Wikidata:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive/2018/07

From Wikidata
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Advertising

Please nuke page creations by Balakanna as promotional. --Kostas20142 (talk) 07:29, 2 July 2018 (UTC)

@Kostas20142: ✓ Done Mahir256 (talk) 20:12, 2 July 2018 (UTC)

BLP vandalism on "Nicolás López" (Q3876520)

Nicolás López (Q3876520) Vandalism from at least three IP users within last two days, of a BLP-violation nature.

@Bovlb: Semi-protected for a week. Mahir256 (talk) 20:07, 2 July 2018 (UTC)

Vandalism by 2003:CD:7F0E:2300:755A:8F29:AD1:6C15

See Special:Contribs/2003:CD:7F0E:2300:755A:8F29:AD1:6C15. --Yair rand (talk) 20:49, 2 July 2018 (UTC)

@Yair rand: Blocked the /64 subnet for a week. Mahir256 (talk) 20:51, 2 July 2018 (UTC)

Request for page protection

Please semi-protect Shawn Mendes (Q17198340) and 5 Seconds of Summer (Q4641147) for something like a year; consistent levels of random vandalism and test edits. Thanks, Jc86035 (talk) 02:41, 3 July 2018 (UTC)

@Jc86035: Semi'd the latter for three years and the former for one. Mahir256 (talk) 02:57, 3 July 2018 (UTC)

Request for page protection: "Daniel Ortega" (Q57402)

Daniel Ortega (Q57402) has been the target of many disruptive changes for weeks, mostly from anons. Bovlb (talk) 04:30, 3 July 2018 (UTC)

✓ Done Matěj Suchánek (talk) 07:27, 3 July 2018 (UTC)

Request for page protection: "association football referee" (Q859528)

association football referee (Q859528) Repeated vandalism by anons. Maybe until after July 15th. Bovlb (talk) 21:42, 3 July 2018 (UTC)

@Bovlb: ✓ Done by MisterSynergy Mahir256 (talk) 23:38, 3 July 2018 (UTC)

Possible need for page protection: Stan Lee

Greetings, the Wikimedia Foundation's Communications department has received some media inquires about some vandalism (already reverted) made to Stan Lee's entry. We wanted to pass along a heads up in case the project admins feel page protection or other actions are warranted. --GVarnum-WMF (talk) 18:08, 5 July 2018 (UTC)

@GVarnum-WMF: Thank you very much for the notice, Gregory! I have semi-protected the item for a year. Let us hope that you are not bombarded with any more concerns of this sort. Mahir256 (talk) 18:36, 5 July 2018 (UTC)
Also a heads-up to @&beer&love: who re-added this claim twice; be sure that the claims you are adding are correct! Mahir256 (talk) 18:40, 5 July 2018 (UTC)
There are also other users who imported such data into that item. Semi-protection for a year does not help a lot, since all the users who import from Wikipedias can still edit the item. Maybe sysop-only for two weeks would be better, so that we reduce the risk a lot that someone accidentally imports this data another time. --MisterSynergy (talk) 18:59, 5 July 2018 (UTC)
@MisterSynergy: ✓ Done You're probably right about accidental imports, especially from already autoconfirmed people (@Ghuron:'s category-based additions, for example); such strong short-term protection also seems appropriate when it earns unwanted attention from the WMF as above. Mahir256 (talk) 20:25, 5 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Maybe it's important to brief people on Help:Ranking#Deprecated rank. It's problematic when people remove claims instead of ranking them correctly. This type of vandalism leads users to repeated incorrect edits.
    --- Jura 19:04, 5 July 2018 (UTC)
    • Technically correct, but right now deprecated rank is only indicated by that tiny little ranking indicator that barely anyone can interpret. I find the UI way too confusing regarding deprecated statements to be happy with that formally correct solution. If deprecated statements were displayed with another color (grey?), I could switch my mind... --MisterSynergy (talk) 19:16, 5 July 2018 (UTC) Just wrote phab:T198907, so let's see ... --MisterSynergy (talk) 19:28, 5 July 2018 (UTC)
      • I think there is a way to switch stylesheets if you don't like Wikidata data-model in its current colors. There is also a qualifier to explain why a statement is deprecated.
        Is there a way to prevent ips from deleting deprecated statements?
        --- Jura 19:31, 5 July 2018 (UTC)
        • Well, I personally don't need this since I'm familiar with deprecation, but there are many users who are not, or who don't want to or even can't change their UI. A distinction should be made by default. --MisterSynergy (talk) 20:08, 5 July 2018 (UTC)

To all involved: relevant articles in en, it, pt, es (1, 2, 3, 4, ...) Mahir256 (talk) 21:22, 5 July 2018 (UTC) The original edit is here: https://it.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Stan_Lee&diff=98252592&oldid=98178264

The protection is not needed as this wrong information is removed from Wikipedia

Вандалы

@Ymblanter: примите меры к обоим вандалам + вандал. Kalendar (talk) 05:11, 11 July 2018 (UTC)

✓ Done--Ymblanter (talk) 05:56, 11 July 2018 (UTC)
:This section was archived on a request by: -- Kalendar (talk) 06:47, 11 July 2018 (UTC)

Вандалы

@Ymblanter: повтор (1, 2, 3) атаки вандалов. Kalendar (talk) 07:21, 11 July 2018 (UTC)

✓ Done, blocked all the three and protected two pages out of three, the last one is left as a vandal magnet.--Ymblanter (talk) 07:24, 11 July 2018 (UTC)
:This section was archived on a request by: -- Kalendar (talk) 07:30, 11 July 2018 (UTC)

Vandalism by 69.70.73.34

See Special:Contribs/69.70.73.34. Please block. Florentyna (talk) 03:22, 6 July 2018 (UTC)

@Florentyna: Blocked the /24 subnet for a week. Mahir256 (talk) 03:30, 6 July 2018 (UTC)

Please restore Q51799430

The item is used by Proteocephalus bufonis Chandra & Gupta, 2007 (Q51799202). Thx. --Succu (talk) 07:19, 6 July 2018 (UTC)

✓ Done Matěj Suchánek (talk) 07:36, 6 July 2018 (UTC)

Please semi Q50339681

It get mainly edits from some ip that tries to re-write history. Several attempts were made to discuss this (mainly in relation to property), but that didn't really help.
--- Jura 10:11, 8 July 2018 (UTC)

✓ Done Semi-protected for one month. Pamputt (talk) 12:00, 8 July 2018 (UTC)

Troll IP 2.247.58.206

Known troll from German WP (Special:Contribs/2.247.58.206). [1] Multiple times blocked, see de:Vorlage Diskussion:Deutsche Biographie. Please block. --Kolja21 (talk) 19:06, 8 July 2018 (UTC)

Looks like the globally banned user "Tobias Conradi" who is blocked here under several accounts. Applied a range block for a week for couple of ranges. I encourage other administrators to do the same if the user pops up in another range. Multichill (talk) 19:39, 8 July 2018 (UTC)
Thanks, @Multichill:, for doing this. I am sure @MisterSynergy: will concur and that @Pigsonthewing: will think differently, though.
Mahir256 (talk) 19:58, 8 July 2018 (UTC)

Request for page protection: John Lennon (Q1203)

Page protection recently expired only to suffer another bout of IP vandalism. - Bossanoven (talk) 23:03, 9 July 2018 (UTC)

@Bossanoven: ✓ Done for three months. Mahir256 (talk) 23:37, 9 July 2018 (UTC)

@Mahir256: Thank you very much. - Bossanoven (talk) 16:08, 10 July 2018 (UTC)

Taeym (talk • contribs • logs) Vandalism.

100.35.57.106 04:31, 10 July 2018 (UTC)

✓ Done —MisterSynergy (talk) 05:22, 10 July 2018 (UTC)

Q55436121

Self-promotion item created by long-term abuser Alex9777777 (also known as Pechkurov Aleksej). --jdx Re: 09:56, 10 July 2018 (UTC)

✓ deleted --Alaa :)..! 10:36, 10 July 2018 (UTC)

Vandalism by User:Schurti 1

link, also blocked in the german WP. --Verum (talk) 15:06, 10 July 2018 (UTC)

✓ Done by Mahir256--Ymblanter (talk) 20:51, 10 July 2018 (UTC)

uncle

Should we really have separate entries for parent's brother (Q41805469) and uncle (Q76557)? - Bossanoven (talk) 19:57, 10 July 2018 (UTC)

@Bossanoven: Speakers of other languages may in fact think we don't have enough items about uncles. As a Bengali speaker, I wouldn't be surprised if we had separate, well-developed items for multiple very specific relationships to the individual. (One time on hiwiki I thought I happened upon articles about each of those relationships.) I'm also not sure this discussion needs to happen here in particular. Mahir256 (talk) 20:03, 10 July 2018 (UTC)

Vandalism by 5.227.6.47

See Special:Contribs/5.227.6.47. Conflict had accured in Russian Wikipedia between this user (this ip adress belongs to Siska188 (Sockpuppet investigation)) and Томасина. Later he was blocked in Ru-wiki due to disruptive editing and personal attacks [2]. Seems like this user desided to make revenge in Wikidata pages. Dantiras (talk) 04:48, 11 July 2018 (UTC)

✓ Done, same as below--Ymblanter (talk) 05:59, 11 July 2018 (UTC)

promotional-only account

Trucksuvidha is a promotional-only account with promotional username. Please consider blocking. --Kostas20142 (talk) 11:28, 11 July 2018 (UTC)

deleted its contribution. --Pasleim (talk) 12:28, 11 July 2018 (UTC)

Can we block &beer&love please

user:&beer&love is prolific with petscan, but seems to have little care for the accuracy of the statements inserted. Not untypical is this gem - adding a point in time based on a misreading of 4 digits. &beer&love does not appear willing to engage in discussion about the quality of their work, nor to fix issues when raised - example.

It sucks that we have an individual injecting crap into the dataset, and unwilling to engage. --Tagishsimon (talk) 02:19, 9 July 2018 (UTC)

@Tagishsimon: ✓ Done for three days, but any admin may undo this block earlier if he or she desires. I must agree that the specific sorts of edits that the user has been making are somewhat problematic, heightened slightly by the Stan Lee incident above, and certainly deserve thorough explanations and remedies. Mahir256 (talk) 03:32, 9 July 2018 (UTC)

This user does not disrupt Wikidata on propose; Stan Lee's incorrect birth date was imported from a vandalized Italian Wikipedia article. The vandalism is removed and I think the protection on Stan Lee's item should be removed  – The preceding unsigned comment was added by 115.27.199.73 (talk • contribs) at 19:13, 9 July 2018‎ (UTC).

The user puts false date of death (P570) into many articles (e.g. on my watchlist; Zoltán Szentirmai (Q1296964), Ahron Daum (Q15215308), Ehsan Jami (Q983182)) and puts them back after I reverted many times her/his edits. I think she/he should at least check that these information are true or false, but she/he puts them back again and again. The main problem is that we do not (and cannot) know how many similar edits she/he made. Bencemac (talk) 17:36, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

Asunto 1
esta carga de 25 items con sexo equivocado fue un error por mi parte. Yo para encontrar los errores quería contejarlo con nombre propios.
Asunto 2
Estoy usando https://tools.wmflabs.org/pltools/recentdeaths/
Para los datos incorrectos (sea la razón que sea) que se añaden por error
- ¿cómo se gestiona: se tipifica como "nivel obsoleto" o se elimina?
- ¿cómo detectan los demás usuarios que usen la aplicación que no deben adicionar esa fecha?
- ¿Se elimina las fechas de defunción de las wikipedias de importación, como si nunca se hubieran escrito. o se referencia por ejemplo una url del hoax.?
En las correcciones de cargas erróneas he visto diferentes formas de actuación, había tipificado como obsoleto, marcando incluso un criterio, pero tambien se considera erróneo. Se borra la fecha en Wikidata, pero no modifican los datos de la wikipedia de importación Ehsan Jami (Q983182) (en árabe), lo cual lleva a un error repetitivo. Otros usuario (no yo) lo marcan como "obsoleto" y no se les borra (siempre).
Como usuario, he estado corrigiendo sexos errónes, incluso revirtiendo ediciones de años pasados.
--&beer&love (talk) 18:27, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
@&beer&love: Muchas gracias por su explicación. Siempre puede pedir a una hablante del idioma de un wiki a puede corregir un error allá si no lo puede corregir si mismo—aprendía que muchas veces solamente preguntar a los bibliotecarios de otros wikis a hacer algo vale el esfuerzo. Preferimos aquí eliminar datos erróneos si no hay referencia (no consideramos wikis de Wikimedia referencias válidas) para ellos; en otro caso lo marcamos obsoleto. Creo que @Pasleim: puede ayudarle modificar la herramienta a detectar datos erróneos que no deben ser añadidos. Mahir256 (talk) 18:45, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
Creo que &beer&love fue bloqueado porque agregó un sex or gender (P21) incorrecto con PetScan, una herramienta que no mantengo. Con https://tools.wmflabs.org/pltools/recentdeaths/ se puede añadir date of death (P570), por ejemplo. Para evitar que un valor incorrecto se añada de nuevo, puede corregir el valor directamente en Wikidata o cambiar la categoría en Wikipedia. Si se define un valor date of death (P570), recentdeaths no añade un segundo valor.--Pasleim (talk) 21:22, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

72.25.24.183

Special:Contributions/72.25.24.183 creates a lot of duplicate items and adds descriptions in wrong languages. I'm not sure if those edits are all intentionally disruptive, but I don't (want to) keep up with correcting/merging this IP's contributions anymore and the IP doesn't react to messages on its discussion page. - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 12:46, 11 July 2018 (UTC)

✓ Done blocked for 5 years (I generally try not to apply unlimited blocks to ip's) . Appears to be a static IP used by the same user and keeps persisting. If contact has been established, feel free to unblock. Multichill (talk) 15:48, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
@Multichill, Valentina.Anitnelav: Are this user's items worth nuking, then? Or are they otherwise worthy of inclusion, only needing to eliminate duplicates? Mahir256 (talk) 18:34, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
I just checked the contributions since July 11th, 14:18 (everything before that should be merged, fine or I already requested its deletion): The majority (all but one) are duplicates/not identifiable. There is one item which I would call borderline notable: Adele 'Rolling in the Deep' (Q55455194), an arrangement of Rolling in the Deep (Q170165) by Walt Ribeiro (Q7964051) (there is a youtube video, but I don't know more about it).
There are items created for PBS NewsHour (Q7118447) and Nightly Business Report (Q16957934) where I'm not sure about their notability: items for previous names/predecessors (?) (The Newshour with Jim Lehrer (Q55405726), The MacNeil Lehrer NewsHour (Q55455488)) and items for their theme music (linked to the items via theme music (P942)) - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 20:10, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protection for Q224

Please semi-protect Croatia (Q224) at least for a week - frequent IP vandalism, temporarily popular theme.--Jklamo (talk) 09:03, 13 July 2018 (UTC)

✓ Done --Pasleim (talk) 09:05, 13 July 2018 (UTC)

Special:Contributions/153.107.192.204

Latest edits all reverted. Maybe only vandalism account. Pelmeen10 (talk) 12:50, 13 July 2018 (UTC)

✓ Done, blocked for a week.--Ymblanter (talk) 21:07, 13 July 2018 (UTC)

Special:Contributions/2001:E68:69EF:7A00:ACDC:98E0:B515:3279

Hello.This IP vandalism the discussion pages.Please act.Thank you --David (talk) 09:04, 14 July 2018 (UTC)

✓ Done blocked for edit warring for 31 hrs. —MisterSynergy (talk) 09:20, 14 July 2018 (UTC)

Current range

@Mahir256, Multichill: I think it's 92.227.94.*
--- Jura 15:21, 13 July 2018 (UTC)

@MisterSynergy: We have to take the blocks we've been applying here to the stewards (@Ajraddatz, Sjoerddebruin, علاء, HakanIST, -revi, Stryn:, all of whom are also sysops here and should be equally as concerned), as this tradeoff between enforcing a global ban and blocking innocent users from editing, about which I have been previously confronted by others, should not be a Wikidata-only issue. Mahir256 (talk) 15:45, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
Maybe you could create a security phab ticket and ask WMF staff to take care of it.
--- Jura 15:49, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
This isn't within the WMF's scope to address. I can look at a global rangeblock later today unless another steward gets to it first; you could post on m:SRG. -- Ajraddatz (talk) 16:24, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
I think we can ask them to look into it. They operate the site.
--- Jura 16:27, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
That depends on the case - they usualy do not interfere on usual problems of wiki. And I don't know what's the problem here? — regards, Revi 16:33, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
@Ajraddatz, -revi: Although to many people the topic of this section is very clearly evident, it is easy to forget that the implication is not evident to everyone. Mahir256 (talk) 16:51, 13 July 2018 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘Indeed! Now it's clear that this is steward jurisdiction rather than WMF. WMF usually do not touch community global ban, it's Stewards who do so. Anyway, if you are sure they're the user evading the gban, please report it on m:SRG. — regards, Revi 16:55, 13 July 2018 (UTC)

Also @Pigsonthewing, Jonas Kress (WMDE):; if you haven't asked people besides myself (or in the latter's case @Smalyshev (WMF): as well) about this issue, now is the perfect time to do so. Mahir256 (talk) 16:57, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
(ec) The problem here is that this user has access to so many IP addresses that simple project admins shouldn’t make the decision to just block all of them for a longer time. As far as I remember, we are talking about 1M IPs or even more of the ISP Telefonica Germany (geolocated in Berlin), which has the largest relative market share in Germany among mobile internet users (~35%, presumably substantially more in urban regions like Berlin). Effective range blocks would make anon editing impossible for a really substantial part of Berlin residents. —MisterSynergy (talk) 16:59, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
@Ajraddatz, -revi: As such, the question we pose to you and the other stewards here (if you'd like it elsewhere, that's fine too) is as follows: compared to how other globally banned users are handled, how should we properly approach a global ban of the sort which is the topic of this section if the user in question avoids creating accounts, while also not effectively crippling the ability of those in a large city, including WMDE developers like Jonas, to otherwise edit in good faith? Mahir256 (talk) 17:12, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
I think m:Global bans#Implementing a global ban partly answers your question. (However, we usually don't globalblock ranges if the collateral damage is too big.) — regards, Revi 12:38, 14 July 2018 (UTC)

The user is always using Telefonica ranges coming from AS6805. These are the ranges based on RIPEstat. I did filter out some unlikely ranges (PI space):

  • 95.112.0.0/13
  • 93.128.0.0/13
  • 92.224.0.0/13
  • 89.15.240.0/20
  • 89.15.224.0/21
  • 89.15.192.0/19
  • 89.15.128.0/18
  • 89.15.0.0/17
  • 89.14.0.0/16
  • 89.12.0.0/15
  • 85.176.0.0/13
  • 80.171.0.0/16
  • 78.48.0.0/13
  • 77.176.0.0/12
  • 77.0.0.0/12
  • 62.52.0.0/14
  • 62.109.64.0/18
  • 217.48.0.0/14
  • 217.184.0.0/13
  • 213.39.128.0/17
  • 213.20.0.0/16
  • 213.191.64.0/19
  • 212.94.224.0/19
  • 2.240.0.0/13
  • 195.71.0.0/16
  • 193.189.225.0/24
  • 193.189.224.0/19
  • 192.31.22.0/24
  • 185.98.140.0/22
  • 185.93.236.0/22
  • 2a0b:de00::/40
  • 2a02:3000::/23
  • 2a01:c00::/26

So if you see any suspicious you can check if it falls within these ranges or lists ASN 6805 at the bottom of the whois output or look at a looking glass if it's coming out of AS6805. Multichill (talk) 16:17, 14 July 2018 (UTC)

Request for page protection

Please semi-protect Neymar (Q142794) for a few years; regular vandalism. Thanks, Jc86035 (talk) 06:40, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

✓ Done for 1 year Pamputt (talk) 07:13, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

Closing a property deletion request

Could an admin please close my property deletion request, Wikidata:Properties for deletion#Property:P1103, as "no consensus"? It's been more than 15 months and somehow there is no process for closing a stale discussion. Thanks, Jc86035 (talk) 06:58, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

✓ Done Pamputt (talk) 07:33, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

Please, help

User Jura1 deletes links to disambiguations, claming that they are not relevant. But they are talking about same things. For example, w:ru:Бингер and w:en:Binger - they all are listing people with surname 'Binger'. I don't understand what does he do. And he does it like in a bot regime. --VAP+VYK (talk) 18:32, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

Please, watch your tone and assume good faith. Matěj Suchánek (talk) 18:52, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
Excuse me, what do you mean speaking about faith? I see that the user does edits deleting links to the relevant pages. This is not question of faith, this is a fact what we can observe. I didn't say that he wilfully do vandalism or something else. I just said about results of his activity, and that's all. --VAP+VYK (talk) 19:03, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
At least, this reaction could be spared. Anyway, I don't think a measure needs to be taken. Other administrators may have different opinion, though. Matěj Suchánek (talk) 19:12, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
Activity of the user, who do thousands edits in a minute, deleting relevant links, isn't interesting for you? --VAP+VYK (talk) 19:21, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
A link that only lists people with a given surname, and nothing else that has the exact same name, goes on the surname item and not on the disambiguation item, something about which Jura did inform you on your talk page. As such I must concur with Matěj here in that little needs to be done here. There are lots of users doing many edits in a minute (to say 'thousands [of] edits in a minute' is an exaggeration) and we can quickly identify problematic edit batches and take action to warn their creators. The edits Jura has been making do not at all seem problematic. Also @Ymblanter, Putnik: if your concerns can be resolved more calmly in Russian. Mahir256 (talk) 19:44, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
(edit conflict) No. If there was a severe problem, I would act. But now I can't see it. I understand it bothers you (just like it would bother me) but in my opinion it's justified. Matěj Suchánek (talk) 19:46, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
My apologies, I am travelling and have a very bad internet, I would be unlikely to help within a week. Sorry for that.--Ymblanter (talk) 21:16, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
These items are mix up with disambiguation and surname and should be split.--GZWDer (talk) 21:21, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

IP deletions

User 88.224.104.234 has been deleting content repeatedly today. --EncycloPetey (talk) 22:52, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

@EncycloPetey: Blocked for three days for what is effectively edit warring. If anything else needs to be done with the Turk, let me know. Mahir256 (talk) 22:58, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

User:MisterSynergy

FYI, I blocked the adminstrator MisterSynergy for 5 minutes for running and unapproved bot under the main account. See also Topic:Ugw2nh22n00tfms5. Multichill (talk) 14:12, 14 July 2018 (UTC)

The 5 minutes didn't work so now it's a indefinite block. I asked MisterSynergy to unblock himself after he disabled the bot (to prevent any misunderstanding about self-unblocking). Multichill (talk) 14:21, 14 July 2018 (UTC)
Wikidata:Bots only describes vaguely for which edits a bot account must be used. As long as the edits are not disputed, I would not block a user based on that reason. --Pasleim (talk) 09:43, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

(Editing here as a user, not in admin role.) It’s meanwhile a bit unpleasant that Multichill apparently does not continue to communicate in the linked topic. I think his intervention was wrong and the block of my account a mistake, but mistakes are occasionally made even while using the admin tools. That’s okay, however as long as I have questions regarding his admin activity I expect him to be responsive. I am now waiting for more than a day to continue editing, as there are more edits in the pipe. My edits have not been critizied at all until now, thus this is just about the procedural question whether my edits should be done with a separate bot account or not. I don’t think they should, as I use the PAWS tool simply to automate edits without any non-human decision-making (“batch editing” similar as with QuickStatements for instance). I could/should have used a flooder flag, however, to enable users to hide them from their watchlists.
More in general: the bot policy has a weakness in that it does not really justify its existence. It was created in the early days of Wikidata, probably based on the fact that counterparts in Wikipedias exist, but way before the various batch editing tools came into operation. Nowadays, automated editing is the norm in Wikidata, unlike in Wikipedias. Thus, it is not well-defined for which purpose automated edits should be made with separated accounts and specifically flagged to the benefit of this project. If someone was able to explain that, and how bot-editing (requiring a bot flag) is conceptually different from automated batch-editing (not requiring a bot flag, per status quo), I would be willing to apply for a bot flag for my alternate account User:MsynBot, hoping that the bureaucrats would grant the flag for a pretty abstract task description like “batch editing to repair constraint violations, in various one-time jobs picked up by opportunity”. It would complicate my workflow a bit, and slightly increase the risk that mistakes might not be seen as quickly, but if I understand how this helps Wikidata I would do it. —MisterSynergy (talk) 17:16, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

I don't consider Wikidata:Bots unclear. It's clearly based on previous versions from other projects. "Contributors must create a separate account in order to operate a bot." (MUST). PAWS is a web based wrapper around Pywikibot. That's clearly a robot. If you don't agree with the robot policy, try to get it changed, but don't come with petty excuses. Multichill (talk) 10:02, 16 July 2018 (UTC)
The purpose of the bot flag is clearly not to tag the tool used to make the edit (Special:Tags does this, to a very limited extent). As I said, it is not totally clear what purpose the bot flag has in this project, the closest claim we have from WD:Bots is to tag accounts that “make edits without the necessity of human decision-making”. Which is not the case here, I simply automated the execution of edits on items which I selected by myself in a thorough investigation before I started this batch. This is classical “batch editing”, which is unfortunately not trivial to distinguish from “bot editing” just by looking at a contributions list. Since there is no other tool (to my knowledge) which allows to perform the edits I made efficiently (i.e. one edit per item), I used the PAWS tool. Anyway, there is no automatic decision-making by the script involved, and the script is also not scheduled to start automatically.
The PAWS tool has been used by other users without a bot flag as well in the past, and there is no policy which forbids its use without a bot flag, or even only mentions that it was controversial to use it that way. If you want to issue blocks for using it without a bot flag, please explicitly change this first, rather than trying to make new policy by the use of your admin tools. It would even be better to implement PAWS it in a way that does not permit editing via an account without a bot flag in that case. —MisterSynergy (talk) 11:45, 16 July 2018 (UTC)

To get things done, there is now Wikidata:Requests for permissions/Bot/MsynBot 2. —MisterSynergy (talk) 12:54, 16 July 2018 (UTC)

Special:Contributions/Research_Bot

@Daniel Mietchen: Research Bot is creating a lot of duplicated items. I don't know whether it currently need administrator action.--GZWDer (talk) 19:44, 14 July 2018 (UTC)

The duplicate creation still continue: e.g. Translational toxicology and exposomics for food safety risk management. (Q55554329) and Translational toxicology and exposomics for food safety risk management. (Q55554331).--GZWDer (talk) 09:18, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
I blocked Research Bot for now. Daniel Mietchen could you have a look on it? Pamputt (talk) 17:35, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
@GZWDer, Pamputt, Jura1: The batch is through now, and the query yields zero results. --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 04:30, 16 July 2018 (UTC)
I was running several different batches simultaneously (at least that was the intention) but when re-specifying how they should run (which was necessary because the machine I am using for this had been restarted by someone else), I mistakenly called the same script twice. Fatameh checks for duplicates, but it uses SPARQL to do so, and if there is a lag, then this results in duplicate entries. --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 06:04, 16 July 2018 (UTC)
  • I see. BTW, could you remove the trailing "." in labels and titles? I think a bot was approved to fix them afterwards, but it would be better if it wasn't added in the first place.
    --- Jura 06:08, 16 July 2018 (UTC)
I do not see a way to remove this period as part of my workflows, as I am simply calling Fatameh with an ID, and it pulls the data directly from Europe PubMed Central, where the period is part of the title (even consciously so — we have contacte them, and they insisted it is and should be part of the title). Failing a pull request to Wikidata Integrator (on which Fatameh is based), something like User:Fatameh_sister_bot is probably our best bet for the moment. In the long run, I would like to decompose titles into their components anyway, since we also have lots of other issues with titles (e.g. "Formula: see text"), and then the presence or absence of the period could be indicated following the respective sources. Crossref, by the way, does not use the period, but Wikidata Integrator does not (yet?) pull its data from there. --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 14:33, 16 July 2018 (UTC)

@Daniel Mietchen, Pamputt, Jura1: Lifted the block as you have merged the duplicates. Mahir256 (talk) 13:41, 16 July 2018 (UTC)

Thanks. I'm on the way to Wikimania — good to know this is resolved. --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 14:22, 16 July 2018 (UTC)

Special:Contributions/GZWDer_(flood)

Please block this flood account until it's clear what we want to do (Wikidata:Project_chat#Another_cebwiki_flood?). There doesn't seem to have been a bot request for it's activity (see [[User:GZWDer_(flood)).
--- Jura 08:43, 16 July 2018 (UTC)

  • @HakanIST, Mahir256: as admins active today, could you look into this?
    --- Jura 12:48, 16 July 2018 (UTC)
    @Jura1, GZWDer: By 'active today' you mean 'active at around 9pm the previous day'...anyway, the last request for bot rights for this account was about four and a half years ago (@Legoktm:), and while the description of that bot's tasks may have been appropriate for back when Wikidata wasn't a behemoth, it certainly would fail our examinations now, and also none of the example edits given are the sorts of mass page creations that take place today. I am a bit discontent personally that this is the third time IIRC that this flood has occurred and that it has occurred after a five-month hiatus by the bot's operator. While I respect the right of users to flood Wikidata with items or to take long breaks such as this—please understand that I am not criticizing those actions in particular—incomplete explanations of further actions only after and among repeated complaints in a public forum seem unacceptable to me. For this reason I have decided to block GZWDer (flood) for three days until GZWDer writes up a full explanation of the changes he wishes to make to items (in the same way one would write up a request for bot permissions) in one place—this may be his userpage or a whole new bot request. Any admin may undo this block earlier if he or she desires, but please consider the benefits of having such a description of further action before doing so. Mahir256 (talk) 13:31, 16 July 2018 (UTC)
I have filed a new request at Wikidata:Requests for permissions/Bot/GZWDer (flood) 2. Please comment on this.--GZWDer (talk) 13:59, 16 July 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protection request

Could you semi-protect Charles Cros (Q356575) for a year since it is regularly vandalized. Thanks. — Ayack (talk) 17:32, 16 July 2018 (UTC)

✓ Done, for six months, as the current vandalism has started since this February. --Okkn (talk) 17:43, 16 July 2018 (UTC)

Продолжение вандализма

@Ymblanter: продолжение вандализма. Kalendar (talk) 19:36, 14 July 2018 (UTC)

@Ymblanter: продолжение вандализма: 2, 3, 4. Kalendar (talk) 19:45, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

Прошу прощения, с той скоростью интернета, которая у меня будет до вечера воскресенья, я эти ссылки даже загрузить не могу. Попросите, пожалуйста, другого администратора.--Ymblanter (talk) 21:19, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
@Putnik: выручайте. Kalendar (talk) 06:06, 16 July 2018 (UTC)
@Kalendar: Заблокировал один из диапазонов (Йоту) на неделю, в другом пока продолжения нет. —putnik 07:21, 16 July 2018 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: -- Kalendar (talk) 19:25, 23 July 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protection request

Could you semi-protect Jorge Piñeyrúa (Q50102764)? It's been vandalized in the last days nonstop.--Zeroth (talk) 21:56, 17 July 2018 (UTC)

✓ Done by Mahir256 for a week.--Ymblanter (talk) 23:34, 17 July 2018 (UTC)

Vandalism by Saifeng3 at Liu Zhongjing (Q22098683)

Saifeng3 repeatedly ‎add defamation content "諸夏國父" (Father of Zhu Xia) and "歷史發明家" (Inventor of History) and repeatedly undo my restore.  – The preceding unsigned comment was added by 116.192.183.44 (talk • contribs) at 16:46, 16 July 2018‎ (UTC).

There is nothing about this on their talk page. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 08:15, 18 July 2018 (UTC)

Accidentally edited while not logged in

Hi, can an administrator please hide my IP here: [3]. Thx. Geoffroi (talk) 23:03, 16 July 2018 (UTC)

✓ Done —MisterSynergy (talk) 23:07, 16 July 2018 (UTC)
@Geoffroi: You may wish to email @Sjoerddebruin, Ajraddatz: about having the address oversighted. Mahir256 (talk) 14:28, 18 July 2018 (UTC)

another protection request

Please semi-protect Dua Lipa (Q21914464) for a few years; German label was "Shay Rachelle" for 6 weeks and there is a roughly 1:1 ratio of constructive edits and bored children. Jc86035 (talk) 14:11, 18 July 2018 (UTC)

@Jc86035: Let's try three months first. Mahir256 (talk) 14:26, 18 July 2018 (UTC)

Вандализм

@Ymblanter: посмотрите вклад на странице. Kalendar (talk) 19:28, 23 July 2018 (UTC)

✓ Done--Ymblanter (talk) 19:31, 23 July 2018 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: -- Kalendar (talk) 08:09, 24 July 2018 (UTC)

Another protection request

Please semi-protect Wikipedia (Q52); vandalized fairly often and all recent edits by non-autoconfirmed users are vandalism or tests. Jc86035 (talk) 09:25, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

✓ Done - Continues right after another protection ends. So made it indef. If another admin thinks it's too long, feel free to change the duration. Mbch331 (talk) 09:58, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

Request block of 189.197.46.51

189.197.46.51 (talk • contribs • logs) This user does not seem to be making any positive contribution and they are not responding to talk page messages. I think their contributions are motivated by having some political axe to grind related to Google and the BBC but it's hard to tell. This has been going on for two weeks now. Cheers, Bovlb (talk) 18:28, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

@Bovlb: Blocked the /24 subnet for a week. Mahir256 (talk) 18:32, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

Merge of Q48778108 and Q28715635

Hi,

I get an error when I try to merge Q48778108 and Q28715635. The two are dealing with (Mohamed) Aziz Derouaz. Two articles existed on french wikipedia and have been merged. Thanks. --LeFnake (talk) 07:12, 23 July 2018 (UTC)

→ ← Merged (using Special:MergeItems). Matěj Suchánek (talk) 07:19, 23 July 2018 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Pamputt (talk) 05:41, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

Q7189270

There is someone who does vandalism on this item, even on the page associated with the Hebrew Wikipedia. We know him, and the vandalism he makes in the Hebrew Wikipedia is listed on the page: [4]

I would like to protect this item. Thanks.

✓ Done Semi-protected for 1 year. Pamputt (talk) 11:23, 23 July 2018 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Pamputt (talk) 05:41, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

Protection request - Q55649583

Please semi-protect Alexandre Benalla (Q55649583); vandalized since its creation, because the person concerned is involved in a judicial and political case in France. Lofhi (talk) 10:52, 23 July 2018 (UTC)

✓ Done Semi-protégé pendant 3 mois, le temps que l'affaire retombe un peu. Pamputt (talk) 11:24, 23 July 2018 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Pamputt (talk) 05:40, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

Вандализм

@Ymblanter: посмотрите вклад. Kalendar (talk) 17:26, 24 July 2018 (UTC)

✓ Done--Ymblanter (talk) 17:28, 24 July 2018 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: -- Kalendar (talk) 05:15, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

Провокационное имя участника

@Ymblanter: провокационное имя участника, весь вклад вандальный. В РуВики участник за провокационное имя заблокирован. Kalendar (talk) 19:07, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

✓ Done--Ymblanter (talk) 19:10, 25 July 2018 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: -- Kalendar (talk) 07:57, 26 July 2018 (UTC)

Request warning of 181.120.60.85

181.120.60.85 was found vandalizing on the 2018 FIFA World Cup page. Vandalizing Evidence —Wei4Green (talk) 21:38, 21 July 2018 (UTC)

@Wei4Green: You don't need an admin to issue a warning; anyone may do so - including you. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 08:45, 22 July 2018 (UTC)
*sigh* Matěj Suchánek (talk) 08:50, 22 July 2018 (UTC)
@Pigsonthewing: Oops, sorry. I didn't know that. So I can customize a warning notice? —Wei4Green (talk) 15:50, 22 July 2018 (UTC)
@Wei4Green: See {{Uw-vandalism1}}, {{Uw-vandalism2}}, et seq. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 22:17, 22 July 2018 (UTC)
@Wei4Green: You don't need to customize anything; a simple notice of the form "Hey, you did this, please don't do this again or you may be blocked" suffices. Also this was a single edit for which I don't think any notice is necessary; any larger pattern of vandalism, however, warrants a warning or a block. Mahir256 (talk) 20:12, 22 July 2018 (UTC)

BMPJ (Q2877174) and (Q28717341)

Good Morning, There was an error in the Wikidata, were two pages for BMPJ (Q2877174) and (Q28717341), you can connect them. Thank you --89.157.191.43 23:07, 22 July 2018 (UTC)

✓ Done ArthurPSmith (talk) 23:52, 22 July 2018 (UTC)

Protection request: Q931088

Could you semi-protect Q931088? IPs from Taiwan keep removing links to the Chinese article.--61.69.191.197 21:24, 23 July 2018 (UTC)

✓ Done by Mahir256. --Pasleim (talk) 07:52, 24 July 2018 (UTC)

Undoing edit groups

(initial announcement to admins only, will announce more broadly once the feature is fully tested)

Hi!

I have rolled out a (tentative) new feature in the EditGroups tool. When a batch contains edits which create new items, regular users cannot undo the batch themselves. A button on the page of the batch takes them to WD:RFD with a pre-filled template that requests an undo for the batch (just like they would request the deletion of a single item). Once there is consensus to undo the batch, any administrator can login to EditGroups and undo the batch there.

The workflow was trialed today and it seems to work okay - there are still a few issues but it should be mostly functional. Feel free to give it a try when the occasion pops up.

Let me know if you notice any bugs or have suggestions. I have also cleaned up Wikidata:Edit groups which serves as a manual for the tool. − Pintoch (talk) 22:39, 23 July 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for this tool. Under Wikidata:Edit groups#Can I redo an edit group that was undone? you write "If the initial undo deleted some items, the new undo will restore them (which will preserve the original Qids).". Does this work for normal users? Can not only administrators restore deleted items? --Pasleim (talk) 07:49, 24 July 2018 (UTC)
Yes that is only available to administrators indeed, I will rephrase that − Pintoch (talk) 08:31, 24 July 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protection request

Demi Lovato (Q41173) is subject of some vandalism today. Please semi-protect for a couple of days. --Kam Solusar (talk) 23:48, 24 July 2018 (UTC)

✓ Done, for a month. --Okkn (talk) 00:04, 25 July 2018 (UTC)
Thanks! --Kam Solusar (talk) 00:13, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

Bad faith edit war from an IP

https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Q27921755&action=history

could someone do something about Special:Contributions/2.243.121.212, that keeps canceling edits, even sourced from the source they themselves added, calling it "Fake" ? Thanks. --Hsarrazin (talk) 10:42, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

Novel or book

When did Fellowship of the Ring cease to be a fantasy novel and become autobiographical? [5]

The same editor is making multiple other bizarre edits like this. --EncycloPetey (talk) 18:16, 21 July 2018 (UTC)

@EncycloPetey: It is only courteous that you ping @Andreasmperu: the admin; Andreas has already reverted the particular set of edits you mentioned, but an explanation is certainly needed for what has happened. Mahir256 (talk) 18:23, 21 July 2018 (UTC)
He is still removing novel (Q8261) from instance of (P31) on multiple items and replacing it with the generic and less informative book (Q571), claiming that "novel" is a genre, which it is not and is not identified as such either here or in the relevant Wikipedia articles I have looked at. A novel (Q8261) is a form of literature, like a play (Q25379) or poem (Q5185279), and is not genre.
A novel can be the only contents of a book, or a book can contain multiple novels. Stating that a novel is a book, or claiming that a work of literature (novel) is an instance of a "book" is therefore incorrect.
The sweeping change Andreasmperu requires explanation for something that results in the loss of important data.
Sorry that I did not make a fuller account before, but I have been having computer issues today, and my computer has gone done suddenly and without warning more than once. --EncycloPetey (talk) 18:30, 21 July 2018 (UTC)
According to Wikidata:WikiProject Books#Work item properties "novel" is indeed a valid value for the genre property. We should probably ping the Books project on this but I'm not sure how to do that right now... ArthurPSmith (talk) 19:10, 21 July 2018 (UTC)
I posted a link to this discussion from the WProj:Books talk page, so it should show up for anyone watching the project page. --EncycloPetey (talk) 19:24, 21 July 2018 (UTC)
@ArthurPSmith: To ping a WikiProject you just use {{Ping project}}. This, of course, will not work for WikiProject Books since it has more than 50 listed members, and thus the template fails to ping anyone due to an imposed limit intended to combat ping spam. Mahir256 (talk) 19:57, 21 July 2018 (UTC)
More problems with @Andreasmperu: over this same issue. He will not allow me to mark To Build a Fire (Q515819) as a short story (Q49084), which is a subclass of literary work (Q7725634). He insists that it must remain as literary work (Q7725634), and not a more precise subclass, even though the current standards at Wikidata:WikiProject Books#Work item properties allow for this change and the current proposal under discussion also allows for this change. --EncycloPetey (talk) 19:01, 26 July 2018 (UTC)
I should note that the item was originally a short story (Q49084) before Andreasmperu changed it. --EncycloPetey (talk) 22:41, 26 July 2018 (UTC)

Another rogue Telugu-speaker?

User talk:G V N Rupa has not responded to requests to stop their edits on the chemical elements - can an admin take a look? I think a lot of this users edits probably should be rolled back, but not sure if some are good... ArthurPSmith (talk) 13:25, 26 July 2018 (UTC)

@ArthurPSmith, Jc86035: Did what I did to User:Madhumitha Velampalli earlier, with some more explicit requests to boot. If I find time within the next week I will compile a longer list of recommendations and demands for them all. Mahir256 (talk) 13:46, 26 July 2018 (UTC)
@ArthurPSmith: This, I hope, is slowly being resolved in several different places. Mahir256 (talk) 15:53, 26 July 2018 (UTC)

код kulturnoe-nasledie.ru - Property:P1483

@Ymblanter: Здравствуйте! Помогите разобраться, актуализировать либо удалить устаревшее и не актуальное свойство. Относительно недавно сайт по адресу http://www.kulturnoe-nasledie.ru возобновил свою работу. Владелец домена остался прежним, а вот содержание сайта кардинально поменялось. Сегодня официальный ресурс Министерства Культуры РФ kulturnoe-nasledie.ru никаких кодов и рег. номеров не публикует а ссылка для проверки неких 10-ти значных номеров (P1483) ведёт на БД Викигида.

Вот уже как 3 года данные и официальные регистрационные номера объектов наследия в России публикуются на ресурсе открытых данных того же министерства и код содержит 15 цифр. В Викидате создано соответствующее свойство для идентификации объектов культурного наследия народов РФ код ЕГРОКН (P5381), а проверка кода (официального государственного рег. номера) производится непосредственно на уполномоченном ресурсе. Прошу вас исправить, либо удалить устаревшее свойство, либо изменить его наименование и описание, поскольку, к сожалению, Викигид не имеет никакого отношения к государственной политике по охране объектов Культурного наследия народов РФ и к самому государств РФу, а функция и контент официального ресурса kulturnoe-nasledie.ru изменились. С уважением, --Frutti-mytti (talk) 10:39, 26 July 2018 (UTC)

Я, честно говоря, не вижу никакой проблемы. Описание свойства по-русски вполне адекватно, если оно Вам не нравится на других языках, можно исправить, а памятники надо как-то нумеровать. Для 15-значных кодов тоже где-то было свойство, если вдруг я ожибаюсь, то надо его предложнить к созданию.--Ymblanter (talk) 10:42, 26 July 2018 (UTC)
Так я же написал выше, вот свойство → код ЕГРОКН (P5381). Но сайт kulturnoe-nasledie.ru сегодня не имеет никакого отношения к устаревшему свойству код kulturnoe-nasledie.ru - Property:P1483, а Викигид не вправе и силах определять объекты для охраны и присваивать им некий статус и код. Это к сожалению ничтожно, выражаясь юридическим языком. А мне не нравится путаница и старое наименование свойства код kulturnoe-nasledie.ru. Ведь это теперь не код культурного наследия.ру, а код Викигида. Если оставлять это свойство то тогда его нужно переименовать в код Викигида - Property:P1483. --Frutti-mytti (talk) 10:49, 26 July 2018 (UTC)
Изменил самостоятельно основные параметры Property:P1483 и удалил неработающие ссылки на старую базу культурного наследия.ру. --Frutti-mytti (talk) 11:36, 26 July 2018 (UTC)
The site of the cultural heritage is again killed

50.254.21.213 00:54, 27 July 2018 (UTC)

used as a References in EN wikipedia pages

50.254.21.213 12:37, 27 July 2018 (UTC)

Close some RFC's?

I realize it doesn't have to be an admin that does it, but if some admin's are willing I think it would be helpful to close some of the current open RFC's. Wikidata:Requests for comment/Help:Modelling seems to have a reasonable consensus for instance. ArthurPSmith (talk) 16:45, 27 July 2018 (UTC)

User:Zyksnowy/sandbox

Can some administrators fully protect this page? It is nominated for deletion but the users are still adding copyvios to the page. Also all revisions of the page should be RevDeled after being blanked. The page can not be deleted currently (see phab:T200534).--GZWDer (talk) 14:01, 28 July 2018 (UTC)

@GZWDer: ✓ Done Thanks @MarcoAurelio:! Mahir256 (talk) 18:40, 28 July 2018 (UTC)
@GZWDer, Deryck Chan: Do you think blocking @Zyksnowy: will be necessary, given that he has been creating an alternate sandbox page? Mahir256 (talk) 19:43, 28 July 2018 (UTC)
@Mahir256, GZWDer: Not now. I looked through his userspace and realised that he has been using his userspace as a temporary pastebin since November 2017 (if not before), but it is only through his recent additions of controversial Chinese label and alias translations that other editors started discovering what was in his userspace. He has contributed a lot useful content dating back to 2014, mainly Chinese translations of scientific and sci-fi content; and statements on Chinese games and website topics. I notice that he has stopped pasting copyrighted content into his userspace since GZWDer's latest warning, so blocking him at this stage would be unnecessarily punitive. Deryck Chan (talk) 13:05, 29 July 2018 (UTC)

Please stop GZWDer_(flood) (talk • contribs • logs)

It seems to create plenty of items lacking statements, none mentioned on Wikidata:Requests_for_permissions/Bot/GZWDer_(flood), possibly explictly excluded on that request.

I thought we had stopped 10 days ago.
--- Jura 11:24, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

I have been doing it for several years, why is this a problem?--GZWDer (talk) 02:16, 26 July 2018 (UTC)
New items provides a start point for others to improvement using various tools (e.g. Pasleim's Harvest Template can not create new items, and PetScan for adding statements to extant items). For label issue, this is a common problem for items not created via PetScan; I have filed phab:T200399.--GZWDer (talk) 05:53, 26 July 2018 (UTC)
You might want to save your explanation for the bot request. The question here is just if you run an authorized bot or not. Apparently, you don't any more.
--- Jura 05:59, 26 July 2018 (UTC)
When I file this bot requests there're few tools available for batch edit. e.g. initial release of Pasleim's harvesttemplates is October 2015 and PAWS is November 2015. (few scripts for Wikidata exist in Pywikibot either, so I did not list it.) So there're plenty of new tools used since the approval.--GZWDer (talk) 06:23, 26 July 2018 (UTC)
Just explain what you plan to do, which tool you will be using, whom you expect to clean up after defective edits in a bot request.
--- Jura 06:29, 26 July 2018 (UTC)

@Jura1: Please raise issues with a particular editor's work on the talk page of the editor in the first instance. It is undue escalation for you to go straight to the administrator's noticeboard when it could've been resolved between you and GZWDer. Also Wikidata:Bot requests do not cover well-bounded, finite batch operations by individual editors. Deryck Chan (talk) 12:16, 27 July 2018 (UTC)

  • This had been done. We already had this several times here as well. For some reason it continued. Given the defect mentioned, clearly it's not the usual tool people use for this.
    --- Jura 12:19, 27 July 2018 (UTC)
  • It seems it still running. Can you someone do something about it? Apparently the operator knows their are running a defective bot.
    --- Jura 05:35, 30 July 2018 (UTC)

Q55765702

The entry need protection and may be blocking Wirterss. Cross-wiki paid editing or self-promotion. Despite the deletion of the English draft was being discussed. (en:Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Zhu Ming (thinker)) the long term abuse log of zh-wiki is located here zh:Wikipedia:持续出没的破坏者/记录/朱明 and the en-wiki SPI is located here en:Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Wirterss. Matthew hk (talk) 01:49, 28 July 2018 (UTC)

add one more sock in wikidata Robiness8. Matthew hk (talk) 00:14, 31 July 2018 (UTC)
✓ Done - I have blocked Robiness8 as a sock of global locked account. Wirterss is already globally locked. Protecting page will not help, since the user can recreate under new item. Also better to have a new item created on Wikidata, over it being not created, since it can point us to the creation of this item on local projects. Sincerely, Taketa (talk) 00:52, 31 July 2018 (UTC)

m:Creation of separate user group for editing sitewide CSS/JS

How are we going to approach handing out the technicaladmin rights? --Rschen7754 02:02, 28 July 2018 (UTC)

I have drafted Wikidata:Interface administrators. Comments welcome.--GZWDer (talk) 03:58, 28 July 2018 (UTC)
Thanks, GZWDer. I'd be happy with 3 days for existing admins without objection and 7 days for non-admins. Transition period could be for six months. Inactivity standards should be different but similar to admins; five edits every six months should be fine. -- Ajraddatz (talk) 20:06, 28 July 2018 (UTC)
"In addition, although Wikimedia Deutschland staff members in "wikidata-staff" group does not have this right per se, they can add or remove the flag to their own account." - I think we would need to make a config change for this. Or, we could just say that they can ask a bureaucrat for access and it will automatically be granted. --Rschen7754 20:32, 28 July 2018 (UTC)
A config change may be needed for "wikidata-staff" group to add or remove the flag to their own account.. Also note currently bureaucrat can not remove interface administrators by default, a config change is also needed if it's decided that it should be possible. In addition, what about bureaucrat requesting the right themselves?--GZWDer (talk) 00:39, 29 July 2018 (UTC)
The bureaucrat change will be made when the group is created. We would need to either give wikidata-staff the right to add it, or they could request from bureaucrats. I'm OK with either. -- Ajraddatz (talk) 22:21, 29 July 2018 (UTC)
Maybe we can use quarry:query/28644 results as help to grant rights automatically for those who have most edited sitewide jss/cs pages in the past and are still active on Wikidata? Stryn (talk) 15:40, 30 July 2018 (UTC)
As we may have a transition period, sending a message to each current administrators is enough.--GZWDer (talk) 18:17, 30 July 2018 (UTC)
@Stryn, GZWDer: Here is a slightly revised query to exclude edits within one's own userspace, since those would still be allowed even without technical administrator privileges. Mahir256 (talk) 18:27, 30 July 2018 (UTC)
I have updated the page per current comments. Comments are still welcome.--GZWDer (talk) 18:19, 30 July 2018 (UTC)

Using English Wikipedia as a reference url

Eswar Prabhat (talk • contribs • logs) is rapidly adding dozens of reference URL (P854) to articles, with the url pointing to the English Wikipedia. Wikipedia is worthless as a reference for Wikidata statements. These additions merely make it more difficult to identify unreferenced statements, and add absolutely no value to the entries: Afghanistan (Q889), Albania (Q222), Andorra (Q228), Armenia (Q399), hydrogen (Q556), helium (Q560) and lithium (Q568) have been affected so far. I've left a note at User talk:Eswar Prabhat, but the additions are continuing unabated. Can somebody please stop this? --RexxS (talk) 19:25, 28 July 2018 (UTC)

@Jc86035, ArthurPSmith, KCVelaga: Round three. Mahir256 (talk) 19:26, 28 July 2018 (UTC)
@RexxS, Saisumanth Javvaji: Ultimately fixing this problem requires going back in time to July 19th-20th at the Vasireddy Venkatadri Institute of Technology and fixing whatever guidelines on editing Wikidata were given at that editathon, unless there is some other way to fix it which I do not have access to. Mahir256 (talk) 19:38, 28 July 2018 (UTC)
@Mahir256: thanks for your efforts so far. Fortunately, I can claim that I wasn't responsible for the editathon at Vasireddy Venkatadri Institute of Technology. England I might be able to help you with, but not India. However, I see that there are only 1110 students there, so the problem is finite. I'll carry on looking for floods on my watchlist for now, and relying on your good graces to apply the brakes when messages don't work. Cheers --RexxS (talk) 19:50, 28 July 2018 (UTC)
@RexxS: Yes, I know you have nothing to do with the editathon; I was merely describing what I had learned in the previous two instances of dealing with this problem. You are in roughly the same group of company as Jc86035 and Arthur above, and I really, really hope either of KCVelaga and Saisumanth can fix this better than I can seeing as they are in roughly the same part of the world as these editors and can speak the same language (as opposed to 12 time zones away and lacking knowledge of Dravidian languages like myself). Mahir256 (talk) 20:06, 28 July 2018 (UTC)
@Mahir256: As I'm Lead Trainer for Wikimedia UK, I'm quite involved with editathons, and coincidentally, I was responsible for training around 60 or more new Indian editors by video-link a few years ago. So it wasn't quite so impossible that I had been involved. We can try to get the message across through any participants that we spot, but in the meantime I guess we just have to keep our eyes open. Cheers --RexxS (talk) 20:42, 28 July 2018 (UTC)
@Mahir256: Myself and KCVelaga will look into the issue and fix it as soon as possible.Saisumanth Javvaji (talk) 13:37, 30 July 2018 (UTC)

Q4148644

Hi! Please restore this object and merje history with Q13407191. Мастер теней (master of shadows), 22:38, 29 July 2018 (UTC)

✓ Done -- Ajraddatz (talk) 22:47, 29 July 2018 (UTC)
@мастер теней: Be sure that those claims which properly belong to the administrative entity do not remain on this item about the island. Mahir256 (talk) 04:09, 30 July 2018 (UTC)
Ok. Clean. Мастер теней (master of shadows), 14:55, 30 July 2018 (UTC)

P742

Hello there! I think pseudonym (P742) should be protected for a little time. Please take a look. Regards, Bencemac (talk) 15:55, 30 July 2018 (UTC)

@Bencemac: ✓ Done for a week. Mahir256 (talk) 16:18, 30 July 2018 (UTC)
Thanks! Bencemac (talk) 16:31, 30 July 2018 (UTC)

Special:Contributions/XdFoissard

It seems all edits are non-constructive.--GZWDer (talk) 05:10, 31 July 2018 (UTC)

✓ Done Blocked indefinitely. I also warned eswikipedia and commons where he did some "useless" edits as well. Pamputt (talk) 05:36, 31 July 2018 (UTC)

Vandalism by User:109.230.86.98

Please check contribution by User:109.230.86.98. Geagea (talk) 06:31, 31 July 2018 (UTC)

Warned. Matěj Suchánek (talk) 06:37, 31 July 2018 (UTC)

Vandal

171.253.143.94 (talk • contribs • logs)

I believe a block is in order. GMGtalk 17:45, 31 July 2018 (UTC)

✓ Done by Nikki for a week. Mahir256 (talk) 17:51, 31 July 2018 (UTC)

Undelete Benoit Soubeyran (Q40676142)

Can Benoit Soubeyran (Q40676142) be undeleted please? Its content was in use at commons:Category:Benoit Soubeyran. Pinging @Multichill: as the deleting admin. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 06:42, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

Non-notable person. Having a Commons category doesn’t establish notability. Multichill (talk) 14:52, 19 July 2018 (UTC)
Per Wikidata:Notability "It contains at least one valid sitelink to ... Wikimedia Commons." So it seems that having a commons category does establish sufficient notability for here? Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 15:26, 19 July 2018 (UTC)
Which would unfortunely mean that every spammer and SEO person could easily circumvent our notability policy by simply uploading pictures of a person/company/product and creating a corrponding category on Commons (since the rules concerning category creation are very lax on Commons). --Kam Solusar (talk) 18:32, 19 July 2018 (UTC)
Let's not forget what they do when pages about them are deleted. Mahir256 (talk) 18:34, 19 July 2018 (UTC)
@Kam Solusar: That seems to be beside the point here - we're not talking about a case of a spammer/SEO person? Mike Peel (talk) 19:30, 19 July 2018 (UTC)
No, of course not. In this case, it's an established Wikimedian, not some random spammer. But I think we have to be careful how to deal with such cases (WD notability due to Commons categories) in general, so we avoid giving spammers an easy way to get what they desire. --Kam Solusar (talk) 22:01, 19 July 2018 (UTC)
Mike, you forgot to quote "In addition, sitelinks on category items to category pages on Wikimedia Commons are allowed if and only if they are linked with category pages on other Wikimedia sites". That page has been in a state of flux it seems, but the meaning has always been the same: Just having a link to a Commons category doesn't establish notability.
Because of the privacy aspects I won't leave notes on user talk pages, see also en:Wikipedia:Outing. Multichill (talk) 09:34, 20 July 2018 (UTC)
@Multichill: I didn't forget that, it's not relevant in this case since we're talking about a topic/person item (instance of (P31)=human (Q5)), not a instance of (P31)=Wikimedia category (Q4167836) item. That first line in the notability policy doesn't seem to have changed for a while, and seems to provide some sort of notability in this case. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 09:54, 20 July 2018 (UTC)
No, it doesn't., Commons:Category:Wikimedians is quite full of non-notable people because Commons has an exception for our own movement photos (party photos of Wikimania are not very educational). Multichill (talk) 10:57, 20 July 2018 (UTC)
That seems to be your opinion, not something that's covered on the notability page. Mike Peel (talk) 12:17, 20 July 2018 (UTC)
"Which would unfortunely mean that every spammer and SEO person could easily circumvent our notability policy by simply uploading pictures of a person/company/product and creating a corrponding category on Commons" Spam images on Commons are subject to deletion using that project's usual processes. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:48, 20 July 2018 (UTC)

The subject of the item in question appears to be clearly notable in Wikidata terms; is catalogued by a source we recognise; and their work (for example, Des «soldats des guerres diplomatiques», les archivistes de Pierre Dupuy à Ludovico Muratori (XVIIe–début du XVIIIe siècle) (Q55670840)) is cited in multiple Wikipedia articles (e.g. en:Godefroy family; en:Pierre Louvet). Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:29, 20 July 2018 (UTC)

Hello. I allow myself to agree with Pigsonthewing. Of course, a Commons category does'nt make a people notable, but ORCID, HAL and Scholar should - IMO - do. Nomen ad hoc (talk) 07:32, 1 August 2018 (UTC).

Another

It appears that Q26207216, deleted by Multichill today, should also be undeleted. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:37, 20 July 2018 (UTC)

Wait a sec ... that was about me! Presumably that's a revenge deletion by Multichill? Mike Peel (talk) 14:08, 20 July 2018 (UTC)

Review needed of Multichill's deletions

Looking at Special:Log/Multichill there are a number of deletions with the rationale "Does not meet the notability policy". Given the above, I think these need review by at least one other admin, as they probably do meet Wikidata:Notability - it's just that they aren't notable in Multichill's opinion, and that's not sufficient to justify deleting them. At the least they should be put through a deletion discussion first. Please could an admin (who can access the deleted pages) have a look through and see if that is the case? Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 14:25, 20 July 2018 (UTC)

I've only looked at a couple, so far, using Google's cache, but Q23041483 is - per [6] - another published, cited author of academic papers, and so notable. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:56, 20 July 2018 (UTC)
Likewise Q28831222, per [7]; Q55472693, per [8]; and Q42078140 per [9]. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:07, 20 July 2018 (UTC)

I restored these items but added them to Wikidata:Requests for deletions. Please comment there. --Pasleim (talk) 19:33, 20 July 2018 (UTC)

@Pasleim: Thank you; however, you have restored only those discussed individually in this section, not all of yesterday's deletions. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 07:38, 21 July 2018 (UTC)
@Pasleim: Did you see this? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:20, 25 July 2018 (UTC)
I saw it but likely you haven't seen my further edits on WD:RFD. --Pasleim (talk) 15:58, 25 July 2018 (UTC)
@Pasleim: I did; and thank you. However, there are still a significant number of red links on Special:Log/Multichill, for 20 July. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 21:02, 25 July 2018 (UTC)
@Pasleim, Pigsonthewing: At a later hour I will undelete those items whose subjects had either no hand or a small hand in their creation/expansion—to relist them on WD:RFD—and ping on this page those users whose items remain deleted by Maarten for failing this rationale. I intend at the same time to go through the current DRs resulting from the actions of this noticeboard section at around the same time and keep those items which fit the aforementioned rationale for my undeletions and which have support for their being kept, leaving the rest for someone else to decide. Mahir256 (talk) 21:32, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ @Pasleim, Pigsonthewing: Note the commonality between the appropriate DRs I have not marked as {{Not done}}, and that I have undeleted six items without this commonality and nominated them on WD:RFD. I have left the items about @Loizza, Obaid Raza, Ben Skála, Falopapas, Nasirkhan, Prateek Pattanaik: deleted as they share this commonality. Another admin may go ahead and undelete those as well to contest them should he or she think differently. Mahir256 (talk) 03:37, 26 July 2018 (UTC)

There are still a number of red links in the relevant logs. Until they are all restored we can't know what they represent, what properties they have, the relationships between them, nor their relationship to other items; and thus the impact they might have on each other's notability. To be clear: any deletion-without-prior-discussion by an admin should be reversed on the good-faith request of an editor, and sent to RfD, unless there is case of utterly unambiguous abuse. It beggars belief that this has already dragged on so long. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:53, 26 July 2018 (UTC)
Also, no; I don't see any "commonality between the appropriate DRs [you] have not marked as not done". Please clarify. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:59, 26 July 2018 (UTC)
@Pigsonthewing: As I have stated above, I have undeleted "those items whose subjects had either no hand or a small hand in their creation/expansion" and left deleted and unmarked on WD:RFD those items which fail this criteria. Mahir256 (talk) 14:05, 26 July 2018 (UTC)
Failure to meet that arbitrary criterion is not by itself a reason for deletion; much less so for deletion without discussion. Please now undelete the remaining items, as requested six days ago, so that they may be properly reviewed and discussed by the Wikidata community. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:13, 26 July 2018 (UTC)

There are still several items in this batch requiring undeletion, so that they can be reviewed by the community. Given the significant number from the batch which, when undeleted, have been found to be notable, and kept, it is unambiguously apparent that there are legitimate concerns about improper deletions. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:00, 1 August 2018 (UTC)

Mahir256 has already reviewed them (comment from 03:37, 26 July 2018 (UTC)), I second his decision. Matěj Suchánek (talk) 13:16, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
That's nice. Now please undelete them, so that the community can do so. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:11, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
They were deleted in compliance with a Wikidata policy and other administrators confirmed this action afterwards. That said, I don't think anyone is obliged to fulfil your request and ask you not to use imperative mood. Matěj Suchánek (talk) 16:19, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
The claims of deletion "in compliance with a Wikidata policy" have, as I pointed about above, been shown to be utterly false for a good number - the majority? - of instances in this case. It is for the community, not individuals to decide whether the claim is true for the remaining items; especially when one of those individuals applies the utterly-made-up criterion of "items whose subjects had either no hand or a small hand in their creation/expansion", which appaers nowhere in our notability policy. For the community to make such decisions requires that the items in question be undeleted. If you refuse to do so, another admin should undelete them. It should not take two weeks for this undeletion to happen. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:58, 1 August 2018 (UTC)

Add fr:Personne to Q215627

The French article fr:Personne clearly belongs to English en:Person, but I cannot add fr:Personne to Q215627. --Martin Gühmann (talk) 00:59, 29 July 2018 (UTC)

The French article is tagged as a disambiguation page, and was linked at Personne (Q16381082). However, looking over the article, it is clearly more than that - I've added it to person (Q215627). -- Ajraddatz (talk) 22:17, 29 July 2018 (UTC)
Thanks--Martin Gühmann (talk) 22:47, 29 July 2018 (UTC)
@Andreasmperu: please look at the fr page compared with the others in that category. It's clearly more aligned with person (Q215627) than the other, even if it has a disambig tag. -- Ajraddatz (talk) 23:30, 29 July 2018 (UTC)
That was the first thing I did. The fact that is tagged as a disambiguation page is not a minor issue though, given that a bot would add the statement instance of disambiguation page to all items containing a sitelink with such tag, and after that “disambiguation” descriptions would be added too. That is why all disambiguation pages need to remain separate. As for the content, yes, part of the frwiki deals with the subject person from a philosophical point of view such as in person (Q215627); however, it has a wider scope, so it is not the same item. In conclusion, a new item needs to be created in frwiki or the current disambiguation one needs to be rewritten in order to be included in Q215627. Andreasm háblame / just talk to me 23:42, 29 July 2018 (UTC)
Me too. There is no need to create a new item when the frwiki page is 90% the same as the other pages at 215627, and not at all like the similar pages it is currently linked to. -- Ajraddatz (talk) 20:29, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
By the way, the way to deal with disambiguation pages is not a personal preference. There are guidelines for them. Andreasm háblame / just talk to me 20:54, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
If all disambig pages were the same then that guideline would be useful here. But they aren't; this is clearly a unique case, and your rigid thinking and stonewall stance isn't helping at all here. How exactly is the French page related to the other disambig pages that it is currently grouped with? -- Ajraddatz (talk) 20:57, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
How is trying to disqualify me a constructive way to discuss? I explain the reasons above. The major problem is that the frwiki is tagged as a disambiguation page, which means it cannot be put together with non-disambiguation sitelinks. But that is not the only problem. As you have agreed, there is no exact correspondence regarding the content, and not because of linguistic issues which would be normal, but because the French link is more general than the others (circumscribed to the philosophical view). That is why the solution is not here in Wikidata, but on frwiki. --Andreasm háblame / just talk to me 21:08, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
I'm not trying to disqualify you. I'm trying to ask for an actual conversation rather than you reverting my edits and pointing me to some vague guideline that clearly is meant to deal with simple, plain disambiguation pages. From my perspective, the frwiki page is much closer aligned in both scope, topic, and actual data with Q215627. The fact that it has a disambig tag on it is a non-issue since it isn't a disambig page proper. But I'm not going to revert you, so do whatever you think is best. -- Ajraddatz (talk) 21:17, 1 August 2018 (UTC)

UTC)

Acussing me of rigid thinking is not disqualification? I didn’t make up those guidelines, and even disregarding that consensus I detailed a practical problem: if even one sitelink is tagged as a disambiguation page, a bot would add the statement instance of (P31) Wikimedia disambiguation page (Q4167410), and after that another bot would add descriptions for different languages of the sort “Wikimedia disambiguation page”, even if another description was already available. I came across this problem many times, and it is a tedious one to fix. The only option I have found so far is to keep disambiguation pages separated, or to remove such tag on the local Wikipedia whenever it was possible to rearrange the Wikipedia article, which was my proposed solution for this case. If you have another way to sort this problem out, go ahead, but please don’t shoot the messenger. Andreasm háblame / just talk to me 23:24, 1 August 2018 (UTC)

Pinging of item creators during deletions

At Wikidata:Requests for deletions there is a clear rule to "ping the item's creator in your request (or ping the bot operator, when appropriate) if 1) the user is still active on Wikidata and 2) the user has contributed the majority of information in that item". Unfortunately, this rule seems not to respected. Just find out to have 8+ items deleted (quarry), but I am not aware of being pinged even once (and one my friend has even 300+ items deleted without being pinged). Administrators dealing with deletions, please do follow this rule. Thanks.--Jklamo (talk) 01:16, 29 July 2018 (UTC)

@Jklamo: I added this as a courtesy, expecting no one in particular to follow it as much as they do the suggestion that immediately precedes it. Mahir256 (talk) 06:42, 29 July 2018 (UTC)
The change is also not processed in the translations yet. Maybe add it automatically when people nominate using the gadget? Sjoerd de Bruin (talk) 18:54, 30 July 2018 (UTC)
I understand your concerns, but this is not so easy. There is no requirement that a deletion has to be discussed at Wikidata:Requests for deletions, so the relevant (proposed) policy is at Wikidata:Deletion policy. The majority of deletions, of which we have 3000+ per week these days, is indeed not discussed anywhere, but nevertheless uncontroversial.
Technically there is no method at this point how admins could ping someone during deletions without adding substantial extra workload to the deletion process (e.g. individual talk page topics, or ping from some other page). Maybe a “ping via deletion summary” similar to the newly “ping via edit summary” could be useful here, but I am not sure whether everybody would be fine with the expected ping spam then. —MisterSynergy (talk) 00:47, 2 August 2018 (UTC)
Would it be worth thinking about a bot to automatically do the pinging? Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 15:51, 3 August 2018 (UTC)

RedTube ID (P5540)

Hello. The URL of this new property is on the antispam list. Can it be removed so that it works properly? YouPorn performer ID (P5267) is also waiting for an intervention. On the other hand, we have other Wikidata property related to erotica or pornography (Q53671196) – such as Adult Film Database actor ID (P3351), IAFD female performer ID (P3869), IAFD male performer ID (P4505) or Pornhub star ID (P5246) – that are not blocked in such a manner. Can one have a look? It would be much appreciated. Thierry Caro (talk) 11:04, 30 July 2018 (UTC)

Important note. We won't all die in immediate pain if you eventually consider this! Thierry Caro (talk) 04:43, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
 Info there was relevant discussion in the past at Wikidata:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive/2018/06#Pornhub (Q936394). —MisterSynergy (talk) 22:42, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
Yes. Thank you. Thierry Caro (talk) 11:18, 3 August 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protection request of Nikolas Cruz (Q48886558)

Too much recent IP vandalism. - Bossanoven (talk) 18:45, 30 July 2018 (UTC)

When is too much actually too much? Sjoerd de Bruin (talk) 18:46, 30 July 2018 (UTC)

Probably three reverts. What's your take? - Bossanoven (talk) 18:47, 30 July 2018 (UTC)

✓ 1 month. Matěj Suchánek (talk) 06:38, 31 July 2018 (UTC)

@Matěj Suchánek: Thank you, Matěj, and thank you for doing this in a timely manner, unlike @Sjoerddebruin:. - Bossanoven (talk) 02:18, 3 August 2018 (UTC)

Please spare this and watch your tone. Thanks, Matěj Suchánek (talk) 06:31, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Wikidata:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Archive/2018/07&oldid=724094102"