Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Wikipedia:ANI)
Jump to: navigation, search

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 A message may therefore have been archived.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 WP:CHU to change your user name or take another user name.
  • See WP:RFCU for CheckUser requests.
  • See WP:OS for oversight.

The "Yok Kek Nguan" vandals[change source]

Three anon editors from IPs registered to the US have been repeatedly vandalizing (T·E·H·L·RSudan by changing the president to "Yok Kek Nguan" and vice-president to "Paul Mawein Ajang". I don't think blocking the IPs would stop this so maybe protection would be an alternative. ««« SOME GADGET GEEK »»» (talk) 20:59, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

Before we do that, are we sure that they don't have a new president and vice president? I don't know where to check that for Sudan. --Auntof6 (talk) 21:03, 28 February 2018 (UTC)
Oh, definitely not. Two news stories: [1] and [2]. ««« SOME GADGET GEEK »»» (talk) 21:20, 28 February 2018 (UTC)
OK, thanks. I've semi-protected for three months. --Auntof6 (talk) 21:36, 28 February 2018 (UTC)
I notice that (T·E·H·L·RSouth Sudan and more recently, (T·E·H·L·RUnited Nations have been the target too, so I have range-blocked for 2 weeks. Chenzw  Talk  01:22, 1 March 2018 (UTC)
Now we have an "IP-hopper" on these pages. See the revision history for the vandalizing IP addresses. All of them have done the same thing and this for needs an investigation.««« SOME GADGET GEEK »»» (talk) 18:36, 5 March 2018 (UTC)
The vandals are back. ««« SOME GADGET GEEK »»» (talk) 20:49, 12 April 2018 (UTC)

block request[change source]

Special:Contribs/2600:1000:B104:1305:A18A:6EC5:18B1:1925 Please block this IP address. vandalism --Rxy (talk) 22:21, 25 March 2018 (UTC)

Already posted at WP:VIP. This IP is engaging in libelous edits on high-visibility BLP's and articles. Vermont (talk) 22:25, 25 March 2018 (UTC)
I blocked Special:Contribs/2600:1000:b10e:a150:281d:a83d:7407:5337 . feel free to modify or unblock it if necessary. Thanks! --Rxy (talk) 10:58, 26 March 2018 (UTC)
A local block? Bold move...stewards don't usually do that on wikis with active administrators. -DJSasso (talk) 11:02, 26 March 2018 (UTC)
It's an xwiki LTA that made a bunch of accounts last night and used them to vandalize on this wiki. Vermont (talk) 11:06, 26 March 2018 (UTC)
No I get why it was blocked, but if it was a xwiki thing, usually its a xwiki lock and not a local block. I just can't remember the last time I saw a steward make a local block. Saw one do a CU here recently too. Just figured in both cases it was new stewards. No big deal was just surprised. -DJSasso (talk) 11:08, 26 March 2018 (UTC)
Yes, "Usually" so. Do you think this is "usual" status after look at created accounts of Special:Contribs/Mastervandyrandy, Special:Contribs/Randallvanderal Special:Contribs/2600:1000:b10e:a150:281d:a83d:7407:5337 and that evasion of Special:Contribs/2600:1000:B104:1305:A18A:6EC5:18B1:1925 ? In urgent cases are stewards may take an actions. e.g. Special:Redirect/logid/1131332, Special:Redirect/logid/1093285, m:Special:Redirect/logid/2427082. This time is really no available local admins. I don't want to take a global block when vandalism occured in one wiki only (except Open Proxy or case of foreseen to spread at another wiki). --Rxy (talk) 11:31, 26 March 2018 (UTC) modify wrong copy and paste.--Rxy (talk) 11:50, 26 March 2018 (UTC)
Yes, they certainly can. I didn't look to see how many accounts were created, just the one you blocked locally which only made two edits so I didn't see the urgency so was surprised. And you only posted a couple minutes before I did, which to me meant there was an admin around, however, looking now at the block log though it appears you did the block hours before you posted which I didn't realize when I commented. -DJSasso (talk) 12:29, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

Geometry related articles[change source]

Geometry related articles which were delete earlier have been recreated with the redirect to polygon and polygon hold no information about these subjects. So I think it's best to delete them. There are many to mark it for QD so requesting it here. Thanks-BRP ever 05:23, 28 March 2018 (UTC)

The reason for the earlier deletes was that the articles were unsimplified from enwiki. If they're recreated as redirects, I don't see a problem. Maybe you could go through RFD with these if you think redirects shouldn't be kept. --Auntof6 (talk) 05:41, 28 March 2018 (UTC)
If you see in the history of some of those deleted articles you may find that some of them were created as redirects and were later modified into copies of enwiki. And if the reason was that I do not have problem with keeping those redirects with the closely related pages. I was just a little bit confused about those earlier and newer version. Thanks-BRP ever 06:18, 28 March 2018 (UTC)

Does this count as a bad username?[change source]

Hi. I wonder if I could seek administrator opinion on a user I have found in RC, User:Gangbang42056. In accordance with policy, I will make the user aware that I have raised a request here. I want to query whether the username concerned, whilst not specifically covered in WP:USERNAME, could be seen as unacceptable due to the sexual meaning of the word "Gangbang". Could I get some input on whether it's acceptable or not please? Thank you. DaneGeld (talk) 19:39, 28 March 2018 (UTC)

Edit: User notified - here. DaneGeld (talk) 19:42, 28 March 2018 (UTC)

  • Yes - Gangbang only means one thing ..... It's a no brainer tbh so I obviously support SOFTBLOCKING. –Davey2010Talk 20:44, 28 March 2018 (UTC)
I have obviously lead a very cloistered life. I knew it was a sexual reference, but Google has just opened my eyes as to what it actually is. I didn't even need to bring this to you, it's obviously offensive and covered by the Username policy! My mind will never be the same again... ^.^ DaneGeld (talk) 21:53, 28 March 2018 (UTC)
  • (Non-administrator observation)Yes, but... it's not enough to block immediately on. Considering their only edit is vandalism, and it happened 4 hours ago, I recommend to just leave it be. Also, regarding DaneGeld's comment about searching it on Google. It does have two meanings, at least where I come from. Someone who is a member of a criminal organization, i.e. a gang, is commonly described by that term. In using it for that purpose, there is no sexual implication. Vermont (talk) 21:57, 28 March 2018 (UTC)
  • You're right there are 2 meanings but this troll clearly doesn't mean the gang related term and that's pretty obvious by their vandal edit - this user has a similar name however A) that user's added streetgang stuff to their userpage and B) Hasn't vandalised anywhere hence the leeway given there, When you've dealt with trolls and vandals for a good 4-5 years you can generally see differences between a legit editor and a troll/vandal, Ofcourse if an admin disagrees then cool I shant lose sleep over it however I'm 110% sure it's a troll/vandal, If they want to edit constructively then they can always resign up and a nicer name (No good asking them to ask what they mean by this word as they'll just read this discussion ....). –Davey2010Talk 23:09, 28 March 2018 (UTC)

I have blocked the user for having a bad user name: not because of the sexual implication, but because of the implication of violence. Even if the user didn't have anything negative in mind, people seeing the user name probably would. The user can appeal this if they want. --Auntof6 (talk) 23:28, 28 March 2018 (UTC)

Understandable. Thank you for your clarification, WP:USERNAME wasn't all that clear with their, "Here are ways to avoid offending people...Do not choose something that may be offensive." :-) Vermont (talk) 23:35, 28 March 2018 (UTC)

Threats[change source]

The user has already been blocked, but can someone please look into the threats being posted here? This guy's been hounding en.wikipdia, simple.wikipedia, and the Spanish and French ones for months, with increasingly volatile threats toward Alan Jackson. He has stalked me on both Twitter and Facebook with more of the same. This insane diatribe he's just posted has me convinced that he's seriously out for blood. Global blocking hasn't worked, and I don't wanna keep playing whack-a-mole with his socks across three different wikipedias that I barely edit. Is there any way we or any other Wikipedia can track this guy down and stop him forever? Maybe alert his ISP or something? TenPoundHammer (talk) 06:03, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

I've indefinitely blocked that account here. I don't have the necessary authorization to verify socks or check IP addresses, but maybe some of our admins who do have it will be able to help. --Auntof6 (talk) 06:35, 29 March 2018 (UTC)
@TenPoundHammer: I would suggest contacting the WMF. They have response teams and protocols in place for threats of harm and like actions. I have reported a half dozen or so. They can not tell you there outcome but will take appropriate action. --Enfcer (talk) 14:01, 29 March 2018 (UTC)
That user created another account and left another comment on User talk:TenPoundHammer. I reported it to VIP and I'll sit around and rollback it's edits. Vermont (talk) 14:55, 29 March 2018 (UTC)
I'll take a look in a few minutes. I meant to get looking at it earlier but I have had a busy morning. -DJSasso (talk) 15:56, 29 March 2018 (UTC)
And I also found it adding threats to it's own talk page and pinging TenPoundHammer. If you read closely the text looks serious.-BRP ever 01:21, 30 March 2018 (UTC)

Semi-Protect Google[change source]

Psl631 TALK Contribs 14:17, 1 April 2018 (UTC)

  • The reason why not is as follows: semi-protection only prevents edits by unregistered users, and by accounts that have not been autoconfirmed or confirmed. All the recent vandalism on the page is by a single user registered under various names (that's an inference, but I'm sure it's right). As far as I can see, the page has not been especially targeted by many unregistered users. You could argue that his accounts had not been confirmed, Still, personally, I'm not going to do it. Others will make their own minds up in due course. Macdonald-ross (talk) 15:31, 1 April 2018 (UTC)
Macdonald-ross: It is a cross wiki LTA known as Hoggardhigh. Vermont (talk) 18:22, 1 April 2018 (UTC)

Revision Deletion Request[change source]

See Special:Contributions/K-Pop_Hater_on_Wheëls. A few of those edits could use revision deletion due to their offensive content, per the second bullet in WP:RD. Thanks, Vermont (talk) 11:55, 7 April 2018 (UTC)

I looked at them,and for most, I don't see material that needs to be revision deleted; yes. Some of these edits use language that may be offensive, on the other hand, I expect people to be able to cope with offensive language. Note that English is not my mother tongue, so I leave it up to native-speaking admins to acr, if they feel like it. --Eptalon (talk) 16:03, 7 April 2018 (UTC)
You suppressed the most offensive one. The others aren't really screaming "revdel" to me (except the one on K-pop), but it's not for me to decide, which is why I linked the Special:Contribs page rather than specific diffs. Vermont (talk) 16:09, 7 April 2018 (UTC)
I have also suppressed (revdel, still visible to admins) the K-Pop entry you linked. As for the others, let's see what the native speakers think. --Eptalon (talk) 16:16, 7 April 2018 (UTC)

Buddhism[change source]

Hey, I only note that the article Buddhism have got vandalized by many IP editors, an range of IPs by 2 IPs and they blank the article, replacing content with insult and otherwise vandalize the article. Please can somewone add a temporarily semi-protection to the article? -- Psl631 TALK Contribs 18:30, 11 April 2018 (UTC)

The page is now edit-protected (for a month; you need autoconfirmed flag to edit). --Eptalon (talk) 18:58, 11 April 2018 (UTC)

Please[change source]

please copy this to the user page of Cæsey on english wikipedia (this is an urts appeal) I am autoblocked :(

I am not a sockpuppet of Iniced, and i have never created an account before this one. i tried to create another account to protest just now.. i'm so sorry for creating it.. i know it is not the way to go.. I beg of you to unblock me. i promise i will abide by whatever anyone wants.. I am not a sockpuppet of this user though. i respect your decision, either way. By the way, the account i just created was a user named Stephen Cali. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Cæsey. Stephen Cali (talk) 23:31, 12 April 2018 (UTC) Oops, wrong account.... sorry.. Cæsey 你好! 23:35, 12 April 2018 (UTC) I don't know where else to go... Cæsey (talk) 23:46, 12 April 2018 (UTC) I'll just try to contribute here constructively... Cæsey (talk) 23:48, 12 April 2018 (UTC)

(Non-administrator observation) @Cæsey: For future reference, this is not the place to appeal such blocks. I have left a message on an administrators talk page on the English Wikipedia. I will kindly request that you do not continue posting about this around, as you did on the page for requesting username changes on metawiki, as it's a bit excessive. Thanks, Vermont (talk) 00:08, 13 April 2018 (UTC)

Okay, thanks. 𐌂ᵃᵉˢᵉʸ (talk) 22:58, 14 April 2018 (UTC)

Quite surprised here ![change source]

I’m quite surprised here just wanted to know from Admins here why the same person both account have right of Patrollers ? One is hardly seen active @Gordonrox24: but another last edit is 6 years ago. @Gordonrox2448:with only 56 edits. Just wanted to know in good fait Being a user of Simplle English Wikipedia & my suggestion is give chance to new active users and remove old inactive patrollers which are not active since 1-2 years. MTKASHTALK Contribs 22:35, 13 April 2018 (UTC)

There's no limit on the number of patrollers we have, so inactive users having the right doesn't keep new people from getting it. I can't answer about the two accounts who look like the same person having the right. --Auntof6 (talk) 23:07, 13 April 2018 (UTC)
User:Gordonrox24 is a former Admin, and it is not uncommon, for former Admins to be granted these rights when they leave either through inactivity or by them stepping down, as they are already trusted members of the community. The User:Gordonrox2448 is their alternate account which they list on their User Page and is only accessed when they are on an unsecured computer. This is not uncommon to see either since the main has it, the secondary can also. As far as limits on user numbers there are no limits. We can have every active editor if they met the criteria be Patroller's and or Rollbacker's. It has been debated before about removing old permissions from accounts, but as of right now the only ones that are removed are Admin/Crat/Oversight/Checkuser for inactivity. Your account is only 4 days old, once you have more experience feel free to apply for the Patroller or Rollbacker rights, and an Admin will review the request. -- Enfcer (talk) 23:57, 13 April 2018 (UTC)

‎Rocky Paul 6[change source]

Does any action need to be taken against Rocky Paul 6 (possible indefinite block)? None of their edits are helpful and they don't look like they are here to contribute. J991 17:40, 15 April 2018 (UTC)

Any Kind heart Admin Here[change source]

Any Kind heart Admin here who can grant me fir rollback request? i had file a request for rollback but no reply yet. But i got rejected from Patrollers right after creating many BLP pages. So, i wont make new pages now but i will fight for vandalism. I am here wants to make community better but not any appreciation. i'm active 7-8 hours in a day. Creates 3-4 articles per day but not created any article today since i rejected for patroller rights. If i rejected for rollback right too than also i wont stop helping simple english community cause its my home and i am the family member. Peace ! MTKASHTALK Contribs 20:18, 15 April 2018 (UTC)

Answered on request for Permissions. -- Enfcer (talk) 20:26, 15 April 2018 (UTC)

Request for semi protection on Pol Pot[change source]

Hi. Could I please ask if the administrators would consider putting semi-protection on the article about Pol Pot. There has been several attempts to force information into the article, that Pol Pot committed suicide, most of these attempts have been described as "correcting vandalism", which they're clearly not. All have also been from the same IP range starting, which leads me to believe this could be from the same user. Thanks! DaneGeld (talk) 21:17, 15 April 2018 (UTC)

Since the vandalism is all in the same IP range it is preferred to block the offending IP's, then to semi-protect, I have placed a 1 week range block for that series of IP's. We will see if this helps to stem the tide of vandalism. -- Enfcer (talk) 21:25, 15 April 2018 (UTC)
Thank you. I've got the article on my watchlist, so we'll see if things start to come out of the woodwork elsewhere. DaneGeld (talk) 21:31, 15 April 2018 (UTC)

IP user blanking talk page, offensive edit summaries[change source]

Hi. I'm bringing you the IP User:2600:100D:B102:C6FC:284F:D63C:33CE:3E92. Having already been warned by other users that they aren't allowed to blank their talk page, they've continued to blank it continuously, commenting out notes, claiming harassment and calling one editor an offensive slang word referring to gay people, as well as using foul language in their edit summaries. Can you please look into this? Thanks. DaneGeld (talk) 21:28, 16 April 2018 (UTC)

User Blocked for 31 hours for Bad Behavior, along with revoking talk page access since that is where the main problems stem. -- Enfcer (talk) 22:30, 16 April 2018 (UTC)

Improper closure of Wikipedia:Requests for deletion/Requests/2018/Aditi Sharma (Actress)[change source]

I would like to bring up the recent closure of the above for attention:

  • RfD was closed due to article being deleted per QD G4.

The deletion policy makes it very clear here: "This rule cannot be used if the article was only quickly deleted with no request for deletion.". I note that this (third) version of the article contains a claim to notability: "debuted as a lead role" (emphasis mine), as compared to the earlier two versions (which were deleted per A4, which I don't dispute) which merely assert her acting debut.

Unless we are seeking to rewrite the deletion policy, can we please adhere to procedure? Getting this RfD passed, by the way, will also make QD G4 legitimate in future. Chenzw  Talk  03:33, 19 April 2018 (UTC)

I have to agree here. Speedies are played with too loosely here sometimes. The other bad one is the claim of notability one. If anything can remotely be assumed to be a claim whether its a true claim or not, or makes them notable or not. It can't be speedied. -DJSasso (talk) 13:55, 19 April 2018 (UTC)

Move request on the page Google Mail[change source]

Hi! I tried today to move the page Google Mail to Gmail, because the page title should be the service's correct name. When I clicked "Move page" the move was failed due to example a redirect exists (that title is a redirect to Google Mail) on the title that cannot be overwrited. Please can another editor try to move the page Google Mail to Gmail to make the title is the correct name of the mail service? -- Psl631 talk contributions 15:48, 19 April 2018 (UTC)

 Done I left the old name as a redirect, because there are links to it and because, according to the article, the old name was used in the past. --Auntof6 (talk) 15:58, 19 April 2018 (UTC)

Revision delete[change source]

Please delete the revisions done here and there is one edit summary too. Thanks-BRP ever 02:58, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

That can't be rev deleted. It is just run of the mill vandalism. -DJSasso (talk) 12:39, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

Hulk Hogan[change source]

This is the result of around 90 changes done to the Hulk Hogan page and when I had a proper look at all the changes it seems someone is playing with the page. I reported this problem in the talk page and now watching it happen again and again brings the discussion here. Please have a closer look. Thanks.-BRP ever 11:18, 21 April 2018 (UTC)

(Non-administrator observation) From what I know, that is a LTA whose name I can't remember. They do subtle BLP disruptive editing. I've changed the date to just the year, 2011, when he declared retirement. Hopefully this should stop them from continually changing it further. Vermont (talk) 11:35, 21 April 2018 (UTC)
Ah, so the editor has come back from their recently-expired 1 year block. Persistent case, too; I have applied another block lasting 3 months. Chenzw  Talk  16:05, 21 April 2018 (UTC)