Jump to content

Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Current issues and requests archive 71

Add links
From Simple English Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Rachid lanjri

I think this is a QD A4 case, but since the author is repeating QD tag removal, I will forward the QD request to here. MathXplore (talk) 03:21, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Already  Done. MathXplore (talk) 13:18, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yahya Jamaaoui

Per Wikipedia:Requests for deletion/Requests/2021/Yahya Jamaaoui, I think this is a QD G4 case. Since the author is repeating QD tag removal, I will forward the QD request to here. MathXplore (talk) 03:33, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Already  Done. MathXplore (talk) 07:20, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

RfD needs attention...

Hello, fellow admins, our request for deletion page needs attention: There are quite a few overdue ones, which need closing. It looks like in recent times, I have been the admin who closed most requests. So, if you have a second, take a look, and close some. Thank you Eptalon (talk) 06:08, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I do check, but most of the time recently I find that someone has already taken care of the ones that were ready to close! -- Auntof6 (talk) 01:39, 8 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Disruptive changes from a large range.

https://simple.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3AContributions&target=119.155.179.249%2F16&namespace=all&tagfilter=&start=&end=&limit=50 This large /16 range has been making unhelpful changes for a while now since atleast August. It seems to be one person using this whole range. This is a large range however and the /24 only hit a handful of the IPs. Bobherry Talk My Changes 21:15, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Too large for a long block. Blocked for 2 weeks fr33kman 21:19, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Large and long range blocks are fine. I usually enable account creation for large (>/20) IPv4 range blocks with a duration of over 1 month. Evaluating the contribs of that range also helps determine how many people you're likely going to annoy with the block. — *Fehufangą ♮ ✉ Talk page 02:53, 8 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hoaxy, or only lesser problems~?

October 2023 Shuafat attack.--I have searched at En-wiki "2023 Israel–Hamas war".--Seems like no hits there, on "Shuafat".--If none of the administrators are vaguely familiar with this topic, then perhaps consider taking maximum safety measures, in regard to any presentation on this simple-wiki page. 2001:2020:319:E5B1:D59:42EA:FFE5:144F (talk) 19:26, 8 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

With only 3-4 editors on simplewiki working on the article it is going to be quite different than the one on enwiki. That is only a problem if it become non-neutral or unfactual. Are you stating the our article has something the enwiki article doesn't have or the oppsite? fr33kman 19:32, 8 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I have deleted the page after doing a search for it on Google, enwiki and having realized that it must be a hoax. Let me know if this is wrong. fr33kman 19:39, 8 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Disruptive IP range on movies

Special:Contribs/197.229.2.0/24 is making a bunch of disruptive changes. They are removing references and copying plot summaries from other websites. Kk.urban (talk) 06:11, 9 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Requesting protection of Shah Rukh Khan

Shah Rukh Khan keeps getting vandalized. Please protect it. X58075398 (talk) 13:59, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Protected for 2 weeks.. Eptalon (talk) 23:27, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Imran Abbas RfD

There is something screwy with Wikipedia:Requests for deletion/Requests/2023/Imran Abbas. I know there were more to it than is shown. The history does not even list my editing it. At the same time, looking at the first post in the history, it was started with a comment from me already in it.. I remember the edit that came from and that there were a couple more after it yet there is nothing in the history. Someone played around with the history changing what is attributed to me by removing the attrib and also removing my other posts and the posts of others. Pure Evil (talk) 00:53, 12 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It was one of a few that weren't listed. Oddly enough, it listed more or less the same thing twice, so I deleted the top part; all this is visible from the history though. Eptalon (talk) 12:07, 12 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It was listed as an RfD.. I commented on it and later replied to the comment of the user changing it.. and neither of those comments are in the history. I also remember someone replying to my missing reply. Also not in the history. My comment that is actually there was added by someone other than me. The history shows some of the past but much of it is missing. It completely blanks out any actions from me while a comment signed by me is in the post.. How did I comment on it , at least twice, and only one of those comments show up and yet I am not in the history and someone else posted my comment? The history is not valid.. Pure Evil (talk) 22:44, 12 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Could the AFD have been deleted and then recreated by the IP? There's something odd here for sure. Ravensfire (talk) 22:52, 12 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
That should have turned up in the logs. Or something. This is odd. Ravensfire (talk) 22:54, 12 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Looking over the article in the state is was when the RfD tag was placed, that is not the article the RfD comment signed by me was dealing with.. That comment is from an RfD for someone else. This RfD may not have been added after all, but my comment was posted. just somewhere else and copied to this one. Pure Evil (talk) 22:53, 12 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Ah ha - and that is the answer. Look at [[1]]. Ravensfire (talk) 22:59, 12 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
At least I know Im not going crazy (er) This is similar to the Janet James RfD where someone else copied and pasted my comments from a separate RfD. At least on that one, they did not sign my name to the comment.. It also seems on this one that they took Fariens comment from that tread as well. Pure Evil (talk) 23:19, 12 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
And found.. Wikipedia:Requests for deletion/Requests/2023/Syed Hassan Jafari (Actor) was the RfD the info was taken from.. I posted, they fixed, I replied, Freekman replied to that.. they lifted part of that train and pasted it into this RfD. Pure Evil (talk) 23:00, 12 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please grant me the Confirmed permission

Hi. I'm a Commons admin and occasionally need to swap out images on other projects - such as if the identical image is under two different names, and we need to move all of the uses to one file before deleting the other. It looks like I don't have permission to do that here because I'm not confirmed/autoconfirmed. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 03:01, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@The Squirrel Conspiracy Hello, the autoconfirmed threshold here is 4 days and 10 edits. You're only 4 edits short, I'd suggest that editing the sandbox a couple of times. I'll also modify the filter that caused your edits to be blocked. — *Fehufangą ♮ ✉ Talk page 03:25, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Autoconfirmed requires 4 day (  ) and 10 edits ( Only 6). A couple more edits and it should kick in automatically. Pure Evil (talk) 03:34, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 03:56, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

List of the oldest people by country

The page is claimed to be under construction but I see no changes and the latest version fits to QD A1 or QD G2. Since the creator is repeating QD tag removal, I will forward the QD request to here. MathXplore (talk) 06:43, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

According to the history, you tagged it for deletion 9 minutes after it was created with the in use tag. Not saying they are actually working on it, but interrupting them less than 10 minutes into the job is a bit rash. Have a little patience. Like hours or days.. there is no rush needed here. Pure Evil (talk) 08:41, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Report concerning User:2600:6C50:17F:ABB9:A8AF:FA30:FB46:37AC

2600:6C50:17F:ABB9:A8AF:FA30:FB46:37AC (talk • contribs • CA • deleted contribs • nuke contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log) and other IPs on same /64

Some kind of pro Armenian vandal/historical revisionist. Reverted my removal of his vandalism on several pages. See Darius III, Tiridates III of Armenia, Hittites, Orontid dynasty.

Their /64 is already blocked on Wikidata for similar edits. See https://guc.toolforge.org/?isPrefixPattern=1&by=date&user=2600%3A6C50%3A17F%3AABB9%3A and wikidata:Wikidata:Administrators' noticeboard#Semi-protection for Q319478 and Q363394. Thank you. -- William Graham (talk) 18:29, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Blocked the /64 range for a while. Let's see if they go away however unlikely. Thanks for reporting fr33kman 18:33, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
2600:387:8:9::97 (talk • contribs • CA • deleted contribs • nuke contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log)
Back again already. -- William Graham (talk) 21:17, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Seems so. I will deal with it. Thx :) fr33kman 21:20, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Page protection for Negroid

Can you please semi-protect Negroid? Kk.urban (talk) 23:16, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

 Done by Eptalon --Ferien (talk) 19:48, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

List of Mexican supercentenarians

I'm not sure what to do with List of Mexican supercentenarians. It was created and then many names were added to the list and it was blanked multiple times. The users and IPs editing it mostly seem to be sockpuppets of each other, although this isn't proven. I haven't checked any version of the list to see if it's accurate, but I don't have much trust in that direction. Kk.urban (talk) 19:37, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It's currently a redirect to a nonexistent page, but it could be reverted to a previous revision. Or deleted... Kk.urban (talk) 19:37, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I've deleted it fr33kman 19:42, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Fr33kman You didn't delete List of Mexican supercentenarians. I don't know if I should restore it to an earlier version or what. Kk.urban (talk) 19:43, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Done: fr33kman 01:02, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Page protection for List of Pixar movies

There's a persistent IP editor on List of Pixar movies that's removing sources, adding unsourced information and generally not being helpful. It seems to be coming from a couple of different IP's and affects more than one article. Would an admin mind taking a look into this? Ravensfire (talk) 16:06, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Protection for TeenNick

TeenNick (change · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete)
This page has been getting unsourced hoax edits added to it by someone under multiple accounts and IPs for at least a month now. Bobherry Talk My Changes 02:24, 19 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Disruptive RfD nominations by Rathfelder

I have been seeing numerous disruptive RfD nominations from the user Rathfelder that violate the basic checks that should be done before deletion (WP:BEFORE). This has been a continuing issue, despite many comments about how this is a problem (see Wikipedia:Requests for deletion/Requests/2023/Microsoft Expression Web, Wikipedia:Requests for deletion/Requests/2023/Political union and Wikipedia:Requests for deletion/Requests/2023/Navagraha), with no sign to change his ways and failure to get the point - and now going about nominating unreferenced BLPs, that we have hundreds of, for deletion (see Wikipedia:Requests for deletion/Requests/2023/Michele Tafoya and Wikipedia:Requests for deletion/Requests/2023/Lee Hamilton). I don't know whether we should consider WP:ONESTRIKE considering it could apply here, but I'm not liking slightly poor articles constantly being nominated for deletion with reasons that are invalid. That being said, I am very involved in this issue, often being the one improving these articles to save them from deletion, so I won't be taking any administrative action on this myself. --Ferien (talk) 21:23, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I understand that the policy is that unreferenced articles about living people are liable to be deleted. It also agreed that in some cases what we have is so poor that it should go. These nominations are not intended to be disruptive. I've done a lot of work on uncategorised articles, and I do find some very poor articles. Generally I tag them. I only propose deletion in a small proportion. Some of my proposals are agreed to be deleted and some arent. I think we need to exercise judgement. Rathfelder (talk) 22:12, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
BLPPROD does not exist on this wiki, but a key part of w:WP:BLPPROD on enwiki is that you look for reliable sources yourself before nominating the article for deletion. If you had even looked at the enwiki equivalent for all of these articles, you would have seen there are reliable sources available for both of these people. None of the articles that you have nominated for cleanup-related reasons come close to w:WP:TNT standard, as none of the articles you have nominated for deletion under cleanup issues have resulted in deletion, despite you nominating many articles for deletion for these reasons. RfD isn't an article cleanup venue. I am happy to create one in my userspace or get community opinion on it if you like, but RfD shouldn't be it. --Ferien (talk) 16:39, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Why does BLPPROD not exist on this wiki? Surely the reasons for it on other wikis apply just as much here? Rathfelder (talk) 17:08, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Because it'd be a lot of work to make sure articles on all living people have references on this wiki, where we don't have as many active editors. So long as the articles say nothing controversial, a lack of sources is not an issue. Many of the unreferenced BLPs that we have can actually be pretty easily fixed, and I have been addressing your articles at RfD and when I had more time, I had been clearing up that backlog anyway. --Ferien (talk) 20:31, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It seems that not everyone agrees with you. See Wikipedia:Requests for deletion/Requests/2023/Disfranchisement, Wikipedia:Requests for deletion/Requests/2023/Microsoft Expression Web, Wikipedia:Requests for deletion/Requests/2023/Morality and religion. Kk.urban (talk) 19:36, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
In each cases opinions differed. That is surely the point of having discussions. Rathfelder (talk) 19:44, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Just to be clear, I was replying to Ferien here. Kk.urban (talk) 19:45, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
If this is the case then perhaps the basic rules for nominating articles should be changed, although that is not necessary. WP:BEFORE is put out very clearly and it is very clearly being broken. We as a wiki have chosen to not use deletion as cleanup for a very long time, there has been no reason given as to why that should change now. A couple of editors choosing to either ignore the policies we have or pretend they don't exist, shouldn't mean we abandon those policies. --Ferien (talk) 20:28, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Why do we let BLP articles be posted without references? The point of the policy is to protect Wikipedia from litigation and to fend off hoaxes. The fact that most could easily have references is beside the point.Rathfelder (talk) 21:12, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Asked and answered. Ferien has addressed this already above. Repeating the same question just because you do not like the answer is not constructive. --Gotanda (talk) 00:45, 18 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
In English Wikipedia people cannot post articles without references. That shifts the burden on to the contributors. Rathfelder (talk) 10:42, 18 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
This is not EnWp. --Gotanda (talk) 11:41, 18 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
But can we not have a similar system? Rathfelder (talk) 15:47, 18 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
That would be a separate discussion (useful background reading: Wikipedia:Simple talk/Archive_101#BLP_PROD_process). I also want to take this opportunity to reiterate that the BLP policy prohibits addition of heated, arguable material that is unsourced (be it good or bad), not any unsourced material. EN uses the term "contentious". Chenzw  Talk  16:54, 18 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not proposing that we should apply a PROD policy to all existing articles, if it is agreed, as it appears to be, that we shouldnt. (though I think that should be more explicit). I am more interested in a policy which automatically prevents people from posting any unreferenced articles. Rathfelder (talk) 11:05, 19 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Edits by QLDer in NSW

The editor is enthusiastic and seems to be in school, but they are bulk creating hundreds of very low info stubs for others to clean up. They themselves describe their approach to editing, "Thanks for reminding me. I do recall once thinking "Shouldn't these be simplified?" but I then thought "Meh, I'll do it later." Later doesn't happen. I and PureEvil have both cautioned them about adding articles with errors. I have given them clear advice for how to go back and clean up after themselves, but they rarely do. Problems include, broken images or templates, incorrect electoral results, blank sections, and more. The 700+ stubs will soon grow further out of control. I thought bulk creation was discouraged here. In any event, they may need a break from new article creation. --Gotanda (talk) 00:34, 18 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think Special:Contributions/149.167.175.128 is also related to this case, similar type of page creation, and IP comes from similar region. MathXplore (talk) 06:26, 18 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
There is also Special:Contributions/149.167.173.216 which followed the same pattern until blocked four days before QLDer started as a "Former IP editor". --Gotanda (talk) 23:25, 18 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I think we should not link IPs and accounts. As a checkuser I can tell you: such associations are sensitive information. Eptalon (talk) 23:55, 18 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry about that. I did not realize I was causing an issue by doing so. How should handle similar in the future? Gotanda (talk) 02:32, 19 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: I didn't check, I can't tell you if they match. In the future: write a mail to the checkuser list? But as long as there is no sign of abuse, there is no need for a checkuser action Eptalon (talk) 11:15, 19 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Television series for Yo! Smiley Clown Jr. With TeenNick

Yo! Smiley Clown Jr. With TeenNick (change · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete)
This page has been getting unsourced hoax edits added to it by someone under multiple accounts and IPs for at least a month December 2023. Goopii1 (talk) 18:25, 19 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The above user (Goopii1 (talk · contribs)) is a sockpuppet (of Good Goo2 X (talk · contribs) etc.) and should be indefinitely blocked. You Hood1 (talk · contribs) is another sockpuppet. Kk.urban (talk) 18:49, 19 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Edits by X58075398

I have seen a lot of edits by X58075398 (talk · contribs) that are not helpful, relating to spelling variants and formatting issues. Some of these are:

  • A pattern of changing "colour" to "color" across many articles, which is against MOS:ENGVAR.
  • Replacing links to "https://www.mathsisfun.com" with "http://www.mathisfun.com", although the website is hosted at the first title and "https" is more secure
  • Moving MATLAB and INTLAB to MatLab and IntLab, although the titles are all-caps in all the sources and in other Wikipedias
  • Removing use of the {{radical}} template in informational pages, by substituting it, which is unhelpful because these pages are designed to show how to use it, and if it is substituted, that won't work
    • They also tagged the {{radical}} redirect to {{radic}} for deletion, and then replaced use of {{radic}} with {{radical}}. That doesn't make any sense.
  • Replaced all instances of the word "pi" with the symbol π on Pi

I hope that administrators can review these changes and make recommendations to X58075398 if they are doing something wrong. Kk.urban (talk) 18:53, 2 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(Non-administrator observation) Sent AN notice. MathXplore (talk) 13:48, 3 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, thanks for noticing. I do however not see a need to act at the moment.
  • Remember that we usually don't bite newccomers; ENGVAR is very nice, but our target aaudience alos includes those learning English. For that reason,I'd expect a consistent use of one form across the article. Remember, there are many places that use English, such as Belize, South Africa, or India. Language can be a contentious issue, and you need to be careful what forms you use.
Eptalon (talk) 23:25, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • This user seems to be causing further issues. They are moving and editing various Basic English pages and their wording to "BASIC English". As this involves page moves over redirects with redirects which will likely need to be deleted, I bring it here. Pure Evil (talk) 01:21, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • User started bulk changing categories from Basic English 850 words to BASIC English 850 words, causing Red Categories. I have since blocked them, as this is vandalism, since there does not appear to be any consensus for the change, and I have rolled back all those to the proper current category. -- Enfcer (talk) 23:04, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I think consensus should have been gathered before they did all them. It almost looks like they had a bot run on their account they did them so fast in my opinion as well. Bobherry Talk My Changes 01:13, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

LTA enwiki sock Oatsandcream

en:Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Oatsandcream/Archive has switched their attention to Simple English Wikipedia, as some do. Their main problem behaviour is adding hoax media to articles about lost films; claiming that a still or a clip of a famous film has been recovered, or that their own home videos are themselves significant lost films.

The three edits from 68.148.136.66 are probably enough for a behavioral block: pushing the same hoax Marx Brothers image that an Oatsandcream sock put up on enwiki last week ([2]), adding a copyvio image of King Charles (attempted by a sock on enwiki at [3]), and creating a dubious article about the lost Beatles song Pinwheel Twist (which was deleted on enwiki for being created by an Oatsandcream sock).

Mussia has been adding the same unsourced plot/cast details to the Simple English coverage of Humor Risk that an Oatsandcream sock was writing last week, with their Marx Brothers edit here at [4] being the same as a sock on enwiki at [5]).

The sockmaster never created an Oatsandcream account on the Simple English Wikipedia, but they've had past accounts banned here, such as SpookLoud (talk • contribs • CA • deleted contribs • nuke contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log). Belbury (talk) 22:30, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

List of security hacking incidents

There were 2 RFDs (1 2) for List of security hacking incidents that both resulted in a keep. But I have found an identical page on academickids.com, which seems to be another online encyclopedia. Is there any way to determine whether the simplewiki page was copied from there (making it a copyright violation), or if their page was copied from simplewiki? Kk.urban (talk) 07:00, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I imagine all you would have to do is check which one was made first. QuicoleJR (talk) 17:25, 22 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I can't determine which was created first. Probably we made it first but it's impossible to determine. From looking around their website, it all seems to be a copy of Wikipedia (templates, menus etc...) So, I'd say they copied us. fr33kman 17:44, 22 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Page protection for WP:Notability

It looks like this is going to become a long term problem that might warrant some kind of page protection. Philipnelson99 (talk) 22:00, 22 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

User blocked. Let's see if it continues when it's expired. It's better to block than protect. fr33kman 22:03, 22 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Just happened again from a different IP @Fr33kman. Philipnelson99 (talk) 23:10, 22 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It's also possible we could introduce an edit filter to prevent {{notability}} from being placed on wikispace pages. Philipnelson99 (talk) 23:13, 22 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Protected the page. — *Fehufangą ♮ ✉ Talk page 23:47, 22 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Is this really enough of a problem to warrant an abuse filter? QuicoleJR (talk) 03:32, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It's an explicit pattern of sustained abuse that would be easily prevented by a filter. Philipnelson99 (talk) 19:06, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
and it's likely that {{notability}} nor the word "Dickipedia" would ever need to be placed on a wikispace page. Philipnelson99 (talk) 19:07, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://simple.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Current_issues_and_requests_archive_71&oldid=9236887"