Wikidata:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive/2019/03

Some problems in (P2003)

Hi, Jchangchua did some changes in Instagram username. I restored changes but still showing some wrong result. Please look at here and correct this problem. Nirmol360 (talk) 12:47, 1 March 2019 (UTC)

As far as I can tell you've already fixed this yourself. Mbch331 (talk) 08:35, 2 March 2019 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Mbch331 (talk) 08:51, 2 March 2019 (UTC)

Vandalism by IPs

Please block IPs 77.77.218.166 and 77.77.219.174. Maybe a rangeblock is needed. Esteban16 (talk) 16:54, 1 March 2019 (UTC)

The latest changes from 77.77.219.174 were from February, the lastest changes from 77.77.218.166 were from yesterday. It is obvious the user is up to no good, but blocking 1024 IP addresses wouldn't help as the user isn't online that much and an indef isn't appropriate as it's a normal ISP range. Mbch331 (talk) 08:43, 2 March 2019 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Mbch331 (talk) 08:51, 2 March 2019 (UTC)

Имя учётной записи

@Ymblanter: Рамис Анварович директора компании - странное имя пользователя. Kalendar (talk) 05:42, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

Ну, формально не запрещено, единственная правка больше похожа на некомпетентность, чем на вандализм.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:42, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: -- Kalendar (talk) 09:25, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

Вандализм

@Ymblanter: Lohpidro Kalendar (talk) 11:21, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

 Done--Ymblanter (talk) 11:24, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: -- Kalendar (talk) 11:27, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

Any kind of protection requested for Q4942723

Apparently someone keeps removing this dog's date of death for no apparent reason, even after multiple reverts by myself and others. Please add semi-protection or whatever you feel more appropriate. Thank you. Redgolpe (talk) 19:39, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

•  Done semi'd for a week. Mahir256 (talk) 20:25, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Redgolpe (talk) 22:32, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

Problem in creation page

I created a English language of the Wikipedia French page Planète Rap (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Plan%C3%A8te_Rap) and I have a big problem.

I want to correct the title of the page, but the title is draft:Planète Rap by mistake.

For questions on pages on enwiki, contact enwiki village pump. Mbch331 (talk) 08:46, 2 March 2019 (UTC)

Wikidata:Requests for comment/Adopt a username policy

This RFC seems to not have resulted in much of a consensus for anything. Could an admin please close it? --Rschen7754 02:51, 3 March 2019 (UTC)

Please block 190.160.21.173

Look at his contribution and judge that he is a vandals. --Catherine Laurence 04:21, 3 March 2019 (UTC)

 Done Blocked for 31 hours. Thanks for reporting. Jianhui67 ^{talk★contribs} 04:53, 3 March 2019 (UTC)

Вандализм

@Ymblanter: NekrozCel Kalendar (talk) 08:47, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

 Done--Ymblanter (talk) 08:54, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: -- Kalendar (talk) 19:29, 9 March 2019 (UTC)

Рекламное имя

@Ymblanter: Novohata. Рекламное имя? (https://novohata.ru/) Kalendar (talk) 08:51, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

Удалил страницу.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:56, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: -- Kalendar (talk) 19:29, 9 March 2019 (UTC)

Q56319281

Where is the previous item for Kendall Stephens, and why was it not merged with this one: Kendall Stephens (Q56319281)? - 108.71.133.201 18:17, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

Q55279044 was merged into Q56319281. Do you look for that one? —MisterSynergy (talk) 18:23, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

@MisterSynergy: You're supposed to merge into the older item; that's the policy. What is "do you look for that one" supposed to mean? I thought your English is a 4? - 108.71.133.201 18:36, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

No, it isn't. Also, I strongly warn you against such a tone. Matěj Suchánek (talk) 19:26, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

@Matěj Suchánek: Yes, it is a policy. It clearly states it right here: Help:Merge#Select_recipient_item. And one cannot have a tone over the internet. Tone is a sonic quality. - 108.71.133.201 19:36, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

Neither is that a policy page, nor does it "clearly state" that one's supposed to merge into the older item. In this case, the merge direction does not matter at all. —MisterSynergy (talk) 19:43, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

(edit conflict) That page is not a policy but a proposal. And it states: The recipient item is usually [ie. not always] the item that is used more often (possible indicators are the quality of sitelinks or the number of sitelinks and statements). When in doubt, it's best [ie. not compulsory] to choose the item with the lowest Q####... Matěj Suchánek (talk) 19:45, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

Academy of Sciences of the Soviet Union links

I can't add any links to other Wiki projects and to Wikidata, because Q2370801 is for some reason protected from creation in English Wikipedia. Can you remove that protecion? MarcusTraianus (talk) 19:55, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

@Abián:--Ymblanter (talk) 20:00, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

@MarcusTraianus: You're only three edits away from being an autoconfirmed user on Wikidata, but I've granted you the confirmed flag so that you can directly edit any semi-protected Item. --abián 20:12, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: MarcusTraianus (talk) 20:10, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

pleace block Special:Contributions/46.19.85.4

vandalism. thanks, דגש חזק - Talk 21:42, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

Done by Abián. Esteban16 (talk) 22:26, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Esteban16 (talk) 22:26, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

I'm under an attack by a troll

Please protect my user page and talk page (User talk:MathKnight) and block the troll https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/185.46.76.64 . It is urgent. MathKnight (talk) 11:50, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

The IP was already banned. I also protected the user page. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 14:52, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protection for Q8614281

For the past half a year or so Help:Authority control (Q8614281) has been repeatedly vandalized from multiple different IP addresses. Could it be semi-protected for some period of time? Shinnin (talk) 13:02, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

 Done For a month. Csigabi (talk) 13:32, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

Please protect the Q1070984

Someone was delete some claim and had not left any reason. Thanks. --Catherine Laurence 13:32, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

• I added 6 months worth of semi-protection. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 14:53, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protection for Q5104

For some strange reason this item has been vandalized constantly in the last days. I ask for semi-protection. —Vercelas (quæstiones?) 21:53, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

•  Done semi'd for a week. Mahir256 (talk) 22:11, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

Вандализм

@Ymblanter: 46.138.51.194. Kalendar (talk) 19:31, 9 March 2019 (UTC)

 Done--Ymblanter (talk) 19:59, 9 March 2019 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: -- Kalendar (talk) 05:06, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

Вандализм

@Ymblanter: 89.35.255.60 Kalendar (talk) 05:07, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

 Done--Ymblanter (talk) 06:37, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: -- Kalendar (talk) 10:12, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

Вандализм

@Ymblanter: 188.191.211.236 + удалить страницу обсуждения участника. Kalendar (talk) 05:10, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

Blocked for three days. -- Ajraddatz (talk) 05:48, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: -- Kalendar (talk) 10:13, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

Вандализм

@Ymblanter: 89.188.160.31. Kalendar (talk) 19:31, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

Нет смысла, скорее всего, динамический айпи, больше сюда не вернётся.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:34, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: -- Kalendar (talk) 05:44, 12 March 2019 (UTC)

Unable to add interwiki links to Q5618095

I was trying to add [1] to Q5618095. However, the system stops me saying that it is a template documentation subpage even through it is not. VulpesVulpes825 (talk) 01:03, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

 Done I have done it. I do not know what it did not work for you. Pamputt (talk) 07:20, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

Please block sockpuppet

New account BagBagiyoSub1970 does nonsensical merges similar to recurring vandal Guntur Subagiyo (last heard of in May 2018). Could you please block and revert merges if possible? Thanks LaddΩ chat ;) 11:45, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

 Done Blocked and rolled back. Bovlb (talk) 19:31, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

More recent than May 2018. See also KrisnaMukti1969 (talk • contribs • logs), IndraMaulanaCNNID (talk • contribs • logs), and Broery2000 (talk • contribs • logs). Bovlb (talk) 19:42, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

IP address removing coordinate locations??

I noticed an odd constraint change from 129.13.72.197 which I rolled back, but then saw a lot of removal of coordinate locations in their history. They seem to be all in Germany, could somebody more familiar check and rollback or take other actions if necessary? ArthurPSmith (talk) 16:21, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

Spammer

Please block 223.230.151.85 (talk • contribs • logs) and 223.230.165.73 (talk • contribs • logs) for spamming. Shinnin (talk) 08:33, 8 March 2019 (UTC)

 Done Blocked for a week. Thanks for reporting. Jianhui67 ^{talk★contribs} 09:55, 8 March 2019 (UTC)

Вандализм

@Ymblanter: 188.170.73.73 Kalendar (talk) 11:36, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

 Done--Ymblanter (talk) 11:53, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: -- Kalendar (talk) 12:08, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

Вандализм

@Ymblanter: 46.211.235.165 Kalendar (talk) 11:43, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

 Done--Ymblanter (talk) 11:53, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: -- Kalendar (talk) 12:08, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

Вандализм

@Ymblanter: 46.211.45.26 Kalendar (talk) 12:07, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

Слишком поздно.--Ymblanter (talk) 12:09, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: -- Kalendar (talk) 12:27, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

Вандализм

@Ymblanter: 145.255.11.232 Kalendar (talk) 12:26, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

Тут я тоже не вижу смысла: одна вандальная правка, он сам её и откатил, все правки вчера, скорее всего, под этим айпи мы больше его не увидим.--Ymblanter (talk) 12:28, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: -- Kalendar (talk) 12:31, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

Вандализм

@Ymblanter: Hoangthanh123 - один и тот же текст на четырёх языках. Kalendar (talk) 12:30, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

 Done--Ymblanter (talk) 17:07, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: -- Kalendar (talk) 19:30, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

Вандализм

@Ymblanter: 62.183.126.116. Kalendar (talk) 16:56, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

 Done--Ymblanter (talk) 17:10, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: -- Kalendar (talk) 19:31, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

Q32641

Dear Wikidata admins. The item linked above is controversial. An editor, User:FogueraC is pushing his POV, and he is claiming that I am pushing mine. The definition of Valencian (Q32641) has been the topic of many heated debates (and even violence). To solve the conflict, Q1468503 (AVL) was created to provide authority on the topic. The former description of the item was not aligned with the definition given by the AVL, the current description is not aligned with the definition given by the AVL either. My proposal is that this definition is taken verbatim from the source and enforced in all languages. The definition can be found here. I will not perform more edits to that item, and to Wikidata in general until this issue is properly solved.--Micru (talk) 15:52, 8 March 2019 (UTC)

I am not sure we can do anything here. The only way to resolve this is a talk page discussion. We can do smth only if the user refuses to discuss.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:46, 8 March 2019 (UTC)

It its explained in the talk page. The former description was unsourced. The current description has the following sources (I will just copy what I said in the talk page):

• There are 9 authoritative sources saying that Valencian (Q32641) is a dialect (Q33384) of Catalan (Q7026) (you can check the details like pages or links in the item Valencian (Q32641)):
  1. Ethnologue (Q14790)
  2. The IEC Dictionary of the Catalan Language (Q11917114)
  3. Encyclopædia Britannica (Q455)
  4. Els parlars catalans (13 ed.) (Q61650939). You can check that it is authoritative because, for example, it is cited in the basic bibliography of the course of Catalan dialectology of the University of Valencia (Q383568): [2]
  5. Lenguas y dialectos de España (1 ed.) (Q61728934). You can check that it is authoritative because, for example, the author is a member of Royal Spanish Academy (Q11993457) and the book is cited in the basic bibliography of the course of Spanish dialectology of the University of Valencia (Q383568): [3]
  6. Dialectologia catalana (1 ed.) (Q61729107). You can check that it is authoritative because, for example, the author is a member of Acadèmia Valenciana de la Llengua (Q1468503) and the book is cited in the basic bibliography of the course of Catalan dialectology of the Autonomous University of Barcelona (Q43452): [4]
  7. El que s'ha de saber de la llengua catalana (4 ed.) (Q61729120). This and the next two books are references that are more old and they have a more historical importance. You can check that it is authoritative because, for example, the author is Joan Coromines (Q137659). It is not one of his most important works, but it is where he does the dialectal classification of the Catalan (Q7026).
  8. Gramática histórica catalana (1 ed.) (Q61729173). You can check that it is authoritative because, for example, it is cited in the bibliography of the course of Catalan dialectology of the Autonomous University of Barcelona (Q43452): [5]
  9. Diccionari català-valencià-balear (2 ed.) (Q61729222). You can check that it is authoritative because, for example, it is cited in the bibliography of the course of Catalan dialectology of the University of Valencia (Q383568): [6]

• There is another authoritative source (Diccionari normatiu valencià (Q15810630)) saying that Valencian (Q32641) is a language variety (Q3329375) of Catalan (Q7026). The conflict here is that Diccionari normatiu valencià (Q15810630) does not mention which Catalan (Q7026) name prefers (you can see in the item that the language has three names: Catalan, Valencian and Catalan-Valencian-Balear).

You can see that these sources reflect different linguistic POV (international POV, Catalan POV, Valencian POV and Spanish POV), and all of them agree with the description. Even Diccionari normatiu valencià (Q15810630) agree with the description, contrary to what Micru says, because «dialectal variety» just means «linguistic variety of a language in a place», and Diccionari normatiu valencià (Q15810630) says that Valencian is a linguistic variety of a place (Valencian Commmunity), it is not a sociolect or a idiolect or a register or any other type of linguistic variety. In fact, the author of Dialectologia catalana (1 ed.) (Q61729107) is a member of Acadèmia Valenciana de la Llengua (Q1468503) and is one of the sources that say that Valencian is a dialect. --Foguera (talk) 21:36, 8 March 2019 (UTC)

@Ymblanter: I am sorry that you are unable to do anything about it. This user has engaged in edit warring without agreeing to a consensus first, so in my view there is nothing to discuss with him. --Micru (talk) 10:31, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

Bad edits from GPSLeo with QuickStatements

GPSLeo have made a lot of wrong edits with QuickStatements! He do not understand that the items related to physico-geographical regionalization (Q11834037) Hungary have not any relation to Natura 2000 site ID (P3425) or to Common Database on Designated Areas ID (P4762). Please set back this bad edits as soon as possible! Texaner (talk) 19:38, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

Let us wait until they respond at their talk page.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:52, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

Вандализм

@Ymblanter: 83.149.46.157 Kalendar (talk) 10:20, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

 Done--Ymblanter (talk) 10:46, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: -- Kalendar (talk) 07:21, 16 March 2019 (UTC)

Вандализм

@Ymblanter: 176.59.200.96 Kalendar (talk) 10:22, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

 Done--Ymblanter (talk) 10:46, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: -- Kalendar (talk) 07:21, 16 March 2019 (UTC)

Unclear protections

For unknown reasons all pages I edited since about 2018-12-22 are (or appear to be) suddenly semi-protected: Emma Blackery (Q15994935), Sasha Grey (Q2709), aTelecine (Q4033106), The Juliette Society (Q21501388), and more. I gave up to find any page not semi-protected at the moment. This also affects the three pages I created from scratch in 2019: Pendu Sound Recordings (Q61523615), Rockwerk Records (Q60609062), RWG Records (Q60492205) (actually a complete list including whatever Be..anyone did here on Freeciv (Q424271) among others, and that's now also semi-protected.)
AFAIK the first of two RFCs potentially explaining this issue is not yet closed, and even if closed only Sasha Grey (Q2709) could remotely qualify as "most used". Not one of the pages I worked on here (with or without login, and I didn't login since April 2016) was ever vandalized by IPs, and I added my thoughts about this RfC on the Project chat (now archived):
It's a huge waste of time for all involved parties to handle the (about 1K, in hindsight) potential edit requests only by me in less than three months with a semi-protection, if the far simpler "edit review" procedure as on enwiki for really vulnerable pages (with some kind of IP vandalism, excluding zero in three months) is also possible here.
Maybe this is only a glitch or some emergency caused by a denial of service (DoS) attack, then it's fine, revert it as soon as possible. Otherwise it's just stupid, I explained this rather drastically on the new Talk:Q15994935, expect 999 more edit requests only by me in the next three months (or maybe I just ignore WikiData as good as I can, and fight it on dewiki + enwiki, they are always looking for new WikiData haters.) –84.46.53.245 17:44, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

None of the items you have reported here is protected. What does the software say when it prevents you to edit? —MisterSynergy (talk) 18:20, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

@84.46.53.245: I also cannot see that any of these items are protected. Could you please give more details about what operation you were attempting, and what message you saw? Cheers, Bovlb (talk) 05:44, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

 Resolved: Today The Juliette Society (Q21501388) has working "edit" buttons. Presumably I missed an "edit" button at the top of all items that never existed here, and assumed a conspiracy instead of a PEBKAC. Thanks to Bovlb, MisterSynergy, and Jmabel in the PC. –84.46.52.207 15:10, 12 March 2019 (UTC)

Request block 37.26.149.177

User is blocked on he.wiki and is now vandalizing WD Keren - WMIL (talk) 09:45, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

Not done for now - only one edit here, and this is the only activity so far in March. If it continues then I can place a global block on the IP. -- Ajraddatz (talk) 16:42, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

Protect

Please, protect Q90662. Vandalism by different IP's on last days. Rafael ^{(stanglavine) msg} 15:54, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

 Done Protected for a month. Thanks for reporting. Jianhui67 ^{talk★contribs} 16:19, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

Block

Please, block 112.215.243.1. Vandalism, same after warning. Rafael ^{(stanglavine) msg} 16:24, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

Done. -- Ajraddatz (talk) 16:39, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

User:Thisismattmiller

The user is making a huge amount of edits, I reverted two of them (items were in my watchlist) because the property (P244) was referring to a different item. He just made exactly the same edit, I deleted again. I wrote on his talk but he didn't answer. It's ok to make an error but not to repeat it when somebody explained you what you did wrong. Is there a way to do something? --Civvì (talk) 08:49, 12 March 2019 (UTC)

He replied on his talk page and told that he will take care so everything looks good so far. Pamputt (talk) 10:54, 12 March 2019 (UTC)

Merge

Can someone please merge Q61944325 and Q56448127? Thanks Patriccck (talk) 13:35, 12 March 2019 (UTC)

 Done You can do yourself next time. Rafael ^{(stanglavine) msg} 16:49, 12 March 2019 (UTC)

Вандализм

@Ymblanter: パベルプラト Kalendar (talk) 10:13, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: -- Kalendar (talk) 10:19, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

Hide personal information

Hi! Can someone hide the following version [7]? Personal email address has been included. Thank you! --Arthur Crbz (talk) 10:07, 13 March 2019 (UTC)

 Done thanks. Pamputt (talk) 10:50, 13 March 2019 (UTC)

Concerning the birth date (the IP requests to delete the birth date), we should read Wikidata:Living people. I remember a discussion (I have not found yet) whose the conclusion is we remove the personal information if they are not "easily" found. In this case, we can easily find the birth date on several websites so I am not sure about what to do. Pamputt (talk) 12:08, 13 March 2019 (UTC)

Requesting to block User:DZwarrior1

• ACF Fiorentina (Q2052)
• DZwarrior1 (talk • contribs • logs)

The user refused to go to talk page to talk about the matter of adding alleged full name of a football club as en label in wikidata. However, it was long determinate as hoax in en-wiki. "ACF " is not an abbreviation so it did not need dot as A.C.F., nor the need of alleged full spelling "Associazione Calcio Firenze" as label. Yes the wrong full spelling is appeared in fr wiki. But not appeared in the native it-wiki (it:ACF_Fiorentina). es:ACF Fiorentina also accepted my explanation to fix their article title in the past. It may worth as an unprintworthy alias , but certainly not using the wrong title as the main English "Label".

Also, the user never respond to the warning in en-wiki for bold move to wrong article title, and have zero edit in any user talk page namespace (including their own one). I would believed the user would just bring his disruptive behaviour to wikidata, making controversial edit and never participated in discussion or written response to any message and warning. Matthew hk (talk) 09:32, 8 March 2019 (UTC)

update, that user was blocked in en-wiki and it-wiki. Matthew hk (talk) 15:04, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

Please ping me if they continue disruptive editing, I will block them here as well.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:49, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

Ymblanter Their edits in Inter TV (Q56887163) count as a good faith "merge" or not, or a disruptive editing? They changed the label to "duplicated page of: https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q2259328" Matthew hk (talk) 18:25, 16 March 2019 (UTC)

Clear disruption, blocked for 31h--Ymblanter (talk) 18:46, 16 March 2019 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Regards, ZI Jony ^(Talk) 08:55, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

User:Cerimònia

Please block Cerimònia (talk • contribs • logs) as a vandalism-only account. They are already indef blocked in enwiki for that same reason, and are now continuing their behavior here on Wikidata. Shinnin (talk) 07:41, 13 March 2019 (UTC)

 Done indefinitely. Pamputt (talk) 08:04, 13 March 2019 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Regards, ZI Jony ^(Talk) 08:55, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

Should these be merged?

Q2328086 and Q16246919. They seem to be about the same thing and are mutually exclusive except for language PL. --Level C (talk) 23:57, 13 March 2019 (UTC)

They're not the same. Q2328086 is more specific and guarantee (Q16246919) is more generic. Mbch331 (talk) 12:08, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Regards, ZI Jony ^(Talk) 08:55, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

Semi-Protection for Q7667850

T-Series (Q7667850): Subject to frequent IP and account vandalism & trolling. Gotitbro (talk) 01:04, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

 Done, protected for a year, LTA--Ymblanter (talk) 11:51, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Regards, ZI Jony ^(Talk) 08:55, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

Please block User:Mozes Victor Konig

His user's name is propaganda.Please see Q62060519. -- Catherine Laurence 14:54, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

 Actions taken by Jianhui67. Regards, ZI Jony ^(Talk) 20:37, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Regards, ZI Jony ^(Talk) 20:37, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

Please block Daniatyn2266

Please block Daniatyn2266 whos performs incorrect merges on the same items as the multi-recidivist Guntur Subayigo. LaddΩ chat ;) 22:14, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

Why do not you talk to them first?--Ymblanter (talk) 10:47, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

@Ymblanter: We did a few times in the past, on User talk:Guntur.Subagiyo and User talk:Guntur Irawan#merging items. Have a second look at the long lists of socks used to perform similar merges. LaddΩ chat ;) 11:22, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

 Done--Ymblanter (talk) 11:25, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Regards, ZI Jony ^(Talk) 08:55, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

Protect

Please, protect Q317521. Vandalism by different IP's in last weeks. Rafael ^{(stanglavine) msg} 13:47, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

 Done--Ymblanter (talk) 19:52, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Regards, ZI Jony ^(Talk) 08:55, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

Hello

Hello administrator,

I have created the Chinese version on zhwiki of Tanya Plibersek, and I was about to make a link between it and its English version on enwiki. However, I failed to do do and the system said it must be done by the administrator. Thus, could you please help me a hand on this? Thank u!

Regards, Apollovvv

@Apollovvv: I went ahead and added the link to Tanya Plibersek (Q7684036). William Graham (talk) 14:06, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Regards, ZI Jony ^(Talk) 08:55, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

Protect

Please, protect Q48772419. Persistent vandalism on the last month. Rafael ^{(stanglavine) msg} 17:09, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

 Done--Ymblanter (talk) 19:55, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Regards, ZI Jony ^(Talk) 08:55, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

Vandalism

User:Maitsavend continues giving fictional names in Tatar: Q1424567, Q5540, Q5545 and so on. --Derslek (talk) 05:27, 16 March 2019 (UTC)

I blocked them for a month and reverted their edits in these three items.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:51, 16 March 2019 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Regards, ZI Jony ^(Talk) 08:55, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

Q62078971

Self-promotion item created by long-term abuser Alex9777777 (also known as Pechkurov Aleksej). --jdx ^Re: 17:12, 16 March 2019 (UTC)

Hello. I have deleted the item. Bear in mind that requests for item deletion should go to WD:RFD. Thanks. Jianhui67 ^{talk★contribs} 17:40, 16 March 2019 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Regards, ZI Jony ^(Talk) 08:55, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

Vandalism

Please (semi-) protect International Women's Day (Q38964) -- Luitzen (talk) 07:44, 17 March 2019 (UTC).

 Done by Mahir256. Jianhui67 ^{talk★contribs} 14:51, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Regards, ZI Jony ^(Talk) 08:55, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

Q15925869

Please temporary semi-protect this item, some people keep replacing the external link to something unrelated. Stang 12:25, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

Also, please block ‎Caoliu2019, this user keep replacing link after warning is given. Stang 13:14, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

The item is protected for a week and the user is blocked for 31 hours. Jianhui67 ^{talk★contribs} 14:50, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Regards, ZI Jony ^(Talk) 08:55, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

Odell Beckham Jr.

Odell Beckham Jr. (Q16212482) was vandalism. Please roll it back. -- sk (talk) 14:56, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

 Done —MisterSynergy (talk) 15:30, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Regards, ZI Jony ^(Talk) 08:55, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

150.241.162.249

This IP is repeatedly vandalizing an item, please block them and/or protect the page. --Lucas Werkmeister (talk) 14:58, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

 Blocked the range 150.241.162.128/25, repeated vandalism by static IPs of the same organization. Thanks, Lucas! --abián 15:06, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Regards, ZI Jony ^(Talk) 08:55, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

Margarita Salas (Q3320231)

Often vandalised item - need to be checked, repaired and protected. Jasc PL (talk) 15:12, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

 Semi-protected for one month and reverted the visible vandalism. Thanks, Jasc PL! --abián 15:26, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

Thanks! Jasc PL (talk) 15:29, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Regards, ZI Jony ^(Talk) 08:55, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

Israeli occupied territories

Hi, I have a problem with places located in the Israeli occupied territories, that is, the territories Israel has occupied since the 1967 war.

After 1967, Israel has unilaterally annexed part of East Jerusalem, this annexation is accepted by exactly 0 other countries. My 2 cents is that we should follow what the international community says, and therefore should not say that they are in Israel.

Comments? Huldra (talk) 20:26, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

@Huldra: this is not a question that concerns especially the administrator. You should ask your question on the project chat. Pamputt (talk) 20:45, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

Ok, thanks! I will, Huldra (talk) 20:47, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Regards, ZI Jony ^(Talk) 08:55, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

Fuque_rabbits

Please stop this vandal kid Jasc PL (talk) 22:47, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

 Done User blocked and article protected. Bovlb (talk) 23:36, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

Thanks! --Jasc PL (talk) 00:16, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Regards, ZI Jony ^(Talk) 08:55, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

Block

Please, block 195.221.155.10. Have a history of vandalism and blocks. Rafael ^{(stanglavine) msg} 11:50, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

 Done by Ymblanter. Regards, ZI Jony ^(Talk) 20:20, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Regards, ZI Jony ^(Talk) 20:20, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

Excessive vandalism - IP 37.71.130.150

Please stop this vandal kid. Jasc PL (talk) 14:25, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

 Done Blocked. Bovlb (talk) 15:22, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

Thanks! Jasc PL (talk) 15:26, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Regards, ZI Jony ^(Talk) 08:55, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

Muhammad al-Idrisi (Q173441)

Please protect this page due to excessive vandalism since 2018 Jasc PL (talk) 14:44, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

 Done Protected for two weeks, also indeffed Gerard depardieux (talk • contribs • logs). Bovlb (talk) 15:23, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

Thanks! Jasc PL (talk) 15:27, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Regards, ZI Jony ^(Talk) 08:55, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

Robert Hooke (Q46830)

Looks like this item needs further protection. --Succu (talk) 22:43, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

 Done, six months. Sjoerd de Bruin (talk) 22:44, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Regards, ZI Jony ^(Talk) 08:55, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

Вандализм

@Ymblanter: Инженер Механических Душ. Kalendar (talk) 17:20, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

 Done--Ymblanter (talk) 17:25, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Regards, ZI Jony ^(Talk) 17:45, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

Вандализм

@Ymblanter: 93.79.7.150. Kalendar (talk) 17:21, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

Тут, похоже, какой-то обший айпи, вандал уже исчез.--Ymblanter (talk) 17:26, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: -- Kalendar (talk) 18:50, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

Vandalism

List of vanndals:

1. User:176.85.188.246
2. User:205.121.233.163--Di^Mon₂₇₁₁ 19:44, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

@Dimon2711: Thanks for reporting. We don't generally block IP addresses for one or two bad edits. IP addresses often change hands so, unless there is some indication that the behaviour is sustained over time, a block may be more likely to cause collateral damage to an unrelated editor than to stop a future problem. Cheers, Bovlb (talk) 23:00, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Regards, ZI Jony ^(Talk) 06:16, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

Вандализм

@Ymblanter: 213.233.110.195 Kalendar (talk) 10:03, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

 Done, protected the page--Ymblanter (talk) 10:09, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: -- Kalendar (talk) 11:38, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

Request for page protection

Could Thomas Gottschalk (Q203806) be semi-protected temporarily? Multiple IP addresses have been vandalizing it. Thanks, Jc86035 (talk) 10:06, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

 Done protected for a month. Csigabi (talk) 10:08, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Regards, ZI Jony ^(Talk) 16:39, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

Вандализм

@Ymblanter: 91.78.24.168 Kalendar (talk) 09:49, 22 March 2019 (UTC)

 Done--Ymblanter (talk) 09:56, 22 March 2019 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Regards, ZI Jony ^(Talk) 13:40, 22 March 2019 (UTC)

Vandal

User:2A01:CB04:5E:6800:94A7:A6E0:519F:F25B--Di^Mon₂₇₁₁ 11:58, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

 Done Blocked for 31 hours. Thanks for reporting! Jianhui67 ^{talk★contribs} 13:32, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: --Di^Mon₂₇₁₁ 14:01, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

Вандализм

@Ymblanter: 89.185.5.172. Kalendar (talk) 18:57, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

 Done--Ymblanter (talk) 18:59, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: -- Kalendar (talk) 19:02, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

Q266224

Perhaps Markus Persson (Q266224) needs some protection, IP vandalism seems to be persistent there. — Mike Novikoff 13:03, 26 March 2019 (UTC)

 Done Protected for 2 weeks. Thanks for reporting. Jianhui67 ^{talk★contribs} 13:30, 26 March 2019 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: — Mike Novikoff 13:43, 26 March 2019 (UTC)

Editwarring by Tagishsimon

Hoi, user Tagishsimon insists on descriptions on people stating their ORCID number. I am a huge fan of ORCID but it is just not acceptable to mark people in this way. Please revert all changes where a description includes an ORCID number. Thanks, GerardM (talk) 12:31, 2 March 2019 (UTC)

I have explained at length to gerard what I am doing and why. My explanation is "I spend a lot of time adding new items for en wikipedia articles on humans. To do so, it is necessary to search for items having the same name. Pretty much all such searches will pull up one or several ORCID person items, or CBDB person items, since these have been added in tens and hundreds of thousands. Because these have no descriptions, it is necessary to waste time inspecting each of them to find out they are not the footballer/politician/whatever that I'm searching for. Adding descriptions including the ORCID ID provides a means of disambiguating this item from that item, within the search results, without having to waste time calling up the full item. For the majority of ORCID items, ORCID is the only available property; for CBDB, the dynasty & CBDB ID. Clearly this is more useful than having a blank description. Clearly, also it's suboptimal and we live in hope that eventually better descriptions will be added."

An easy example is, for instance, a search on David Grant, which absent information about ORCID IDs for two items, yields a search in which it would be necessary to inspect the full record for two items. With the "researcher ORCID ID=XXXX" description disambiguator, it can be seen from the search that the David Grants are not, for instance, the footballer I was looking for. Because of widespread duplication of names, the ORCID number is necessary to disambiguate the two researchers. Other wikidata editors have accepted my rationale above. I'm sorry Gerard does not, but I'm not moved by his argument, and I have yet to hear a cogent argument from him as to why no description is better than the descriptions I'm adding, in the context of the search use case.

I note that Gerard and I have history. I've had to block him on twitter for being a griefer, and can point to more Gerard griefing on en wikipedia. This incident seems pretty much par for the course in my experience of Gerard. --Tagishsimon (talk) 12:45, 2 March 2019 (UTC)

I do not know the word "griever", I have put my arguments in front of Tagishsimon several times now and he just does not appreciate that you cannot reduce a person to a number. There are alternatives and this is just not it. Thanks, GerardM (talk) 13:02, 2 March 2019 (UTC)

@Gamaliel, Pintoch, Sjoerddebruin:, as participants in a related discussion. Mahir256 (talk) 23:42, 2 March 2019 (UTC)

In a previous different situation, Tagishimon was undoing the work that I had done and his only response was.. what I do is acceptable given a different set of data. I explained why his approach was substandard and there was no response. He is the one who has been insulting calling me names, he is the one who does not care to consider the issues at all.

The question is NOT as he suggests that he only uses it on some researchers, he does that to all of them. It is therefore not a case of enabling disambiguation. He only adds descriptions in English, he does not add statements that people are a researcher (a questionable but acceptable practice. All in all the issue is that there is no consideration for a BLP issue here. Thanks, GerardM (talk) 12:35, 3 March 2019 (UTC)

Several editors have stated that using the ORCID number in the description is obviously "inappropriate" or "acceptable" but no one has bothered to explain why, and many other editors see no problem with it. Any discussion should begin with this explanation and not gloss over it. That said, I am willing to refrain from using the ORCID number whenever possible but given the inadequate state of many ORCID items and the numerous duplicate names it will be necessary to use the ORCID number with some items as there is no other information to disambiguate an item. I share the concern of Tagishsimon and have spent many hours using OpenRefine to add descriptions to these items given the difficulties they cause in creating new items and reconciling them in OpenRefine. Gamaliel (talk) 15:13, 3 March 2019 (UTC)

The BLP issue at hand is that it is similar to stenciling a number to a forehead of a person. The only justification is that it is convenient for you. As you may know, there is a bot making the rounds adding employer information based on ORCID information. As a consequence it is possible to include the latest employer to the description.. Making it something like "Researcher at !@#$ university". So adding some muscle to this process of including the statements to Wikidata would help.

In addition, as only descriptions are changed, it is weird that no statement is added for "occupation" "researcher" at the same time. So in consequence, this has been an action that has not been properly considered nor executed. Given the bed side manners of Tagishimon the evolution of this situation has been sickening. Thanks, GerardM (talk) 15:43, 3 March 2019 (UTC)

Your BLP claim makes no sense, and it's very insulting for you to dismiss the reasons that Tagishsimon and I have put so much work into cleaning up these items as "convenient" for us. It's for everyone who tries to create or reconcile items on Wikidata! Don't complain about Tagishsimon, I have no idea what has happened between you two in the past, but don't drag other people into the unpleasantness between the two of you. Gamaliel (talk) 16:11, 3 March 2019 (UTC)

gerard, the word is griefer, not griever. It means someone who causes trouble for the sake of it. I have explained at length why I am using the ORCID number as part of the disambiguation in the description. That is consonant with Help:Description, sentence 1 of which states "The description on a Wikidata entry is a short phrase designed to disambiguate items with the same or similar labels." I have suggested that you can improve descriptions that trouble you; you choose not to do this. You have suggested that such descriptions are "redundant"; they are not, since the ORCID ID property is not surfaced in search results, and it is mainly about improving search results so as to speed the addition of links to en.wiki biography articles that the work has been done. You have argued that "What you do is of hardly any relevance because it does English only." That makes no sense. None of us are under any obligation to tackle all language descriptions. You argue that I should be adding occupation properties, and that failure to do so is problematic. Again, here, you are reaching to the bottom of the barrel: none of us is under any obligation to append property X when appending description Y. You argue that "it is similar to stenciling a number to a forehead of a person." It clearly is not. It is a good faith description designed to disambiguate one person from another. You continue to make sweeping accusations that I have "destroyed the work [you] did" in relation to Ghanaian MPs, but despite being asked, repeatedly, for pointers to any such work, you have provided no such evidence. From my perspective, you're like my own little troll, following me around and making trouble. Honestly, I could do without it, if it's all the same to you. --Tagishsimon (talk) 16:19, 3 March 2019 (UTC)

First, you become insulting by using words and phrases that can be considered insulting. The words used at me are insulting, it follows that I can not expect good faith actions from you. That is your problem more than mine. When you disagree with me on how I perceive the use of numbers on people, it may be disappointing but given that this is mentioned in the past makes it not surprising. Particularly because no agreement was reached.

I fully understand why you think you need these descriptions. I have been professionally involved in databases. I mention this because it is only relevant because of your claim that I do not understand.. When you want to understand the quality of what you do, it seems to me that for you everything is ok as long as you find it beneficial. I understand that it is tough to be called out on this. What you do is not acceptable because what you do is reduce people to a number so that you can send them right or left.

I do not have problems with disambiguation because I do not use descriptions, automated descriptions are superior. It helps when you add statements. It is what I do.

In conclusion, I do not play fast and loose with Wikidata. I do not insult when I state that these descriptions are problematic. It does not help me make my point when I am the one insulting. Again, I repeat my request to the administrators: remove all descriptions where an ORCID identifier is included. Thanks, GerardM (talk) 18:23, 3 March 2019 (UTC)

By this logic, we should delete all of these Wikidata items because they reduce a person to a Q number. Gamaliel (talk) 03:20, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

No, a Q number only shows when there is no label. It is a state that we do not want. We are talking here about descriptions, this is you being unreasonabl. Thanks, GerardM (talk) 07:34, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

I could not dig into this in detail but think that (a) using ORCID in the description for disambiguation purposes is useful when no better (i.e. more specific) description is available, (b) using "researcher ORCID ID=XXXX" is not ideal and should probably be replaced by something like "researcher, ORCID ID=XXXX" or "researcher (ORCID ID=XXXX)" to emphasize that the item is about the researcher, not the ID. --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 22:06, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

Problematic batch creation by GerardM

I think what administrators should look at here is instead the sloppy mass creation of items by GerardM. In batch 6388 he created today using Quickstatements, there are numerous duplicate items that require merging and all the items lack statements except "instance of human" and the ORCID and Scopus identifiers, and interesting occurrence given above Gerard M demands other editors create statements and claims that creating statements is "what I do".

One example of many from the latest batch is Dimitris Milakis, which was created as Q61950592, Q61950593, and Q61950594, all with identical ORCID and Scopus identifiers.

I would suggest that GerardM be prohibited from mass creation of new items until he is willing to exercise basic quality control. Gamaliel (talk) 03:44, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

@Gamaliel: This is more indicative of an issue with SourceMD (or any semi-automated tool that uses the Query Service to check for completeness, which may not be updated regularly enough for that tool), and in fact I seem to recall more frequent users of the tool running into this problem, so there is no need to blame specifically Gerard for this problem. Mahir256 (talk) 04:15, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

For those that take an interest in SourceMD; as I have indicated often enough, I run the same tool often for the same people and as a consequence many issues get resolved by the process. One issue is that papers get created in one run but they are only attributed to the author(s) in a second run. Thanks, GerardM (talk) 07:45, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

As an aside, you are familiar with the concept of stalking? Anyway, this is very much beside the point and it degrades the argument. Thanks, GerardM (talk) 09:19, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

@GerardM: Just this past weekend I had to merge together 4 (FOUR!) identical scientific articles which had been created by SourceMD - please do NOT re-run until a sufficient time has passed that the query service has caught up with changes - recently it has been up to half a day behind. ArthurPSmith (talk) 14:41, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

Yesterday I merged three items for the same author.. They had an article in English, one in Portuguese and there was a scholar item (one with papers). Yes, there are doubles. The SourceMD has had several iterations and is less likely to create doubles. I am familiar with the time it takes for information to update. What I do is run processes not for the same people but for people who are co-author.. That ensures that there is less likelyhood of doubles.

You do realize that this is a collaborative project? If you don't want people complaining about errors you create, then make sure you create your items properly. Gamaliel (talk) 14:51, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

I have written quite extensively about errors, I understand errors quite well. What I also find is that people are quite happy to find problems elsewhere and are reluctant to reflect on their own work. When I add for instance employment records, like I did today, I have build in steps to check if what I do is correct. So I stay well within the 6% error rate you can expect of all of us.

When you consider collaboration, your way to vindicate your position has been by attacking me. So why should your argument wash with me? I noticed that you were praised for work done by you and, I am happy for you. Apparently you do some good and I leave it at that. Thanks, GerardM (talk) 15:13, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

Hi GerardM, yes we are well aware that these bugs are beyond your control. Given the feedback above by ArthurPSmith and Gamaliel it looks like this is leaving significant issues behind, so why don't you do something else instead? While this tool is not working as it should, please refrain from using it. If you keep submitting batches in the coming days I am afraid I will have to revert them until this discussion is resolved. Keep up the otherwise good work! − Pintoch (talk) 19:28, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

What I do is not run them straight away. What I do is run jobs on co-authors, particularly after sufficient time for query to recover. I only see the new co-authors when the system has caught up. I do duplication work but I would find duplicates in this way, there have not been duplicate authors for quite some time that I have seen. There used to be, but not anymore. Thanks, GerardM (talk) 19:52, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

Not anymore? In the collapsed box below is a list of 72 duplicate items for authors that you created yesterday alone. Gamaliel (talk) 21:03, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

SourceMD and similar tools do duplicate detection, but this involves SPARQL and fails when there is a server lag. The best cause of action in such cases is to keep off running such batch jobs when the lack is too large, but sometimes, this is not practicable, as such situations might occur while a batch is running. --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 22:06, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

@Daniel Mietchen: indeed! For this reason, I think it would be good to hold off from running large batches, where SPARQL lag can increase significantly while the batch is running. − Pintoch (talk) 05:27, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

If this is an inevitable part of the process, then an editor should build into their workflow searching for and resolving duplicates in their batches. Gamaliel (talk) 14:13, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

What all the duplicate items have in common is that they share the same ORCID id. They should always be merged in the lowest numbers. Regularly running a cleaning job is something that makes sense. Thanks, GerardM (talk) 15:57, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

So far as I can see, you are often creating duplicate items with sequential ids. It does seem like it might be better to avoid this duplication when preparing the quick statements, rather than merging later. Bovlb (talk) 23:20, 6 March 2019 (UTC)

That is not how SourceMD works it has nothing to do with "quick statements". Sorry.. Thanks, GerardM (talk) 16:28, 9 March 2019 (UTC)

Regardless of what tools you are using, if you are able to identify potential duplicates before a run you should do so and not create duplicates on Wikidata. You appear to be a technically savvy person, so willfully choosing to import duplicates is clearly disruptive. William Graham (talk) 17:06, 9 March 2019 (UTC)

The problem has nothing to do with me. It is the result of our database not being able to recognise that there is a duplicate. A duplicate not known because the lag of the query service is too big. When you call people disruptive, it hurts and it is particularly problematic when it is obvious that you do not know what you are talking about. Thanks, GerardM (talk) 14:56, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

@GerardM: Consider the case of Ray S Fertig (Q61950876), created at 2019-03-03T01:50:10‎, and Ray S Fertig (Q61950877), created one second later at 2019-03-03T01:50:11‎. How low a lag do you expect the query service to have in order to help with this case? Bovlb (talk) 20:18, 12 March 2019 (UTC)

My use case is valid. When lag is not acceptable, it is not. Thanks, GerardM (talk) 17:21, 13 March 2019 (UTC)

I think we must be talking at cross purposes here. Let me try to explain myself more clearly. You created two identical items, each including an ORCID iD, within one second of each other. The two edit summaries are "Created a new Item: #quickstatements; #temporary_batch_1551603252832; invoked by sourcemd_batch_processing on behalf of User:GerardM (batch 6388)" and "Created a new Item: #quickstatements; #temporary_batch_1551603849585; invoked by sourcemd_batch_processing on behalf of User:GerardM (batch 6389)". Whatever tools you are using on your end, the fact that they have the same ORCID iD identifier means that you have enough information to detect that they are duplicates. Are you using the query service to check for duplicates in the one second period that elapsed between these two edits? Or are you submitting one batch and then doing duplicate checks for the next batch before the first has finished? Cheers, Bovlb (talk) 19:18, 13 March 2019 (UTC)

It is the tool that finds missing items, authors. It is all in the process adding and checking them as well. So no, you do not know the tool, you assume and you are wrong. Thanks, GerardM (talk) 06:46, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ I am not familiar with this tool, but it is not wrong to say that you have been creating duplicate items. Whatever tool you are using, you are still responsible for the edits. I suspect what is happening is that you are starting a new batch before the quickstatements bot has finished processing your previous batch. Your first batch of changes has not yet gone into Wikidata, so any duplicate check will fail. This is therefore nothing do with lag in the query service, but simply the time required to process a background quickstatements job. I am concerned that you do not seem to acknowledge that this is a problem. Cheers, Bovlb (talk) 17:29, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

Clearly sourcemd is not functioning correctly in the way that @GerardM: is using it. @Magnus Manske: do you have any guidelines to help prevent this sort of duplication? @Daniel Mietchen, Pintoch: any ideas? ArthurPSmith (talk) 17:37, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

I do acknowledge that there is a problem. So much so that there is now a request to find a solution for this problem. In itself these duplicates are easy to process.. they have the same ORCID number so it is a problem but not really problematic.

On 2019-03-06, I resolved all ORCID duplicates and now I see 65 ORCIDs with multiple items. I don't know how many of these new cases have the same cause. I do see that some of these were assigned the ORCID erroneously, so we cannot do an automatic merge. Bovlb (talk) 18:09, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

I would welcome some more detail on how @GerardM: is using SourceMD. Can you reconstruct what the input was to batches 6388 and 6389, or document your input for some of the next batches? I suspect that the problems would be less grave if SourceMD were run based on one SPARQL query for all co-authors rather than running it once for every co-author and based on IDs. Another way to improve the situation would be for @Magnus Manske: to add a way to inspect/ download the input to a batch (i.e. either the list of IDs or the SPARQL query). --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 20:11, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

@ArthurPSmith: Despite the warnings, GerardM keeps submitting large SourceMD batches. As announced two weeks ago, I am reverting them now. @GerardM: please stop using SourceMD right now. Given the issues reported here and elsewhere by Gamaliel, ArthurPSmith and Sic19 and following the warning I gave you two weeks ago, I am reverting all the batches that you submit. If you keep submitting batches, I will have to block your account. − Pintoch (talk) 07:53, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ The problem is larger than just GerardM. Looking at ORCID duplicates, I sampled some of the cases. Some are old items that subsequently gained ORCIDs (allowing us to detect the duplication); others seem to have been caused by (use of) SourceMD, e.g.

• John O'Hara (Q62036300) + John O'Hara (Q62036382)
• Hui Khoon Ng (Q62036489) + Hui Khoon Ng (Q62036587)
• Cole A. Graham (Q62071825) + Cole A. Graham (Q62071834)

The first two pairs above were created by @Daniel Mietchen in different batches, a few minutes apart. The last pair is not attributed to any user, which is also surprising. Bovlb (talk) 20:26, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

The amount of duplicates that are being created with the same ORCID is a cause for concern - I merged around 90 duplicates on 2019-02-20 and 2019-02-21 and there are other merges mentioned above. This should be a rare occurrence and I would expect the likely cause to be human directly editing an item rather than a tool that is capable of detecting an existing item with that identifier. If nothing else, this highlights a general need to check our batch edits for problems. Simon Cobb (User:Sic19 ; talk page) 21:18, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘Hello,

it seems the wrong time for me to try the tool. I had a question though: are both methods (fullautomated and semiautomated) modes affected? I created few items using the semiautomated one and it seems fine. However, I'm not sure about the behaviour when creating mass items, which I prefer not to do yet. Would be thankful if I get notified when the error is fixed or clear safe instructions are there. Best thanks Sky xe (talk) 12:15, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

I am running a job based on a query by Daniel Mietchen. It will do what I want it to do. It allows me to gender co-authors and it will update them all. Thanks, GerardM (talk) 13:35, 22 March 2019 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Regards, ZI Jony ^(Talk) 16:20, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

Block for 173.71.136.136

Vandalism, 4 warns on TP. Since this IP has stopped, but if this IP starts again, do not have any qualms about blocking. Cordially. --Eihel (talk) 02:50, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

 Done--Ymblanter (talk) 19:02, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Regards, ZI Jony ^(Talk) 16:20, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

Block for User:AriZonA2007b

Hi,

This is an account that has just been created, and it already has vandalized 4 pages Special:Contributions/AriZonA2007b.

In addition, Bram Stoker (Q36184) is regularly vandalized, can you protect it?

— eru ^{[Talk] [french wiki]} 07:50, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

 Done Blocked indefinitely and Bram Stoker (Q36184) semi-protected for 6 months. Pamputt (talk) 08:28, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Regards, ZI Jony ^(Talk) 16:20, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

Vandal

194.199.77.51--Di^Mon₂₇₁₁ 09:52, 25 March 2019 (UTC) 212.55.25.249--Di^Mon₂₇₁₁ 09:54, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

@Jianhui67:--Di^Mon₂₇₁₁ 11:44, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

 Done I have blocked the 2nd IP for 31 hours. The first one does not seem serious, so I don't think a block is needed. Thanks for reporting. Jianhui67 ^{talk★contribs} 13:00, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

@Jianhui67: thanks! Also please block 200.29.191.68--Di^Mon₂₇₁₁ 13:51, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

 Done Jianhui67 ^{talk★contribs} 13:52, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

Thanks! @Jianhui67: also 200.111.64.2--Di^Mon₂₇₁₁ 12:16, 26 March 2019 (UTC)

 Done Blocked for 31 hours. Thanks for reporting! Jianhui67 ^{talk★contribs} 13:06, 26 March 2019 (UTC)

@Jianhui67: Thanks! Also please block 5.225.24.148--Di^Mon₂₇₁₁ 22:12, 26 March 2019 (UTC)

And 2806:109F:11:E38F:E88D:6265:2339:7630--Di^Mon₂₇₁₁ 22:22, 26 March 2019 (UTC)

 Done Jianhui67 ^{talk★contribs} 02:46, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Regards, ZI Jony ^(Talk) 16:20, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

Vandal

200.54.179.51 --Antur (talk) 16:09, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

 Done Blocked for 3 days. Thanks for reporting. Jianhui67 ^{talk★contribs} 16:12, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Regards, ZI Jony ^(Talk) 16:20, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protection for Q243

Please semi-protect Eiffel Tower (Q243) - very popular theme, heavy IP vandalism from various IP addresses.--Jklamo (talk) 18:48, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

 Done, previous protection ended a few days ago. Again protected for one year. Sjoerd de Bruin (talk) 18:49, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Regards, ZI Jony ^(Talk) 16:20, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

Вандализм

@Ymblanter: Filinoff Kalendar (talk) 06:06, 26 March 2019 (UTC)

 Done--Ymblanter (talk) 06:25, 26 March 2019 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Regards, ZI Jony ^(Talk) 16:20, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

Request for page protection

Please semi-protect Snapchat (Q333618) for about a year. Thanks, Jc86035 (talk) 16:50, 26 March 2019 (UTC)

 Done for a month. Csigabi (talk) 16:52, 26 March 2019 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Regards, ZI Jony ^(Talk) 16:20, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

Please revert repeated attack

It is a sad thing that I cannot respond to a simple, basic question on the Project chat without user:Pigsonthewing putting in an attack, and then repeating that attack. Can an admin please revert this repeated attack before things get out of hand? - Brya (talk) 17:43, 26 March 2019 (UTC)

I'm puzzled by this request. Are you sure you linked to the correct diff? That one appears to be @Pigsonthewing restoring a sub-thread that you deleted. I'm not seeing an attack. I'm not even seeing where Pigsonthewing has addressed you directly in that thread. Could you please clarify? Bovlb (talk) 21:03, 26 March 2019 (UTC)

I did not delete anything. I just restored a thread that Pigsonthewing had deleted, so-called "moved" because it was "related". The two threads have nothing in common except that taxa are mentioned and that I had responded in both threads. So unless one adopts the perspective that anything that mentions taxa and has user:Brya should be lumped in a ghetto, where it is locked away out of sight out of mind, there is nothing they have in common. - Brya (talk) 03:18, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

And of course, there is the ban erected when Pigsonthewing kept messing with my edits. - Brya (talk) 03:29, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

I will be blocking both editors for violating Wikidata:Editing_restrictions#Brya,_Pigsonthewing,_Succu:_HTML_comments/modifying_comments. --Rschen7754 04:12, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Regards, ZI Jony ^(Talk) 16:20, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

Unauthorized bot?

Hello admins, please review Special:Contributions/BlueCot_NG that just started. Looks to be an unauthorized bot or just a fake account vandalizing as a bot name. Thanks, Xaosflux (talk) 18:28, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

It's globally locked now. Jianhui67 ^{talk★contribs} 18:48, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Regards, ZI Jony ^(Talk) 19:33, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

Please block IP

IP 139.192.134.160 has been messing up WD for the last few days, in a fashion similar to recurrent vandal Guntur Subayigo, mainly affecting item Super Why! (Q16547115). Thanks LaddΩ chat ;) 01:59, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

 Done blocked by Mahir256 with an expiration time of 3 days. Regards, ZI Jony ^(Talk) 06:07, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Regards, ZI Jony ^(Talk) 06:07, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

Problem with Palestinian town?

My good friend User:Stefanik yesterday tried to add a language link to a new article on cy-Wikipedia. The result was the removal of all language links. I've tried to do the same this morning, and the same happened! All language links were removed; see Birzeit (Q212381). When I pressed 'edit' button to add new article, the usual blank line does not appear (see image). I tried the Publish button and it removed all language links. I'm now unable to add any links on any towns? Is there a bug here? Llywelyn2000 (talk) 06:04, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

@Llywelyn2000:  Done, added cywiki sitelink. Regards, ZI Jony ^(Talk) 06:14, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

Thanks ZI Jony for adding the cywiki link. The problem remains. I'm unable to do so, and the edit box does not appear. So what was the problem? Llywelyn2000 (talk) 07:17, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

There is a bug currently identified, sitelinks can only be added by a script--Ymblanter (talk) 07:37, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

I have the same problem, what I can do? --Codas (talk) 09:52, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

@ZI Jony: - did you use a script to add link? Llywelyn2000 (talk) 09:54, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

The bug has been resolved, it should work now.--Ymblanter (talk) 10:32, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

Thank you! --Codas (talk) 11:19, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

Mobile web and Duplicity was work. Regards, ZI Jony ^(Talk) 12:25, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

Diolch! Thanks! Llywelyn2000 (talk) 13:57, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Regards, ZI Jony ^(Talk) 14:45, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

Vandlism

Hello, @205.209.241.6 has vandalized Mount Everest Q531 and Logic Q6667429, I undid everything, but seeing as the only thing he's done for now is vandalism I think he should be banned. Niko.georgiev (talk) 06:22, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

 Done, blocked for 31h--Ymblanter (talk) 07:39, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Regards, ZI Jony ^(Talk) 14:45, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

Rạch Miễu Bridge

Rạch Miễu Bridge (Q2684873) interwiki links are deleted by mistake. How do I restore them? (enwiki / zhwiki / viwiki / thwiki / plwiki / nlwiki / jawiki / idwiki / frwiki ) --Asfreeas (talk) 09:28, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

Already done by M2k~dewiki--Ymblanter (talk) 10:33, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Regards, ZI Jony ^(Talk) 14:45, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

Properties ready for creation backlog

Category:Properties ready for creation is backlogged again - currently with 33 entries. Can someone work on them, please? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:34, 22 March 2019 (UTC)

Now up to 37 entries. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:38, 26 March 2019 (UTC)

Now down to 27 (thank you), but there are long-standing items; Wikidata:Property proposal/Cini Foundation ID was marked as ready on the 19th; Wikidata:Property proposal/LinkedIn personal profile ID a week ago. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:01, 29 March 2019 (UTC)

Both  Done. Regards, ZI Jony ^(Talk) 15:03, 29 March 2019 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Regards, ZI Jony ^(Talk) 15:03, 29 March 2019 (UTC)

Block for DankRuffalo

Transphobic Vandalism --Sharouser (talk) 04:05, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

Only two edits but both are really transphobic. Should we block or try to discuss first? Pamputt (talk) 08:30, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Regards, ZI Jony ^(Talk) 15:03, 29 March 2019 (UTC)

Please protect editing by IPs of (FC Zürich)

3 Reverts in 4 days. https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Q206692&action=history --Wurgl (talk) 08:53, 29 March 2019 (UTC)

 Done Semi-protected for 2 weeks. Pamputt (talk) 09:03, 29 March 2019 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Regards, ZI Jony ^(Talk) 15:03, 29 March 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protection for Q9036

Please semi-protect Nikola Tesla (Q9036) - popular theme, persistent IP vandalism from various IP addresses.--Jklamo (talk) 14:38, 29 March 2019 (UTC)

 Done Semi-protected for 1 year by Mahir256. Pamputt (talk) 14:53, 29 March 2019 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Regards, ZI Jony ^(Talk) 15:03, 29 March 2019 (UTC)

Вандализм

@Ymblanter: 2a02:2698:c23:3be:916a:66e1:5960:5be8. Kalendar (talk) 19:28, 29 March 2019 (UTC)

 Done--Ymblanter (talk) 19:30, 29 March 2019 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: -- Kalendar (talk) 17:19, 30 March 2019 (UTC)

Vandalism

I have reverted a number of vandal edits by 92.184.108.97. Might be good to keep an eye on him or block him. - Andre Engels (talk) 11:34, 29 March 2019 (UTC)

@Andre Engels: They have stopped. You can always warn vandals before reporting them, so they may stop vandalizing. Esteban16 (talk) 03:52, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Esteban16 (talk) 03:52, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

Вандализм

@Ymblanter: Сатоси Накакмото. Kalendar (talk) 17:21, 30 March 2019 (UTC)

 Done--Ymblanter (talk) 17:47, 30 March 2019 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: -- Kalendar (talk) 19:04, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

Vandal

@Jianhui67, Ymblanter: please block 51.253.245.110. Thanks!--Di^Mon₂₇₁₁ 06:03, 30 March 2019 (UTC)

 Done--Ymblanter (talk) 17:45, 30 March 2019 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Regards, ZI Jony ^(Talk) 10:20, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

81.43.239.133

Above ip is vandalising. Please block.--BRP ^ever 19:15, 30 March 2019 (UTC)

 Done Jianhui67 ^{talk★contribs} 19:16, 30 March 2019 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Regards, ZI Jony ^(Talk) 10:20, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

Vandalism

Gabri Cavallaro (talk • contribs • logs) Multiple vandalisms, already indef-blocked on it.wiki. --Titore (talk) 13:20, 31 March 2019 (UTC)

 Blocked. Thanks! --abián 13:22, 31 March 2019 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Regards, ZI Jony ^(Talk) 10:20, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

And again

And again user:Pigsonthewing happily and deliberately violates the topic ban, presenting an argument that should not fool any 10-year old. I suppose it might be argued that it is progress that for once he does present an argument, but it is no comfort. See also here. - Brya (talk) 04:20, 30 March 2019 (UTC)

I do not believe that the changing of just the headings is a violation of the topic ban. However, in the comments above I see violations of the other restriction: "Brya, Pigsonthewing, and Succu are not to make any comments about each other, including but not limited to their (perceived) competence, skills, goals, or motivations." - also here [8]. I will note that this [9] is also probably a violation on Brya's part but since they are already getting one block I will ignore this.

With that being said, I think we should consider expanding the restrictions to include all editors, for example "Brya, Pigsonthewing, and Succu are not to make any comments about any user, including but not limited to their (perceived) competence, skills, goals, or motivations." and "Brya, Pigsonthewing, and Succu are not permitted to use any HTML comments on discussion pages, or in messages directed at other users or to modify other users comments, including, but not limited to: indentations, and hiding their comments." (with maybe the exception for reverting pure vandalism from say, a user talk page). At least the latter seems to have sparked this particular conflict. --Rschen7754 04:49, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

Sorry? Next time I'm somehow involved here, User:Rschen7754, please notify me. Thanks a lot. --Succu (talk) 19:19, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

My apologies. I have notified Pigsonthewing and Brya now. --Rschen7754 00:18, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

Agreed with the proposal by Rschen7754; the current situation appears to be unbelievable. Hope that we will move on. Pamputt (talk) 19:21, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

Is there any current incident I'm involved in, Pamputt? I'm not aware of any one. So please stop generalizing. Danke. --Succu (talk) 19:32, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

BTW: Is there any evidence that Brya and myself made comments about each other we didn't like? In my opinion the whole paragraph is fabricated. Good night. --Succu (talk) 20:13, 1 April 2019 (UTC)