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 A message may therefore have been archived.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.

Hollowww - edit intentions

Hollowww (talk · contribs) has made 804 edits since starting to edit here on June 4. Of those 805 edits, 800 are to their user space, 2 to their user talk, 1 to Wikipedia space, 1 to the template space, and 1 to a main space article. They have made 36 subpages of articles that are unlikely to pass Simple English standards for language and construction.

They are currently blocked on English Wikipedia for sockpuppetry. I asked about their edit intentions on their user talk page and they said "I only want to make and use sandbox there, I don't intend to create articles at the moment" and, when asked what they're writing the drafts/what they intend to do with them, "Just for fun I'd say, I like writing." I see WP:NOTHERE intentions with this account; they don't intend to contribute to the project, just to write their own things for their own "entertainment." Can an admin please review if further discussion or any action is needed with the user? CountryANDWestern (talk) 10:43, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for bringing this to my attention. I can assure you that I never meant to actually publish any articles on the Simple Wikipedia, and that I have been using my sandbox area for personal practice and to learn formatting and editing suitable for Wikipedia. I understand how my edits could have appeared suspicious to you and other editors, and I apologize for creating any misunderstanding that I did. I'm glad to restrict my sandbox activities or follow any recommendations or advice to avoid that this all happens again. -- Hollowww (talk) 12:21, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I note that since you responded to this post, you have made one main space edit and approximately 200 to your user space pages. CountryANDWestern (talk) 01:33, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Mia9542

Mia9542 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

The above user continues to create articles as translations that require clean up from other users or have questionable notability. They have been warned to stop many times, including by an administrator, but continue their article creations. They have not edited anywhere but articles; they have not made any indication that they are aware of the concerns. They are blocked on the English Wikipedia as a sock of a long-term blocked IP address. Please consider a ONESTRIKE application for creating bad pages and not engaging in addressing concerns. CountryANDWestern (talk) 19:54, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Imho their articles should be nuked and they should be blocked per ONESTRIKE, All of their articles are more or less one-liner stubs none of which contain any sources at all, –Davey2010^Talk 19:59, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I blocked the user. They've been warned numerous times, and I actually fixed quite a few of their articles. However, they don't seem to be willing to learn or responding to the existing problems. It's time to stop that per WP:ONESTRIKE and creating bad pages or making unhelpful changes to the project. I'm not going to just delete everything, we need to sort that out a bit. Articles that are already fixed and notable don't need to be deleted. -Barras talk 20:07, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Barras Oops sorry Barras, I had only checked 3 of their articles and those 3 were unsourced-one-liners so I simply assumed they all were, Thanks –Davey2010^Talk 23:09, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

RFD backlog

There is a big RFD backlog. Cactus🌵 ^hi ^ツ 08:40, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, admin. I've been working on reducing the count at Special:WithoutInterwiki, and it's resulting in a lot of RFDs and QDs because there are many pages that slipped through new page patrols. CountryANDWestern (talk) 13:39, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I mean, it has been that way for a while. We are mopping our best. ;}-- BRP^ever 13:40, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Just closed a bunch of requests. The backlog is now down to the pages I nominated. Someone else should close those requests. (If no one is doing that, I will also take care of those requests.) -Barras talk 13:46, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I closed the rest, except one which I think might need some more discussion.-- BRP^ever 13:58, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Revdel request

Hi, Could someone revdel this please, Thanks –Davey2010^Talk 10:41, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. Done. -Barras talk 11:46, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Request for page protection: Sophie Xeon

Hello, I would like to request semi-protection or full protection for the article Sophie Xeon.

The page has been subject to recent vandalism and disrespectful content regarding SOPHIE’s gender identity and cause of death. I believe page protection is necessary to prevent further harm, especially given the sensitive nature of the subject and SOPHIE’s status as a respected figure in the transgender and music communities.

Thank you. Berlington11 (talk) 16:23, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Berlington11:

Not done Our rule of thumb is to protect pages if there is so much vandalism that it's difficult to keep up with. That isn't the case here. The most recent edits to the page were on 28 June: there were four edits, including your three. During this month, there were only seven edits, including the four on 28 June. That isn't enough to protect. -- Auntof6 (talk) 03:58, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ah. Alright then.

Thanks for response!

Berlington11 (talk) 08:06, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Userspace admin protection

I will try to create a more complete list (if there are anymore) tomorrow, but for now can an admin please unprotect User:ImprovedWikiImprovment/Archive box. I'm sorry, I had not planned for what happens if I don't have the permissions lol. --IWI (talk) 01:05, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No urgency at all btw. --IWI (talk) 01:05, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@ImprovedWikiImprovment:

Done -- Auntof6 (talk) 03:52, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks :) --IWI (talk) 03:54, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Protection of Italian brainrot

The Italian Brainrot page has been repeatedly vandalized. I suggest restricting it to auto-confirmed users and up Thegoofhere (talk) 05:34, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Thegoofhere:

Not done Our rule of thumb is to protect pages if there is so much vandalism that it's difficult to keep up with. That isn't the case here. The article has had only 5 edits in the last week. The most recent edits before that were a few on 14 June. That isn't enough to protect. Feel free to report again if the amount of vandalism becomes difficult to keep up with. -- Auntof6 (talk) 07:03, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Page SputnikMusic Being Consistently Edited by Agenda'd Ex-Staff

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sputnikmusic&action=history

Users keep adding an unnecessary "Controversy" section (with and without neutral language issues)

There was indeed a contingent of staff who recently chose to leave the site. Some have taken defamation of the site to wikipedia. I apologize for any edit warring. User "tectactoe" is a user who has decided to aggressively provide "support" to ex-staffers. TwentyWhiteTents is former staff member JohnnyOfTheWell who has been demoted and banned from the site and is understandably unhappy about that. 2600:4040:A23F:900:8BB:5878:CD57:304D (talk) 14:04, 1 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This is the Simple English Wikipedia. You need to ask on the admins noticeboard on the English Wikipedia. We can't help you here fr33k man 14:16, 1 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Sorry, I have no idea what I'm doing. 2600:4040:A23F:900:8BB:5878:CD57:304D (talk) 14:19, 1 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Abuse filter

These abuse filters have not been hit for the pass few years/have not been hit much and should be disabled:

Cactus🌵 ^hi ^ツ 07:34, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think that because they have been hit they should remain. They aren't hurting anyone's ability to edit and may be used again in the future. If they had zero hits I could understand. fr33k man 11:46, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

how about the one that was hit 2yrs ago? Cactus🌵 ^hi ^ツ 12:44, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think it doesn't hurt to have filters like this "just in case" they end up being useful in the future. If others feel they are unnecessary, maybe they should be combined since some of them are quite short? Ternera (talk) 13:07, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I guess they could be expanded, but an admin need to do that. Cactus🌵 ^hi ^ツ 22:36, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, abuse filters are usually monitored quite closely by admins. There are actually quite a few that have been disabled in the last few years. The main issue is when false positives start to occur, but as long as a filter is doing its job, there's not much reason to disable it unless it hasn't been hit in years and years. --Ferien (talk | join TBA!) 16:55, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, someone might want to chk the private ones. Cactus🌵 ^hi ^ツ 03:24, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection requested for Don Bradman

Hi, I'm having a spot of bother with an IP who seems to be fixated with a particular link in this article. I've had to revert three times in the last three days. Basically, the IP clearly does not understand redirects, and will not comply with w:WP:NOTBROKEN. I think a period of semi-protection, perhaps till the end of July, would be justifiable. What do you think? Thanks very much. Jack (talk) 15:08, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Just as a note - usually, protection is only added if it's the only option available to solve the vandalism, per WP:SEMI. Ternera (talk) 15:13, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, thanks, Ternera. I realise it's not a major problem, and I'll be happy to just keep an eye on it. Hopefully, they will get the message. All the best. Jack (talk) 16:29, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Not done Yeah, I'll keep a watch on it too but this isn't the level of disruption we'd consider protection at yet. Thanks, --Ferien (talk | join TBA!) 16:53, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Ferien. All the best. Jack (talk) 16:54, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of talk pages

What on earth is the point of this? Examples:

172.56.200.107 (talk) 20:02, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

In both cases, a user (an IP in the first case, a registered user in the second case) had created multiple article talk pages that contained only the talk page header template. We don't want to encourage that, and the pages were deleted. -- Auntof6 (talk) 02:46, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Steven1991 and targeted harassment

Hi, Steven1991 was blocked from EN.Wiki for harassment, and has taken it upon himself to try to drag my name through the mud in edits such as this https://simple.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Antisemitism&diff=prev&oldid=10174808, and taking it off wiki https://www.reddit.com/r/Palestinian_Violence/comments/1hgveqf/yeah_sure_the_juice_poisoned_the_wells_username/. I have also reported this to trust and safety. Insanityclown1 (talk) 00:25, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Antisemitism_on_Wikipedia#WTF for more. Polygnotus (talk) 00:54, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with the concerns and have removed the image myself as well. I think that the whole Online_antisemitism#English_Wikipedia needs to be closely examined, particularly its use of images. What is in the article is labeling particular users as antisemites, even if names are obscured. This raises WP:NPA concerns. I don't know the history at English Wikipedia that led to the block of Steven1991, but if there was a harassment campaign of this particular user that contributed to that block, continuing here by adding that image to the article reeks of continuing the harassment and may need the consideration of a WP:ONESTRIKE block. CountryANDWestern (talk) 00:57, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@CountryANDWestern Would you be so kind to remove File:Serial_erasure_of_content_in_a_Jewish_history_article_by_a_user_engaging_in_tendentious_editing.jpg from Wikipedia:Vandalism? I am not autoconfirmed here. And yes, they should be indeffed. This kinda behaviour is incompatible with a collaborative environment. Thanks, Polygnotus (talk) 01:01, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed some of the trash, but someone should really take a critical look at those sections. Polygnotus (talk) 01:17, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have some concerns over their pages as well. Some of them seem to have OR, complex, and based on studies/sources that represent one side of things. However, I have had some involvement with them on an RFA so I am not the best person to handle this situation but I have seen more than enough for WP:ONESTRIKE.-- BRP^ever 02:04, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The edit on Antisemitism alone is sufficient for a WP:ONESTRIKE block. The original research is another reason. Blocked. --Ferien (talk | join TBA!) 09:20, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Here's a fun one. Whenever Steven and I have had conflict, I get repeated password requests from an IP either in Scotland or on the border of Scotland. I can't prove it's them, but it seems highly suspicious, given that Steven has said on his EN.Wiki talk page that he is from the area. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Insanityclown1 (talk • contribs) 02:54, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Lucy Letby - article protection

Please consider semi-protection of Lucy Letby due to continued IP disruption there. CountryANDWestern (talk) 10:00, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Done MathXplore (talk) 10:07, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

User:CountryANDWestern

A dispute has arisen between myself and this editor (C&W) who has apparently decided that I'm not fit to deal with rogue micro-stubs in the cricket sphere. I took issue with C&W over this edit which I reverted, posting my reasons on the article's talk page. With no regard for w:WP:BRD, C&W abruptly restored the edit and refuses to comply with BRD. C&W has subsequently set about restoring other micro-stubs which I had redirected, obviously to make a w:WP:POINT.

I should make clear that I don't object to anyone restoring a redirect if they are going to expand the article citing reliable sources—I do that myself. It may be argued that this is all C&W is doing. But, is C&W interested in cricket, or is C&W asserting that C&W is right and there is nothing to discuss? Does C&W really believe that we should store a huge pile of useless micro-stubs that were created indiscriminately by bad editors with questionable motives—for example, the Auckland IP, Nikolai Kurbatov, or Spec150?

I have another concern about C&W. I noticed that they first edited Simple on 15 May, only three days after I started here, and so I looked at their first edits to see what brought them here. I was a bit surprised that C&W's first edit used a warning template. A few minutes later, C&W was loading the monobook.js and the twinkleoptions.js. So, I assumed they must have, like myself, come over from enwiki having had years of experience there.

I then looked at C&W's Xtools to see the extent of their experience. This shows that C&W had never used Wikipedia before 15 May. They have made a small number of edits at each of enwiki, wikidata, and commoms since then. I think this needs to be investigated, because no one can know so much about Wikipedia processes and procedures without long experience. This person is plainly not a "newbie". It is interesting to read C&W saying You haven't been around long enough to know on 1 June, only a fortnight after joining.

I suppose C&W might claim to have been a long-term IP editor, or they might put forward the old "fresh start" chestnut. If they were an IP, we should really be asking for evidence of past editing. If it is a "fresh start", what was/were the former account(s), and why has a fresh start been necessary?

Please ping me if you need to ask me anything. Thanks. Jack (talk) 13:53, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Is that now about edit warring somewhere (which is one problem that need to be looked at) or is that about a person possibly doing a clean start, assuming good faith in that point? -Barras talk 14:03, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I’m also curious since this was broad to AN: what administrative action is being sought? CountryANDWestern (talk) 14:25, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Uh the whole point of a fresh start is that you don’t reveal the previous account so you’re not connected. CountryANDWestern (talk) 14:05, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting.--(Fresh start? Well, user:C&W is now 'largely claiming that c. none of the Norwegian mayors (of municipalities), are notable to on a List of Norwegian mayors (2023-2027). If not a frivilous claim, then it seems close.--Here is the article, where user C&W is part of a '2-1 lead', in regard to "votes".--Now, if user:C&W is in fact, edit-warring (as the original poster, seems to claim): Would it not be enough to give one or more warnings, and following that, one steps up sanctions, to say a one-week block.--Thoughts? 2001:2020:359:B9D1:8915:4255:47BD:6A40 (talk) 14:17, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

C&W is a fresh start account so that explains his editing experience. He has no requirement to explain who he was or explain the circumstances of why they did a fresh start. This is not the first time this has been brought up and we have expressed support for C&Ws fresh start. He has not caused problems on simplewiki (apart from nominating about 7000 articles for RfD :) fr33k man 14:37, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Gadget request

Hello! I'd like to request the creation of a new local gadget called WizardCat, which I have written and tested. It is a semi-automated tool that helps add categories to the pages that are currently in Category:Category needed.

When in effect, it loads the uncategorized pages and suggests categories using the Wikidata P910 links and the categories on enwiki's version of the article. It allows the user to click to automatically (using MediaWiki's API) add the selected category and (if present) remove the {{uncategorized}} template (HotCat rarely removes these templates). CSRF is also used here. Categories from enwiki will only show up if our Wikipedia has them.

Would an admin kindly move the script to "MediaWiki:Gadget-WizardCat.js" and add WizardCat[ResourceLoader]|WizardCat.js to MediaWiki:Gadgets-definition, please?

I would very much like feedback on this if something doesn't seem right. Thank you for your time! ⯎ Aster alee ⯎ 19:33, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Asteralee: I'm quite impressed with what I've seen so far, although I just have a couple of comments to make:

For Ain't I a Woman? I was presented with a category to add from enwiki, with a tick, but the article already had the category on. Does this tick mean the category is already added? Also, should it have loaded if the page was no longer uncategorised by the time I looked at it?
As a procedural note, I'm not sure how we go about adding new gadgets, as we rarely get them. Should we have a discussion first before adding them, have a slight testing phase first, etc? Not certain on this end of things, so I'll defer to another bureaucrat or admin.

--Ferien (talk | join TBA!) 20:19, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Ferien The ticks were supposed to be for suggestions, but I changed them to lightbulbs to show they are suggestions. Categories that are already added to the article are not displayed.

No, WizardCat does not load. After the next button is pressed, the article is seen as categorized and is not seen again.

I think testing the code and consensus would work in this case. This can be between administrators here or posted on the Simple talk to gather other users' thoughts. ⯎ Aster alee ⯎ 00:11, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think a period of time would be a good idea to let people play with it and that there should be a gathering of consensus; although I'm sure people will like it. It should only require a short period of trial. It should be done on STfr33k man 00:53, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

My comments:

If simple and enwiki both have a category, but the name is different (for example, if ours uses simpler words), does the gadget recognize this and suggest our category? Or does it only suggest if the names are the same?
It can be a problem if a page is incompletely categorized. For example, with a biographical article, if the only categories added are for birth and death years, that is not enough, but the page leaves Category:Category needed and we lose the indicator that more categories are still needed. I see this often when people do the categorization, and I suspect it would be the same with a tool. I think it is less of a problem for the page to stay as it is than to be incompletely categorized.

-- Auntof6 (talk) 03:32, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think the script only suggest the ones with the same name as I had gone through quite a few with no suggestions. Cactus🌵 ^hi ^ツ 03:48, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Is there an edit summary for the script, so that more users know about this and that people know the user is using the script? Cactus🌵 ^hi ^ツ 03:47, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Cactusisme The tool does have an automated edit summary. ⯎ Aster alee ⯎ 00:18, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Asteralee why does it add/suggest non-existent cats? Cactus🌵 ^hi ^ツ 10:12, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion request

Hi, Could someone delete all of the empty talkpages 217.161.67.210 (talk • contribs • CA • deleted contribs • nuke contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log) has created please, I'm guessing the IP is an LTA so wouldn't object to them being blocked either, Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 14:58, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Done and done fr33k man 15:07, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Freekman much appreciated :), Thanks, Warm Regards, –Davey2010^Talk 15:24, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

List of countries

You know how List of countries by area is semi-protected indefinitely? Well List of countries should be protected for the same reason. People have recently been adding entries such as:

West Korea
Queen
North Switzerland
Mykolaiv Oblast

Yeah, it really needs to be protected. And some criteria should be established for the list. Should it be sovereign states, or does it include territories and dependencies. 204.195.97.109 (talk) 17:01, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I see that all of the vandalism today is from the same IP. It would probably help to block them as a first start. I have reported them to WP:VIP. Ternera (talk) 18:02, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Pretty much going to say

Not done on that request. I also think we should consider removing the other protection. Not sure this is still needed. -Barras talk 19:25, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Create protection

this per user request Cactus🌵 ^hi ^ツ 10:07, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Done -Barras talk 22:16, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

User:AjirikMitau is reverting my deletion requests

Please make him stop doing it Trade (talk) 20:55, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I placed a warning on their talk page since that had not been done yet. Ternera (talk) 22:00, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked by MathXplore Cactus🌵 ^hi ^ツ 10:57, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]