Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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 A message may therefore have been archived.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.


Repeated vandalism[change source]

See 216.152.176.170 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • nuke contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log). —Justin (koavf)TCM☯ 18:23, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

No admin is going to block this IP unless it has warning templates, which it doesn't currently. Anyhow, you're supposed to report vandalism to Wikipedia:Vandalism in progress. J991 18:26, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

Disney is back[change source]

Our Disney friend is back (or we have another one), this time changing the dates of movie releases. The IP is different, at this time I have blocked the IP for two weeks, but keep watch on any changes to dates on Disney related pages. I would not bother with warnings, and simply block on sight.--Peterdownunder (talk) 11:39, 16 December 2017 (UTC)

Have blocked one of his IPs for one month, but is a mobile IP so probably dynamic. I have also added page protection to the pages for 6 months which might give us a break for a while. --Peterdownunder (talk) 11:22, 23 December 2017 (UTC)
And it is still going on - now blocking on sight for six months, and increasing page protections where needed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Peterdownunder (talkcontribs)

Bad Username[change source]

Have just encountered a user who is spelling an obscene phrase using Hangul. The user, "ㅈㅣㄹㄹ ㅜㅐㅌ ㄷㅇㄷㅈ" (Kiss the cock) vandalised McDonalds and included their username in the edit. What do we do with these? I assume to report here since I don't know anywhere else to report a bad username. Thanks DaneGeld (talk) 15:04, 18 December 2017 (UTC)

Reports for bad usernames should be reported here as WP:UAA redirects this noticeboard. The user has been blocked indefinitely by Djsasso. --Eurodyne (talk) 18:00, 18 December 2017 (UTC)

AFD closure 4 days overdue[change source]

Hi. I was just wondering if any of the administrators (maybe someone not involved in the shenanigans going on there) was free to take a look at the Abdulrahman Elsamni RFD please? It was due to be closed around 9AM UTC almost 4 days ago, and it's still sitting there. I'm aware it's a rat's nest but it needs looking at please. Cheers. DaneGeld (talk) 22:54, 20 December 2017 (UTC)

I'm recusing myself because I initiated the request, but I'm sure another admin will get to it. It's not unusual for RfDs to go several days or more beyond the indicated date, even when they're not as messy as this one. Remember that we're all volunteers here and very little is truly urgent. --Auntof6 (talk) 23:19, 20 December 2017 (UTC)
I understand your situation completely. I would imagine that given the chance, most people on here would recuse themselves from tidying that lot up! I can't begin to imagine how long it will take and with the Christmas holiday in full swing, well...let's just leave it hang. Family first :) Have a good Christmas. DaneGeld (talk) 11:41, 21 December 2017 (UTC)
7 days is only a minimum, deletions often stay up longer. No need to post here everytime they go long. -DJSasso (talk) 11:43, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

Is this a bad username?[change source]

Asssseatwer (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • nuke contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log) contains the string "ass" which could make the username mean "ass s seat wer". Probably so since the account is used for vandalism. ««« SOME GADGET GEEK »»» (talk) 03:01, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

I agree, indefinitely blocked.--Peterdownunder (talk) 06:26, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

Nobel prize vandal[change source]

The Noble Prize vandal is still active, usually adding "davidabdelmohsen" to the articles. All the edits are coming from Egypt, so I have range blocked the IPs for another 3 months.--Peterdownunder (talk) 11:25, 23 December 2017 (UTC)

Request for protection: Semi-protected (Temporary)[change source]

Could I please request Temporary Semi-protection on Kookaburra, it appears that a number of IP edits (potentially from the same pool) are engaged in a revert war with User:ErikvanB. Could we get the article restricted to registered users only for a bit until we can figure out what's what? Thanks! DaneGeld (talk) 21:24, 24 December 2017 (UTC)

I have semi-protected the page; autoconfirmed is needed for editing. The protection will expire two weeks from now. We should re-assess the issue mid-january--Eptalon (talk) 22:30, 24 December 2017 (UTC)

Reminder about end-of-year RfDs that result in deletion[change source]

Any RfD that is initiated in 2017 but closed as a deletion in 2018 will require special handling when deleting the page. This is because the usual delete reason for deletion by RfD automatically builds the RfD page name using the current year. Since the page names for these RfDs will include the year 2017, the automatic reason will be incorrect.

Instead of using the automatically generated reason, we will need to enter the reason manually. Just copy the RfD page name, paste it into the manual reason box, and put square brackets around it so that there's a convenient link in case it's needed. --Auntof6 (talk) 05:58, 25 December 2017 (UTC)

At the time of this writing, four RfDs are left unclosed; Of these, 2-3 are relatively clear cases. Even though this will shorten the discussion, I propose that all current RfDs are closed in 2017. That way, handling remains simpler. --Eptalon (talk) 13:09, 31 December 2017 (UTC)

Baring that, its probably not that big a deal if a link is broken, especially since you could just create a redirect avoiding the whole problem. -DJSasso (talk) 13:11, 31 December 2017 (UTC)

Looks like we're OK for this year. Any new requests will be dated 2018. Thanks to User:Eptalon for closing many of the outstanding requests. --Auntof6 (talk) 01:55, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

Question about Revision Deletion[change source]

Is it possible to just hide part of a particular revision of a page, or does the whole revision get removed? I'm asking because I'd like to get an edit summary on Acceleration due to gravity hidden under RD2 (I'm not even sure if that qualifies, but it's the closest I can get) for use of offensive language. Any thoughts on if it's possible to leave the revision and just remove the edit summary? DaneGeld (talk) 00:03, 28 December 2017 (UTC)

I have hidden the edit summary, of the resp. revision. As you said, the languagage was inappropriate--Eptalon (talk) 00:09, 28 December 2017 (UTC)
@DaneGeld: FYI, revdel gives a choice of hiding the edit summary, the revision text, or both. :) --Auntof6 (talk) 01:33, 28 December 2017 (UTC)
@DaneGeld: Actually, revdel gives a choice of hiding the edit summary, the revision text, the identity of the editor, or any combination thereof. :) StevenJ81 (talk) 15:45, 28 December 2017 (UTC)
OK, so there's a third option. DaneGeld wasn't asking about that, so I answered about the things he/she was asking about. --Auntof6 (talk) 16:00, 28 December 2017 (UTC)
To be honest that edit summary wasn't really revdel worthy, swears while being not polite are not grossly offensive which is the requirement. Grossly offensive was intended to mean things like hate speech. The particular swear that was used would fall under "ordinary rudeness" which is specifically mentioned as not being able to be RD2'd. -DJSasso (talk) 05:12, 31 December 2017 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection[change source]

Due to repeated vandalism/attacks by a globally locked long-term abuser, I hereby request that my user page be semi-protected for 2-3 weeks. Thank you. —Glendales 22:02, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

 Done Semi-protected for 2 weeks. --Auntof6 (talk) 22:15, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

Two more articles by socks of globally blocked user "Alec Smithson"[change source]

Today I drastically cut back Meteomont from this complex but garbled version. It now matches the article on English WP (en:Meteomont). The sock has also created Ton Fan. This needs attention. It is a comples but garbled machine translation, half in French. I'm not sure that it is even noteworthy or a true art movement. Nothing that this editor or his socks writes can be trusted as true. For further information see en:Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/Alec Smithson. Voceditenore (talk) 07:17, 2 January 2018 (UTC)

Well I'm afraid to say, in this case @Voceditenore:- it can be trusted. The Ton Fan art movement is very, very real and has a very large following in Central Asia and across the world. Ton Fan is characterized by abstract art, proponents like Hsiao Chin, Chen Tao Ming and others made it what it is today, and it's been around since 1956. Hsiao Chin is still alive as are most of the others. DaneGeld (talk) 09:10, 2 January 2018 (UTC)
Thanks, DaneGeld. However, something needs to done about the text of this article. It is not in Simple English and is almost entirely a machine translation from the original French WP version with some additions in English that look very much like they were pasted in verbatim from some other source. I strongly suggest to anyone attempting to fix up this article, that they base it on this version of the French Wikipedia article which was not created by Smithson or his socks. Best Voceditenore (talk) 15:15, 3 January 2018 (UTC)
Article deleted and user blocked. Anyone wishing to write an article about Ton Fan in Simple English is welcome.--Peterdownunder (talk) 20:46, 3 January 2018 (UTC)
Thanks for that Peter. As I say, the subject is absolutely genuine, so I'll put the article on Ton Fan together and put it out here as soon as possible. DaneGeld (talk) 21:13, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

Concern about IP:119.30.38.147[change source]

This IP:119.30.38.147 wrote abusive, insulting bad words on my talk page. IP wrote in Bengali but in English script! For understanding, I can explain some phrase, like: fucker, stupid etc, and s/he feels awful to look me! Also given the threat to change my personal style/getup!! All about abusive personal harassment and extremely flout to my personal life. I have concern and also ask for hiding this edit history and take necessary steps to that kind of stupidity. It is all over the personal issues where he mentioned Jimmy Wales and the other Wikipedian Nahid Sultan too. Another IP address created an article about myself where all the information gathered from the personal website, social sites, IMDb link etc and which is kind of Copyvio and too much harassment. S/he also wrote the same thing on my English Wikipedia talk page. Moheen Reeyad (talk) 16:34, 2 January 2018 (UTC)

I have revision-deleted three edits to the page. I do not think oversight is necessary; few admins here understand the languages of the Indian subcontinent (except perhaps English or Portuguese). As the editor in question does not edit here much, I don't believe blocking would be appropriate, esp. not without proper warnings. To get the resp. edits removed from your talk page at EnWP, you should address the admins there. (at en:Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard or one of its subpages). --Eptalon (talk) 21:14, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

Jupiter (mythology)[change source]

Please semi-protect due to a high level of complex changes, addition of challengeable material without sources, and other disruptive edits. —Glendales 21:22, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

I have edit protected the page for a day.--Eptalon (talk) 21:27, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

Protection for Porcelain[change source]

Hello, Porcelain might need a protection, also a fix as some of the vandalism were mixed up through time. Also, I believe ORES should be enabled here.--HakanIST (talk) 17:10, 6 January 2018 (UTC)

Already reverted back to to the last good version. -DJSasso (talk) 19:14, 6 January 2018 (UTC)

BeginnerBot[change source]

This user appears to be a bot unauthorized anywhere which is adding hyperlinks in quantity where wikilinks would suffice.   — Jeff G. ツ 14:17, 8 January 2018 (UTC)

Blocked as unapproved bot. -DJSasso (talk) 15:37, 8 January 2018 (UTC)

FurryBeast[change source]

I'm suspicious about User:FurryBeast. Not only are they possibly committing a WP:ONESTRIKE violation (they have been disruptive and they are indeffed on en) but their actions also suggest that they might be a sock, possibly of User:Jason Dude Smith. Any thoughts on this? J991 16:23, 8 January 2018 (UTC)

Both FurryBeast (talk · contribs) and Jason Dude Smith (talk · contribs) have been indefinitely blocked on English Wikipedia today. CheckUser confirms that both are socks of long-term nuisance editor JaySmith2018. See en:Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/JaySmith2018. Voceditenore (talk) 17:08, 8 January 2018 (UTC)
Confirmed as socking here plus some sleepers. I was going to block him earlier but I couldn't remember the other name Jason Dude Smith. Thanks. -DJSasso (talk) 18:02, 8 January 2018 (UTC)

Protection for Doreen Mantle[change source]

The page Doreen Mantle is getting constantly vandalized by these block evading IPs of Dopenguins. I think protection would be helpful here (and possibly could be applied to the other affected articles as well). J991 19:20, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

There is a reason I am not doing that which I would rather not get into here per en:WP:BEANS. There isn't a rush to revert these edits so don't stress to much about them. I revert them as I see them. -DJSasso (talk) 19:27, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

Bad username[change source]

Riannanhasamassivepussy999 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • nuke contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log) Disruptive, maybe a personal attack? 129.67.119.169 (talk) 22:42, 14 January 2018 (UTC)

Indeffed. --Auntof6 (talk) 22:50, 14 January 2018 (UTC)

Calling enwiki admins[change source]

I know we have an admin or two here who is also an admin on enwiki. Could one such person please check the following two new articles here to see if they are the same as those that were deleted on enwiki:

Thanks. --Auntof6 (talk) 09:22, 18 January 2018 (UTC)

The first one is mostly the same but not identical, there are sections that don't exist on the en version that do on ours. If you want the source let me know and I can email it to you to compare. The second one is closer to being the same but not identical. It too has atleast once section that isn't in the other. -DJSasso (talk) 11:49, 18 January 2018 (UTC)

Doreen Mantle (again)[change source]

This is kind of related to the above thread about protection, but since I'm not asking for it and that's nearly 5 days old, I thought I'd start a new one. Doreen Mantle, as pointed out is being messed around with by block evaders. Even now, after being supposedly put back to a version pre-vandalism, it's still wrong. There are discrepancies between our version and the one on the English Wikipedia - she apparently IS South African born, which we keep undoing, although we can't decide where - EN says Cape Town, we say Johannesburg. Perhaps if we put our article right, Dopenguins will leave it alone. DaneGeld (talk) 10:03, 18 January 2018 (UTC)

@DaneGeld: Why is it that you haven't left any warning messages for Dopenguins? If you expect the admins to do something about this, you could at least do your part and warn the user that there's a problem with their edits. --Auntof6 (talk) 10:14, 18 January 2018 (UTC)
@Auntof6: - I haven't left warning messages for the editor concerned because I've not been in a position to catch them physically editing. I'm doing my part by coming to speak to other editors where there's been a discussion or comments about the editor, and making suggestions about what we could do. (Redacted my next statement) DaneGeld (talk) 15:49, 18 January 2018 (UTC) EDITED: 20:29, 18 January 2018 (UTC)
It comes across as you complaining that we aren't doing anything about it is what I think she isn't saying. If you don't think the admins are aware of this editor then that is crazy. It is just one of many socks that have come over the years. We are dealing with it. If you haven't read it before you should take a look at en:WP:RBI. Basically the more you talk about it the worse you make it. -DJSasso (talk) 16:01, 18 January 2018 (UTC)
(Redacted my statement: Have read RBI and fully understand why I'm not helping fix this by banging on about it.) DaneGeld (talk) 20:29, 18 January 2018 (UTC)
She was just asking what you were doing about the situation before you complained about the admins. It was a fair question, but if you want to act like a child and take your ball and go home that is fine as well. We are all volunteers here. -DJSasso (talk) 18:56, 18 January 2018 (UTC)
(Redacted this comment - having read RBI I know I am now in the wrong, completely, and being a spoiled ass will do nothing to help it.) DaneGeld (talk) 20:29, 18 January 2018 (UTC)
The en version is also in a state of constant flux because they are doing it there too. All edits from a blocked editor get reverted, good or not. If you know a the correct version go ahead and fix it, that being said I wouldn't count on the en version as being the correct version as we have been fighting him there as well and some of their changes there just haven't been reverted because others have edited inbetween making edits harder to undo. I would also note it isn't just that article they are targeting, its 10s of others so changing one to their perferred version won't stop them, it is actually likely to encourage which is why all blocked editors edits are reverted good or not. Most of the pages they have been targetting have been protected at the moment. As mentioned above this one hasn't been for reasons. -DJSasso (talk) 11:39, 18 January 2018 (UTC)