Shortcut: WD:AN

Wikidata:Administrators' noticeboard

From Wikidata
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Administrators' noticeboard
This is a noticeboard for matters requiring administrator attention. IRC channel: #wikidataconnect
Translate this header box!
Start a new discussion
On this page, old discussions are archived. An overview of all archives can be found at this page's archive index. The current archive is located at 2024/08.

Requests for deletions

high

~151 open requests for deletions.

Requests for unblock

empty

0 open requests for unblock.

Backlog of unblock requests

See Wikidata:Administrators'_noticeboard/Archive/2023/03#Backlog_of_unblock_requests

We still have these four open unblock requests from 3-5 weeks ago. I appreciate that there are complexities involved, but I don't think we should leave unblock requests hanging indefinitely with no (apparent) progress. Is there anything going on with these that we can't see? What is it going to take to get these resolved one way or the other? Thanks. CC @Jasper Deng. Bovlb (talk) 18:00, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Just a note that we still have the same backlog, and no communication seems to be taking place. Bovlb (talk) 02:07, 10 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Bukky658 has provided a substantial response that addresses many points. Bovlb (talk) 17:36, 10 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
In the light of Jasper Deng's prolonged Wikidata break, I'd be grateful for any other admins who wanted to chime in here. Thanks, Bovlb (talk) 20:56, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks to Sotiale, Ymblanter, and Lymantria for their input. I have unblocked Bukky658. This still leaves two (Khaddy4, Semmy1960) in the same group, and one other (TemiteeonDiamond) also waiting for feedback from Jasper Deng. Bovlb (talk) 16:58, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
We still have a significant backlog, with unblock requests going back to 2023-03-01. Bovlb (talk) 15:40, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
No change to the backlog. It looks like Jasper Deng is no longer contributing to this project. Bovlb (talk) 21:26, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I think this should rather be addressed to the active users with checkuser rights, not admins. —MisterSynergy (talk) 21:37, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
OK. There is an open case. Bovlb (talk) 21:49, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
There has been no progress on the open checkuser case, nor any action on the four open unblock requests. Unblock requests are awaiting responses from @ Estopedist1, Ymblanter, Jasper Deng. Bovlb (talk) 18:40, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
But we may not overturn checkuser blocks, even if we think the results are false positives. Ymblanter (talk) 18:58, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
If the checkuser process is dysfunctional, we should get rid of it. This situation is not acceptable. —MisterSynergy (talk) 19:18, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Or possibly elect new checkusers. Ymblanter (talk) 20:15, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
We should first evaluate whether we still need this role. Could the collective absense of checkusers be related to this position? Does the checkuser role provide actual value to this project? It would not be wise to elect new checkusers, only to see them burn out later as well. —MisterSynergy (talk) 20:43, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
or that BrokenSegue (talk) 20:45, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Another week and no progress on this. Bovlb (talk) 04:28, 9 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Block review for 83.61.231.21

Greetings, I hope that an impartial administrator can review the blocking of 83.61.231.21. This editor has worked with me in the past, in fact they have worked to limit and reverse damage caused by a particularly disruptive sockpuppet. Unfortunately, @Multichill has blocked this editor for one week, with no warning and no explanation.

Apparently, this stems from some sort of dispute on James VII and II, when Duke of York, 1633 – 1701 (Q113459961), but it is difficult to tell the nature of the dispute since neither the administrator nor the IP editor have used talk pages, nor edit summaries, to explain themselves. What is apparent, however, is that Multichill has used three separate accounts to edit this item: his administrator account, @BotMultichill, and @BotMultichillT. Therefore, Multichill himself is heavily involved in this dispute, and clearly unable to remain impartial in the event of a block.

It seems to me that Multichill has imposed this block to "win" this dispute and erase 83.61.231.21's changes and keep them away from that item, as well as editing Wikidata at all, for one week. Now I am just a humble country editor, but this sort of behavior while involved would be improper for administrators at other wikis, and I hope that everyone here can appreciate the need for warnings, discussion, and explanations to be given, before, during and after blocks are meted out. Elizium23 (talk) 09:24, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Elizium23: First of all, I would like to thank you for taking the trouble to review this case. On the other hand, the truth is that, on at least two occasions –here and here–, I exposed in the edit summary that item Q113459961 (created on 21:00, 6 August 2022) was a duplicate of item Q18686035 (created on 12:23, 28 December 2014).
After copying Q113459961's properties related to James II's painting into the oldest item (Q18686035), I treated to recicle Q113459961 with another Peter Lely's painting –because, although I knew there was a way to merge duplicates, I really wasn't sure if it had to be requested on Wikidata:Requests for deletions or somewhere else–. However, in fact, I was preparing reply to @Multichill on his talk page after being informed he reverted me a second time, but when I was about to send him my reply, I got the notification that I was blocked. So I've barely had a chance to explain the changes –it's also true that, unlike Commons or Wikipedia, where before publishing any edit you can use the edit summary to explain it, on Wikidata you only have the option to write a summary of edition when editions are undone and, although I try to collaborate respecting the policies of each project, it is true that sometimes, there are moments in which I forgot to indicate them, and I recognize that error on my part–.
I'm also sorry if it looks like I'm trying to bypass the block now, but it wasn't until now that I realized my connection changed automatically (I think I should create an account to avoid confusion). Anyway, I wanted to take advantage of commenting on it if I was required to respond. For now, until I'm asked to respond to a comment, I'll stay out of Wikidata until a decision is made on the blocking. 81.41.175.237 10:37, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The ip 83.61.231.21 is evading the blockade with both his user [1] both with its new ip [2]. Bye --151.57.107.68 13:05, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Stv26 is not blocked here, or anywhere else on WMF projects. Stv26 is an editor in good standing with over 5,000 edits. If you are accusing this editor of being a block-evading sockpuppet, you had better open an investigation about that, and I will vouch for his good faith, because the initial block by @Multichill was unjust. Multichill has failed to respond in this forum, or anywhere else for the time being. Unfortunately, there are no other Wikidata administrators willing to weigh in on this matter. Elizium23 (talk) 16:45, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Elizium23: I have suspicions that 151.57.107.68 is in fact Livioandronico2013 evading his block using IPs for, this time, to try to harm me in some way, either by linking me with other users both here and in a Commons DR in which I participated. Also, I want to mention that I am only blocked in Wikidata, so for now I can edit in other places too –of course, always constructively–. I can also perfectly say that I have never used a user account –although I know that, to avoid being reverted due to suspected vandalism, I should create one, but I haven't done so yet–, so it is clear that these accusations from someone who, although it has not been globally blocked, there is no doubt that it is the same one that was dedicated to hindering the editions of other users, especially regarding images, they only have the objective of harming me in some way, I think that for "revenge" for having participated in reverting their editions.
Moving away from this though, as you can see from my comment above, my internet connection was switched automatically, so I stated that unless I'm required to respond to other users' comments, I was going to stay away from Wikidata until I get unlocked or my block expires, whichever comes first given the circumstances Elizium23 mentioned above. 81.41.175.237 17:17, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I created James VII and II, when Duke of York, 1633 – 1701 (Q113459961) based on https://rkd.nl/en/explore/images/143625 . The item was vandalized to be about a completely different painting https://artuk.org/discover/artworks/sir-george-booth-16221684-1st-lord-delamer-of-dunham-massey-228619 . The vandalism continued so I blocked the IP and protected the item from future harm. Unfortunately IP vandalism of paintings is very common and often not caught (or much much later) and probably having created over 500.000 of them, I'm often involved. People should just create an account. I always take the time to explain things to new editors. I stopped investing time in IP editors on Wikidata a long a time ago because that's a complete waste of time. If it's a duplicate, you should just properly merge it instead of changing it to a completely different painting. Of course you would need to be logged in for that to see the gadget. Multichill (talk) 12:03, 13 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Erledigt unblocked. New user making mistakes interpreted as vandalism. Hopping to other IP's anyway making the block pointless. Multichill (talk) 12:17, 13 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I don't feel this is sufficiently resolved without an explanation of how a deeply-involved administrator and two of his Bot-sockpuppets can take over an article, protect it against community edits, and simultaneously sanction an innocent editor over a content dispute. This is confusing to me, because it appears to be unethical behavior, and I would prefer that other, uninvolved administrators comment on the ethics behind these actions, please. Thank you. Elizium23 (talk) 15:23, 15 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Elizium23 Do you have any concrete objection to the response of Multichill on 12:03, 13 May 2023 (UTC)? --Emu (talk) 15:48, 15 May 2023 (UTC) Emu (talk) 15:48, 15 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Friday and Robinson (Q3555448)

The vandalism on this item goes back years. I gave up trying to find a sensible revision to restore. There are some good edits mixed in as well, so it's hard to undo without some friendly fire. Infrastruktur (talk) 10:08, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Block evasion

This LTA is using multiple IPs trying to harm another users, including me, in some way accusing them of evading blocks. Although I was involved in this section related with my block due to my connection automatycally changed, this user is vandalizing this page accusing users without any evidence. 81.41.175.237 17:54, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I hereby endorse this report; this is classic behavior from this LTA, and the IPs all geolocate to different ISPs in different regions of Italy, which is SOP for Σπάρτακος socks. Elizium23 (talk) 18:00, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I am not quite sure what can be done here. All these are dynamic IP which are not going to be used again. Ymblanter (talk) 17:58, 15 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Ymblanter is completely right. This guy is a literally unblockable sock. He cycles through IPv4 addresses faster than we can report them. The only time he gets nailed is creating a new account and uploading dozens more photos to Commons, then we discover it and block that account. But the IPs just keep coming. I documented a lot of it on Meta. I suggested rangeblocks, but unless the Stewards wanted to block /14 ranges of every damn ISP in Italy, literally, there is nothing that can be done about this abuse. Elizium23 (talk) 18:24, 15 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

User:Seanetienne

Actions of Seanetienne (talk • contribs • logs) in repurposing redirected QIds is currently the subject of discussion on project chat - [3]. Now as far as I can see, Seanetienne has changed their approach and is instead changing the meaning of poor, statementless items, to new meanings e.g. [4], [5]. It's fairly clear that the need not to change the meaning of items has been brought to Seanetienne's notice on their talk page and on Project Chat, and yet here we are. Courtesy ping @Seanetienne: --Tagishsimon (talk) 23:21, 13 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

yeah this looks wrong. no matter what the intent was, doing this is not what we want. You changed this item from about "serges Fernandez" to "Joshua Tan". If you're interested in removing clutter nominate these items for deletion (in a batch). Don't repurpose existing items or redirects. BrokenSegue (talk) 01:55, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Seanetienne: Care to explain why you are still repurposing items after being told no less than 3 times not to do this? E.g.: Q95922538 Infrastruktur (talk) 17:44, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
What? what? oh wait... oops! Sorry I didn't receive the messages in time as I was still accessing the scope and where to start the restoration work. I previously believe that empty items with non-existent history are fresh resources due to them posing 0 threat to linking as they were never linked and never would be (reasonably assured). Unless they are expanded or redirected they are on the way of deletion. Now I see... alright I'll do no more of such... sry
On the other hand, I have access to Musicbrainz. I will update the Wikidata links as soon as new items are created. Sorry it took some time to type. Thanks to all the admins involved in the retrospective restoration work. Sorry for the inconveniences. Seanetienne (talk) 18:23, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Seanetienne I have unblocked you. Please never ever change the meaning of items for whatever reason. As for cleaning up, this will need some time. Personally, I don’t think it’s a good idea to just revert, especially not it repurposing happened years ago. However, there seems to be no consensus on how to proceed (Wikidata:Project_chat#Do_wikidata_allow_reusing_redirected_items?). Tread carefully until the problem is fixed. --Emu (talk) 19:28, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Seanetienne Your recent edits on Q56342252 don’t seem like you really grasped what we tried to explain to you. --Emu (talk) 15:23, 15 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
That move was prior to the conversation. I thought that the link was moved somewhere else and treated the item as empty. That's why when I found the redirect item number Q112422495 pointing to Diana Moore I picked it up and used that instead. Seanetienne (talk) 15:54, 15 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
To prevent further damage to the project, I have just blocked @Seanetienne for the Main namespace until further notice. If you are an admin and you feel that Seanetienne has explained themself, feel free to lift the block. --Emu (talk) 18:02, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Report concerning User:190.114.46.46

190.114.46.46 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL (for IP: GUC))

Reason: vandalism. LR0725 (talk) 16:12, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Blocked for three months Estopedist1 (talk) 19:15, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. Lymantria (talk) 05:22, 15 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Report concerning User:2402:6b00:3295:cf00::/64

2402:6b00:3295:cf00::/64 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL (for IP: GUC))

Reason: vandalism. --BY7679 (talk) 06:11, 15 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Erledigt Blocked 1 month. --Lymantria (talk) 07:37, 15 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. Lymantria (talk) 07:37, 15 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Protection for Dora the Explorer (Q331031)

Persistent vandalism by IP. Madamebiblio (talk) 15:18, 15 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Madamebiblio Is this a content dispute? Are there any sources (wheter true or false) for Dora being produced in Parts in Mexico? --Emu (talk) 15:50, 15 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Emu Any mention on English or Spanish articles. Only this controversy about the main character. Madamebiblio (talk) 17:25, 15 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
What. In any case ✓ Erledigt, two weeks semi. --Emu (talk) 18:01, 15 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. –– Yahya (talk) 09:06, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Protection for Loreen (Q483376)

Several IPs upset by the results of the Eurovision song contest have found creative ways to express their disappointment. Nitraus (talk) 15:32, 15 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Erledigt two weeks semi --Emu (talk) 15:55, 15 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. –– Yahya (talk) 09:07, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Undeletion request

Hey Admins, can you please assist in undeleting the following items.

We are tracking them in the Name Suggestion Index project. The items in NSI are generally retail chains, health clinics, transit systems, or other points of interest which are found in OpenStreetMap. These are generally entities which exist in the real world more than 50 times, so we consider them notable.

Thanks for your help and for all you do!

Archpdx (talk) 16:46, 15 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ping @Ymblanter, Jianhui67, MisterSynergy: as deleting admins --Ameisenigel (talk) 17:43, 15 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I have restored Q117622807. Please do not forget to add OSM Name Suggestion Index ID (P8253) to these items in order to make the usage visible. —MisterSynergy (talk) 17:53, 15 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Restored mine Ymblanter (talk) 17:57, 15 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Archpdx: Apologies for late response, I have restored mine too. Jianhui67 talk★contribs 16:42, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. Lymantria (talk) 16:49, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request on the data complete gadget

Can someone take a look at This edit request on the DataComplete gadget ? The main issue with the current version is that it make synchronous IOs to get the datas and that it blocks the Wikidata item page for like several seconds in some cases. Another solved issue is an incompatibility with the inverse statement gadget.

The new version is linked, I worked on one of my subpages. author  TomT0m / talk page 08:49, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Report concerning User:195.90.108.150

195.90.108.150 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL (for IP: GUC)) — Reasons: Vandalism TenWhile6 (talk | SWMT) 10:45, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Erledigt Blocked for 31 hours. --Lymantria (talk) 16:48, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. Lymantria (talk) 16:48, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Report concerning User:181.29.51.53

181.29.51.53 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL (for IP: GUC)) — Reasons: Vandalism TenWhile6 (talk | SWMT) 19:32, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Blocked 3 days for vandalism/edit warring a patroller. Infrastruktur (talk) 19:47, 16 May 2023 (UTC) [reply]

I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. --TenWhile6 (talk | SWMT) 19:57, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Q1088552

Están modificando la iglesia católica global a kostyol, creando un caos con enlaces antiguos, dada la importancia del enlace. Verpetino (talk) 20:39, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Harrassment from off-wiki

A new account User:CerealNo defaced my talk page with obscene images. Likely related to an en-wiki admin case at en:w:Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#User:Serial Number 54129 casting aspersions.

Can someone please deal with the user account?  —Michael Z. 01:05, 17 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Wikidata:Administrators%27_noticeboard&oldid=1897453570"