Jump to content

Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Current issues and requests archive 32

Add links
From Simple English Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Japan chronology projects

Is this a good or appropriate place to post these kinds of issues?

A. The List of Emperors of Japan is a chronology. I plan to create 100+ articles with links to this list. This historical record uses the unique Japanese calendar and the Western Gregorian calendar. I have created one sample article — Emperor Ankō?
B. The list of Japanese era names in the Japanese calendar is also a chronology. I plan to create 200+ articles in the context of this list. I have created two sample articles — Shōō (Kamakura period) and Einin?
C. As you can see, the Wikipedia:Basic English combined wordlist is supplemented with more difficult words. I provided links to relevant simple:Wikipedia articles and simple:Wiktionary definitions.
D. I have used Japanese language kanji and a diacritic (en:macron). This writing is consistent with en:Wikipedia:WikiProject Japan Manual of Style.

Is this good for simple:Wikipedia? Do you have comments? questions? suggestions? --Tenmei (talk) 14:18, 26 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Answers: Is this the right place for these kind of discussions? The best place would be the talk page of the relevant article, or perhaps on Simple Talk where everyone can read it. But as this follows on from the discussions above, it will be OK to answer the questions here. Japan is not a subject that has many articles, and so your contribution is welcomed by the whole community. Lists are a difficult thing to simplify, but I think so far you have done a good job. The combined word list with links is usually the best way to go when simplifying, and if it is not simple enough, another editor will probably fix it. Kanji and diacritics used correctly are fine to use on this Wikipedia. As we do not have them in our Manual of Style, it would be suitable to default to the English Wikipedia for correct use. --Peterdownunder (talk) 23:19, 26 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

import.

Resolved. Template imported by User:Lauryn Ashby Bluegoblin7 ∞ 23:16, 1 April 2010 (UTC) [reply]

Can someone please import Template:Intervals from enWP? SS✞(Kay) 06:00, 29 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

 Sure, sounds like fun. Lauryn (u • t • c) 06:03, 29 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Jew--protection request

Resolved. Protected for two weeks Bluegoblin7 ∞ 23:13, 1 April 2010 (UTC) [reply]
Jew (change · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete)

Has much IP vandalism (compared with only one edit in six months that wasn't vand, rv or bot); also possibility of hate vandalism. Request three months semi-protection. Purplebackpack89 23:10, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

 Done by User:Bluegoblin7 for two weeks.--Gordonrox24 | Talk 23:11, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
(Edit conflict x2) Three months is excessive, i've done it for two weeks and it can be re-protected after that if needed. Bluegoblin7 ∞ 23:13, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Possible conflict of interest

Resolved. Seems to have been sorted. Goblin 13:28, 8 April 2010 (UTC) I ♥ Chenzw![reply]

As I detailed on Talk:Zoosk, there have been some edits to Zoosk that resemble an advertisement that I have reason to think may have been introduced by somebody with a conflict of interest. Kansan (talk) 16:08, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have reverted the edits by AKBrooks and left a note at her talk page. Let us see where it goes from here. Either way (talk) 16:23, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Import request

Resolved. Done by me Goblin 15:57, 5 April 2010 (UTC) I ♥ Meganmccarty![reply]

Can somebody please import Consumerism from the English Wikipedia for me? Kansan (talk) 15:52, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

 Doing... Goblin 15:53, 5 April 2010 (UTC) I ♥ Nifky![reply]

Thanks. Kansan (talk) 15:56, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Goblin 15:57, 5 April 2010 (UTC) I ♥ Chenzw![reply]

Arbitrary section name

I have made 1 or 2 minor edits on wikipedia before. I also contributed to the Fund appeal last year. Yet now I find, when i tried to log in, that you no longer have an account with my name. Further more the edits I made - even the whole webpage - has gone. If this is related to my short complaint about allowing the BBC and other institutions to send bots round to re-write history, then i demand a refund as this is NOT the site i donated to, and this cavalier attitude shown by some self important 'admins' is not what i would subscribe to either. If this message is posted in the wrong place, its because trying to actually communicate with "The editors" is a nightmare maze of menus and sub-menus that casual visitors have NO WAY of understanding. In fact, there is a useful project right there, displaying the site in TREE form, so users can navigate to the correct destination I am right royally peed off if someone has arbitrarily erased my account, and will dedicate myself to being a nightmare and a nuisance if this is the case. 86.160.216.176 (talk) 10:21, 8 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A couple of things, first off when you submit something to the wiki it gives a warning at the bottom of the page to not submit if you do not consent to have your content edited in any way. Deletion is a form of editing. Secondly, this is simple.wikipedia. Are you sure your article wasn't at english.wikipedia. If this is the case that is probably why you cannot access your account. -DJSasso (talk) 12:19, 8 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Aye, we also actually have no way to erase an account. Do you remember the approximate account name and I can look for it on here and en for you? James (T C) 12:32, 8 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I don't mean to sound annoying or anything, but please remember, caps off (don't use capitals)! :) Even though wikipedia isn't censored, 86.160.216.176., it's best to keep on the safe side and try to keep your temper. Caps won't help anything. Thanks, ♥ Belinda ♥ 12:35, 8 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
As Jamesofur said, users on Wikimedia cannot delete/erase a username. Unless you are very sure that you can't log in, your username may have been merged to another temporary name if someone has stated on WP:CHU that they wanted to rename to your username (usurping). Either way, please tell us what you believe is your username; this may help us find it for you. Nifky^ 12:53, 8 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Import

Resolved. Imported by me. Nifky^ 13:00, 8 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Would someone please be so kind as to import Reception history of Jane Austen from the English Wikipedia? I'd also prefer to have it in mainspace. I'll certainly do my best to simplify it to my satisfaction tomorrow before I do anything else on Wikipedia. :) Thank you very much in advance, and God bless, --Classicalina|talktea 12:57, 8 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Nifky^ 13:00, 8 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much! That was pretty fast. I'm working on simplifying it right now (I've simplified the introduction and the first section already). :) I just have one question: do you have to put an {{enwp based}} template on the talk page for imported pages, too? Thanks, —Classical Esther 10:41, 9 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
No, at Wikipedia:Transwiki attribution it says that when you import it in the history of the page 'imported x revisions from en.wikipedia'. :) Nifky^ 12:35, 9 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, I see. :) Thank you very much for all your help. —Classical Esther 12:45, 9 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It also brings all the edits with it, unless you only bring over the most recent one. Either way is acceptable. I prefer to bring them all over, some only the last. -DJSasso (talk) 13:00, 9 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Block review: Flayof

Resolved. Reviewed & denied Goblin 11:20, 10 April 2010 (UTC) I ♥ GoblinBots![reply]

I blocked User:Flayof yesterday indefinitely. About 18 hours ago, Flayof put up an unblock request. It has not been tended to yet. Could someone take a look? Much appreciated, Either way (talk) 11:02, 10 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Goblin 11:20, 10 April 2010 (UTC) I ♥ GoblinBots![reply]

Template:Infobox military conflict

Resolved. Imported. Nifky^ 06:42, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Could someone please inmport en:Template:Infobox military conflict for me? It's indefinitely protected at the moment through high risk of vandalism at the English Wikipedia, so I can't bring it over. It would be highly useful for many historical articles we currently have. Thanks, —Classical Esther 06:06, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Nifky^ 06:42, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much for the quick import. :) —Classical Esther 06:46, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Block Adorno rocks

Resolved. Blocked by Jamesofur. Griffinofwales (talk) 20:30, 16 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

User:Adorno rocks is moving many pages.  PiRSquared17 (talk)  18:14, 16 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Another PBP89 Protection Request that you may not like

George Washington (change · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete)

In the last week, has been vandalized several times by several different IPs, and one confirmed user. I propose silver-lock for a minimum of three months, and throw in an indef move protection. I know I'm tough on silver-lock proposals, but that's just the way I am. Purplebackpack89 03:41, 18 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Three months is too long; I have semi'd it for two weeks and if vandalism continues after the two week period is up, we can revisit the issue.  — laurynashby 03:50, 18 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Two weeks is too short. Way too short. By Cinco de Mayo, we'll have had more vandalism on a very important article Purplebackpack89 03:52, 18 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Two weeks is plenty. "If vandalism continues after the two week period is up, we can revisit the issue"  — laurynashby 03:53, 18 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Two weeks is plenty. It is the first time it has been protected and the current rate of vandalism is not beyond workable. Protection should be kept to the minimum amount possible if the two weeks doesn't work (especially it gets worse) then perhaps but 3 months off the bat is meh. James (T C) 04:22, 18 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I am not objecting to the time frame, but PBP 2 weeks is way better than what you would have got from me. You probably would have gotten a week at most from me. Protection is only meant to occur in the very worst of situations. Think 25+ vandalism edits from like 5 different editors in a single day. Protection is a last resort in a situation where blocks haven't worked. -DJSasso (talk) 15:17, 18 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Agree with Djsasso's assessment. I see 4 vandals in the last month. To lock it for three months over this would be inappropriate. Two weeks seems a bit much too, in my opinion but is much more liveable than months of protection. Either way (talk) 17:03, 18 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

POV editing from IP 195.195.131.166 again

Resolved.

IP 195.195.131.166, who has been blocked previously for edits that constitute a POV and block evasion, has been creating articles on Pakistani tehsils again. This would be fine, except if you look closely, these edits define it as in "occupied Kashmir". The term "occupied" implies, depending on who's using it, that either India or Pakistan illegitimately controls an area. It is not Wikipedia's job to take a side in an international land dispute, and I think that action is needed (so many articles have been created that I wanted to get an administrator's advice before diving into it). Kansan (talk) 16:03, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I would also like to add that there have been complaints from readers that some of our coverage on this issue is biased, and in looking at them, I have found that some articles do, bluntly, take a side on the issue. I came across one today on Abbottabad District that did so very subtly. I think that this is partly due to a lack of familiarity of most editors from English speaking countries about Pakistani/Indian geography, but I think that it's worth us keeping a close eye on in the future, if not systematically going through all edits dealing with Kashmir, Pakistan, or even containing the word "occupied". Kansan (talk) 16:06, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Blocked and articles nuked by Petersymonds. This user has been community banned for this very problem and an inability to engage in conversation about it. James (T C) 16:14, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The user appears to be back as 195.195.131.162, which is part of the same IP range. This specific IP has also been blocked previously for block evasion. Today, they haven't yet made any NPOV edits, but it's worth keeping an eye on if you as administrators choose not to block it. Kansan (talk) 16:09, 21 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the notice. The block is to prevent that user from making vandal changes. If they make even one vandal or POV edit from that IP, I think we ought to consider a range-block (perhaps 195.195.131.166/28) for the 3 months. EhJJTALK 16:28, 21 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Request

Resolved. Import is used to improve the encyclopaedia, not import userboxes. Additionally, imports cannot be done from the Catalan Wikipedia. Lauryn Dirty little secrets 17:51, 22 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, could you do some imports for me from the Catalan Wikipedia? They are the following:

Thanks in advance. --Diego Grez let's talk 20:44, 21 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Many of these userboxes exist on the English Wikipedia. Why do you want them in Catalan? EhJJTALK 21:13, 21 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Because many of them I already have on my Catalan userpage, and I really like them. I'll translate them as well. --Diego Grez let's talk 21:23, 21 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Sadly we do not currently have any wiki other then en (and other simple projects) set up for import. With community consensus we can of course ask for more to be set up but for now the only option is en. James (T C) 21:28, 21 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, I think so, but for sure it is done just once ;-) --Diego Grez let's talk 00:37, 22 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with Either way. Just copy them over, simplify them (probably not necessary with userboxes) and then put the attribution template on the talk page. Forgive me for being frank, but I, and by extension the other administrators, have better things to do with our limited free time than import userboxes.  — laurynashby 01:03, 22 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Whoops. Sorry. Please forgive me. --Diego Grez let's talk 01:11, 22 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Arthur Rubinstein

Resolved. Restored and userfied by Pmlineditor LaurynDirty little secrets 17:46, 22 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I am requesting the reinstatement of the above named article, which was deleted by User:Lauryn_Ashby. I had just begun working on this article and feel did not have time to bring it up to specs before it was deleted.THD3 (talk) 17:34, 22 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Assuming good faith here. I have restored and moved the said article to userspace so that you can simplify it. I hope Lauryn doesn't have any problems with this. Cheers, Pmlineditor ∞ 17:40, 22 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Riaz Ahmed Gohar Shahi

There's been a lot of edit warring about this article, some of its edits being quite recent (its protection has expired now), and the discussion on the talk page is beginning to turn into a dispute over his death. It's been disputed on en as well, and it seems that the same problem is occurring here as well. Could an uninvolved administrator please take a look at this and decide what to do about this and cool things down somewhat? Thank you, —Classical Esthertalk 08:44, 23 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

 Done protect for 1 month --vector ^_^ (talk) 09:34, 23 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Inactivity

I'm sorry, my internet access is as such that it is difficult to edit. I don't expect to be out of this situation anytime until around early next year. Is it possible to take leave and retain my access levels, or how is this type of situation handled? Many thanks, Jon@talk:~$ 09:38, 23 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well our current policy is a year? of inactivity I believe and knowing you you will be back far before that :) To be honest I also have less of a problem with inactivity when someone is making an effort to tell us that they will be basically inactive for some reason or another as you are so. 09:41, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
you are a Bureaucrat, you can remove your right by yourself :( --vector ^_^ (talk) 09:42, 23 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
sorry, only sysop rights you can remove :| --vector ^_^ (talk) 09:43, 23 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • I appreciate that you informed us about this. I think in this case you can just hold your rights and come back when you have a normal Internet access. Maybe you should just move yourself to inactive on the adminlist and leave a comment on your userpage. Barras talk 10:28, 23 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Well you can ask to have them removed and then ask for them back when you come back since you would not be doing so under a cloud. Or you can do nothing and have them removed after a year of inactivity. Personally I prefer you to remove them yourself, but its totally up to you. -DJSasso (talk) 12:12, 23 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Import

Resolved.

done James (T C) 19:53, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Import en:Template:Bible_translation_infobox.  PiRSquared17 (talk)  19:51, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, Jamesofur already did it!  PiRSquared17 (talk)  19:52, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
 Done James (T C) 19:53, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

en:Template:EnglishTranslations  PiRSquared17 (talk)  21:14, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

 Done  — laurynashby 02:49, 21 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

en:Template:General relativity and en:Template:Three Kingdoms infobox  PiRSquared17 (talk)  14:04, 21 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

 Done  — laurynashby 21:35, 21 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

en:Template:Str index  PiRSquared17 (talk)  18:23, 22 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Please be sure you are simplifying these templates. Lauryn Dirty little secrets 18:25, 22 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
OK.  PiRSquared17 (talk)  18:27, 22 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Won't work w/o en:Template:Str ≥ len.  PiRSquared17 (talk)  21:15, 22 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Won't work w/o en:Template:Str_index/logic.  PiRSquared17 (talk)  21:59, 22 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
 Done and  Done. Griffinofwales (talk) 22:00, 22 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't want to bug you, but the only other import I need is en:Template:Str len.  PiRSquared17 (talk)  18:39, 22 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

 Done You're not bugging me. :) Lauryn Dirty little secrets 18:41, 22 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much! :)  PiRSquared17 (talk)  18:51, 22 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Won't work w/o en:Template:Str len/core.  PiRSquared17 (talk)  19:00, 22 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
 Done Lauryn Dirty little secrets 19:03, 22 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

en:Template:Math-stub. PiRSquared17 17:14, 25 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Don't import it. It's too complex and links to redlink templates. PiRSquared17 18:06, 25 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

User:Лъчезар

User:Лъчезар was banned on regular Wikipedia for pushing Moon hoax conspiracy theories. I suggest banning him here too as that's his major motivation. ScienceApologist (talk) 20:11, 23 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see a ban on his account on the English Wikipedia (which is what I assume you mean by "regular" Wikipedia). According to his block long, he's never had a block there. Am I missing something? Either way (talk) 20:18, 23 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Also, blocks do not automatically transfer across wikis, so each case must be judged on its own merit. Kansan (talk) 21:34, 23 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, but in the past, this wiki has given users blocked on other wikis "one strike". EhJJTALK 23:05, 23 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Not blocked, banned. There is a difference. ScienceApologist (talk) 23:12, 23 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Banned wiki-wide? Griffinofwales (talk) 23:13, 23 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
By "blocked", I meant indef-blocked. While there is a difference between blocked and banned, it's not all that important. If a user is blocked/banned on another wiki, they are usually looked at very closely here. If they edit constructively, they can be allowed to edit here. If they begin to vandalize here, they don't get the usual four-warnings; they can be blocked by any admin as a cross-wiki vandal. EhJJTALK 00:15, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

(<-) I am a ware that this user only seems to have edited the article currently at Moon landing conspiracy theory, its talk page, and a few user talk pages, but at the moment I do not see a reason for a community ban. Can anyone cite negative side-effects we have had from this user? --Eptalon (talk) 13:09, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

62.167.144.196 (talk · contribs)

Hey. Apparently 62.167.144.196 (talk · contribs) has imported a lot of articles from the English Wikipedia. The problem is that:

  1. They are not simple
  2. It's not attributing

Should they be nuked or something? --Diego Grez let's talk 17:21, 25 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have left a note on the IP's talk page. If the pages do not get simplified they can be deleted, and if the page creation continues a block may be in order.--Gordonrox24 | Talk 17:31, 25 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Can someone block this account?

Resolved. done by Barras talk

Because until I get renamed on meta and other projects, I may from time to time accidentally login as this one without noticing. Singlish speaker (talk) 09:34, 28 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. {{Sonia|talk|en}} 09:57, 28 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://simple.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Current_issues_and_requests_archive_32&oldid=2178284"