Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard

Shortcuts

This is a message board for talking about tasks on Wikipedia that only administrators can do. Please put new messages at the bottom of the talk page or click here to start a new discussion.

Please note that the messages on this page are archived periodically. A message may therefore have been archived. Note however, that the archives must not be modified, so if something needs discussing, please start a new discussion on this page.

Are you in the right place?

This is the Simple English Wikipedia. Click here for the Administrators' Noticeboard on the regular English Wikipedia.
Use Vandalism in progress to report serious and urgent vandalism from other users to administrators.
Use Requests for permissions to request administrators to give you tools that can help you do things faster on Wikipedia, such as rollback.
Use Simple talk to ask general questions about Wikipedia and how to use it.
See meta:Steward requests/Username changes to change your user name or take another user name.
See WP:RFCU for CheckUser requests.
See WP:OS for oversight.

Shut down ChenzwBot

This bot sends threats about block me from that wikipedia while I NEVER doing vandalism. 88.226.104.79 (talk) 19:39, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The bot is not an admin and can't block users. fr33k man 23:48, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

also see this and this. Cactus🌵 ^spiky ^ツ 11:06, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The bot is reverting some things that are not vandalism. @Chenzw: Can you look at it, please?

IP user, please bear with us until this can be investigated. In the meantime, I don't think we want to shut the bot down just for this, so if you could please hold off on the change that that bot keeps reverting, that would be appreciated. Thanks, and sorry for the inconvenience. --Auntof6 (talk) 04:20, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies for the delay. I have re-introduced your changes and added those incorrect detections to the bot's training database so future similar changes will be judged correctly as good ones. One of the detection methods the bot uses is to look for words that appear more frequently in vandalism, and in this case, unfortunately the ISO language code "hi" was incorrectly detected to be vandalism, especially since there weren't any other content introduced in the change. In future, if you think that you were incorrectly reverted, please go ahead to re-do your change. The bot will not revert the same editor-page combination more than once over a 24 hour period. Chenzw Talk 10:36, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Weird behavior

this user is behaving really werid. very fast and many edits in small period of time. mutiple vandalism warnings. they appear possibly to be hiding vandalism in-between copy edits. I dont have time to look into what I am reporting I maybe wrong but still its a large amount of unsourced material and date changing. Id recommend if you know how look at what triggered it to show up on the patrols, as I say stuff there. I may be wrong. I just cant look through all of there edits. again I apologies if im wrong. but something to look into. its not a full allegation its just to many edits to look through. I assume good faith but its just too much on a feature article. Thanks JamesEMonroe (talk) 00:51, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I apologies if I am wrong. but to bring attention to someone more exp then me. it is their decision.

maybe its good faith and they are getting it somewhere and I misread my patrol report that I lost. i cant for the life of me look thorough it

User: 85.225.19.251

Article Amitabh_Bachchan JamesEMonroe (talk) 00:51, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That behavior is happening at the English Wikipedia; you're at the Simple English Wikipedia. CountryANDWestern (talk) 09:40, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I was wondering why it was so weird. But I don't get it as isn't this the mirror site for it for mobile. I was wondering why I couldn't find the case JamesEMonroe (talk) 09:43, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@JamesEMonroe: This is Simple English Wikipedia, a separate site from regular English Wikipedia ("enwiki"). It is its own site, not a mirror of enwiki. -- Auntof6 (talk) 11:59, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

WikiCleaner

What are the rules here on using WP:WPCleaner? Do I need to be a administrator? Do I need flood or bot flag? I checked the page for rules here but it only has a redirect and no information on rules here. Thanks :) Ieditrandomarticles (talk | contribs) 15:59, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

non admin comment: Hi @Ieditrandomarticles,

Nope you don't need to be administrator to use it,
Generally speaking yes you're supposed to ask for the flood flag before using it if doing repetitive edits however getting a response from any admin can take 8+ hours so I personally use it without the flood flag (generally speaking I try to use it at night time/early hours of the morning when no one's on), Unfortunately in the past when I used to wait for a response sometimes it would be declined anyway so yeah I just crack on without it but yeah expect to be messaged about it constantly if you do go down that route),

Please be aware not all issues on there can be fixed (such as "table end") - You should preview all edits you make to make sure you're not messing the page up one way or another, Hope this helps, Thanks –Davey2010^Talk 16:35, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Ieditrandomarticles next time, ask this on simple talk. Cactus🌵 ^spiky ^ツ 09:10, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This was an Admin-Specific question and not something opened to the general community to discuss. :) Ieditrandomarticles (talk | contribs) 11:35, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

not really Cactus🌵 ^spiky ^ツ 09:07, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

'Hoax title'?

See simple.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Hazaristan&diff=10265891&oldid=10265889

("Hazaristan").

I took one glance at the language-link (interwiki), English.
Please put hoax-tag, and/or QD-nominate.--Other wiki-users might be comfortable with taking this to Simple-Talk.--Good luck (while i fix other articles). 2001:2020:303:BB75:484E:9116:1DB5:1026 (talk) 06:39, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Not a hoax. I've restored the article. CountryANDWestern (talk) 09:34, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Recreated. No mention of him at En-wiki (May's third week)

This one.

The name ought to stay red, unless he becomes notable,

No mention of him at en-wiki,if asked.

Some might choose to QD, recreated titles; i will be waiting for 'only his name', before i QD this topic. 2001:2020:303:BB75:3825:C63B:A42C:AEF0 (talk) 17:40, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see the issue. Am I missing something? fr33k man 00:00, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Not following exactly what the IP is saying, but I will point out that the article it's mentioned above was deleted earlier as a creation by a sock -- a sock that you had blocked and is now globally locked. CountryANDWestern (talk) 00:21, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Understood, thx fr33k man 00:23, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

User:Nikolai Kurbatov

This editor was blocked at the end of last year. I don't know the actual reason for that, but I am concerned about the large number of mini-stubs they created, mainly about sportspeople who may not be notable due to lack of significant coverage.

I am seeing similarities between Nikolai's stubs on here, and those created at enwiki by Lugnuts. This is especially evident in the cricket sphere because, in the overwhelming majority of Nikolai's stubs, the only sources cited are the statistical databases ESPNcricinfo and CricketArchive. The latter of those is paywalled, and is not the most reliable of sources. Taking this a step further forward, Lugnuts also created a mass of Olympic stubs based on minimal information in Olympedia, just like Nikolai's Kim Bub-min, in fact.

I'm presently trying to create order out of near-chaos in the cricket categories, and I'm beginning to anticipate nomination of dozens, perhaps scores, of bio-stubs for deletion.

This is a heads-up, really, as I can't yet say what the scale of the problem might be, but it does seem to me that I'm in familiar territory. Thanks. Jack (talk) 15:30, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Module import request

Hi, Could someone import the latest revision of en:Module:Citation/CS1 to Module:Citation/CS1 please,

The module is missing

"local function _citation (frame, args, config) -- save a copy in case we need to display an error :message in preview mode

if not frame then

frame = mw.getCurrentFrame(); -- if called from another module, get a frame for frame-:provided functions

end"

which is needed for COVID-19 pandemic (see ref section - it's bringing up an error which is because the module is missing the above info), Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 18:21, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Done -- Auntof6 (talk) 23:58, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Auntof6 much appreciated, Thanks, Warm Regards, –Davey2010^Talk 08:08, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nuke, as a 'nipping in the bud'

simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/5.150.102.118

is creating 'two, complex-articles in one minute'.--Nuke is likely needed.--I plan to QD, an expected upcoming article, from that user.--If that will be helpful, then fine. 2001:2020:309:CBE7:81A2:5D2B:39F3:BFE7 (talk) 18:46, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@2001:2020:309:CBE7:81A2:5D2B:39F3:BFE7, Please QD or RFD it.

Also going off on a tangent for a sec; you say "I plan to QD, an expected upcoming article" .... Why would you "plan" to QD any future creations but not QD the current stuff ?.

Also how would you know if they're going to create any upcoming articles?.

Have you ever thought of QD/RFDing the articles yourself instead of making posts here everyday of the week expecting people to do it for you?, Just curious. –Davey2010^Talk 19:14, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"I plan to QD, an expected upcoming article, from that user".--If that relieves an iota, of user:Davey2010's concerns (while i am busy fixing articles, that are not 'nukable'), then fine.--Have a nice day. 2001:2020:309:CBE7:19A0:324E:FC75:7E17 (talk) 20:48, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

So why not plan to QD the current ones?. I just don't understand the point of coming here every day requesting someone do something that you're more than capable of doing yourself ? Adding {{qd|A<Number>}} to articles isn't that hard, –Davey2010^Talk 20:56, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nuke, is the first word of this thread.--Maybe you meant to ask, why i 'did QD for' Vrinda AI Build By Fake Navneet Exposed, and also 'QD for' Nasir Zaman, but not for other stuff that should be ' gang nuked' or get mass-QD?--That might be a better question.--At least two of your questions, seem to have an air of non-goodFaith. Be that as it may.--If this thread was regarded as helpful, to anyone (if not you), then fine.--If my reply is perceived as non-rude, then fine.--Good luck, and have a nice week (while i am busy fixing other articles). 2001:2020:309:CBE7:19A0:324E:FC75:7E17 (talk) 00:26, 21 May 2025 (UTC) /2001:2020:309:CBE7:19A0:324E:FC75:7E17 (talk) 00:27, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Done. Re: the article linked in line one: "22:48, 20 May 2025 ... deleted page Human geography of machu picchu (QD A6: The page is a fake or a hoax)". 2001:2020:309:CBE7:19A0:324E:FC75:7E17 (talk) 00:31, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

107.9.140.157

Special:Contribs/107.9.140.157 - that user is intentionally creating hoaxes about highways. The highways with those numbers exist, but the descriptions are incorrect. Their pages should be nuked and they should be blocked as they are on English Wikipedia. 166.107.163.11 (talk) 23:44, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Everything nuked. User blocked. -- Auntof6 (talk) 00:03, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

49.37.116.120

This IP address has been creating constantly test articles that have been deleted via Quick Deletion, however this user has deleted a QD notice of a article previusly discussed and deleted, and that’s not the first time. Emolga826 (any problem?) 05:24, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Emolga826: Previously discussed article deleted (for the 3rd time) and salted. Another cleaned up, but feel free to nominate for QD or RFD if you see fit. The other article is at RFD. Have I covered everything? -- Auntof6 (talk) 11:23, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Palestinian Jews

Request for protection at Palestinian Jews which is target for on-going IP socks. CountryANDWestern (talk) 15:56, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@CountryANDWestern: Sorry for the delay in response: there has been no vandalism since less than an hour after you made this request, so 4 days ago. Therefore I don't think any action is needed now, but report again if there are more problems. Thanks. -- Auntof6 (talk) 18:52, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, looks like it's stopped for the moment. I think there were some range blocks that occurred that may be helping to stop it. Will keep an eye and report if it picks up again. There were 7 or 8 days in the last month-ish where the IPs were there. CountryANDWestern (talk) 18:55, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

69.115.128.236

Hello :) Could you please mass-delete pages created by Special:Contributions/69.115.128.236? A3 and G5 apply. It's that LTA who copy-pastes articles about Latin American women from enwiki. Thank you :) ✩ Dream Indigo ✩ 20:55, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Voice-actors in 'the stable' of user:Mia9542

Voice-actor advertising, diff

simple.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Kenny_James&diff=10275074&oldid=10270881

Another voice-actor advert, Mike Vaughn.--Deleted at En-wiki,if asked.--I 'will QD' that one, now. 2001:2020:309:CBE7:C923:C352:F84F:8155 (talk) 02:19, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Steps have been taken for both articles, including 'one QD'. 2001:2020:309:CBE7:C923:C352:F84F:8155 (talk) 02:26, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

We dont need a topic on the administrators noticeboard for raising a QD. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 13:26, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Edit warring: repeatedly putting back "promo"; warring against edit by user:Aunt of 6, and against another distinguished user's edit. See diff,

simple.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Kenny_James&diff=10281269&oldid=10276491
. 2001:2020:309:CBE7:12D:9A39:273A:D21B (talk) 20:38, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Archival of Talk:Main page non-working again...

I think in the past we had a setp, that a bot would archive the discissions on that page, at the moment, it looks like the bot isn't operating. Eptalon (talk) 11:31, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hoax

Pak-Yul.--'Google search, and hoax it seems'. 2001:2020:309:CBE7:1C0C:D9B2:52E5:7040 (talk) 15:54, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

not an admin -

Done - a6-tagged as agreed nothing comes up, Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 16:27, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

IP Block

Please block the IP who is messaging me here about their block on en-Wiki. Thanks! - UtherSRG (talk) 20:24, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I was just trying to add etymologies!!!! :'o 191.95.48.8 (talk) 20:51, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

IP was blocked. Block has expired. -- Auntof6 (talk) 19:01, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Legal threats at Gurjar clans

User:TruetellerKayT, who presumably is a sock anyway, is making legal threats at Gurjar clans. CountryANDWestern (talk) 02:31, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think what they said in the edit summary is a direct theat per se. They are just saying it might be libel. I'll have a word with them. fr33k man 02:45, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

BTW, defamation isn't a crime, it's a tort (a civil matter), just FYI. fr33k man 02:57, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Mass removal of templates

2A00:23C7:DC80:D701:7DD2:C59E:B48B:108D is continuously removing stub and other templates from pages. Could an admin please take a look? DreamRimmer (talk) 08:41, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I blocked that /64. But there are quite a few of edits that needs to be checked, I have reverted a few; I'd appreciate if others can look into those as well.-- BRP^ever 11:28, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@DreamRimmer: It looks like the remaining changes where something was removed are okay. The templates I saw being removed were mostly okay, such as removing stub templates from articles that aren't stubs. -- Auntof6 (talk) 19:07, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Shenanigans? user:151.188.137.230

After my edit (turning a redirect into a disambig),
simple.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ja&diff=10272684&oldid=10272434

, thereafter some 'trouble' began.

Codex (disambiguation). Trying to have the disambig deleted. Earlier,

reverting the following disambig pages, ja, or
simple.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ja&diff=10272684&oldid=10272434

Ascend,
XEC, or simple.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=XEC&diff=10288931&oldid=10282834
.
An unhappy camper? Wiki-hounding (a minor case)? 2001:2020:303:BB75:65C1:ABAD:9A2B:B55 (talk) 17:09, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see any time you engaged with this user on a talk page to discuss the concerns. Consider doing that before reporting it to a noticeboard. CountryANDWestern (talk) 17:24, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Article move

Hey, I created an article in my userspace titled User:JohnSkirbe/Daniel Finkelman and believe it meets the guidelines for mainspace. It has been over a week since I tagged it for review. Could an administrator please review and consider moving it to the main namespace?

Thank you! JohnSkirbe (talk) 17:43, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Not an admin -

Not done @JohnSkirbe because the individual isn't notable and would be quickly deleted under A4, Please continue sourcing and expanding it, Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 17:47, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@JohnSkirbe: Actual admin here: The admins don't normally do moves from userspace to mainspace. If your account is not yet autoconfirmed, you can copy and paste the article. We don't even have the requested move template you put on the page, if that's what you meant by tagging for review. If you're looking for review, you could request that at Simple talk -- it's not an admin-only task. -- Auntof6 (talk) 19:12, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing at en-wiki (about 'sardine-tool for software or whatever')

Kipper tool. no mention at en-wiki.--please consider to do online search and/or putting hoax-tag.--I want no further part in this (but plan to work on other articles). 2001:2020:309:CBE7:AD1E:4E81:9EC4:B165 (talk) 16:23, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: if i do not put 'hoax-tag myself', then i usually never go to Simple-talk (about hoaxes), and have not been there - this time either.--I (still) want no further part in this (but plan to work on other articles). 2001:2020:309:CBE7:AD1E:4E81:9EC4:B165 (talk) 16:25, 28 May 2025 (UTC) /2001:2020:309:CBE7:AD1E:4E81:9EC4:B165 (talk) 16:27, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Operation Kurojaro (2025). no mention at en-wiki.--please consider to do online search and/or putting hoax-tag.--I want no further part in this (but plan to work on other articles). 2001:2020:309:CBE7:AD1E:4E81:9EC4:B165 (talk) 22:00, 28 May 2025 (UTC) /original poster[reply]

Every project is run independently. No project’s content takes precedence over any other’s. What exists in another Wikipedia project has no bearing on what shall exist here. Steven1991 (talk) 03:10, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

QD nonsense (is that what this is)?

One name in the title, but a 'totally different name' in the lede.--I am not comfortable taking this to Simple-talk ('for whatever reason'). 2001:2020:303:BB75:3CC2:307E:962A:5791 (talk) 12:14, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The name in the title, seems to only be in one en-wiki article. But that is a football-player from another country 'in the same part of the continent'.--If any of this was helpful, then fine. 2001:2020:303:BB75:3CC2:307E:962A:5791 (talk) 12:17, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding speedy deletion of Satish Raj

Hello, I would like to respectfully raise a concern about the recent speedy deletion of the article Satish Raj.

The deletion tag was added by 2001:2020:303:BB75:3CC2:307E:962A:5791, who mentioned that "if the article is not on English Wikipedia, then it is not notable on Simple Wikipedia." I believe this is a misunderstanding of Wikipedia's notability guidelines, as notability should be based on reliable sources, not presence on another language Wikipedia.

Within seconds, I added the {wait} tag and politely asked for clarification, but the page was deleted before any response could be provided. The article was not a draft—it included a complete biography, awards, categories and references.

As someone contributing with sincerity, I’m left unsure what the actual issue was, and feel discouraged. I also noticed the IP who tagged the page had no visible user profile or significant edit history. My concern is whether editors should be allowed to tag articles for deletion without review, especially if they are not established contributors. It may lead to confusion or even feel like a personal attack to new users.

I deeply respect the Wikipedia guidelines and the work of administrators. If I’ve posted this in the wrong place, I sincerely apologize. I’m only trying to understand the process better and ensure good-faith contributions are given a fair chance.

Thank you. 🙏 Moulyags (talk) 14:53, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I deleted the page because I did not find a claim of notability listed. It had nothing to do with whether or not it exists on enwiki. We have thousands of pages here that enwiki doesn't have. Regards fr33k man 18:36, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oldest people

There's some sort of edit warring going on at Oldest people. I spent some hours this morning to check the sources an clean up everything. I'm tired of it. Please protect the page and also review the changes of Дејан2021 (talk • contribs • CA • deleted contribs • nuke contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log). The account's been blocked on enwiki related to the same problems as here. - Barras talk 14:56, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have blocked the user from editing the page and protected the page. If the situation gets resolved through communication, user can be unblocked.-- BRP^ever 15:30, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot! -Barras talk 15:38, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@BRPever and @Barras, I already said that I listed the main sources, I updated the page thoroughly and accurately, however, the user Barras, removed 80% of the content, replacing it with the wrong content and with only Top 10, instead of Top 100 oldest people ever, so the best solution would be, do you want Top 10 or Top 100? Дејан2021 (talk) Дејан2021 (talk) 16:58, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Дејан2021 Hi, I'd say we keep it to top 10 that makes it fairly easier to update to make sure it's accurate. Also, readers are generally only interested in top ten and having a list of 100 makes it unnecessarily long, and adds a lot to maintenance work. BRP^ever 23:01, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@BRPever, Ok, I agree too, although I managed to regularly update the Top 100 as well, and the Top 10 will be perfectly fine and easier after I do the formatting later and add more References (one other independent source for each person from Top 10). As for living people, they will be in accordance with the official data of GRG and LQ, combining both sources, because some cases are not validated by both organizations, and for our article it is enough that it is validated by at least one organization, such as GWR, GRG, ESO and LQ... Дејан2021 (talk) 05:50, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I just finished formatting, completing and adding more sources, is everything ok now? Дејан2021 (talk) 10:28, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Cross-wiki promotion & likely conflict of interest

Regarding users...

Pugliese3 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Sapienstoonz (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

These users are engaging in cross-wiki promotion of Fernando Nano Sosa. Each is blocked at the Spanish Wikipedia for (per translation): "Creating pages or edits for self-promotion: Account with particular purpose + Conflict of interest."

Here at Simple, they are creating articles about him and his single film, 47, el muerto. They are adding him to TV shows as if he is a notable aspect of its creation. They are creating articles like Horror_and_Fantasy_Cinema_in_Argentina#Historical_Revisionism_and_Political_Horror to attempt to frame his work as vital. I issued each a ONESTRIKE warning ([1] [2]) regarding their spamming/promotion of Sosa a couple of days ago. Today they returned to editing about Sosa at the now deleted Sosa article. I'm requesting admin review to determine whether their actions necessitate a reciprocal block. CountryANDWestern (talk) 01:32, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Disruptive IP

For the past few weeks, 2001:2020:309:CBE7:F5D9:160D:93C2:8187 (talk · contribs · (/64) · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) and its associated IP addresses have shown a pattern of making spurious claims about well-sourced articles being “non-notable” (e.g. 1, 2, 3), and abusing the QD function (e.g. 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9). This is highly disrespectful to other contributors. The same range of IP addresses has also engaged in spam-like behaviour on the Simple Talk page (e.g. 8, 9, 10, 11). Steven1991 (talk) 09:47, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Requesting Check user here to stop this long term abuse and to know actual active and sleeper accounts hiding behind these IPs to damage the project. 2400:C600:531F:86ED:4034:C2FF:FE8A:1CEE (talk) 14:10, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

CheckUser does not link IP addresses to individual accounts though. What makes it tricky is that the IP user is hopping back and forth with slightly different addresses of the same range. Steven1991 (talk) 16:47, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of QD tags (i.e. at Sejwal (caste), and other articles): admins might want to check out which persons in this discussion, are involved in that. Diff,
simple.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sejwal_%28caste%29&diff=10299851&oldid=10299688
. 2001:2020:309:CBE7:247D:46C0:A810:7B74 (talk) 17:48, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Some of them were removed because you had abused the QD function, including removal by admins when you were using other IP addresses to do so. Instead of reconsidering your actions, you continue deflecting it onto others. I am hardly convinced that you are participating in good faith. Steven1991 (talk) 17:51, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

i have put back QD-tag in Sejwal (caste), see edit @17:51. 2001:2020:309:CBE7:247D:46C0:A810:7B74 (talk) 17:54, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Auntof6 @FusionSub @Fr33kman Would you mind having a look at this issue? Steven1991 (talk) 17:55, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Non-authorized removal of QD-tags, has now happened again. 2001:2020:309:CBE7:247D:46C0:A810:7B74 (talk) 17:59, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Because you have been abusing the function to the point that it can be considered disruptive, if not vandalism, depending on context. It is better to avoid such IDIDNTHEARTHAT behaviour, and engage constructively when this is a collaborative project. Steven1991 (talk) 18:02, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Look, there is a slim chance that you can keep "your" article Sejwal (caste), and that is by you (or anyone) taking it to Delete-discussion or AfD.--However, the QD-tag is fair, but maybe you can find a 'sympathetic user' that can 'convert' the QD, into an AfD. 2001:2020:309:CBE7:247D:46C0:A810:7B74 (talk) 18:09, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That article is not written by me. I am not involved in that topic area. I am commenting on your behavioural pattern as a third-party observer. Would you please learn to listen to others’ concerns? Steven1991 (talk) 18:11, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop placing QD tags using notability as a reason. Lack of notability is not qd criteria, and lack of an enwiki article isn't either. You can see all the valid reasons at Wikipedia:Deletion policy.- FusionSub (Talk page) (Contributions) 18:17, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Someone reports that the IP user is continuing the same behaviour. It does not seem to have the intention to stop. The Talk page warning that he/she had been given yesterday was also removed by him/her. Steven1991 (talk) 12:49, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

New QD-tag (as of 18:21). Justification has been 'improved'. 2001:2020:309:CBE7:247D:46C0:A810:7B74 (talk) 18:24, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Removal has happened yet again, this time by ChenzwBot.--Someone else might need to revert that edit, by that Bot. 2001:2020:309:CBE7:247D:46C0:A810:7B74 (talk) 18:29, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The bot rightfully did so. It has also left a warning on your Talk page. Desisting from it is the best course of action for you. Steven1991 (talk) 18:30, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

They're now placing deletion requests/opinions at article talk pages rather than taking action themselves: 1, 2, 3, 4. It's funny, in these edits and in others, they're commenting that they're too busy working on other articles to take action but I'm not really seeing a lot of "fix[ing] articles that have passed Delete" like they say they're busy doing.... CountryANDWestern (talk) 09:57, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@FusionSub Is it possible for your team to handle this? The IP user seems to be causing substantial disruptions to the platform. The IP user has no intention to desist either. It continues the said abuse in Wikipedia:Sandbox. Steven1991 (talk) 16:19, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Sejwal (caste)#Needs Delete (or AfD).--The sooner, the better.--After that, let the chips fall where they may. 2001:2020:309:CBE7:890B:9EEE:6387:3E54 (talk) 16:17, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Not here to build an encyclopedia

The account User:CountryANDWestern was created just a couple of weeks before and aggressively tagging articles for deletion, like this one, Winston Churchill as a writer, without even trying to find a source for notable entities. I am requesting checkuser here as this user is clearly not new but a block evading sockpuppet who is trying to damage the aim of constructive encyclopedia. Will object this behaviour from a newbie. 2400:C600:531F:86ED:4034:C2FF:FE8A:1CEE (talk) 13:32, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There are other reasons newer users may have more experience than a typical new user. CountryANDWestern (talk) 13:38, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, most block evading sock puppets do provide this beautiful excuse of clean start. Anyways, I found your way of editing objectionable to the actual aim of constructive encyclopedia. So just need another set of eyes here, to check if we are dealing with the block evading returning scammer. 2400:C600:531F:86ED:4034:C2FF:FE8A:1CEE (talk) 14:07, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

His edits seem more reliable than yours. -Barras talk 14:09, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Barras offwiki canvassing? 2400:C600:531F:86ED:4034:C2FF:FE8A:1CEE (talk) 14:11, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

What a great example of assuming good faith… yes, anyone who disagrees with you on this post is clearly being canvassed. You caught me. CountryANDWestern (talk) 14:22, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It might be a good idea to "ride" on user:CountryANDWestern, so that s/he provides inline references (also for tall claims).--However, the QD of that Churchill article, does seem fair.--The way forward: provide diffs (also in the future), if the user seems to be editing in an objectionable manner. 2001:2020:309:CBE7:247D:46C0:A810:7B74 (talk) 17:33, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Got an example of places where I’ve failed to provide sources or wrote “tall claims”? CountryANDWestern (talk) 17:39, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No one has provided diffs (yet), which convincingly ties user:CountryANDWestern, to 'bad stuff'.--One should have good-faith (and 'more diffs', if one has complaints beyond the complaint about 'Churhchill, the writer'). 2001:2020:309:CBE7:247D:46C0:A810:7B74 (talk) 18:17, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I see nothing wrong with CountryANDWestern's editing. You, however, are coming across an disruptive. I suggest you drop this conversation and move on. fr33k man 18:31, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

+1 - Most established users here are aware C&W is a CLEANSTART account and fwiw CLEANSTARTS aren't forbidden (unless C&W is an LTA/sock which I'm assuming isn't the case here).

The title of this thread is also misleading as tagging articles and reporting LTAs is improving and building the encyclopedia. Not every edit here needs to be article-expansion/created related.

Provide diffs that C&W is an LTA and or not here to build an encyclopedia and your complaint will be taken a lot more seriously.

Lastly; WP:RFCU is that way →. –Davey2010^Talk 20:34, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

What do you really want to convey? Steven1991 (talk) 19:32, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello to all of you, yes, RFCU is that way, but there are two basic problems here. While I, as a Checkuser can make a link between a named user an an an IP address, I am not allowed to tell anyone. And secondly, the checkuser policy forbids what is called a 'fishing expedition'. So, unless there's a concrete request, there's little to do here. And I don't know if you know them, but the Salem witch trials were started by a group of adolescent girls, who accused a number of people; at least 30 people died. The villagers believed those teenage girls; and iirc the teenage girls, who admitted they invented most of it, a few years later weren't even punished; that was in the 1600s, so 400 years ago. Eptalon (talk) 20:43, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm officially turning down your request for a checkuser. fr33k man 20:39, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]