Wikidata:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive/2019/10

From Wikidata
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Special:Contributions/91.9.199.24

Vandalism. (Talk/留言/토론/Discussion) 11:40, 1 October 2019 (UTC)
It is too late now, apologies for not reacting on time.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:17, 1 October 2019 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: ‐‐1997kB (talk) 11:32, 3 October 2019 (UTC)

174.253.82.83

Please block the IP. See Special:Contributions/174.253.82.83. Continued vandalism after warning. Thanks, --DannyS712 (talk) 06:28, 2 October 2019 (UTC)

Looks like no more necessary. ‐‐1997kB (talk) 11:32, 3 October 2019 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: ‐‐1997kB (talk) 11:32, 3 October 2019 (UTC)

Vandalism report

Hi, Q453666 and Q236795 have been vandalised by 80.11.85.4 (talkcontribslogs) and 82.127.243.92 (talkcontribslogs). Can you semi-protect the items or block users? Many thanks in advance. --—d—n—f (talk) 07:38, 2 October 2019 (UTC)

both item has been protected. ‐‐1997kB (talk) 14:41, 2 October 2019 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: ‐‐1997kB (talk) 11:32, 3 October 2019 (UTC)

Vandalism report

Special:Contributions/2A01:E0A:10E:9E40:D30:5652:7431:8C65 (3 pages affected by wrong editions) Jospe (talk) 08:15, 2 October 2019 (UTC)

It stopped, I think is not necessary anymore. Sorry for delay. Rafael (stanglavine) msg 16:54, 2 October 2019 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: ‐‐1997kB (talk) 11:32, 3 October 2019 (UTC)

Raphael (Q5597)

Vandalism at item. (Talk/留言/토론/Discussion) 12:05, 2 October 2019 (UTC)

protection ✓ Done. ‐‐1997kB (talk) 14:41, 2 October 2019 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: ‐‐1997kB (talk) 11:32, 3 October 2019 (UTC)

Protect Tanaka Hisashige (Q717411)

Been vandalism for a long time. Catherine Laurence (discussion) 09:28, 3 October 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done ‐‐1997kB (talk) 11:32, 3 October 2019 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: ‐‐1997kB (talk) 11:32, 3 October 2019 (UTC)

Q1931364 (climate change denial)

Hi,

may I change Leugnung der menschengemachten globalen Erwärmung to Verleugnung des Klimawandels on DE:WP, because its more correct?

Thanks in advance, MfG (talk) 10:53, 1 October 2019 (UTC)

You should ask this at de.wp, we can not change anything on another project.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:14, 1 October 2019 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. DannyS712 (talk) 03:13, 5 October 2019 (UTC)

78.157.101.36 - Please block vandal

IP 78.157.101.36 has a long history of vandalism that is quite disturbing on the Danish Wikipedia. Please block. Contribution log is here. --Pugilist (talk) 08:12, 2 October 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done--Ymblanter (talk) 20:44, 3 October 2019 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. DannyS712 (talk) 03:13, 5 October 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protect Q66996277

It is a frequent target of an LTA. Nigos (talk) 09:29, 3 October 2019 (UTC)

✓ Semi-protected for a month. Esteban16 (talk) 01:42, 5 October 2019 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. DannyS712 (talk) 03:13, 5 October 2019 (UTC)

Revision deletion

Please delete last revision of Q371488. Reason: revealing private or personal information (IP address). Sorry for bothering. Kartavy (talk) 11:52, 3 October 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done by somebody.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:45, 3 October 2019 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. DannyS712 (talk) 03:13, 5 October 2019 (UTC)

131.165.50.111

131.165.50.111 (talkcontribslogs) continues vandalism after warning -LiberatorG (talk) 18:28, 3 October 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done--Ymblanter (talk) 20:46, 3 October 2019 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. DannyS712 (talk) 03:13, 5 October 2019 (UTC)

184.146.207.178

Vandalism. (Talk/留言/토론/Discussion) 07:20, 4 October 2019 (UTC)

 Not done. Sorry, but it is too late now to take any action. If they IP vandalizes again, please report. Esteban16 (talk) 01:39, 5 October 2019 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. DannyS712 (talk) 03:13, 5 October 2019 (UTC)

Special:Contributions/86.212.190.51

Vandalism. (Talk/留言/토론/Discussion) 14:51, 4 October 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done blocked for 31 hours. Jianhui67 talkcontribs 15:03, 4 October 2019 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. DannyS712 (talk) 03:12, 5 October 2019 (UTC)

Special:Contributions/172.58.96.138

Vandalism. (Talk/留言/토론/Discussion) 03:38, 5 October 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done Blocked for 31 hours. Jianhui67 talkcontribs 04:25, 5 October 2019 (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) 13:57, 5 October 2019 (UTC)

Special:AbuseFilter/125

Please emergency disable this filter until @Matěj Suchánek: fixed it. See Topic:V8lpcrmxdqv6yo4t.--GZWDer (talk) 10:12, 5 October 2019 (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. GZWDer (talk) 11:12, 5 October 2019 (UTC)

126.43.255.198 (talkcontribslogs)

Vandalism.--Afaz (talk) 12:42, 5 October 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done blocked for 24 hours. Jianhui67 talkcontribs 13:53, 5 October 2019 (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) 13:57, 5 October 2019 (UTC)

Historiadormundo again

Hi there. Historiadormundo (talkcontribslogs) is just back from a week-long block and yet they have returned to their disruptive behavior, by continuing to add incorrect labels, descriptions and other stuff on Eugenio Cruz Vargas (Q16334084). I have not bothered to revert since I was too blocked for "edit warring" (despite I only reverted them thrice, but oh well). Hopefully someone will, and hopefully too they will have the intention to motivate Historiador to change their disruptive behavior, which has gotten them blocked on Meta, Commons and the Spanish Wikipedia. Cuatro Remos (talk) 00:01, 5 October 2019 (UTC)

I have to note that the incorrect label-stuff I mentioned before also applies to other of their latest contributions, which you can see. All of the descriptions have been machine-translated from Spanish, but a very tough Spanish (although it is their native language). --Cuatro Remos (talk) 00:02, 5 October 2019 (UTC)
As I have been involved in previous disputes between those two users, I abstain to take any action. However, I would like to point that I have warned Historiadormundo before becasue of his unintentional bad edits (labels, descriptions...). I believe he does have good intentions, but makes mistakes that should be corrected. For example, the aliases of the item are, in my opinion, not the best. Why to add "Eugenio Cruz Vargas" (the item's label) and "Cruz Vargas" (his surnames) as aliases? That's redundant. I'd like him to fix his edits, including other items, so this won't get worse. Esteban16 (talk) 01:57, 5 October 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done Reverted and blocked for a month. Andreasm háblame / just talk to me 16:25, 5 October 2019 (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) 20:27, 6 October 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protect Q15924626

A dynamic IP is overwriting this item with information about the same non-notable person with a similar name, likely a self-insertion. This item has been protected in the past for this. Vandalism on item is persistent and long-term vandalism by the same person that started April 1, 2016. This IP is adding that name to other projects usually by overwriting some other persons article as creation of articles in that name generally get deleted fairly quickly. Not a notable person, just someone trying to create a fake presence. The IPs are socks of 1 chisper who has been blocked for this elsewhere. See also this enwiki SPI archive. Geraldo Perez (talk) 18:40, 5 October 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done by Mahir256--Ymblanter (talk) 21:04, 5 October 2019 (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) 20:26, 6 October 2019 (UTC)

Karan sharwanand

Karan sharwanand (talkcontribslogs) is a vandalism only account, with two edits from June 13, both since undone (but one survived till today, and propagated a spam short description onto Wikipedia, until I removed it). I'm less familiar with wikidata conventions than wikipedia's; do I need to add a template to their Talk page about this, or is the ping sufficient? Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 22:35, 5 October 2019 (UTC)

This vandalism at Wikipedia was live until seconds ago. Propose site ban. Mathglot (talk) 22:42, 5 October 2019 (UTC)

✓ DoneMisterSynergy (talk) 17:31, 6 October 2019 (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) 20:26, 6 October 2019 (UTC)

User:2A02:6D40:35FC:D101:6494:7A2D:DC0:1617

2A02:6D40:35FC:D101:6494:7A2D:DC0:1617 (talkcontribslogs) really bad Vandalisms. --Wurgl (talk) 19:18, 6 October 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done, for 31h--Ymblanter (talk) 20:07, 6 October 2019 (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) 20:27, 6 October 2019 (UTC)

Q17198340

Shawn Mendes (Q17198340): excessive vandalism. — Mike Novikoff 16:37, 9 October 2019 (UTC)

  • ✓ Semi-protected Ayack (talk) 16:46, 9 October 2019 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: — Mike Novikoff 16:53, 9 October 2019 (UTC)

User talk:OneLittleMouse

Please protege this page User talk:OneLittleMouse persistent harassment vandalism. 85.26.164.11 06:07, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done by User:YmblanterMisterSynergy (talk) 12:00, 7 October 2019 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. DannyS712 (talk) 18:56, 10 October 2019 (UTC)

Nonsense

This user is clearly not here to contribute. (Talk/留言/토론/Discussion) 11:46, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done: already blocked; tidying now… —MisterSynergy (talk) 11:54, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. DannyS712 (talk) 18:57, 10 October 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protection for Q12732209

Please semi-protect Liga IV, Bucharest (Q12732209) - persistent IP vandalism from various IP addresses (possibly same user).--Jklamo (talk) 14:13, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done, for a month--Ymblanter (talk) 18:41, 7 October 2019 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. DannyS712 (talk) 18:57, 10 October 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protection for Q18810940

Please semi-protect Camila Cabello (Q18810940) - persistent IP vandalism. - Premeditated (talk) 12:29, 8 October 2019 (UTC)

✓ Semi-protected for 6 months. Thanks! --abián 12:33, 8 October 2019 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. DannyS712 (talk) 18:58, 10 October 2019 (UTC)

Vandalisme

L’IP 192.77.176.251 s’est amusée à vandaliser plusieurs pages. Un avertissement peut être nécessaire.--Olivier Tanguy (talk) 15:28, 8 October 2019 (UTC)

✓ Blocked by Ymblanter. Esteban16 (talk) 23:14, 8 October 2019 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. DannyS712 (talk) 18:58, 10 October 2019 (UTC)

Special:Contributions/130.180.91.130

Vandalism. (Talk/留言/토론/Discussion) 09:11, 9 October 2019 (UTC)
done by Ymblanter. ‐‐1997kB (talk) 03:29, 10 October 2019 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: ‐‐1997kB (talk) 03:29, 10 October 2019 (UTC)

Q2673

Chuck Norris (Q2673): excessive vandalism. --Trade (talk) 13:33, 10 October 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done Semi-protected for a month. Bovlb (talk) 14:04, 10 October 2019 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. DannyS712 (talk) 18:55, 10 October 2019 (UTC)

Q46633

Charles Babbage (Q46633): it's kind of tedious to restore the number of his children again and again. — Mike Novikoff 14:37, 10 October 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done Wow. That's been going on for two years now. I'm guessing it must be a question on some school quiz. Semi-protected for a year. Bovlb (talk) 15:13, 10 October 2019 (UTC)
The vandal IPs all geolocate to various places in Spain. Some of them also have edits to the Spanish Wikipedia. I suspect we are seeing this vandalism as a result of the editar datos en Wikidata link at the bottom of the Spanish infobox seen on es:Charles Babbage. Cheers, Bovlb (talk) 16:44, 10 October 2019 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. DannyS712 (talk) 18:55, 10 October 2019 (UTC)

Request protection - Q1496

Ferdinand Magellan (Q1496) seems to be getting a steady stream of vandalism. Not quite sure why it's so popular. Andrew Gray (talk) 18:32, 10 October 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done by Mahir256--Ymblanter (talk) 19:45, 10 October 2019 (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) 20:03, 10 October 2019 (UTC)

Block 85.94.188.47

Special:Contributions/85.94.188.47 please block - vandalism after warnings. Thanks, --DannyS712 (talk) 18:44, 10 October 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done, 31h--Ymblanter (talk) 19:48, 10 October 2019 (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) 20:03, 10 October 2019 (UTC)

Q5577

Salvador Dalí (Q5577): I think it's time to semi-protect this one too, at last. Again, it mostly concerns the number of children (of which he had none). — Mike Novikoff 19:44, 10 October 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done by Mahir256 — Mike Novikoff 19:57, 10 October 2019 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: — Mike Novikoff 19:57, 10 October 2019 (UTC)

User:188.32.110.178

188.32.110.178 (talkcontribslogs) crosswiki vandalism. 83.149.19.188 02:47, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

78.55.6.210

Vandalism by blocked user. Maybe hole /16 needs to get blocked. Prior vandalism under 78.55.175.88. --GPSLeo (talk) 17:16, 6 October 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done: 1 week for now. Watching for other ranges… —MisterSynergy (talk) 17:30, 6 October 2019 (UTC)
Now on 78.54.125.69 --GPSLeo (talk) 19:24, 6 October 2019 (UTC)
/16 range ✓ Done as well. —MisterSynergy (talk) 19:48, 6 October 2019 (UTC)
Can you semi-protect Wikidata:Forum for a few days? --- Jura 06:13, 7 October 2019 (UTC)
I am using range blocks for now; WD:Forum is an important entry point for German-speaking users, thus I prefer to do it this way. —MisterSynergy (talk) 06:28, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

Bot running amok?

Can you stop User:Soweego_bot? --- Jura 21:48, 6 October 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done @Hjfocs: You have some explaining to do. Mahir256 (talk) 22:34, 6 October 2019 (UTC)
@Jura1, Mahir256: in a nutshell, the bot is reverting its own edits. As per Topic:V8nq358b7ediqw1p, there were some issues caused by a QuickStatements batch. The goal was to address Topic:V6cc1thgo09otfw5.
Maybe it would be better to use https://tools.wmflabs.org/editgroups/b/QSv2/19777/ , instead of the bot deletion?
I wasn't aware of that tool, just discovered it thanks to Tacsipacsi (talkcontribslogs)'s comment --Hjfocs (talk) 22:56, 6 October 2019 (UTC)
Okay then, lifted the block. Mahir256 (talk) 23:54, 6 October 2019 (UTC)
Thanks for looking into this. To avoid this, I asked Hjfocs to fix the edit summary: Topic:V8p0cchd2ha1dqr3#flow-post-v8ps2nyo8xa5c9i4. --- Jura 06:15, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

Succu’s behaviour

I expressed my concern on Succu’s talk page about the way he had addressed me. Instead of checking the edit that was in question, or agreeing to maintain a polite language, @Succu: just deleted my comment. I found that rather strange given that I have never disrespected this user. On the other hand, I do remember having read something here about his behaviour. Unfortunately, I am not familiar with the case and my holidays end today, so I am unlikely to be able to keep track of it. It seems that Succu has opted for a fait accompli (Q17444370) approach: I won’t enter an edit war, he ignores my concerns, which results in his edits prevailing. Now I’m wondering if this a recurring behaviour. How should we handle it if that was the case? Andreasm háblame / just talk to me 17:58, 8 October 2019 (UTC)

Maybe you should your kind of communication (Q11024) revise too?
Back to the facts:
  1. You changed the meaning of Ebola virus (Q10538943) and Zaire ebolavirus (Q8064876).
  2. I was notified by this reset and found the item without taxonomic properties.
  3. I readded them You decided to change this without sources.
  4. Finally reverted by you
Essentially it's a renaming of Ebola virus (Q10538943) (in part) → Ebola virus Zaire (Q69997225)Zaire Ebola virus (Q69997384)Zaire ebolavirus (Q8064876) according to the rules of International Committee on Taxonomy of Viruses (Q580606).
BTW: In 2013 the item was about the genus Ebolavirus (Q5331908). Any idea what to do with contradicting sitelinks (and their history)?
Regards --Succu (talk) 21:25, 8 October 2019 (UTC)

User_talk:213.57.158.32

Hello,

This user is repeatedly removing death data from 2 items where the death info is sourced, without bothering to explain or source, or answer questions... Been blocked at least twice already, and goes on - concerned items are :

can something be done to prevent it ? --Hsarrazin (talk) 14:15, 9 October 2019 (UTC)

Special:Contributions/86.44.236.124

Hi, can someone check the edits of the IP? IP has been swapping Anna Kendrick's name with Lucy Boynton's and vice versa. Thanks. (Talk/留言/토론/Discussion) 14:33, 12 October 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done and blocked for 31 hours. Lymantria (talk) 16:23, 12 October 2019 (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) 17:18, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

Please block this contributor - vandalism account

Special:Contributions/Sadafras - I think I reverted all their crap, but could someone please check ?

+ items created to merge poop in *Neptune (Q332) - since they were redirected I cannot ask for deletion, but the crap has been removed. --Hsarrazin (talk) 18:46, 14 October 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done; I deleted their new redirects, and blocked them indefinitely. —MisterSynergy (talk) 18:51, 14 October 2019 (UTC)

Face-smile.svg Thank you. MisterSynergy - this user has also been active on Commons. Do you have rights there ? --Hsarrazin (talk) 18:54, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
No, sorry. --MisterSynergy (talk) 19:06, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
I blocked them on Commons as vandalism-only account--Ymblanter (talk) 19:20, 14 October 2019 (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) 17:19, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

5.244.119.115

Vandalism continues after a warning on the IP's talk page. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 21:20, 14 October 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done Blocked by @Abián: for 3 days. Mahir256 (talk) 21:27, 14 October 2019 (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) 17:18, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

Q11628906

Vandalism by 126.43.255.198 (talkcontribslogs)--Afaz (talk) 00:48, 15 October 2019 (UTC)

 Not done. Sorry, it is too late now. Esteban16 (talk) 01:25, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
@Afaz: Semi'd one item for three months, if that helps. Mahir256 (talk) 01:33, 15 October 2019 (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) 17:18, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

Mariorossimapropriorossissimo

Vandalism-only account. — Mike Novikoff 11:33, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done--Ymblanter (talk) 19:34, 16 October 2019 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: — Mike Novikoff 19:45, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

AITTAM-2006

One more Italian vandalism-only account. Who said that all our vandals are Spanish? :-) — Mike Novikoff 22:55, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done Esteban16 (talk) 23:33, 16 October 2019 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: — Mike Novikoff 23:40, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

2600:387:0:805:0:0:0:70

Please block User:2600:387:0:805:0:0:0:70. See Special:Contributions/2600:387:0:805:0:0:0:70 - vandalism after warning. Thanks, --DannyS712 (talk) 18:25, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done by Ymblanter. Esteban16 (talk) 23:33, 16 October 2019 (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) 16:51, 17 October 2019 (UTC)

Mahendra Bhimte

Vandalism-only account. — Mike Novikoff 02:20, 17 October 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done--Ymblanter (talk) 19:04, 17 October 2019 (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. Nomen ad hoc (talk) 20:54, 19 October 2019 (UTC)

Block request

Hi, could you please provide some rest to 187.189.93.237 (talkcontribslogs) for his work on James Prescott Joule (Q8962)? Many thanks in advance, --—d—n—f (talk) 19:43, 18 October 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done--Ymblanter (talk) 19:00, 19 October 2019 (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. Nomen ad hoc (talk) 20:54, 19 October 2019 (UTC)

I've been told to "go away"

I recently merged Q67576167 into Robert M Graham (Q64684938). I then noticed a duplicate statement; as well as employer (P108) with a value of Victor Chang Cardiac Research Institute (Q7925795), cited to the subject's ORCID iD (P496) record, there was a second statement with same value, but uncited. Of course, I removed the later. I did not envisage for a moment that doing so would be challenged.

I was reverted by User:GerardM, with the edit summary "info orcid.org". I removed the duplicate statement a second time, reverting with an edit summary of "duplicate statement".

I have now been reverted a second time, which has restored the duplicate, uncited and redundant statement. This is bad enough, and the duplicate should be removed for a third and hopefully final time, but the edit summary in that - again, uncited - revert was "there is a source so go away".

I do not believe that addressing a fellow editor in this manner is acceptable; and the choice of words leads me to conclude that attempting further dialogue with GerardM (including notifying him of this discussion; therefore please will whoever responds as an admin do so) would be futile. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:25, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

  • @Pigsonthewing, GerardM: I removed the redundant claim that was missing qualifiers and references. GerardM, did you actually look at the item in the UI before reverting here? ArthurPSmith (talk) 18:32, 7 October 2019 (UTC)
    • Yes it says so on the ORCiD information of the person involved. GerardM (talk) 05:16, 8 October 2019 (UTC)
      • Nobody is disagreeing that ORCID provided the source of that information. The question is whether you noticed that the item had TWO entries for the same employer after you reverted, and the duplicate you were restoring was missing qualifier and reference information. ArthurPSmith (talk) 14:25, 8 October 2019 (UTC)
        • @GerardM: Do you have an answer to Arthur's question from 14:25 on the 8th of October? Mahir256 (talk) 15:14, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
          • No I did not. In my opinion, the way to handle such situations is to remove the extra entry, not to revert it. Not only is it more work I do consider it rude. PS I no longer follow chats as intensely as I used to do. I do not have the time nor the energy. GerardM (talk) 18:57, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
            • @GerardM: I am not following your argument. Andy's initial edit after his merge action, the edit which you reverted, was this one, which appears to be exactly what you are asking for, a removal of the extra entry, not reverting it. ???? ArthurPSmith (talk) 16:56, 15 October 2019 (UTC)

A week has passed; and the conclusion that can be drawn is apparently that telling another contributor to "go away" - and doing so when in the wrong - is unworthy of admin comment, let alone sanction. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:52, 14 October 2019 (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. Pintoch (talk) 08:53, 20 October 2019 (UTC)

Please block 184.146.207.178

Inserting obviously false information. Looks like a block evasion of 184.147.50.147. Please also semi-protect items such as Janella Salvador (Q16226196) Viggo Mortensen (Q171363) Joey King (Q112536) Hunter King (Q5641545) as they have been persistently vandalized. --94rain (talk) 08:09, 20 October 2019 (UTC)

IP blocked for 1 month and all item protected for 6 months. ‐‐1997kB (talk) 09:27, 20 October 2019 (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. Nomen ad hoc (talk) 15:12, 20 October 2019 (UTC)

Please protect Q19862413

Please protect Q19862413 (Barak Ravid) and/or block user:2a03:d5c0:1c0a:39fd:e5ba:cea0:8011:b909 who repeatedly enters wrong data to this page (in Hebrew). דוד שי (talk) 11:53, 20 October 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done Page semi-protected for a week. There seem to be three different IPs involved with few edits each, so I have not bothered to block them at this time. Nothing else of interest shows up in IP ranges. Cheers, Bovlb (talk) 20:16, 20 October 2019 (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. Nomen ad hoc (talk) 20:51, 20 October 2019 (UTC)

Special:Contributions/Rii'jeg'fkep'c

Vandalism. -- 05:35, 11 October 2019 (UTC)

Could you please give more details? I see a few items on which you have reverted their addition of Chinese labels, but I'm having trouble determining why you are describing these contributions with such a strong word. Bovlb (talk) 18:50, 11 October 2019 (UTC)
@予弦: Bovlb (talk) 19:24, 11 October 2019 (UTC)
@Bovlb: Lables and aliases vandalism.
  1. User:Rii'jeg'fkep'c (a native Chinese speaker) added "理勾" (transliteration of "LIGO") and "理勾引力波干涉天文台" (The correct Chinese translation is "激光干涉引力波天文台".) in Laser Interferometer Gravitational-Wave Observatory (Q255371), "伽林斯坦" (Transliteration of "Galinstan". The correct Chinese translation is "镓铟锡合金 / 鎵銦錫合金".) in Galinstan (Q675176), "阿美理卡" (transliteration of "America") in United States of America (Q30), "甫比阿" (transliteration of "phobia") in phobia (Q175854), "欧美伽" (transliteration of "omega") in Ω (Q9890), "美伽)" (transliteration of "mega") in mega (Q107205), "纳萨"(transliteration of "NASA") in National Aeronautics and Space Administration (Q23548), and "阿尼美" (Transliteration of "アニメ". The correct Chinese translation is "日本动画 / 日本動畫".) in anime (Q1107). All these transliterations are not used in Chinese.
  2. They also added "理[ㄍ区]" in Laser Interferometer Gravitational-Wave Observatory (Q255371), "伽林ㄙ坦" in Galinstan (Q675176), "赛[内区]甫比阿" in cynophobia (Q38579), "比[ㄍ矣]鲁" in beagle (Q21102), "尼侯尼吾ㄇ" in nihonium (Q1301), "雅伊ㄊ" in Yeot (Q1144106), "阿伊[不区], AIBO, aibo, アイボ, 机器犬阿伊[不区]" in AIBO (Q403438), "[ㄊ矣]ㄇ普拉" and "[ㄊ恩]普拉" in tempura (Q328709), and "戴森ス费ㄌ" (the correct translation is "戴森球".) in Dyson sphere (Q469). ㄍ, ㄙ and ㄌ are w:Bopomofo, which is used for phonetic transcription only. And ス is a Japanese w:kana. Some descriptions are also incorrect.
  3. They also added incorrect aliases in (Q40709), (Q40725) ,(Q40481), (Q40488), (Q40582) and (Q40454). -- 04:54, 12 October 2019 (UTC)
If I understand what you're saying correctly, you are raising three issues here:
  • Chinese-language aliases that are transliterations of English words (or initialisms) rather than being expressions used by Chinese speakers.
  • Using Roman characters in Chinese-language aliases for Japanese characters.
  • Some issue with descriptions that you have yet to explain.
From what I have heard so far, this seems like, at worst, a good faith editor with a misunderstanding of what makes a good alias. Also, I'm having trouble seeing where you raised this issue directly with them before bringing it to this noticeboard. Their talk page was a redlink until after your last post here, when you gave them a vague warning without drawing their attention to this thread. My recommendation is that you attempt to engage this editor directly, welcome them to the project, and give them an explanation of what you think they could be doing better and why. Coming here with claims of "vandalism" seems more likely to turn them against the project than to improve their editing. Cheers, Bovlb (talk) 17:21, 12 October 2019 (UTC)
@Bovlb: If such transliterations are really needed as "useful informations", then the correct way is to add properties transliteration (P2440) and their friends, mixing transliterations and main label names are just duck test (Q1324171)-based vandalism, so just block Rii'jeg'fkep'c, please. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 00:01, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
@Liuxinyu970226: I am not claiming that these transliteration make for good aliases. My point is that the contributions as described, while they may be misguided, are nevertheless likely good faith. My view is that the correct response would be to engage the editor, welcoming them to the project and explaining how their contributions might be improved. Coming to this board instead and describing their contributions as "vandalism" is poor behaviour because it fails to create a welcoming and collegial editorial environment. I admonish both 予弦 and Liuxinyu970226 not to describe edits as vandalism unless they are prepared to substantiate the claims. Cheers, Bovlb (talk) 03:39, 15 October 2019 (UTC)

Close as keep and block please

I have just dealt with an ugly argument between two users who both need a sanction of some sort I believe by hat boxing (I think that's the right term) the worst of it. The issue is here. The IP 2001 is not listening and should be soft range blocked for a period forcing him to make an account by other means. Quakewoody has been handling it very badly to the point that a block should be done there as well, although the IP is the real issue. The deletion request should be closed as keep. TLPG (talk) 03:24, 14 October 2019 (UTC)

Blocked the /64 due mainly to the Aussie's last message. It's disheartening to see few other admins having a look at the RfD backlog at the moment. Mahir256 (talk) 03:44, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
"forcing him to make an account" We have no policy of requiring editors to create accounts. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:30, 14 October 2019 (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. Nomen ad hoc (talk) 17:03, 21 October 2019 (UTC)

Blockage of 24.37.129.34

Each time 24.37.129.34 (talkcontribslogs) intervene, it is to vandalize an item. This IP has been warned before and should be blocked. Pierre cb (talk) 16:47, 17 October 2019 (UTC)

They have been already blocked three time, I have blocked now for 5 years--Ymblanter (talk) 19:06, 17 October 2019 (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. Nomen ad hoc (talk) 17:04, 21 October 2019 (UTC)

LTA abuse filter

Hi. At meta we have a reasonable abuse filter for managing this LTA, and we have made it quite specific to their edits. Happy for someone to contact me, or someone with rights to meta abuse filters to have a look.  — billinghurst sDrewth 23:13, 17 October 2019 (UTC)

✓ created filter 128. ‐‐1997kB (talk) 02:41, 20 October 2019 (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. Nomen ad hoc (talk) 17:04, 21 October 2019 (UTC)

Please block 70.27.77.5

70.27.77.5 (talkcontribslogs) - same user of 184.147.50.147 (talkcontribslogs) & 184.146.207.178 (talkcontribslogs) (both blocked now) --WhitePhosphorus (talk) 00:36, 22 October 2019 (UTC)

Blocked for 3 months. ‐‐1997kB (talk) 01:22, 22 October 2019 (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. WhitePhosphorus (talk) 01:28, 22 October 2019 (UTC)

Please block 85.192.76.123

85.192.76.123 (talkcontribslogs) vandalizing after uw-vandalism4 warning. --WhitePhosphorus (talk) 11:11, 22 October 2019 (UTC)

Now 88.26.202.17 (talkcontribslogs) due to vandalism patterns and whois information. --WhitePhosphorus (talk) 11:37, 22 October 2019 (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. --WhitePhosphorus (talk) 12:49, 22 October 2019 (UTC)

Special:Contributions/223.146.224.188

Vandalism. (Talk/留言/토론/Discussion) 12:54, 22 October 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done Blocked. See thread above. Bovlb (talk) 18:06, 22 October 2019 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. DannyS712 (talk) 18:07, 22 October 2019 (UTC)

Protection request

Hi, can you protect Jennifer Lopez (Q40715)? Regular vandalism, please see recent history. Thanks --—d—n—f (talk) 15:09, 22 October 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done Semi-protected. I also blocked a couple of the IPs. Bovlb (talk) 17:32, 22 October 2019 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. DannyS712 (talk) 18:05, 22 October 2019 (UTC)

Block request

Please block 88.12.143.7 (talkcontribslogs): vandalism. --—d—n—f (talk) 15:22, 22 October 2019 (UTC)

Blocked by MisterSynergy. Bovlb (talk) 17:29, 22 October 2019 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. DannyS712 (talk) 18:06, 22 October 2019 (UTC)

Q7326

Hernán Cortés (Q7326): finally, it's a bit too much. — Mike Novikoff 16:00, 22 October 2019 (UTC)

If a straightforward suggestion is needed, here's one: this page is asking for a semi-protection for a long time now. — Mike Novikoff 18:26, 22 October 2019 (UTC)
✓ Done, protected for a year--Ymblanter (talk) 19:19, 22 October 2019 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: — Mike Novikoff 19:33, 22 October 2019 (UTC)

QuickStatmentsBot and unattributed edits

QuickStatementsBot (talkcontribslogs)

@Magnus_Manske

I'd like some assistance in dealing with a chronic issue with the QuickStatementsBot.

As I understand it, this is not a bot in the usual sense because it has no autonomous code to generate changes; instead, it merely provides a batch service to proxy edits for other users via various tools. This means that, unlike typical bots, we do not hold the bot operator responsible for the edits, but instead expect to find the responsible editor identified in the edit summary (see RFP).

Unfortunately, this bot has a long-standing problem whereby some edits have no editor indicated in the edit summary. I believe that this is a serious problem because, in the cases where an error is made, we cannot track down who made the error and, as a result, they may never find out. This deprives us of a crucial opportunity for process improvement. Some examples of unattributed bad edits: Special:Diff/884168986, Special:Diff/968618496, Special:Diff/972630488, Special:Diff/1011479498, Special:Diff/1011360190. For the avoidance of doubt, the vast majority of edits made by this bot (whether attributed or not) seem to be good edits.

This issue has been repeatedly raised with the bot maintainer by myself and others (Topic:V2fzk650ojg2n6l1, Topic:V85eg51k9dnxaqb1, Topic:V8th0j0qmza2yykx, Topic:Uwfg7rq8lq84kiv6, Topic:V64n8o927s1gmcr9) with limited response. I am at a loss on how to proceed here. I have attempted to work with the bot maintainer to resolve this, but what I have been doing has obviously not been working. I don't think it's appropriate to escalate this by blocking the bot. Does anyone have any suggestions?

Cheers, Bovlb (talk) 02:54, 10 October 2019 (UTC)

I believe these were done under the QuickStatementsBot account by the SourceMD service, also run by me. SourceMD (especially the batch mode that cause these edits) is currently inactive, as I don't have the bandwidth to fix it properly right now. --Magnus Manske (talk) 10:25, 10 October 2019 (UTC)
The most recent edit by QuickStatementsBot has the edit summary ‎Added qualifier: series ordinal (P1545): 2, #quickstatements; invoked by SourceMD:ORCIDator and is dated "2019-10-10T08:07:01". When did the "no user name in edit summary" code become inactive? Bovlb (talk) 14:11, 10 October 2019 (UTC)
@Bovlb: I agree this is an issue. I think QuickStatementsBot should not be used at all, it has been a long-standing loophole in the bot approval process that we should never have accepted in the first place. All edits should be made directly under the account of the user responsible for the action. − Pintoch (talk) 15:46, 10 October 2019 (UTC)
I once raised the issue in 2018 (this is really a security issue - anyone, includes anonymous and blocked users, can do disruptive edits without being discovered), but get no answers. I think we should take down new_resolve_authors tools in favor of author-disambiguator.--GZWDer (talk) 17:58, 10 October 2019 (UTC)
Where and what is "author-disambiguator"? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 22:03, 10 October 2019 (UTC)
toollabs:author-disambiguator.--GZWDer (talk) 10:41, 11 October 2019 (UTC)
Great! If this alternative is available, should we simply block QuickStatementsBot then? − Pintoch (talk) 13:31, 11 October 2019 (UTC)
It's only an alternative for "new_resolve_authors" at the moment; and it actually uses Quickstatements for the edits (right now); batches may end up being run by Quickstatementsbot (but should be attributed to a user). ArthurPSmith (talk) 17:01, 11 October 2019 (UTC)
Looking at QuickStatementsBot's recent contributions, it doesn't look like any of them are attributed to users. This may be related to this change whereby the QuickStatements batch mode no longer uses QuickStatementsBot. I don't want to be legalistic about the RFP because circumstances change and remits expand, but is there a different RFP I should be looking at? Bovlb (talk) 18:19, 11 October 2019 (UTC)
@Magnus_Manske: It seems to me like the bot is currently operating outside of it's scope and that it might be the best choice to block it as long as it's in it's current state. ChristianKl❫ 08:18, 15 October 2019 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── There are plenty of bots which clearly operate outside of their approved scopes; many operators collect the botflag with an initial task, and later add completely different tasks without asking for approval. Not cool, but this is the reality. It would be odd if we now used the finding "edits outside of its scope" as a blocking reason when such behavior is pretty much the informal standard here.
I suggest to not block QuickStatementsBot as long as its edits are sane. When that is not the case any longer, the bot account would receive a block until User:Magnus Manske as its operator has cleaned-up. Magnus meanwhile knows that this situation is kind of problematic, and he has time now to implement a cleaner method to save the edits than using QSbot. —MisterSynergy (talk) 08:44, 15 October 2019 (UTC)

Agree with MisterSynergy that it may be excessive to hold a bot operator to the letter of the RFP, but the key point here is not about whether the edits are outside of scope or sane, but the fact that these edits are (apparently) proxied, without indicating the initiating user. No-one expects either a (conventional) bot or a user to have a 100% success rate, but it is important that people can learn from their goofs.
So, some specific questions for @Magnus Manske:
  1. When we see unattributed edits from QuickStatementsBot (e.g. Special:Diff/1032504936), are these edits made on behalf of a user, or are they the responsibility of the Botop?
  2. If they are made on behalf of a user, why is the user not indicated in the edit summary?
  3. If they are made on behalf of a user, do you have a plan for indicating the user in the edit summary?
Cheers, Bovlb (talk) 14:09, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
@MisterSynergy: Wikidata is about finding consensus. When bots are going a bit over their approved scope to make edits that are uncontroversial I don't see a reason to ban the bot about it. If it's however used to make the bot engage in edits that are controversial and for which the bot wouldn't get an approval when that's sought such as unattributed automated edits, I see that as a ground for stopping that behavior. ChristianKl❫ 19:05, 18 October 2019 (UTC)

Wow Kidd

Issue #1910201748171
(describe the issue for which you need an administrator's decision; don't include "217.210.112.12 17:48, 20 October 2019 (UTC)")
Author and time of the request
217.210.112.12 (talkcontribslogs); 15:43, 6 September 2019 (UTC)
Decision
(to be filled in by an administrator)
I did some clean-up on Wow Kidd (Q71708969), but its notability is marginal, so it might not stick. Bovlb (talk) 18:07, 22 October 2019 (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. Bovlb (talk) 16:32, 24 October 2019 (UTC)

Move talk page

Hello. I global renamed a user, but for some reason his talk page did not get moved, and I don't have the permissions to do so. I need an sysops help with moving: User talk:Jinoytommanjaly to User talk:Gnoeee
Thanks --SimmeD (talk) 08:54, 23 October 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done.-- Hakan·IST 10:16, 23 October 2019 (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) 07:05, 24 October 2019 (UTC)

Request Semi-protection for Tupac Shakur (Q6107)

Hi, needs Semi-protection for Tupac Shakur (Q6107)? Regular vandalism. Thanks - Premeditated (talk) 14:19, 23 October 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done Semi-protected for 3 months. Pamputt (talk) 06:29, 24 October 2019 (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) 07:05, 24 October 2019 (UTC)

Undue merges and deletions

[Copied from Project chat]

Hello,

could someone help me undoing merges of Q66727680, Cliopsy (Q3428596) and congrès Cliopsy (Q72055715), which are clearly undue (these are three different entities, a congress, an association and a journal, that all match WD criterias)? Also, I would someone to restore this claim (correctly sourced) and revert this change (which is semantically wrong, as one can't be a "member" of a journal — nor of any published work in general).

Thanks, 92.184.102.234 20:59, 23 October 2019 (UTC)

C'est un peu plus compliqué que cela... Différend sur la pertinence d'avoir trois pages différentes pour une association (1) qui publie une revue (2) et fait des colloques (3), pour l'instant la page de la revue existe déjà, le différend est sur la nécessité de créer deux autres pages, cf [1], même requête, cela serait bien de ne pas multiplier les demandes identiques sur plusieurs pages, --Pierrette13 (talk) 21:39, 23 October 2019 (UTC)
I undid the merge but I'm not sure the items are notable enough for Wikidata. These items need references. Anyway, no need of an admin so this message is useless here. Cheers, VIGNERON (talk) 06:24, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
Merci de ta réponse et de ton intervention, effectivement, la question de notoriété reste non tranchée mais ok pour ta décision en attendant mieux, à suivre, --Pierrette13 (talk) 07:36, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: 92.184.102.234 13:15, 24 October 2019 (UTC)

Vandalism by User:195.77.175.65

Has a long history of vandalism edits, may require a long block. --Denniss (talk) 10:31, 24 October 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done--Ymblanter (talk) 18:46, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: ‐‐1997kB (talk) 07:32, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

Block 104.242.14.26 for vandalism

104.242.14.26 has been persistently vandalizing A. Y. Jackson (Q3499926). --SixTwoEight (talk) 15:43, 24 October 2019 (UTC)

Blocked by Bovlb--Ymblanter (talk) 18:47, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: ‐‐1997kB (talk) 07:32, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protection for Q12495

Please semi-protect Burj Khalifa (Q12495) - persistent IP vandalism from various IP addresses, very popular theme.--Jklamo (talk) 17:05, 24 October 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done--Ymblanter (talk) 18:48, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: ‐‐1997kB (talk) 07:32, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

Request semi-protection for Q517

Persistent vandalism. Sealle (talk) 07:24, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done for 6 months. ‐‐1997kB (talk) 07:31, 27 October 2019 (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) 16:08, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

三浦春馬でイェーガー (talkcontribslogs)

Vandalism only account.--Afaz (talk) 14:55, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

@Afaz: ✓ Done Blocked. It's an odd pattern. Vandalism across four languages is a little impressive. Bovlb (talk) 15:48, 27 October 2019 (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) 16:08, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

Destroyted (talkcontribslogs)

Please block this guy —a LTA sock—. Thanks, —Hasley 20:55, 27 October 2019 (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) 22:55, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protection for Q307

Galileo Galilei (Q307): persistent vandalism. — Mike Novikoff 22:44, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done Protected for a year. That item is a recurring target of vandalism. Must be a school topic. Bovlb (talk) 00:13, 28 October 2019 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: — Mike Novikoff 00:50, 28 October 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protection for Q67237006

Ed Maverick (Q67237006): excessive vandalism. — Mike Novikoff 01:07, 28 October 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done for 3 months. ‐‐1997kB (talk) 02:58, 28 October 2019 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: — Mike Novikoff 04:38, 28 October 2019 (UTC)

美姫は大和撫子

LTA (w:ja:Wikipedia:進行中の荒らし行為/長期/Mikihisa) / copycat. (Talk/留言/토론/Discussion) 14:48, 31 October 2019 (UTC)
✓ Done by 1997kB. (Talk/留言/토론/Discussion) 15:01, 31 October 2019 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: (Talk/留言/토론/Discussion) 15:01, 31 October 2019 (UTC)

Blockage or warning - Visite fortuitement prolongée

Hello. As you can see it here or here, user:Visite fortuitement prolongée harassed some users about fr-sysops actions. She's blocked indefinitely on wikipedia-fr. Sammyday (talk) 14:19, 18 October 2019 (UTC)

One message is not harassment. But this is good that you are here. Why have I been indefinitely blocked in frwiki? Visite fortuitement prolongée (talk) 09:55, 19 October 2019 (UTC)
As I said : harrassment. Sammyday (talk) 11:26, 19 October 2019 (UTC)

VFP bullying

Sammyday (talkcontribslogs)'s above request against me is bullying. He try to afraid me and silent me. See also "Difficile de vous répondre si vous ne savez pas lire." (hard to answer if you can't read) in special:diff/997327393. Visite fortuitement prolongée (talk) 11:35, 19 October 2019 (UTC)

Please, do not import problems you have/had at frwiki into wikidata. Lymantria (talk) 11:52, 19 October 2019 (UTC)
That's the point : it's not a problem of wiki. It's a problem of user (PEBCAK in "slang"). Thanks to VFP to introduce another proof. Sammyday (talk) 23:38, 19 October 2019 (UTC)
@Visite fortuitement prolongée: arrêtez immédiatement les actions relevées par Sammyday (ou n'importe quelle autre en lien avec votre blocage sur frwiki) sans quoi je serai obligé de vous bloquer car il semble que vous ne soyiez pas sur Wikidata que pour contribuer paisiblement. Cordialement. Pamputt (talk) 15:07, 26 October 2019 (UTC)

Wikidata:Requests for permissions/Oversight/-revi

This is a policy-instructed notification of my candidacy for Oversight. Thank you. — regards, Revi 16:50, 26 October 2019 (UTC)

Suspicious new account

Contribution on 3pCpHp0 (talkcontribslogs) that are random and nonsense on the seven wonders of the world. Probably a troll. author  TomT0m / talk page 14:09, 26 October 2019 (UTC)

Hmm. I have reviewed their contributions, and I get the sense that they are good faith, but just not very competent (yet). This is the sort of topic area that is likely to be a school project. Have you tried talking to them? Bovlb (talk) 18:54, 26 October 2019 (UTC)
Seemed unlikely, popped out from nowhere and go straight in to Wikidata … If it’s a school project it’s highly unprepared. My feeling is that a chool project is more likely to start from Wikipedia. But you are right, nothing that scary in the history after all. author  TomT0m / talk page 10:13, 28 October 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protection for Little Ararat (Q4278782)

Please semi-protect, continuous vandalism from IP-adresses. - Kareyac (talk) 04:06, 28 October 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done Semi-protected for 1 week. Pamputt (talk) 06:41, 28 October 2019 (UTC)

Get her globally blocked please

Vandal user's vandalism IP. --E4024 (talk) 18:59, 28 October 2019 (UTC)

@E4024: I have protected Beren Saat (Q270698). I'm reluctant to block IPs when only one article is involved, there are multiple IPs, and the timelines don't suggest that the same addresses will be used again. Could well be block evasion from Cigerova_Sevda_-_Beren_Saat (talkcontribslogs). Do you have any idea what the intention of these changes is? To request a global lock, go to meta:Steward_requests/Global. Bovlb (talk) 20:32, 28 October 2019 (UTC)

Block request

Hi, please have a look on the contributions of 190.82.86.75 (talkcontribslogs). Many thanks in advance, --—d—n—f (talk) 19:27, 28 October 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done Blocked for 31 hours. Bovlb (talk) 20:37, 28 October 2019 (UTC)

vandalism on Henry Dunant (Q12091) ‎

All the contributions of the ip 160.53.247.172 seem to be vandalism. I think it should be blocked. Sapphorain (talk) 13:37, 29 October 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done, for 31h--Ymblanter (talk) 19:25, 29 October 2019 (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) 20:35, 5 November 2019 (UTC)

Ip 212.117.127.245 begs for a lock

212.117.127.245 (talkcontribslogs) All Vandalism. --Wurgl (talk) 14:38, 29 October 2019 (UTC)

Done. -- Ajraddatz (talk) 18:20, 29 October 2019 (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) 20:34, 5 November 2019 (UTC)

130.180.91.130 another lock candidate

130.180.91.130 (talkcontribslogs) --Wurgl (talk) 14:48, 29 October 2019 (UTC)

Also done. -- Ajraddatz (talk) 18:20, 29 October 2019 (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) 20:35, 5 November 2019 (UTC)

User:Topp

I've asked User:Topp to attend to an issue they created with a conflated identity. Though they continue to edit, they have not responded to my messages on their talk page. As they have no user page, and so no Babel template, I can't be sure it's not a language issue - it's possible they speak Russian. Can anyone assist, please? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 09:02, 30 October 2019 (UTC)

@Pigsonthewing: Hi Andy. Do you have a reference for the claim that No-one who died in 1998 can have a ORCID iD (P496)? Cheers, Bovlb (talk) 14:58, 30 October 2019 (UTC)
Not a reference, but: ORCID's Terms of Use do not allow to create an ORCID ID for anyone else but oneself, and they started offering IDs in 2012 (I think). Thus, a person who died in 1998 did not have the chance to register such an ID.
That said, I do not think that conflation is an issue here. It just appears that someone has created an ORCID ID for Dmitry Mishin (Q60832387), although this is not allowed by ORCID's ToS. There is a good chance that they will delete that ID again once they find out. User:Topp is involved due to Special:Diff/1020915644. —MisterSynergy (talk) 15:26, 30 October 2019 (UTC)
Thank you, that seems clear. https://w.wiki/B4W . Interestingly, this appears to be the only person with an ORCID known to have died before 2012. Bovlb (talk) 16:16, 30 October 2019 (UTC)
I just learned that there is even a related constraint on ORCID iD (P496) (see talk page) and a corresponding report at Wikidata:Database reports/Complex constraint violations/P496 to oversee this situation. —MisterSynergy (talk) 16:18, 30 October 2019 (UTC)

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────

Thanks all. In that case, I've marked the ID as deprecated, and asked ORCID to do the same at their end. The fact remains, though that Topp has twice failed to engage with good-faith attempts to discuss the issue. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:59, 30 October 2019 (UTC)

Indeed. They don't have a good track record of responding to messages on their talk page. I found one case where they did so (in Russian). On the plus side, I see nothing in their contributions to suggest any specific affinity for Dmitry Mishin (Q60832387); it seems as likely that they simply found the ORCID ID than that they were involved in creating it. I sympathize with your frustration, but what administrative action are you seeking here? We can't force someone to read and respond to messages. A block would do it, but that seems extreme here. You might want to try addressing them in Russian, but I'm not the best person to assist you with that. Bovlb (talk) 00:01, 31 October 2019 (UTC)

Änderung des Usernamens

Hallo Admins,

ich möchte unseren Usernamen ändern lassen. Leider ist das nicht möglich. Könnt ihr weiterhelfen?  – The preceding unsigned comment was added by PaulValentineGmbH (talk • contribs) at 15:06, 30 October 2019‎ (UTC).

Dazu ist meines Wissens ein Antrag unter meta:Steward requests/Username changes gemäß der dortigen Beschreibung notwendig. Die Änderung des Benutzernamens betrifft dann alle Wikimedia-Projekte. —MisterSynergy (talk) 15:16, 30 October 2019 (UTC)

Q14445505 and Q14944467

Can an admin add tl:Padron:Graphic novel list/footer to Q14445505 and tl:Padron:Graphic novel list/header to Q14944467, I can't seem to add them. Thanks.--Lam-ang (talk) 16:44, 31 October 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done--Ymblanter (talk) 19:43, 31 October 2019 (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) 20:34, 5 November 2019 (UTC)

126.43.255.198 (talkcontribslogs)

This IP still trolling.--Afaz (talk) 16:59, 31 October 2019 (UTC)

Looks he/she has stopped for now. In my opinion, I am not really ok to block an IP, that may be dynamic, that does 3-4 edit every 7 days. Yet, another sysop could have a different opinion :) Pamputt (talk) 23:14, 31 October 2019 (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) 20:33, 5 November 2019 (UTC)

Persistent vandalism on China politics-related items

During the past several months, multiple IP users: 220.169.0.0/16 (talkcontribslogs)、106.18.0.0/16 (talkcontribslogs)、124.228.0.0/16 (talkcontribslogs)、113.218.0.0/16 (talkcontribslogs)、61.187.0.0/16 (talkcontribslogs)、118.254.0.0/16 (talkcontribslogs) (banned for 2 weeks), which are all located in Hengyang, Hunan, China according to Geolocation, have been persistently vandalizing WikiData items related to China politics. These IP users share similar vandalism patterns. Typically they add non-neutral words usually expressing extreme political views (appearing to hold a nationalist stance like w:50 Cent Party or just seek attention) and leave insulting comments when reverting others' edits. In most cases, these edits are made through mobile-web. It is reasonable to suppose that all of these IP users are operated by a single person or a small group of persons. It is obvious that those (or that) user(s) is/are totally unreasonable and it is not possible to communicate with at all. For example:

In view of the fact that those IPs are not used by other kinds of edits for more than one year, I think it is fine to ban those IPs for at least several months to mitigate potential vandalism in the future. 虹易 (talk) 00:35, 9 October 2019 (UTC)

It seemingly dates back to at least March 2019: 61.187.158.194 (talkcontribslogs).--虹易 (talk) 12:42, 30 October 2019 (UTC)
Possibly relevant: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-49921173 Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:08, 9 October 2019 (UTC)
@Pigsonthewing: Thanks for the information. But as far as I can see, no indication that there are coordinated disruptive edits backed by some state involving these articles/items so far. At least the above edits appear not to be so. Such kinds of disruptive edits have been lasting for years, dating back to early years of Chinese Wikipedia. It is possible that some people are encouraged or instigated by the recent political propaganda of the Beijing Government. But similar political propaganda has been also persistent for even decades, with peaks and troughs. Anyway, these problems are worth attention so that to keep Chinese Wikipedia (possibly as well as other WP in the future) neutral as it should be. (Off-Topic) Some recent news reports bring the risk of driving internal conflicts in the Wikipedia community. It is dangerous to raise dissatisfaction with other members of the entire community within a small group, which, unfortunately, has been normal in some regional groups (typically some Mainland China groups, not referring to that/those in the news). What's more, the benefits of "seeking solutions" from the public or politics outside the community are no more than bad, in my opinion. 虹易 (talk) 01:43, 10 October 2019 (UTC)

Request Semi-protection for Q5226214

Merging this thread as it seems to be the same topic. Bovlb (talk) 23:53, 10 October 2019 (UTC)

Reason: IP user and new user vandalism. Thank you! --SCP-2000 (talk) 14:03, 10 October 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done Semi-protected for a month. I'll keep an eye on some of those IPs. Bovlb (talk) 14:08, 10 October 2019 (UTC)
I protected four additional items. There seems to be a lot of activity in Chinese labels, descriptions, and aliases on topics related to Hong Kong and Taiwan. Bovlb (talk) 16:49, 10 October 2019 (UTC)

In addition to the IP ranges listed above, I see multiple problematic edits from the following:

Bovlb (talk) 16:00, 11 October 2019 (UTC)

I listed those because it seems that MediaWiki only suppport /16. According to IP w:Whois, some are actually /12.虹易 (talk) 02:32, 12 October 2019 (UTC)

Here is another problematic IP 38.100.229.84 (talkcontribslogs). BTW I currently maintain a Telegram group to monitor Chinese-related label/description/aliases edits and anyone interested may pm me (@WhitePhosphorus) via Telegram (plz inform me your wikimedia username) I'll invite you to that group. I'll work on corresponding IRC channel as well if needed. --WhitePhosphorus (talk) 04:34, 18 October 2019 (UTC)

Blocked for a month, but I don't see anything related under the /16 there. Bovlb (talk) 13:58, 18 October 2019 (UTC)
New IP: ‎223.146.224.188 (talkcontribslogs). --WhitePhosphorus (talk) 12:40, 22 October 2019 (UTC)
Please remove the edit summary of https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Q67188291&diff=prev&oldid=1037053760 . --虹易 (talk) 12:48, 22 October 2019 (UTC)
Blocked for a month. I don't see anything relevant under the /16. Bovlb (talk) 15:00, 22 October 2019 (UTC)
59.51.120.210 (talkcontribslogs), 106.18.139.212 (talkcontribslogs) --WhitePhosphorus (talk) 05:14, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
I blocked 59.51.120.210 and protected Glory to Hong Kong (Q67188291). Doesn't seem worth blocking the other at this point. Both IPs have some older vandalism in the /16. Bovlb (talk) 16:59, 24 October 2019 (UTC)

Winshare_Liao (talkcontribslogs), who has been blocked as a Vandalism-only account on zhwp, shares similar vandalism patterns with these IP users except that edits of the former are performed with mobile app instead of mobile web. The only two edits of this account on WikiData are also vandalism. --虹易 (talk) 03:19, 25 October 2019 (UTC)

124.228.239.62 (talkcontribslogs) & 45.12.110.144 (talkcontribslogs), both are Hunan IPs as well. --WhitePhosphorus (talk) 01:41, 26 October 2019 (UTC)
Winshare_Liao yes, but I'm disinclined to block a user so long after the fact. Blocked 124.228.239.62; nothing new under the /16. Bovlb (talk) 01:57, 26 October 2019 (UTC)
Changed my mind. Blocked Winshare_Liao. Bovlb (talk) 04:38, 26 October 2019 (UTC)
Please semi-protect Q2033. Thanks. --虹易 (talk) 07:01, 31 October 2019 (UTC)
59.51.123.215 (talkcontribslogs) --WhitePhosphorus (talk) 09:56, 31 October 2019 (UTC)
Semi-protected Notepad++ (Q2033) for a month. Doesn't seem worth blocking the IPs, but worth keeping an eye on: 59.51.123.215/16 (talkcontribslogs), 106.17.182.250/16 (talkcontribslogs), and 118.254.150.228/16 (talkcontribslogs). Bovlb (talk) 20:28, 31 October 2019 (UTC)

Is it time for a long-term block of large IP ranges?

IP range calculator on English Wikipedia

Reviewing the vandalism mentioned in this thread, I picked out 24 IP addresses where:

  • They have been used for vandalism of this type in the last three months.
  • Their /16 block contains at least two such IP addresses
  • The /16 block has no non-vandalism edits in the last six months.

There are eight /16 ranges involved:

From this evidence, it seems as though a lengthy (e.g. 6 months) block on these eight /16 ranges (or perhaps some narrower set of ranges) would cut out a significant amount of vandalism without collateral damage. (For the avoidance of doubt, I do not propose that we "Prevent logged-in users from editing from this IP address".) Is it too soon? Would this be too extreme? Cheers, Bovlb (talk) 23:23, 31 October 2019 (UTC)

Worth noting that the level of vandalism in this period is likely lower than it might have been because of short-term blocking of some IPs, and protection on many of the articles (although it keeps spreading to new ones). Bovlb (talk) 23:26, 31 October 2019 (UTC)

QuickStatementsBot (continued)

Wikidata:Administrators'_noticeboard/Archive/2019/10#QuickStatmentsBot_and_unattributed_edits
QuickStatementsBot (talkcontribslogs)

The above thread was archived without resolution. In summary:

  • This bot does not invent changes, but instead proxies edits on behalf of users.
  • The initiating user should be indicated in the edit summary, not only by good practice, but also according to the bot's RFP.
  • The bot, however, makes edits with no indication of the initiating user.
  • While most of these edits are good, some are bad but cannot be tracked to the responsible user.
  • When this subject is raised with the bot op (@Magnus Manske) they are not responsive.

After a hiatus that started during the above thread, the bot is back to making changes that do not indicate any user. I really don't want to block QuickStatementsBot, but we seem to be running out of other options. What is the best path forward here? Bovlb (talk) 00:06, 28 October 2019 (UTC)

In the archived discussion, users GZWDer, ChristianKl, Bovlb and myself are in favour of stopping these unattributed edits. Only MisterSynergy opposes a block. Given the summary above, I am therefore blocking QuickStatementsBot now. If Magnus Manske (or anyone else!) does not have time to fix SourceMD, it should be enough to file a new request for bot permission, which would allow unattributed edits. If that is approved, we should unblock the bot. − Pintoch (talk) 06:17, 28 October 2019 (UTC)
I strongly object. I find that formality is given priority over functionality. In previous iterations it was suggested that people did not take responsibility. I have as a consequence maintained the duplicate items with the same ORCID identifier. There is no alternate functionality. The work is important. In previous conversations I noticed considerable negativity towards Magnus on this subject. WHAT ARE YOU TRYING TO ACHIEVE but more importantly WHAT ARE ACTUALLY ACHIEVING! Thanks, GerardM (talk) 09:32, 28 October 2019 (UTC)
The issue here is that the tool makes edits without stating who made the edit. This means that when someone finds an error they can't go to the talk page of the person who entered the data to challenge the edit. I don't have any hostility for Magnus and think he does good work but that doesn't mean that in this case it's good to continue to have more unattributed edits. ChristianKl❫ 10:05, 28 October 2019 (UTC)
This is a repeat of what has been said before. Again, imho this is formality trumping functionality. Thanks, GerardM (talk) 10:32, 28 October 2019 (UTC)
Knowing who made an edit is functionality. It's not a matter or the formality of the bot approval process. ChristianKl❫ 13:48, 28 October 2019 (UTC)
Taking away functionality that has been in use for years is and will prove destructive. Functionality that has no equivalence for what is imho only formality. Thanks, GerardM (talk) 16:58, 28 October 2019 (UTC)
Hate to lose the bot even temporarily but agree with the block, the lack of attribution has caused some serious problems. I stumbled on a large number of items created by this bot that had incorrectly formatted labels (examples: Q67465358 Q67440935 Q67462000 Q67459028) and I have no idea how to address this issue since I don't know who is responsible. Gamaliel (talk) 17:08, 28 October 2019 (UTC)
I checked the first example.. What did you do, why what is your point? GerardM (talk) 09:26, 29 October 2019 (UTC)
@GerardM: I didn't do anything because, as I said, I could not engage with the editor responsible for creating the improperly labeled item. My point is that we cannot correct and prevent incorrectly created items if we can't discover the source of the problem. Gamaliel (talk) 14:12, 29 October 2019 (UTC)
@Gamaliel: Magnus did create new functionality for SourceMD in Rust. He was testing it and was told that he did not have the right status to continue.. So I stay with my assessment that it has little to do with functionality and that the real issue is formality. Thanks, GerardM (talk) 17:31, 29 October 2019 (UTC)
@GerardM: I do not understand how your response relates to anything I said. Gamaliel (talk) 17:55, 29 October 2019 (UTC)

May I just say that there are several organizations who would *love* to put their very notable members (more than 9000 items/persons) on wikidata. After showing them how fantastic scholia can be with working ORCID imports, they would love to see their organizations to be shown with all their papers and author networks linked, etc. We have done this, for example, for the Indian National Young Academy, and apart from contributing to global science, it has activated scholars who have never been on any wiki project to upload selfies, contribute to wikidata and wikipedia. 49 other organizations like it are to follow; we have just started a few weeks ago. So to the moderators (sorry I am new, I hope this is ok...) It would be awesome to have the tool up and running so that we can do this more quickly and easily? [as an added bonus, you might win wikidata volunteers from nearly 50 countries ;))] Put differently, what has to be done to get the tool up and running? And what can be done in the meantime? Thanks! --PPEscientist (talk) 00:36, 30 October 2019 (UTC)

OK, so SourceMD bot is not running at the moment, and has not been running for a while. So the bad edits should have stopped. Why do you want to block that bot? --Magnus Manske (talk) 10:32, 30 October 2019 (UTC)

Hi Magnus,
The latest edit from QuickStatementsBot seems to come from SourceMD according to the summary. The bot was approved with the understanding that edits would be attributed to the users responsible for them in the edit summary, which is not the case for that edit (and at least the 500 latest edits).
Even then, I think it would be better not to use QuickStatementsBot at all: all edits should be made directly under the account of the responsible user via OAuth. Lucas Werkmeister has contributed a patch for QuickStatements batches, but it seems that you are using this bot account in other tools too (which is again outside the scope of the bot request). Perhaps it would be worth changing SourceMD such that its actions are sent to QuickStatements itself, so that all edits are made directly under the user's account.
Pintoch (talk) 13:19, 30 October 2019 (UTC)
I am so fed up with all this.. Just look at this history page. It does state that I created that item and it does state the process that did the work. All this is because Magnus is frustrated in the roll out of his updated functionality. I use whatever is available. The functionality that I used recently is the old old version because the latest version is dead. So PLEASE support the development of the bot software and get a grip on what quality is. Thanks, GerardM (talk) 07:27, 31 October 2019 (UTC)
I think I may be beginning to see some light here. Magnus has suggested that the unattributed edits arise from an old tool that "has not been running for a while", but this is at odds with the fact that we see recent unattributed edits. GerardM says they recently used "the old old version". Could it be the case that this issue is down to GeraldM (and others?) using an old tool that is considered obsolete by its maintainer but which is not, however, disabled? If so, can we move forward here by disabling the old tool and unblocking the bot? Cheers, Bovlb (talk) 15:00, 31 October 2019 (UTC)
Yes there seems to be an inconsistency between Magnus saying that SourceMD bot is not running at the moment and the fact that QuickStatementsBot was still doing SourceMD edits a few days ago. Since all edits I can see were unattributed recently, I do not think that the block has had a side-effect on a newer version of the tool (so there is no rush to unblock the bot). − Pintoch (talk) 17:27, 31 October 2019 (UTC)
Actually this means there're no asynchronous batch run in backend currently (which is how the bot usually run in 2017-09 to 2019-06). ORCIDator and NewResolveAuthors may still be invoked manually by users which also results in edits of this account.--GZWDer (talk) 18:05, 31 October 2019 (UTC)
Here are recent edits by this bot that link to a batch, and hence indirectly indicate the initiating user. Cheers, Bovlb (talk) 18:36, 31 October 2019 (UTC)
Ah, makes sense. @Magnus Manske: could you deactivate all versions of SourceMD which use QuickStatementsBot without a link to a batch attributed to a user? Once that is done we can unblock the bot. − Pintoch (talk) 08:11, 1 November 2019 (UTC)

That does not resolve my issue that SourceMD needs to be available. I am fine with the latest and greatest but there has to be a service. Thanks, GerardM (talk) 11:02, 1 November 2019 (UTC)

Vandalism by Warzep, aka Germainflush.

Could you block Warzep (talkcontribslogs) and once again remove

See my request last February for more information. Thanks. Habertix (talk) 21:32, 29 October 2019 (UTC).

✓ Done--Ymblanter (talk) 20:03, 1 November 2019 (UTC)
  • David Carson, regardless of how many times he has been deleted in the past, now has both ISNI and VIAF identifiers. Someone finds him notable and identifiable. Quakewoody (talk)