Shortcut: WD:AN

Wikidata:Administrators' noticeboard

From Wikidata
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Administrators' noticeboard
This is a noticeboard for matters requiring administrator attention. IRC channel: #wikidataconnect
On this page, old discussions are archived. An overview of all archives can be found at this page's archive index. The current archive is located at 2023/02.

Requests for deletions

high

~171 open requests for deletions.

Requests for unblock

low

1 open request for unblock.

Request to Ban user:Saman1378[edit]

User @Saman1378: has changed the description in Farsi (Lang:Fa) for item Q113994656 (Mahsa Amini) multiple times: [1], [2], [3].

Their edits are against the English desc. on this item and what has been approved on English ([4]), Farsi ([5]) and Kurdish ([6]) wikipedia articles.

I request this user to be banned. I also request this item to be semi-protected. needless to say, to comment on the request or to take action, one must know Farsi. Matingholami (talk) 21:21, 26 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, I changed it because you stated an unproven claim, with which document do you say that he was killed by the government? I have no business writing whatever you want, but what do you see as the answer of your conscience? Mehsa Amini died only God knows whySaman1378 (talk) 00:44, 27 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Matingholami@Saman1378 please discuss the topic and find the solution at item's talk page: Talk:Q113994656 Estopedist1 (talk) 08:16, 27 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Undeletion a page[edit]

Q116033344 it was deleted because is not notability, I want undeletion Abdullah nassar page because

abdullah is a famous person public figure and author he has a books and YouTuber

he has many followers from all social media

so I see is a famous person

And he deserves undeletion page

name :Abdullah Nassar (Q116033344) Alzowini (talk) 00:19, 27 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Alzowini: per WD:N please identify "serious and publicly available references" that discuss this individual. BrokenSegue (talk) 01:50, 27 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Relevant items: Q116033344 (12Abdullah1), Q115919858 (Ajax552), Q115912855 (Ajax552), Q116196384 (Afeez555). CC deleting admins @Ameisenigel , Martin Urbanec , Lymantria . Bovlb (talk) 22:35, 30 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Pages I deleted totally lacked serious sources. Lymantria (talk) 06:13, 31 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hello, which sources do you mean? He has a lot of news and articles that refer to him. Unexpectedly, the local news talked about him, about his books, about his achievements. He is an author, writer, YouTuber, and also public figures. He fulfills many of the aforementioned categories. Alzowini (talk) 18:04, 1 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
For Q116033344 there was a discussion on my talk page, where I have explained that the item was not notable. --Ameisenigel (talk) 06:27, 31 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Please Block User:NYC SerqK[edit]

Vandalism after final warning. The Great Wikipedian (talk) 21:36, 30 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

indef blocked. Thanks for reporting. BrokenSegue (talk) 21:54, 30 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@BrokenSegue: Thanks For Blocking. I was wondering If I could have Rollback to deal with these situations better?The Great Wikipedian (talk) 21:56, 30 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
sure. request it at Wikidata:Requests_for_permissions/Other_rights. we hand it out pretty freely. BrokenSegue (talk) 22:33, 30 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@BrokenSegue I have requested it. If you think I am ready, please accept my request. The Great Wikipedian (talk) 13:39, 31 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Report concerning User:RobertiBrownHadley21stCentury[edit]

RobertiBrownHadley21stCentury (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL (for IP: GUC))Reasons: @Estopedist1: user has a very similar edit pattern as 359998Dominic had. We should probably keep an eye on them. Máté (talk) 05:13, 31 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

definitely the same person. honestly given [7] I think it's enough evidence that they aren't here to contribute positively. BrokenSegue (talk) 05:32, 31 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Q1807269[edit]

Q1807269. Since its protection at es.wikipedia, vandalism has now come to Wikidata. LuchoCR (talk) 07:13, 31 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

✓ Protected for one month by Bencemac Estopedist1 (talk) 08:13, 31 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, the above item is being vandalised for few weeks now. A block/protect would be fine. Thanks for your consideration. C1K98V (💬 ✒️ 📂) 08:20, 31 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

i have semi-protected for three months. I have also asked a question on User talk:Mahboobul Arafin — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 08:42, 31 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@MSGJ thanks for the quick response. C1K98V (💬 ✒️ 📂) 08:48, 31 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

User 193.207.97.106[edit]

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

Reason : vandalism on Amanda Lear s page. Thanks. Eliedion (talk) 16:20, 31 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It would also be necessary to obscure the blasphemy contained in this edit. --Amarvudol (talk) 17:27, 31 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Blocked the IP and semiprotected the item for 6 weeks. I do not see sufficient reason to revdel/hide the edit mentioned, in particular I do not read any blasphemy (rough language I do read). Lymantria (talk) 20:46, 31 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
After vandalism on it Wikipedia, on Wikidata.. It continues on en Wikipedia... Eliedion (talk) 20:59, 31 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Please Delete Incorrect Work - Deletion Request Made[edit]

Please delete the following redundant uploads from OpenRefine to Wikibase. There was a technical error where it was uploaded multiple times creating duplicates. I will resolving the properties issues and merging problems and do one final upload. i cannot adjust the data in OpenRefine until these are deleted.

Edit group OR/1e55b26e5f5[edit]

Delete Please delete this entire import as it is incorrect.

Edit group OR/644e0c2dc95[edit]

Delete Please delete entire import as it is duplicate/incorrect

Edit group OR/184b0ef97ae[edit]

Delete Please delete entire import as it is incomplete/incorrect

Edit group OR/d7d6cb14422[edit]

Delete Please delete the entire import as it is incomplete/incorrect

Edit group OR/996f25af6c2[edit]

Delete Please delete the entire import as it is incomplete/incorrect

Edit group OR/e70535859f0[edit]

Delete Please delete the entire import as it is incomplete/incorrect Allyshaleonard (talk) 18:19, 31 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Allyshaleonard: I have deleted all of them. Please be more careful. Also, I don't understand why you are using the wrong value for P31 for all these items. individual (Q795052) is not the right value. You really should do more manual editing to build up experience before making batch edits. And you should review all batch edits for quality before executing them. BrokenSegue (talk) 18:42, 31 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yes, it was pointed out to me to change it to "human" and I have done so for the future. These were not actually supposed to be uploaded and I take your note of being more careful very dutifully. I am having someone part of the long-term community come to the office to supervise the final upload. I appreciate all of your help! Allyshaleonard (talk) 18:44, 31 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Allyshaleonard: what about the other edit groups you uploaded? should those also be removed? e.g. this one BrokenSegue (talk) 18:51, 31 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Going through your contributions I see things like Q115639781 which is definitely garbage. I'm leaning towards reverting everything. BrokenSegue (talk) 18:55, 31 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
i'm fairly sure Q115636332 isn't an art institution... BrokenSegue (talk) 18:59, 31 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Apple did have an art institution program for design and MoMA had been part of that exhibition. If you think there is a better property name that would be more fitting to the institutions previously uploaded then that makes sense. The initial institutions upload seemed to make sense to me and was cleared by other people.
It was the "individuals" (that should be changed to humans) upload that had all the problems and is most concerning. The Wines Site Inc etc. should have been deleted with the concerning bunch as it was uploaded with the "individuals" - it was probably flagged as an individual in our TMS system but it is actually an institution so it did not separate properly before the OpenRefine process.
If you think of a better property for the institutions already uploaded rather than "art institution" - then you can certainly revert those and I will change the property and re-upload them. Allyshaleonard (talk) 19:09, 31 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Allyshaleonard: you didn't identify OR/5720dd2e511/ as one of the edit groups to delete. Please go through all your contributions and check if more groups needed to be deleted and then come back and list them. The problem with the Apple Computer "art institution" isn't that Apple isn't involved with art, it's that we already have an item for Apple Computer. It's Apple (Q312). Also your edit didn't attach a description to the item. The item has no inbound connections and no identifiers. It's "bad". Who cleared this? BrokenSegue (talk) 19:14, 31 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
another example: it looks like Q115636345 is a duplicate of Art Center College of Design (Q3272069) BrokenSegue (talk) 19:19, 31 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I am unsure if you can see the separation between the upload batches of "institution" and "individual" and if what I said makes any sense to you. Again, i appreciate all your help and advice. Allyshaleonard (talk) 19:13, 31 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
https://editgroups.toolforge.org/b/OR/e1ed59fb559/ I have made the deletion request for this as it is an artist upload and should be removed Allyshaleonard (talk) 19:16, 31 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
also discussion here: Wikidata:Project_chat#Allyshaleonard_wrecking_havoc_(again) Estopedist1 (talk) 19:16, 31 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I think your assessment is fair. I am going to ask you remove everything, then review everything with a long-term community member before upload. Please delete all of my contributed works including these newly listed batches.
OR/e1ed59fb559
OR/5720dd2e511
and any others that I may have missed that were uploaded by myself. I want to be sure I match community guidelines as much as possible and I apologize for inconveniences. I appreciate your patience during my learning process.
Just to be sure, this is a request to revert ALL uploads done by myself. Allyshaleonard (talk) 20:15, 31 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I'm working on it. I'd like to flag this edit as being particularly bad. Something is going very wrong in OpenRefine. BrokenSegue (talk) 20:33, 31 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you very much. I also wanted to point out that originally the reason these were uploaded as duplicates was that OpenRefine had said upload had failed, so after some trial and error I walked away. Later when I returned to work, WikiData showed successes in multiple uploads and this was unintentional and a technical issue. Not sure what to do about it, but just wanted to include that issue with OpenRefine as well in case it occurs for others. For the future, I will not take a "failed upload" as truth, be patient and see if anything uploaded, and THEN try again. Much appreciated. Allyshaleonard (talk) 20:40, 31 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

User:Lectrician1[edit]

I have tried discussing with this user over and over again the problems they are causing by doing edits like this just because they disagree with something someone has done. This has caused 90,691 constraint violations. Moreover, this user blatantly lied in this case to another user that of (P642) is currently deprecated even though it not right after they modified position held (P39) to remove of (P642). This needs to stop. -Yupik (talk) 20:33, 31 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I believe of to be deprecated. If it's not it should be since it is very vague. Whether we should make tons of constraint errors is unclear to me. BrokenSegue (talk) 20:38, 31 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It's not. Even the description on the property says it is not: "Use a more specific property where feasible; this property will be deprecated". Will be and are are, of course, not the same thing (and I agree that something that vague should not be used). IMO creating a ton of constraint errors just leads to people ignoring them, so no, imo, we shouldn't. -Yupik (talk) 20:58, 31 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Here's another instance. -Yupik (talk) 21:06, 31 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
you just linked to a revision where the person agrees that it is deprecated BrokenSegue (talk) 21:14, 31 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
You're right; they did :D (Even though it actually isn't. :)). -Yupik (talk) 21:23, 31 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Lectrician1: FYI --Ameisenigel (talk) 21:34, 31 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This has caused 90,691 constraint violations
The constraints are not wrong though. It shouldn't matter how many violations it creates. The current usage is a fundamental data quality issue in Wikidata that needs to be resolved.
I removed it as an allowed qualifier to encourage people to not use the property and find better uses where they can. If we don't have the constraint, people are continuing to use it when they shouldn't, therefore making the jobs of those who will clean it up in the future even harder.
From what I've seen of current usages of "of" based on a script I created last night to monitor new usages, people are using it even when there are alternatives. They either don't know that we're trying to not use the property because it's not clearly stated in the property's description that they shouldn't, or they don't want to take the time to find alternatives and use it because it currently does not bring up any constraint violations.
Yes, some people may choose to ignore it the constraint violations, but others will not and actually consider whether they should use the property to begin with or fix current usages - therefore bringing down the usage of this property that needs to go away at some point. Constraint violations are especially important to new contributors like the edit brought up to begin with, where the user does not know why "of" should not be used in the first place or that they should be searching for alternatives.
Moreover, this user blatantly lied in this case to another user that of (P642) is currently deprecated even though it not right after they modified position held (P39) to remove of (P642)
I didn't intentionally "blatantly lie". It was my understanding that the property was deprecated. I stated this understanding after I made that discussion post. I was mistaken. I came to understand this property is not deprecated after Yupik clarified this with me. I have even created a new discussion post asking for it to now be considered deprecated. Lectrician1 (talk) 21:52, 31 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Repeated vandalism by user:Harry king0001[edit]

This user:Harry king0001 is vandalizing many pages repeatedly, here 1,2,3,4 and many other pages. This user is blocked on other wiki projects for the same reason. Please block this user and his IP. History quester (talk) 00:34, 2 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

✓ Done already globally blocked--Estopedist1 (talk) 06:27, 2 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. The Great Wikipedian (talk) 16:23, 2 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Protection for Q112135922[edit]

Long-term vandalism. LuchoCR (talk) 04:31, 2 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

✓ Protected for one year (second time) Estopedist1 (talk) 06:29, 2 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. The Great Wikipedian (talk) 16:23, 2 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Report concerning User:Fallnlllunlnlml7l[edit]

Fallnlllunlnlml7l (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL (for IP: GUC))Reasons: vandalism Infrastruktur (talk) 16:51, 2 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • ✓ Done Blocked, reverted, deleted, blanked. Bovlb (talk) 17:24, 2 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. The Great Wikipedian (talk) 17:42, 2 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Ongoing attack by WMF-banned LTA[edit]

The globally banned pest w:en:WP:LTA/GRP is currently engaged in a major vandal attack on the project, as is clear from my recent contribution history. Administrator assistance in reverting the pest and blocking his IPs (he is known to use some proxy service) will be most welcome. JavaHurricane (talk) 17:50, 2 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The problem is known and we are monitoring it in the background. Thank you for your efforts. —MisterSynergy (talk) 18:31, 2 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I blocked a few IPs. They seem to have access to a wide range of otherwise-undetected proxies. Also, see phab:T328689. Bovlb (talk) 18:32, 2 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Report concerning User:Baba Berete[edit]

Baba Berete (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL (for IP: GUC))Reasons: vandalism Yger (talk) 17:52, 2 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

They're definitely going about some things the wrong way, but they do seem to be trying to contribute. Is there a reason you didn't reach out to the user first? I have invited them to join this discussion. Bovlb (talk) 18:43, 2 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Report concerning User:2001:861:4C40:CA60:39AC:3487:1EB1:FCA6[edit]

2001:861:4C40:CA60:39AC:3487:1EB1:FCA6 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL (for IP: GUC))Reasons: Delinking many articles,all edits are vandalism. Rollback would help with issues like these. (Admins please approve my Rollback Request) The Great Wikipedian (talk) 20:14, 2 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

✓ Blocked by BrokenSegue Estopedist1 (talk) 21:32, 2 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Please block Esebasquad[edit]

Since yesterday Esebasquad (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL (for IP: GUC)) has been fairly busy creating/changing joke Polish descriptions for a number of items. Hjart (talk) 09:34, 3 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]