else at the school. Good luck with your project! :) –FlyingAce✈hello 13:06, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
Thank you!!! :) MdeVicente (talk) 17:40, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. Ameisenigel (talk) 16:07, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Report concerning User:Letnan Satu.Inf AirlanggaYudhoyono Kopasus-Tni

Letnan Satu.Inf AirlanggaYudhoyono Kopasus-Tni (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL (for IP: GUC)) — Reasons: They are already blocked, but they should not be able to edit their own talk page (see history). Cheers, — Envlh (talk) 08:51, 17 December 2022 (UTC) Envlh (talk) 08:51, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

  Done by Ymblanter --Ameisenigel (talk) 10:35, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. Ameisenigel (talk) 10:35, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Thoughts on an admin bot?

This has probably been discussed before but I haven't seen the discussion. Thoughts on an admin bot to do basic cleanup. I'm thinking a task like

  • Delete items older than 24 hours with:
    • no statements
    • no inbound links
    • no sitelinks
    • only one editor
  • Warn the creators and offer advice on undeleting

Thoughts? Are there other tasks that would make sense for an admin-bot? Maybe semi-protect items with 3 rollbacks in 24-hours? Would any of this need an RfC? BrokenSegue (talk) 19:45, 7 December 2022 (UTC)

Do we understand how such items typically get created? Ymblanter (talk) 19:50, 7 December 2022 (UTC)
My impression from looking at recent changes is that a lot of items are made by people that just don't understand wikidata and think it's like Wikipedia where you are restricted to name/description. So they just give up. I also think a bot warning users their items are empty and that this is bad would be useful. BrokenSegue (talk) 20:34, 7 December 2022 (UTC)
I think they are often created a the result of errors. E.g. Spwriredonia retorta (Q114716884). BrokenSegue (talk) 20:41, 7 December 2022 (UTC)
This is basically the classical “empty item” worklist. User:ValterVB used to delete a lot of items from that worklist in the past, and I do so occasionally now. I don’t think we would be more aggressive if we were to delete these items by bot, it would just come much quicker than it does right now. 24 hours is a bit too quick from my experience, I would recommend 5-7 days or so.
I am sceptical regarding the deletion notification, however. A couple of months ago we have discussed a similar service with User:Bovlb, but after having a couple of such conversations with affected users I think they kinda backed out of this idea. You would basically need to provide *a lot* of support for often questionable intentions with very little reward. —MisterSynergy (talk) 20:53, 7 December 2022 (UTC)
The discussion was at Wikidata:Project_chat/Archive/2022/07#Deletion_without_discussion (search for "Here's a specific proposal"), also discussed at Wikidata:Administrators'_noticeboard/Archive/2022/09#User_:_Bovlb_Deleted_Our_Wikidata_Page and Topic:X2we405ydxnsb4eg. I am still in favour of such a bot, but I'd prefer to spend my limited time on improving the deleted items search. Bovlb (talk) 21:13, 7 December 2022 (UTC)
I wasn't suggesting notification of deletion. I was suggesting warning them that their item needs statements to be useful. BrokenSegue (talk) 22:41, 7 December 2022 (UTC)
Just to be noticed that we have an active User:Dexbot (maintained by user:Ladsgroup). It's deletions can be found [7] Estopedist1 (talk) 07:34, 8 December 2022 (UTC)
@Estopedist1 I'd be more than happy to make it automated and run it as a bot but: 1- Agree on the conditions and reach consensus (probably in WD:PC) 2- give me a couple of days to write the code. Amir (talk) 08:50, 8 December 2022 (UTC)
Oh I didn't realize this bot existed. It's already very close to what I'm suggesting. If you're actually interested in coding up the bot I proposed above that'd be great and I'd be willing to try to build consensus for it. BrokenSegue (talk) 17:33, 8 December 2022 (UTC)
Sure thing. Let me know once it's reached. Amir (talk) 20:38, 8 December 2022 (UTC)
discussion is moved to here: Wikidata:Project_chat#Admin_Bot_Proposal:_Deleting_Empty_Items Estopedist1 (talk) 07:12, 9 December 2022 (UTC)
I think it would be great if an admin bot would delete instances of Wikimedia disambiguation page (Q4167410) when they have no sitelinks that have neither of our redirect badges. Wikimedia disambiguation page (Q4167410) seem to me only notable if they have actually sitelinks to non-redirect pages. When disambiguation pages get transformed into redirect pages on Wikipedia, we don't need the items for them anymore. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 15:05, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

Report concerning User:Vs64vs

Vs64vs (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL (for IP: GUC)) — Reasons: User try to force some data looks like russian propaganda and it's not fit the facts described in the articles, eg. try to foce archaic russian form "on" istead of modern "in" according to placing "in Ukraine". Krzysztof Popławski (talk) 12:08, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

@KrzysztofPoplawski The POV edit war on Holodomor (Q165058) seems to be the biggest problem. I have instated a partial block for this item and this user. Most other edits seem to be fine from a first glance but feel free to explain any other problematic behavior in more detail. --Emu (talk) 19:15, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

Attention administrators: The case of Holodomor (Q165058) is highly problematic: The item isn’t sourced or modeled too well. Descriptions have been altered in November resulting in an edit war. This is especially troubling as the topic is very contentious (especially the question ifthe term genocide is appropriate). Therefore: Please consider devoting some of your precious time to look into the edit history and check on my actions up until now. Please don’t hesitate to reverse my actions if you feel that I made an error of judgement. --Emu (talk) 20:17, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

Report concerning User:82.78.75.38

82.78.75.38 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL (for IP: GUC)) — Reasons: Returning vandal Wikidata:Administrators'_noticeboard/Archive/2022/11#Report concerning User:82.78.75.131. Gikü (talk) 20:39, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

  Blocked for three months Estopedist1 (talk) 18:57, 15 December 2022 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. Ameisenigel (talk) 12:16, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

Request for protection and revdel

Hi there - could you please semiprotect Q3990036, which has been an LTA target for a while? MisterSynergy did it previously. It's this guy again, currently using a VPN or P2P proxy service. Also please revdel his usual harassing nonsense in the edit summar(ies). Thanks in advance - Antandrus (talk) 22:08, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Revdel used where necessary; now monitoring for more of these edits. —MisterSynergy (talk) 22:17, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. Ameisenigel (talk) 12:17, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

Please protect Joseph Augustus Zarelli

Joseph Augustus Zarelli (Q331015) has been vandalized several times by various IP accounts over the last few days (removal of labels and inappropriate use of description and alias fields). Hjart (talk) 07:19, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

  Done two weeks semi --Emu (talk) 12:21, 15 December 2022 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. Ameisenigel (talk) 12:17, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

Emblem change of the Cavalry of Brazil article

I come through this topic to ask for the alteration of the emblem of the ptwiki version of the aforementioned article, due to the consensus obtained there around its promotion to a featured article. When I went to change it here, as I was the one who ended the candidacy there, my editing was blocked, and it was suggested that I proceed to this place in order to request the change. I appreciate your understanding, Editor Master Plus (talk) 14:27, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

I forgot to add the link: Brazilian cavalry (Q106543149). Editor Master Plus (talk) 14:29, 15 December 2022 (UTC)
@Editor Master Plus:   Done – it doesn't necessarily need an admin, just an autoconfirmed editor, so you will be able to add the badges yourself once you have 50 edits :) –FlyingAce✈hello 14:53, 15 December 2022 (UTC)
FlyingAce,Thanks for the answer! Editor Master Plus (talk) 13:55, 16 December 2022 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. Ameisenigel (talk) 12:17, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

Report concerning User:213.52.5.153

213.52.5.153 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL (for IP: GUC)) — Reasons: vandalism Infrastruktur (talk) 07:11, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

  Stale Last edit stems from October. It is not useful to block for a limited time now. Lymantria (talk) 08:14, 16 December 2022 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. Ameisenigel (talk) 12:18, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

Please block 178.21.183.189

178.21.183.189 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL (for IP: GUC)) has over the last week become increasingly annoying, vandalizing descriptions of various celebrities. Hjart (talk) 14:19, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

  Blocked for a week. --Esteban16 (talk) 14:56, 16 December 2022 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. Ameisenigel (talk) 12:18, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

Semiprotect Dina Boluarte (Q106474688)

Please semiprotect Dina Boluarte (Q106474688) since there are constant vandalism edits by IP users. Thanks. --Ovruni (talk) 18:54, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

  Done for 2 weeks Ymblanter (talk) 20:04, 16 December 2022 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. Ameisenigel (talk) 12:18, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

User:Marquaad34

Marquaad34 repeatedly has reverted the WD:RFD Q115636550, instead of discussing ⚊⚊ DCflyer (talk) 04:22, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Please block Marquaad34 for the myriad of unconstructive/abusive edits, including the creation of a false human settlement. ⚊⚊ DCflyer (talk) 04
37, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
Editor also blanks talk page
Special:Diff/1791285044. ⚊⚊ DCflyer (talk) 04:56, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
@Dcflyerrepeatedly has reverted edits to Q115636550, instead of discussing Marquaad34 (talk) 04:26, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
Your allegations are not accurate. You have thrown too much at once for me to be bothered to refute every single one of them. Marquaad34 (talk) 04:46, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
Worth noting that this is not the first time that this user has engaged in a bad-faith argument on WikiData Marquaad34 (talk) 05:08, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
user:Marquaad34 is blocked for 2 weeks Estopedist1 (talk) 07:25, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. Ameisenigel (talk) 12:19, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

Report concerning User:37.170.52.151

37.170.52.151 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL (for IP: GUC))--Shivanarayana (talk) 10:17, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

  Done --Ameisenigel (talk) 12:24, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. Ameisenigel (talk) 12:24, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

IP block person who keeps creating non-notable items for companies in "North England"

Literally the most annoying thing ever. Keeps creating a new account to create a new item for a non-notable company that they know will be deleted:

I know it's the same person because they keep creating items with the same style and in the same location.

Please IP block them from creating new accounts and editing. Lectrician1 (talk) 16:04, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

See Wikidata:Requests for checkuser/Case/Libertylocks. Lymantria (talk) 17:53, 15 December 2022 (UTC)
  Done Users have been identified and blocked, their items deleted. See the above checkuser case. Lymantria (talk) 07:14, 21 December 2022 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. Lymantria (talk) 07:14, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

Report concerning User:Fizzy bubbIech

Fizzy bubbIech (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL (for IP: GUC)) — Reasons: Disruptive editing and insulting a book author on their talk page. Dorades (talk) 11:12, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

@Dorades Seems to have stopped according to the last line on User talk:Fizzy bubbIech? --Emu (talk) 12:21, 15 December 2022 (UTC)
I thought so, too, but then they inserted all the unsourced statements again. --Dorades (talk) 12:35, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

Report concerning User:8.243.15.178

8.243.15.178 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL (for IP: GUC)) — Reasons: Vandalism on David Beckham (Q10520) Patricio.lorente (talk) 18:50, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

  Done --Ameisenigel (talk) 20:55, 21 December 2022 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. Ameisenigel (talk) 20:55, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

Report concerning User:95.62.56.52

95.62.56.52 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL (for IP: GUC)) — Reasons: Persistent vandalism. Dorades (talk) 08:28, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

  blocked for 31 hrs. --Esteban16 (talk) 15:04, 16 December 2022 (UTC)
Please reinstate the block, IP is continuing. --Dorades (talk) 14:29, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
  Blocked for three months Estopedist1 (talk) 04:51, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. Lymantria (talk) 06:17, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

Please protect Édith Piaf

Over the last week Édith Piaf (Q1631) has become an increasingly popular target of vandalism from various IP accounts. Hjart (talk) 14:13, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

  Protected for 1 week. --Esteban16 (talk) 15:00, 16 December 2022 (UTC)
  Re-protected for five years (celebrity) Estopedist1 (talk) 04:55, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. Lymantria (talk) 06:17, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

Q115690281

Hi, I have the resquest of @QDJ22 about my deletion of Q115690281. I highly doubt this author is notable, as he have only a autoedited book [8], but a opinion of another admin will be welcome. Fralambert (talk) 16:01, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Does not seem notable. No authority control, no independent media coverage (just a few vanity articles). Keep deleted. --Emu (talk) 16:47, 16 December 2022 (UTC)
The same user has requested some undeletions (of Q115682600, Q115682064, Q115682782, and Q115681761) at my talk page. You might want to judge those as well. I think these items do not meet our notability criteria either, more opinions are welcome. Lymantria (talk) 16:51, 16 December 2022 (UTC)
please i dont understand why you keep saying it didnt meet the notability because i wasnt allowed to complete any of the item before judging and deleting it which i have explained that there are still information to add QDJ22 (talk) 21:10, 16 December 2022 (UTC)
Q115681761 might be a borderline case as this article could be construed to confer notability – although I personally think that the deletion was warranted (especially since there is no source for most of the statements at time of deletion). I couldn’t find any sign of notability for the other items. Given the broad scope of the various items, this might be a case of undisclosed paid editing which could lead to a block of @QDJ22. --Emu (talk) 21:47, 16 December 2022 (UTC)
i dont know anything about the article you mentioned and the item is not a piad editing, if it is a paid editing, dont you think i would have input all the source and reference from the start, the item is about my friend and i didnt know that i have to put reference and source to each statement from start and since you all mention i want to correct it by requesting for undeletion instead of recreating it. I am a volunteer editor QDJ22 (talk) 23:43, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Semiprotect Q11343874

there are constant vandalism edits by Rakuten Mobile IP users. Afaz (talk) 13:47, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

  Protected for one year (second protection) Estopedist1 (talk) 06:33, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. Lymantria (talk) 06:17, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

Report concerning User:179.58.84.247

179.58.84.247 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL (for IP: GUC)) — Reasons: vandalism Saroj Uprety (talk) 17:28, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

  Protected vandalizing a concrete item Estopedist1 (talk) 06:37, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. Lymantria (talk) 06:17, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

Report concerning User:Fernando kamacho

Fernando kamacho (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL (for IP: GUC)) — Reasons: persistent vandalism Saroj Uprety (talk) 17:28, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

  Protected vandalizing a concrete item Estopedist1 (talk) 06:37, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. Lymantria (talk) 06:17, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

Protection for Q713083 (Q713083)

Someone changing the explanation continuously 'Korean culture' to 'Chinese culture' in this query. please protect the document. thank you! ―파란여우 (BlueFox) (토론 (talk)) 02:51, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

  Not done older (October 2022) one-time vandalism by one IP Estopedist1 (talk) 05:02, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. Lymantria (talk) 06:17, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

Report concerning User:158.99.0.0/19

158.99.0.0/19 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL (for IP: GUC)) — Reasons: Vandalism eg. Special:Diff/1373162282/1790870507 in 2022-12-16 by Special:Contributions/158.99.2.120: 25 edits of pranks on placenames, deleting properties, modifying coordinates (compare with [9]); Special:Diff/1785746142/1792413922 in 2022-12-19 by Special:Contributions/158.99.3.165: multiple pranks on date of birth. Background information: 158.99.0.0/16 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL (for IP: GUC)) was blocked on 12 June 2022 per Wikidata:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive/2022/06#Report concerning User:158.99.0.0/16, but was unblocked on 14 December 2022 (UTC) per Wikidata:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive/2022/12#Request_to_unblock_IP_158.99.0.0/16. Vandalism resumed immediately since then. This time I suggest a narrower range 158.99.0.0/19, which is the narrowest range that covers the past one year. Note that edits on other wikis from this range are also mostly unconstructive:https://xtools.wmflabs.org/globalcontribs/ipr-158.99.0.0/19/all?limit=500 . Wotheina (talk) 08:45, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

158.99.0.0/19 is blocked Estopedist1 (talk) 04:52, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
158.99.0.0/16 is blocked --Estopedist1 (talk) 04:53, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. Lymantria (talk) 06:17, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

GRP LTA again

See Special:Contributions/168.90.109.189. Please revedel as well. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 21:00, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

thanks, revdel was used here —MisterSynergy (talk) 21:11, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
Same: Special:Contributions/141.126.20.125 —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 03:59, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
  Done summary hided Estopedist1 (talk) 04:56, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. Lymantria (talk) 06:17, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

Protection for Q59313241

I am requesting temporary protection against possible vandalism for the Q59313241 element. This item is currently on the agenda in Turkey. Kurmanbek (talk) 22:46, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

  Done two weeks semi --Emu (talk) 22:57, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. Lymantria (talk) 06:17, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

Report concerning User:178.139.232.62

178.139.232.62 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL (for IP: GUC)) — Reasons: LTA. Dorades (talk) 15:46, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

  Blocked for three months Estopedist1 (talk) 04:52, 21 December 2022 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. Lymantria (talk) 06:17, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

Report concerning User:Hguigihkoujklol

Hguigihkoujklol (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL (for IP: GUC)) — Reasons: Vandalism Ɀɾαɯɳ Շคɭк 01:03, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

  Done blocked BrokenSegue (talk) 01:50, 22 December 2022 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. Lymantria (talk) 06:14, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

Protection for Papu Gómez (Q965846)

Reapeted vandalism. Madamebiblio (talk) 03:49, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

  Done Semiprotected for a month. Lymantria (talk) 06:14, 22 December 2022 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. Lymantria (talk) 06:14, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

Protection (again) for Michael Knowles (Q83974181)

Repeated vandalism by multiple IPs; has been protected before due to this issue. Jamie7687 (talk) 20:20, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

  Done semi for 3 months. Lymantria (talk) 20:36, 22 December 2022 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. Lymantria (talk) 20:36, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

Report concerning User:Nurlac

  1. Nurlac (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL (for IP: GUC))
  2. 2405:4802:1CD:D40:5D2A:A173:3282:A792 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL (for IP: GUC))

These are the same user as globally banned Qiure (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL (for IP: GUC)). They are keep changing English label of "cải lương" (cải lương (Q5202988)) and associated items to unsourced English label "Cairoless", refusing to provide any sources or any comments at all. And before that they were banned for uploading and spreading fake flags on multiple wikipedia. Solidest (talk) 19:38, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

maybe a checkuser estimate the case? Estopedist1 (talk) 05:43, 13 December 2022 (UTC)
3. 2405:4802:1CD:D40:C518:5AD2:F112:B168 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL (for IP: GUC)). One more IP with the same edits. They keep vandalizing on wiki-commons with the same edits and getting banned on every account and IP listed here. Same story for wikidata – for some reason they prefer "Cairolesswrights" over "Cải lương writers" here Category:Cải lương writers (Q32538247) and so on. Solidest (talk) 23:00, 13 December 2022 (UTC)
4. 2405:4802:2e0:9fe0:a80c:aacf:c9c1:7c2b (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL (for IP: GUC)). Another IP, seemingly by the same person promoting the same non-existent term on enwiki. See: en:Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard#User with multiple accounts and IPs disrupting Vietnamese articles. Solidest (talk) 15:22, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Report concerning User:Platybelodon

Platybelodon (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL (for IP: GUC)) - Reasons: LTA - same user as User:Extrapolaris and User:Marti1122. Magnatyrannus (talk) 00:08, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

@Magnatyrannus only one edit by User:Platybelodon. Why do you think that the same user? Estopedist1 (talk) 07:03, 2 December 2022 (UTC)
@Estopedist1: Because their name indicates that they have an interest in Paleontology, and that one edit was related to aviation, which other socks of this user share. Magnatyrannus (talk) 13:15, 2 December 2022 (UTC)
@Magnatyrannus: That seems rather thin. Can you please explain what was wrong with the actual edit? Bovlb (talk) 21:19, 2 December 2022 (UTC)
There was nothing wrong with the actual edit, except for the fact that it was made by a sockpuppet. See here for further information. Magnatyrannus (talk) 21:31, 2 December 2022 (UTC)
I don't know how to explain this to you, but I don't think it's good practice to revert edits that improved the project. Bovlb (talk) 22:33, 4 December 2022 (UTC)
Yeah, I immediately regretted that, but is letting a user get away with block evasion alright? Magnatyrannus (talk) 23:32, 11 December 2022 (UTC)
@Bovlb Do you have anything on this? Magnatyrannus (talk) 15:05, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Vandalism on Malay (Q9237)

The Wikidata for Malay (Q9237) is highly vandalized and surprisingly locked, I request a change for descriptions and related datas inputed there. First of all, Malay is an ethnic language spoken by the Malay ethnic group, Malaysia adopted it as their national language (which later known as Malaysian Malay) but not with Indonesia, it such a great lie and hoax to claim that Indonesian is Malay or the other way around. Please fix that. If none of administrators would love to fix that, at least unlocked it, Wiki projects are not place to do original researches nor to push POV, nor to create hoaxes. (ANTI HOAXXX (talk) 06:13, 18 December 2022 (UTC))

@ANTI HOAXXX specific topic. Last editors of the description are user:Taylor 49 and user:Dan Carkner. Best may be to use enwiki first sentence Estopedist1 (talk) 06:24, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
Not Vandalism. If the user wishes to refer to Indonesian they can use Indonesian (Q9240) or the official language of Malaysia Malaysian Malay (Q15065). Malay (Q9237) is referring to the language which encompasses both of those as well as a variety of other existing and historical dialects. A strictly nationalistic, present-day interpretation of "Malay" would prevent this common term from being used under various characteristics in wikidata such as the language of a newspaper published in Batavia in 1890, the language spoken by a Sultan in Sumatra in 1700, or a book published by a Dutch administrator in Java in 1910. Dan Carkner (talk) 14:54, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
I agree mostly with User:ANTI HOAXXX and User:Dan Carkner. Malay macrolanguage is NOT the same thing as Indonesian and Malaysian Malay. The page is NOT locked in any way. Unfortunately the account "ANTI HOAXXX" was created for the sole purpose of placing this complaint. It is likely that the same person has other wiki accounts. This in an old crosswiki problem (comm). I do speak Indonesian, but have NO personal or nationalistic interest in this topic. I do want, however, that things are consistently named and linked across wikis. The claim
> Malay is an Austronesian language that is an official language of Brunei, Indonesia,
> Malaysia, and Singapore, and that is also spoken in East Timor and parts of the
> Philippines and Thailand.
is unfortunate, because it claims that Indonesian and Malaysian Malay is the same language, while this is not the case. There are separate regulatory bodies, and minor (unnecessary) differences between those two. Indonesian is based on Malay macrolanguage, but for whatever reasons considered as NOT covered by the code ms & msa. Taylor 49 (talk) 20:34, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
Most likely "ANTI HOAXXX" is meta:Special:CentralAuth/Anti-Hoaxes AKA "Eiskrahablo". Taylor 49 (talk) 21:06, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
Thanks. Where do you see those parts you are quoting ? Or is that your summary of some of the tagged data? And what changes do you propose, if any?
I personally don't expect there to be ever 100% clear differentiation across Wikidata and various Wikipedias about the difference between the nebulous concept of Malay and specifically Malaysian/Indonesian as well as contemporary regional Malay dialects. But the fact that there are already specific Wikidata items for the specific national official languages helps with that issue a bit. Dan Carkner (talk) 21:07, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
"Best may be to use enwiki first sentence" above. Taylor 49 (talk) 21:09, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
Understood now. I was specifically looking at the Wikidata page only, sorry. Dan Carkner (talk) 21:11, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
If it really is a banned user using many sockpuppets, in that case I don't feel we really have to debate their complaints too deeply. Dan Carkner (talk) 21:16, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Report concerning User:43.239.85.17

43.239.85.17 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL (for IP: GUC)) — Reasons: Vandalism for multiple Taiwan-related item S8321414 (talk) 03:28, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

I warned you on the conversation page. --GALAXYライナー ★彡 ✈︎ (talk) 05:09, 23 December 2022 (UTC)
  Blocked for three months Estopedist1 (talk) 05:40, 23 December 2022 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. Lymantria (talk) 14:27, 25 December 2022 (UTC)

Report concerning User:虎編集さん

虎編集さん (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL (for IP: GUC)) — Reasons:ja:LTA:SUMOSONG --GALAXYライナー ★彡 ✈︎ (talk) 05:14, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

  Blocked indefinitely Estopedist1 (talk) 05:42, 23 December 2022 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. Lymantria (talk) 14:27, 25 December 2022 (UTC)

Report concerning User:192.38.130.8

192.38.130.8 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL (for IP: GUC)) — Reasons: LTA. Dorades (talk) 12:05, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

  Blocked for three months Estopedist1 (talk) 07:30, 24 December 2022 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. Lymantria (talk) 14:27, 25 December 2022 (UTC)

Report concerning User:Wikimangas

Wikimangas (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL (for IP: GUC)) — Reasons: Advertisement and vandalism, it's advisable to check out Barsbold1205 (talk • contribs • logs) as well. CrystalLemonade (talk) 13:04, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

  Done Blocked both accounts indefinitely as I think they are related to each other. I guess a checkuser is needed here as I suspect the culprit might have more accounts. The vandalism started as early as July 2021, as seen from the edits of this IP. Jianhui67 talk★contribs 17:17, 23 December 2022 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. Lymantria (talk) 14:27, 25 December 2022 (UTC)

Report concerning User:Ellasia

Ellasia (talk • contribs • logs) They have created items for their classmates (with photos) and their sister. Please remove items for private persons. See also commons:Commons:Administrators' noticeboard#Block User:Ellasia and remove uploads Pyfisch (talk) 22:53, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

  deleted. Fails WD:Notability Estopedist1 (talk) 07:38, 24 December 2022 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. Lymantria (talk) 14:27, 25 December 2022 (UTC)

Report concerning User:186.42.1.108 and User:140.119.145.168

186.42.1.108 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL (for IP: GUC)) 140.119.145.168 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL (for IP: GUC)) — Reasons: Vandalism and Suspected multiple accounts GALAXYライナー ★彡 ✈︎ (talk) 04:56, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

@ギャラクシーライナー only one edit by both account. No need to block. Estopedist1 (talk) 07:35, 24 December 2022 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. Lymantria (talk) 14:27, 25 December 2022 (UTC)

Q66809901

Edit war. --Krd 08:27, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

  Done, fully protected for two weeks Ymblanter (talk) 20:11, 24 December 2022 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. Lymantria (talk) 14:27, 25 December 2022 (UTC)

d:Q66809901

Since the object has been protected

please add the sitelink de:Mxmtoon to object d:Q66809901. Thanks a lot! M2k~dewiki (talk) 18:43, 25 December 2022 (UTC)

  Done --Ameisenigel (talk) 20:19, 25 December 2022 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. Ameisenigel (talk) 20:19, 25 December 2022 (UTC)

Semi-Protection for Wind Telecomunicazioni (Q650467)

Vodafone vandal LTA reverting to a claim not stated in it.wp. Dorades (talk) 20:53, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

item is protected, and range-block may be also needed here Estopedist1 (talk) 05:00, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. Estopedist1 (talk) 04:37, 26 December 2022 (UTC)

Report concerning User:Carlo Zerulo Dj

Harassment on my user talk after I deleted their user page as spam/advertising. Lymantria (talk) 08:22, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

  Done --Ameisenigel (talk) 12:48, 27 December 2022 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. Ameisenigel (talk) 12:48, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

Culver Max Entertainment (Q6934556)

Happy Winters, would any admin kindly remove IP vandalism and restore stable version and protect if possible. Thanks for your consideration. C1K98V (💬 ✒️ 📂) 15:11, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

I reverted vandalism but I do not see a need for protection. Ymblanter (talk) 19:50, 27 December 2022 (UTC)
@Ymblanter Yeah protection was optional. Thanks for the quick response. C1K98V (💬 ✒️ 📂) 02:38, 28 December 2022 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: C1K98V (💬 ✒️ 📂) 02:39, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

Report concerning User:95.61.145.125

95.61.145.125 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL (for IP: GUC)) — Reasons: LTA adding nonsense claims. Dorades (talk) 13:31, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

  Done --Ameisenigel (talk) 19:01, 28 December 2022 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. Ameisenigel (talk) 19:01, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

Report concerning Q7693181.

Q7693181 has been deleted by 2 separate accounts which suspect might be working together. The person mentioned in the account is a notable person. AdamD66 (talk) 03:41, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

pinging a deleting admin, user:1997kB--Estopedist1 (talk) 05:35, 16 December 2022 (UTC)
@AdamD66: Item was created with a site link to English Wikipedia article which got deleted due to lack of notability in August 2021. Since then it has no additional references and only one identifier: Golden wiki and looking at it's history it seems that was also created by you. You also created Ted Fang's company profile on Golden wiki. To me it looks like you are being paid to increase SEO for him, which is not right use of Wikidata. Plus the item was deleted through the RfD process and your theory of "2 accounts working together" has no credibility. ‐‐1997kB (talk) 08:17, 16 December 2022 (UTC)
Looking at the references on the old Wikipedia article he seems to be notable for Wikidata. And according to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Days_Inn_China he was the ex-president so passes "structural need" at least. Piecesofuk (talk) 10:08, 16 December 2022 (UTC)
I don't think that Wikipedia article had any "serious reference" so I don't think they are notable per that old article. This could qualify structural need so if reviewing admin wants to restore the item, I have no issue with that. Do note that OP seems to be violating ToS by doing paid editing without any disclosure. ‐‐1997kB (talk) 10:09, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

Site links of Q10883243 and of Q109531372 should be switched

The Chinese sitelink of the 2013-Nov 2021 version of Q10883243 needs to be restored. That is based on the Dec 7 2022version of both items, if we switch all Chinese and Vietnamese sitelinks and badges, the problem would be solved. But the system doesn't allow me to change badges. Could anyone help me? 173.68.165.114 23:18, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

In other words, the correct sitelinks should be:

  • Q109531372
vi Tiếng Kinh tại Trung Quốc
zh 中國越南語
  • Q10883243
vi Tiếng Kinh Trung Quốc
zh 中國京語
Thanks! --173.68.165.114 23:26, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
@173.68.165.114: Hello, I think merging both items would be more appropriate as 中國越南語/Tiếng Kinh tại Trung Quốc and 中國京語/Tiếng Kinh Trung Quốc seem to be referring to the same thing. w:vi:Tiếng Kinh Trung Quốc is redirected into w:vi:Tiếng Kinh tại Trung Quốc, and w:zh:中國越南語 is redirected into w:zh:中國京語. Jianhui67 talk★contribs 09:21, 22 December 2022 (UTC)
They are different. 中國越南語 primarily refers to the four dialects (Bac Bo, Bac Trung Bo, Trung Bo and Nam Ky) indigenous to Vietnam spoken in China (most Hongkonger's Vietnamese language falls into this category), while 中國京語 primarily refers to the fifth dialect indigenous to Guangxi. They're not just different in phonology and vocabulary, but also the Chu Nom used in Guangxi has quite a number of distinct characters from Vietnamese Chu Nom. --173.68.165.114 14:54, 22 December 2022 (UTC)
Hmm, then I guess the redirects should be rewritten to differentiate the two terms as right now both 中國越南語 and Tiếng Kinh Trung Quốc are redirected to another page. Jianhui67 talk★contribs 17:02, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protect Q1588689

Hassen Chalghoumi (Q1588689) This item has attracted multiple vandals in the last day. Please protect for some time. Pyfisch (talk) 21:45, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

  Done Andreasm háblame / just talk to me 04:14, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. Martin Urbanec (talk) 22:18, 30 December 2022 (UTC)

Block HelenH.Smith

HelenH.Smith (talk • contribs • logs) seems to be here only to spam WD talk pages. An indef block would probably help. --Tagishsimon (talk) 23:32, 29 December 2022 (UTC)

  Done indef --Emu (talk) 06:49, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. Martin Urbanec (talk) 22:18, 30 December 2022 (UTC)

WIPAWAN5555

WIPAWAN5555 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL (for IP: GUC)) vandalism only account. Cross-wiki issues. Lemonaka (talk) 19:38, 30 December 2022 (UTC)

  Done, indef. I also globally locked that account, due to the xwiki issues Martin Urbanec (talk) 22:06, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. Martin Urbanec (talk) 22:17, 30 December 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protection for various items

Please protect Tessellis (Q726572), Alice ADSL (Q2836529), Q32560599, OpNet (Q3833050), Tiscali Italia (Q113406502) and Aria (Q55832189) due to disruptive editing by LTA Vodafone vandal. Dorades (talk) 20:03, 30 December 2022 (UTC)

  Done, for 6 months Ymblanter (talk) 20:11, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. Martin Urbanec (talk) 22:17, 30 December 2022 (UTC)

Protection for Q158067

Please protection for Vivienne Westwood (Q158067), repeated insistence to change the image from an IP. Madamebiblio (talk) 07:48, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

  Done Semi-protected for two weeks --Ameisenigel (talk) 08:08, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. Ameisenigel (talk) 08:08, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

Ripon Islam Official

Vandalism only account. –– Yahya (talk) 13:42, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

  Done also blocked Ripon islam offecial (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL (for IP: GUC)) --Ameisenigel (talk) 15:49, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. Ameisenigel (talk) 15:49, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

Protection needed because of War Edit on Q65553954

The page in the Hebrew Wikipedia is very attractive to corrupters, since it's a hot political controversy in Israel, and is fair for long periods. Yanivshn (talk) 22:08, 25 December 2022 (UTC)

@Yanivshn: I don’t speak Hebrew but according to automatic translations, this looks like a content dispute and not “corruption” in the sense of vandalism. Which brings me to my question: Where is the discussion about this? Admins can’t resolve content disputes. CC SocialTechWorker --Emu (talk) 22:20, 25 December 2022 (UTC)
True, it's a dispute here, but vandalism occured on the hewiki page, and that's why it is protected there. I think for a dispute protection is also needed, otherwise the war continues. There's no discussion, as far as i know. Yanivshn (talk) 22:53, 25 December 2022 (UTC)
@Emu, I see there is a discussion on the hewiki whether to include the term "fundamentalist" to the desctiption of the party, or not. apparently in hewiki they voted (a vote, not a consensus at all) "yes". It's still a conroversy there. But a vote in hewiki don't bind Wikidata, am i right? Yanivshn (talk) 23:15, 25 December 2022 (UTC)
@Yanivshn No, not necessarily. But it’s generally a good idea to follow Wikipedia because they generally have more manpower and more expertise (at least I imagine this to be the case in the Hebrew language edition, especially when it comes to topics related to Israel). Exceptions are of course possible but should be discussed beforehand. --Emu (talk) 23:42, 25 December 2022 (UTC)
Well, you obviously don't know hewiki (-: It's extremley politically influenced. On political issues, you see two parties, mostly compatible with their political view (right or left). Expertise is relevant only to neutral, non-political issues, but that's not the case here... Yanivshn (talk) 00:51, 26 December 2022 (UTC)
That may be so. But do we have a better Hebrew-speaking user base on Wikidata large enough to limit the influence of individual opinions? --Emu (talk) 08:32, 26 December 2022 (UTC)
Here's the vote: ויקיפדיה:רשימת ערכים במחלוקת/:מפלגת נעם. "large" is a relative term, i think. The hottest votes in hebrew *Wikipedia* involves tens, others may involves only a few people. In *Wikidata*, however, i doubt if even a few will participate. Yanivshn (talk) 14:33, 26 December 2022 (UTC)

user:Lil Resheba

Vandalism: 1, 2 Wanderer777 (talk) 07:02, 26 December 2022 (UTC)

User has already been warned. No activity since the warning. --Emu (talk) 08:34, 26 December 2022 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. Ameisenigel (talk) 16:02, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

Persistent vandalism by multiple IP addresses

My edits at Macedonians in Rostushe (Q99003186) and Macedonians in Kladnik (Q98972862) are subject to a vandalism many times a day by multiple IP addresses (see [10], [11], [12], [13], [14], [15], [16], [17], [18], [19] and [20], [21], [22], [23], [24], [25], [26], [27], [28]). The disruptive editing is part of a cross-wiki vandalism in which pages and articles on the Macedonian Wikipedia have also been affected (see this notification on my talk page there). Furthermore, the description of some edits contains threats, and I also started receiving threatening emails. I protected the pages on the Macedonian Wikipedia and blocked the senders on my email account, so I suppose protection of the vandalised items should work as a first-step preventive measure. Thanks.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 08:30, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

@Kiril Simeonovski I protected both items for three months Estopedist1 (talk) 11:30, 28 December 2022 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. Ameisenigel (talk) 16:03, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

Report concerning User:Dissident93

Dissident93 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL (for IP: GUC)) — Reasons: Disruptive edits. This user was already warned by me and other user sometime ago about his unexplained removals of historical and other useful sourced data, however, it seems that he has started doing it again.

Here are some examples of Dissident93's recent removals, especially on this and this item:

Well, it is better late than never. Regards Kirilloparma (talk) 06:38, 27 December 2022 (UTC)
  • [37] unreasonable change of source: Dissident93 could just add a new one without removing current one;
    • This source did not seem reliable at all so I replaced it. Can you explain how having two sources, one clearly reliable and the other debatable, is better than just having the reliable one?
@Dissident93: Do you mean Igromania (Q4197757) one? Well, this source is not debatable and it is more than reliable. It is widely used in many wikis, including Wikidata and enwiki as well. Please note that Wikidata uses a lot of sources that may not be reliable on enwiki, but this does not mean that they should be removed here. This is not the correct approach. If you think that, for example, the source contains dubious information that cannot be confirmed, then in this case you should use ranks (see examples below) instead of just removing sources. I also want to note that in the Video Games project we do not have clear recommendations on reliable or not reliable sources. The only thing I can say so far is that the only source that preferably should not be used as reliable is vglist (Q96096761), as it is a database that uses data from Wikidata itself.
Example 1: Abandoned (Q106418703)
director
  Hideo Kojima edit
reason for deprecated rank incorrect value
0 references
add reference


add value
Example 2: The Callisto Protocol (Q104172915)
software engine
  Unreal Engine 5 edit
reason for deprecated rank error in referenced source or sources
0 references
add reference


add value
Example 3: Grand Theft Auto VI (Q23648408)
publication date
  2026 edit
reason for deprecated rank not been able to confirm this claim
0 references
add reference


add value
Regards Kirilloparma (talk) 06:38, 27 December 2022 (UTC)
  • [38], [39] unreasonable change of description to less accurate one;
    • This standard matches the other language ones and is inconsistent with plenty of other games. Unless this goes against policy or some talk page consensus (if so please link, I asked for one when you originally reached out to me), we don't need to note genre and setting unless needed for disambiguation as they are all listed in other parameters below.
Who said that this is inconsistent with many other games and other languages? No one forbids you changing from standard to different description. Languages are completely irrelevant here. If there is a standard description in many languages, this does not mean that it cannot be changed to another [more accurate] one. There is no such prohibition here. When you see someone change the description from a standard (which may not always be helpful) I mean YYYY video game to a different description, such as a YYYY video game developed by [someone] or YYYY [genre] video game developed by [someone], it's not a deterioration, but rather an improvement of the description. This one is definitely not an improvement though ... Please fully review Help:Description. Regards Kirilloparma (talk) 06:38, 27 December 2022 (UTC)
  • [40] unreasonable change of language: here Dissident93 could just add English without removing current one;
    • Fixed.
  • [41] unexplained removal of aliases;
    • "ER" is not commonly attributed to the game and I fail to see how a single person would ever search for the game using that. This needs a citation at the very least.
In our case, if you type "ER" in the search box, you will get various matches where you will also get this item (screenshot), so I see no reason why this alias should not be used. It is important to note that aliases do not support the ability to add a source, in our case it would not be required here anyway, since this is a simple abbreviation for a more convenient item search. See also Help:Aliases. Regards Kirilloparma (talk) 06:38, 27 December 2022 (UTC)
  • And here [42], [43] ... no comment. Kirilloparma (talk) 07:32, 22 December 2022 (UTC)
    • The French one seemed unreliable (apologies for assuming one with "blog" in the name counts as reliable) but the German one was accidentally removed. Is there no vetted list of publications deemed reliable for this project? Or can any one be added as long as it has a review score?
You see, as in the case of sources, this is also not the right approach. You remove absolutely everything you disagree with. This is completely wrong. According to your logic, just like you, I can come to enwiki and remove absolutely all reviewers that I personally did not like or that I consider unreliable. Do I understand correctly that, in your opinion, such an edit is welcome on enwiki, and no one will revert it? If yes, then OK. If not, why then? To be honest, I don't see any difference between this edit on the preview page and this edit of yours ...
I remind you that this is not Wikipedia. Even if you think that this statement is debatable for you, it may be useful for Wikidata purposes, so please refrain from such removals.
Is there no vetted list of publications deemed reliable for this project? As I noted here above, we do not have clear recommendations on this, but you are welcome to suggest your ideas and start discussion on the appropriate Video Games project page. All questions are raised there. You can also use the template {{Ping project|Name of the project}} to get participants involved in the discussion.
Or can any one be added as long as it has a review score? In principle, you can add any reviewer, no one forbids you to do so. Also, you have the right to indicate both the reception of critics and users if you consider it necessary. Regards Kirilloparma (talk) 06:38, 27 December 2022 (UTC)
  • So in essence, removal should only be used for obviously false data and the default course of action would be to just keep everything and add when needed? Dissident93 (talk) 09:55, 22 December 2022 (UTC)
    @Dissident93: I think a lot of the confusion here is just lack of familiarity with wikidata. For example generally it's not acceptable for people to edit someone else's comment in-line in the way you did here. Generally on wikidata we do not remove things that are sourced. We prefer adding more sources than removing them. This is similar to how we don't remove historical data. Aliases don't have citations in wikidata (it's just not supported) and the bar for an alias is pretty low. But generally yes the default course of action should be to only add. Only remove unsourced wrong statements. Even incorrect statements with references are supposed to be kept (though with a deprecated rank). I think removing the studio from a game's description is not something I would do. The page on Help:Description#Common_formulas explicitly suggests including the creator of a work. I would suggest you read some of the documentation before editing much more. BrokenSegue (talk) 17:37, 22 December 2022 (UTC)
Thanks to BrokenSegue for this detailed answer. The only thing I want to add is that Dissident93 needs to start getting involved in the project (I mean Wikidata) and understand that Wikidata and the various sections of Wikipedia, including enwiki, although related, are completely different projects, so before removing anything here, it's better familiarize yourself with Wikidata and feel free to contact the participants of the relevant project on the talk page (you can also discuss your idea on the project chat to get involved many other participants) if you have any questions, otherwise similar reports in the future for Dissident93 are simply inevitable here. Regards Kirilloparma (talk) 06:38, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi

There is a user named fifa World Cup Leo messi riggedd and their edits are weird to say the least they even say they are a sock puppet of fifa World Cup Leo messi rigged of simple English wiki so please do something about it

  Done indef --Emu (talk) 14:32, 26 December 2022 (UTC)
They are back and they edited this page
  Done Slightly different user name. Blocked indef as well. Lymantria (talk) 10:42, 27 December 2022 (UTC)
They are back again
  Done --Ameisenigel (talk) 12:39, 2 January 2023 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. Ameisenigel (talk) 12:39, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

Lexeme creations by Daniel Mietchen

Daniel Mietchen keeps repeatedly creating lexemes which only have forms and no senses, identifiers or even backlinks to help people (let alone machines) understand the meaning of the lexeme - essentially the equivalent of an empty item. On the 2nd of December (link), I asked them to improve the quality of the lexemes they're adding because repeatedly adding undefined lexemes and leaving everything for other people to improve is not fair on other users (I am really tired of doing it). Daniel has responded to comments on their talk page after my message (see the page history) but has not responded to my message nor stopped creating such lexemes either (see contributions in the lexeme namespace). I think a partial block for the lexeme namespace would be appropriate, but since I have a vested interest in not having to do all the work of improving Daniel's lexeme creations, I'm posting here instead. - Nikki (talk) 19:27, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

not responding to good faith criticism on talk pages is, in my view, a blockable offense (until they respond). I'm not comfortable enough with the lexeme namespace to know if the particular criticism is valid but I'd be fine blocking them until they at least engage with the criticism. BrokenSegue (talk) 19:59, 15 December 2022 (UTC)
@Nikki: Blocked from the lexeme namespace until they respond (@BrokenSegue: feel free to remove the block once they do). Mahir256 (talk) 20:27, 15 December 2022 (UTC)
@Nikki, BrokenSegue, Mahir256: Just a quick note that I only saw this now. Will look into this and then respond in more detail. --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 09:37, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
Here are my thoughts on the matter:
  1. Part I: Lexemes
    • I agree that lexemes should be linked to structured information as much as possible. If you follow my edits in the lexeme namespace, then you will have noticed that I am doing senses, etymology, compounds, pronunciation and similar on a regular basis. Not sure how best to give an overview here (the contributions in the lexeme namespace currently times out), but perhaps things like the NavelGazer for P5137 might serve as an indication. I am not doing much in terms of identifiers, simply because I am not aware of good workflows for that — pointers appreciated.
    • When I am adding structured information to lexemes, I do not pay much attention to who created the respective pages, other than sending an occasional "Thank you" to contributors that are new to me in lexeme contexts. This is partly because I work on lexemes as I come across them in other contexts (e.g. while reading a paper or working on a Wikipedia article), rather than systematically, and partly because my workflows for creating lexemes (e.g. via Ordia's text to lexemes) are different than those for annotating lexemes (e.g. via MachtSinn), and when I am doing one, I concentrate on that.
    • For lots of lexemes, it is not immediately possible to link them to a sense (e.g. verbs, or nouns with a meaning more granular than the Wikidata items in this space), compound, etymology or so, and immediately going off to create these would again disrupt the lexeme creation workflows, so I leave that for later. This seems to be the core of Nikki's criticism, and having cleaned up or annotated lots of entities set up by others in the various namespaces myself, I have an idea about the frustration that this can cause. However, I think it is important for the project to allow this kind of incompleteness as an entry point for contributions and contributors. There may well be people who prefer to annotate existing lexeme entries rather than creating new ones (verbs have many forms in many languages, and nouns or adjectives in many languages can have many forms too, or a user's knowledge of the language in question might not be sufficient to get all the forms right), and we should be open to this way of contributing, which rests on complimentary contribution pathways, e.g. "simply" creating the lexemes and their respective forms.
    • Working on automation myself both on Wikidata and beyond, I am aware of the benefits of using identifiers and other aspects of structured data, but as stated above, I am not aware of relevant workflows for lexemes. Via things like Scholia's curation pages (example), I help build curation workflows, and closer integration with lexemes (both missing and existing) is being considered. While that has not seen much progress lately, I am planning to get back to this in the new year, and testing the existing workflows that I know is part of that, so that they can be more closely integrated with the new ones.
    • I am aware of some bots active in the lexeme space (e.g. User:Elhuyar Fundazioa bot or User:Uzielbot) but not for German, and I am not sure what the workflows are that Nikki uses to add, say, Duden lexeme ID (P8376) statements to lexeme entries. In any case, I would welcome more bot jobs that assist in curating lexeme entries, both existing and missing, and ideally in ways that work across languages.
    • As an aside, I think the lexeme equivalent of an empty item is a lexeme without forms, and while I do not like empty items either, I think it's better to have them than having no entry for a given concept, since queries allow to list all entities with no statements at all but not all entities that have no entry.
  2. Part II: Blocking
    • I have not been aware of the block for well over a day, while making a good number of edits in the item namespace. I only learned about this while working on a Wikipedia article and looking for some piece of information from a Wikidata newsletter, which I receive on my Wikidata talk page. There, I then saw BrokenSegue's note (thank you!) that brought me here and back to Nikki's earlier note on my talk page, which I had not been aware of before.
    • I do not think that "not responding to good faith criticism on talk pages is ... a blockable offense" as such (quoting BrokenSegue from above), for several reasons.
      1. I am not aware of an existing policy in this regard on Wikidata
      2. If such policy were to exist, I think it would imply the possibility of blocking only after multiple notifications, and perhaps via different channels because
        1. lots of editing on Wikidata happens via external tools, removing users from seeing any indication of a talk page notification.
        2. even if a user might see the notification that they have a new message on their talk page, that does not mean they would check it out immediately, as these messages may well disrupt their workflows (case in point: I haven't gotten back to that Wikipedia article yet).
        3. even if a user checks out their talk page for recent messages, they might miss some messages if there are multiple new ones.
        4. There are some edge cases, e.g. where one might have the talk page still open in some browser tab but not looked at it for a while, perhaps even after a browser restart — that would make the notification disappear without the user even knowing they had one.
    • I cannot say precisely why I missed Nikki's original message on my talk page but just clarified the instructions on my talk page about me missing notifications.
    • I would love to have more interactions with folks active in the lexeme namespace and to learn about their workflows. While WD:AN is perhaps one way to trigger such interactions, I would prefer other routes.
To sum up, I think
  • Nikki's criticism is justified but the solution is not for me to stop creating bare lexeme entries. Instead, we should coordinate on improving the workflows in this space.
  • The block was unjustified. Instead of BrokenSegue notifying me after the block, anyone could have notified me, including before or even without the block.
--Daniel Mietchen (talk) 13:02, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
Thank you for responding. I have unblocked you. I still maintain that not responding to criticism is a blockable offense but in this case you should've been more directly notified/warned. BrokenSegue (talk) 17:38, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
 
petty excuses
Daniel, you are responsible for keeping track of what people on your talk page. The fact that you have a hard time doing so is your problem. Based on your comments a full block might have been better to get your attention. I would suggest you unsubscribe to news letters littering your talk page and set up proper archiving so you won't miss these kind of messages in the future. Multichill (talk) 17:45, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
I agree with BrokenSegue and Multichill. I think that blocking for not responding to criticism within an adequate time framce is already covered by WD:BLOCK #1 (“pattern of local abuse”) and I’m under the impression that this is standard practice. But since offenders often have a hard time understanding that their behavior is problematic, we might as well formalize it by changing the guideline. --Emu (talk) 19:16, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
I think formalizing it would be wise. I would offer the phrasing: "not responding to good-faith criticism on talk/project pages within X-hours of resuming editing after notification". BrokenSegue (talk) 23:31, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
Just acknowledging that I have seen this. --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 07:27, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
I would limit this provision to high-volume operations. I don’t expect random users to reply within a short period of time to my criticism after changing three items. Maybe something like “Users are expected to closely monitor their talk pages and notifications when performing mass changes or item creations. They should reply to good-faith criticism in a timely fashion. They should also halt batches until the issue is resolved. Failure to do so can result in a block.” (might need shortening) --Emu (talk) 12:12, 18 December 2022 (UTC)


@Nikki, Daniel Mietchen: Did you two discuss this further? I don't see any response to Daniel's comment above. I don't have much experience with Lexemes but I will note that I and others have also raised issues with Daniel making items with few or no statements (just looking at the talk page). BrokenSegue (talk) 19:05, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

@BrokenSegue: Nikki and I have had no further discussion on this yet, but I just copied the lexeme part of the above discussion to the original thread, so we can take things from there. --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 11:55, 22 December 2022 (UTC)
@Daniel Mietchen: I'd just like to note (before this section gets archived) that I do not expect any attempt at dialogue with you on your talk page to be meaningful so long as the issues that have been brought up by Multichill and Emu with that page here—and that have apparently been going on for quite a while—have not been resolved; perhaps @Nikki: feels similarly. Whatever on-wiki priorities you may have should be set aside until you are able to adequately recover your ability to acknowledge and respond to pings and messages on that page as well as manage the archival of older threads on that page; a blanket solicitation for help like the one quoted at the top of it is woefully insufficient in this regard, and unless you are in fact on literally every other possible channel (which I have a bit of reason to doubt since, at the very least, none of the primary Wikidata-related Telegram groups appear to contain you) not everyone will necessarily want to be on the channels that you currently are in fact on. Mahir256 (talk) 01:16, 29 December 2022 (UTC)

Want to add a sitelink

Respected Administrator, Please allow me to add a sitelink  – The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ashika Sengupta (talk • contribs) at 12:02, 26 December 2022 (UTC).

@Ashika Sengupta: Which sitelink do you want to add to which item? --Ameisenigel (talk) 12:56, 26 December 2022 (UTC)

Administrator I wanted to add good article badge sitelink to my item named Vaishnavivati goddess.

It doesn't seem that the item contains site links to articles that bear a good article badge. Items themselves do not have badges. Lymantria (talk) 09:14, 27 December 2022 (UTC)


Madam,there is also a page named Vaishnavivati in marathi wiki, can u please add a sitelink for the item Vaishnavivati?

that item isn't protected. you can do it yourself. BrokenSegue (talk) 16:59, 28 December 2022 (UTC)


Ok thank you

Report concerning User:Dan_Polansky

User Dan Polansky (talk • contribs • logs) is inserting comment (DEPRECATED) (P2315) qualifiers into items, apparently in order to question qualified statements and to leave personal opinion. I came across this pattern on the item page entity (Q35120) (see revision history) and removed it from there twice [44][45]. However, the user seems to be determined to force their personal viewpoints into main namespace anyways and reverted it back. Investigating their behavior, I found Property talk:P2315#Useful property – it seems he has discovered this deprecated property recently and he is now adding it to plenty of places. Since this is misbehavior on a larger scale rather than a spontaneous glitch, I am reporting it here.

For reference why this is bad:

  • Main namespace is not for discussions; main namespace is not for unstructured content
  • These discussion comments cannot be easily attributed since there is no signature; one would have to look up in the revision history who has added their opinion as qualifier
  • It is unclear how to act when such a comment is found; add another "comment"? certainly not…
  • The property is deprecated (since years) and will be deleted
  • The property was not made for this

Now here for a second opinion since I do not want to edit war on the entity item Q35120. —MisterSynergy (talk) 23:06, 25 December 2022 (UTC)

I am trying to do serious ontology work here that many people obviously do not want do to, given the sorry state of many entities in upper and middle ontology. Tracing to sources is mostly absent and defining statements are mostly missing, except for subclass of and instance of. Yet it is the defining statements that ensure proper authority control over the subjects. I absolutely need free text comments for that; I trace most of them to sources. I usually do not include any opinion but rather various analogs of "citation needed" or "dubious" and the like. Even when a note looks like something personal, it is easy to recognize as such, and will be easy to remove in future.
The process of concept clarification requires that intermediate epistemic states are captured. It also requires that statements not yet well supported by Wikidata are captured. It is vital that such statements are traced to sources, and that is what I do, trace nearly everything to sources.
I am implementing something like IAR here by using a deprecated property. A good thing is that all such instances will be easy to find by automated means. Those who speak Wikidatese well can translate some of the textual assertions into Wikidatese triplets.
The methodology I am using is obviously not well recognized by Wikidata project, although, curiously enough, the structure of Wikidata project is extremely well set up exactly for what I am doing. It seems that most editors do not understand the principle of definitional network. The designers of the project must have understood the principle of definitional network.
I do recognize that free text statements are suboptimal. They are a necessary evil. --Dan Polansky (talk) 23:30, 25 December 2022 (UTC)
namespace is not for unstructured content: to be productive for concept clarification, the namespace must allow semi-unstructured content in the upper and middle ontology as temporary intermediate state. What should be avoided is original research; the free text should usually only state what the sources say and trace to sources for easy verification or act as "citation needed" tagging. Maybe I just do not know my way around Wikidata; how do I tag a statement for "citation needed" and provide a "reason", like Wikipedia does? I think I can be helped by experts to reduce the amount of free text statements. --Dan Polansky (talk) 23:35, 25 December 2022 (UTC)
@Dan Polansky As MisterSynergy pointed out: Main namespace is not for discussions; main namespace is not for unstructured content. Find an appropriate venue for your ideas (If you can’t think of another, try WD:PC). Using comment (DEPRECATED) (P2315) on the Main namespace isn’t appropriate. --Emu (talk) 23:57, 25 December 2022 (UTC)
It is funny to see whole discussions as qualifiers, but a ping on the talk page should do just fine. -wd-Ryan (Talk/Edits) 00:13, 26 December 2022 (UTC)
As for non-discussion comments, one should either find or create a way to represent the ideas using properties like criterion used (P1013), sourcing circumstances (P1480), reason for deprecated rank (P2241). I'm not totally opposed to comments but usually there are structured ways to do it. -wd-Ryan (Talk/Edits) 00:17, 26 December 2022 (UTC)
What is the reasoning or where can I find solid reasoning? Does the strength of the argument count for nothing here? I have tried to find some convincing reasoning in Wikidata project and I failed. I tried to explain above why temporary semi-structured content is vital, esp. when traced to sources. This is important for the ontology (concept/class definition) part, but I can see how it would be problematic for the data part, the part that concentrates on individual things. And one should not think the difference is all that sharp: in so far as Wikidata allows various text fields, as it has to, it does allow semi-structured content. --Dan Polansky (talk) 00:24, 26 December 2022 (UTC)
Keep in mind that nobody is obliged to give you “solid reasoning” that you are willing to accept. It’s you who has to adapt to Wikidata’s ways, not the other way around. Discussions shouldn’t happen in the Main namespace, that’s just policy. We could change it of course but why should we do that? It’s not that your ideas are in any way superior to talking things out on talk pages. --Emu (talk) 08:25, 26 December 2022 (UTC)
The requirement of solid reasoning is per Wikipedia's policies. Is there a similar policy on Wikidata or have I just made an assumption? --Dan Polansky (talk) 10:47, 29 December 2022 (UTC)

Report concerning User:El hombre de Narnia

El hombre de Narnia (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL (for IP: GUC)) — Reasons: Offensive descriptions. Madamebiblio (talk) 17:14, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

user is warned Estopedist1 (talk) 08:26, 29 December 2022 (UTC)

Report concerning Quickbrownfox0 / Marquaad34

Suspected sockpuppet circumventing a block : of currently blocked user Marquaad34. Based on behavioral evidence : the same or similar edits made to the same items as the original account, including one (Cyber Dawgs (Q75848258)) that indirectly precipitated the current block. ⚊⚊ DCflyer (talk) 16:36, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

@Dcflyer could you give a concrete example of the behavioral evidence? The case (i.e. block evasion) seems to be complicated Estopedist1 (talk) 11:27, 28 December 2022 (UTC)
Hi @Estopedist1 — I apologize for the confusion and any unnecessary occupation of your time. The following are two possible examples:
Thank you for examing this. ⚊⚊ DCflyer (talk) 12:56, 28 December 2022 (UTC)
thanks, actually I trust you almost blindly (512k edits!). But just in case, I notified user:Quickbrownfox0 Estopedist1 (talk) 08:23, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
It was my intention to move on and entirely let go of the issue which led to my block, especially because it was the result of what was clearly a violation of the edit warring policy. I would have liked to let the past stay in the past. However, based on what is happening here in this thread, I'm not sure I can do that anymore.
We are here because @Dcflyer has taken an unusual interest in my Wikidata edit history and now, by extension, the edit history of @Quickbrownfox0. I would describe this as an unusual interest because Dcflyer is the only one who has reverted or otherwise had anything to say about any of the edits I have made to Wikidata. There was only one exception to this -- that being one of my first edits which I made by mistake while still getting familiar with Wikidata's user interface. This was rightly so reverted by another user after I forgot to do it myself (thanks by the way for taking care of that if you happen to be reading this; I am not mentioning you directly because I don't think it's necessary to pull you into this discussion). This unusual interest has resulted in an extensive amount of my edits and one of QuickBrownFox0's edits being reverted for strange reasons, and I'd like to address one of them now since Dcflyer has chosen to bring it up here:
In the case of QuickBrownFox0's aforementioned edit, Dcflyer reverted a reference added by QuickBrownFox0 to a preexisting claim on University of Maryland, Baltimore County (Q735049) having property affiliation value Cyber Dawgs (Q75848258). The reason given was "P6840 of UMBC", which is the information that was literally stated in the reference added. Not only was there absolutely no reason for this reference to be reverted, but Dcflyer has gone on to falsely claim in this thread that (Q75848258) was related to the reason for my blocking. I have never edited (Q75848258) which can be clearly seen by checking its edit history. Dcflyer should not be messing with references to material related to (Q75848258) in this way and falsely claiming that I have anything to do with it. However, the purpose of this thread is not to discuss Dcflyer's revert history, so I will leave other examples of this behavior out of this thread.
Moving on from the topic of specific edits, Tim Finin taught a class at University of Maryland, Baltimore County (Q735049) during the Fall 2022 semester which regularly referred to Wikidata and other knowledge graphs/bases, including a homework assignment which involved querying Wikidata. Additionally, in lectures, it was recommended (but not required) that all students consider creating their own Wikidata account to be contributors to greater human knowledge. Now that the semester is over, and students are on break between semesters, I would not be surprised to see some students from the aforementioned class follow through on that. As the people behind these new accounts would likely be students (or recent graduates) at UMBC, I would expect them to be highly interested in their university's Wikidata page (which would be Q735049) and other similar pages, such as the other pages (Q7803487, Q75848258, Q7865082) in QuickBrownFox0's edit history.
As such, if you see new accounts making edits to these pages, they are probably new users from the UMBC community rather than anyone's sockpuppet account. Even if this weren't the case, contributions from new accounts that look similar to someone else do not make those new accounts sockpuppets of anyone else anyway. Every account had to start as a new account, and the fact that a new account would immediately be accused of being a sockpuppet for making similar edits to another user is deeply concerning to me. That is a terrible way to make new users feel comfortable on a platform whose administrators close out a welcome message with "Once again, welcome, and I hope you quickly feel comfortable here, and become an active editor for Wikidata." I hope it is a coincidence, but I have noticed that QuickBrownFox0 has not made any contributions anywhere on Wikidata (including this thread) since this thread was started, and I would not be surprised if the user behind that account is no longer interested in being a part of Wikidata when these accusations are thrown at them less than 12 hours after making a first edit to Wikidata (see timestamp on QuickBrownFox0's first edit and compare it to the start of this thread).
Quite frankly, I think the fact that it was necessary to bring any of this up is ridiculous and a reflection of flagrantly unethical behavior Wikidata. Dcflyer's extensive edit history should not excuse what has happened here. I was highly inspired for what Wikidata could be based on Tim Finin's class mentioned above. However, I am extremely disappointed in what we are talking about here. Marquaad34 (talk) 09:22, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

Chinese wiki page of gender dysphoria links to wrong wiki pages in other languages

The Chinese Wikipedia page of gender dysphoria was moved from 性别不安 (gender dysphoria) to 性别不一致 (gender incongruence) following the guidelines of the new ICD-11 published at the beginning of 2022. Here is the link of that edit: https://zh.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=%E6%80%A7%E5%88%A5%E4%B8%8D%E4%B8%80%E8%87%B4&diff=69534261&oldid=69524829.

The content of the Chinese Wikipedia page covers both the DSM-5 definitions (gender dysphoria) as well as the ICD-11 definition (gender incongruence). The Chinese page that the English wiki page gender dysphoria currently link to (性别不安) is but a redirect page to the Chinese gender incongruence page (性别不一致). But when someone click the "other language: English" under the Chinese gender incongruence page (性别不一致), it only links to one very small section titled "gender incongruence" under the ICD-11 Wikipedia page, while it clearly should correspond to the gender dysphoria page. This problem seem to exist for other languages' versions of wikipedia pages as well. The Japanese version also seem to have the same problem. For the Chinese wiki page though, I think it would be more appropriate to change the link to 性别不一致 from 性别不安, but I cannot edit it since it has a badge. --LT1211 (talk) 21:20, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

PS: Links for gender dysphoria: Q1049021; gender incongruence: Q56314793. I want to change the Chinese wikipedia link of Q1049021 from "性别不安" to "性别不一致". --LT1211 (talk) 04:25, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
these pages aren't protected. you can do this without the help of administrators. BrokenSegue (talk) 04:47, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
I can't. It says "Warning: You are trying to add/remove badges to this item. At local Wikipedias adding or removing badges are done by consensus. Saving this edit was blocked and should be done only by administrators or trusted users. If you think you are correct, please contact an administrator." There is a badge for intentional redirect there. --LT1211 (talk) 00:03, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
Oh, I'm sorry. I didn't realize you needed to be confirmed to make this edit. Unfortunately not speaking the language I don't feel comfortable making this edit. Hopefully someone else who does will come by. BrokenSegue (talk) 07:00, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Wikidata:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Archive/2022/12&oldid=1812077962"