Wikidata:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive/2013/06

This page is an archive. Please do not modify it. Use the current page, even to continue an old discussion.

Page for logging true duplicates

In light of bug 48260 (which is WONTFIX'd due to the rareness of this issue), I've created Wikidata:True duplicates as a page for admins to log any "true duplicates" they delete that appear to be related to this bug. That way we can get a better handle on how often this happens, and reöpen the bug if the frequency ever gets too high. As I said, this is a very rare issue, so most of you will probably never even delete an item that fits this description. But if you do find one, please log it there. Thanks. — PinkAmpers&^{(Je vous invite à me parler)} 19:21, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

You could also use the history of User:Legobot/Dupes.  Hazard-SJ  ✈  03:04, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

I thought those ones were due to a different (resolved) bug. — PinkAmpers&^{(Je vous invite à me parler)} 03:07, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

Bug 46119, and it's still open.  Hazard-SJ  ✈  03:31, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

As I wrote at the page, there is 3182 duplicated links in the database dump from May 27. I will prepare a new large bulk deletion request, but probably first after the weekend. Byrial (talk) 06:36, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

Undeletion request

Hi. I hope this is the right place for this request.

Q4048164 was deleted after it was merged into Q4047855. Q4047855 is "List of members of the eighteenth Knesset" and as far as I remember Q4048164 was "The eighteenth Knesset". The topics are similar but not identical, so I think the items should not have been merged. Same thing was done with Q3608432 ("The nineteenth Knesset") and Q5382792 ("List of members of the nineteenth Knesset"). In Hebrew Wikipedia we have separate articles about "The seventeenth Knesset" and "List of members of the seventeenth Knesset". For the others there are no list of members articles yet, but hopefully there will be in the future. Crazy Ivan (talk) 11:21, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

 Done Restored the pages, fixed the links to each item and fixed one sitelink for the seventeenth entry. Regards, — Moe Epsilon 11:31, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks a lot. Crazy Ivan (talk) 12:35, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

Logo

See this, wikidata logo has been changed for bn sidebar (Thanks to him who done it ;). Now i want to know that if i need update this logo or change (change like bn font or text color) how can i do it? (means where is need to request for change this). Regards --Aftab1995 (talk) 15:20, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

You can just update the logo at commons:File:Wikidata-logo-bn-156px.png where you first uploaded it. --Stevenliuyi (talk) 16:09, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

Tayammum

Hello, can you please protect "Tayammum". The german article "Tayammun" has nothing to do with it, it's two different words and two different subjects. Thank you. Supermohi (talk) 05:46, 2 June 2013 (UTC) -> see also editwar on de:At-Tayammun

There hasn't been enough edit warring to justify protection, in my opinion. However, I will keep an eye on it and if it continues, it can be protected.--Jasper Deng (talk) 05:49, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

Also, if it is about a different topic, it should be in a different item (if it was in another item at all, no one would be able to add it to another without first removing it). Also, as Jasper Deng mentioned above, there still isn't enough justification for protection. Otherwise, unless there was a greater number of users involved in the edit war, and block if necessary, would do, (rather than preventing everyone outside of the restricting group from editing).  Hazard-SJ  ✈  05:53, 2 June 2013 (UTC); edited 06:21, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

I saw another revert, by yet another user. Because it appears that the edit warring seems unlikely to stop, I have fully protected the item for 4 days. All users involved are asked to resolve this on the item's talk page.--Jasper Deng (talk) 08:08, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

I think you can unprotect Q1771935. The German article de:Tayammum which was added in the last edit is identical to en:Tayammum, so the links seem correct now. de:At-Tayammun, which was linked before, is about a different topic. It seems this was based on a misunderstanding in de.wikipedia and on a typo (n or m at the end of words). Holger1959 (talk) 09:27, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

I've unprotected Q1771935 as the problem seems resolved. Vogone talk 09:38, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

It is a different topic, Tayammun is about "starting actions on the right side" in Islam and Tayammum is about the "dry ablution using sand or dust" in the islamic religion. Tayammun was moved to my user subspace and doesn't exisit in the german WP no more (unless I will publish it again) :) Supermohi (talk) 15:28, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

Hazard-Bot malfunctioning

The bot is duplicating dozens of sections in WD:RFD, and removing some archived RfDs... just take a look at this notice. I'll block the bot at the next mistake. --Ricordisamoa 05:45, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

Is this fixed? [1] ? ·addshore· ^{talk to me!} 08:48, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

Actually, I've made no recent code changes. However, I've given an update at my talk page, please see there.  Hazard-SJ  ✈  00:13, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

 Fixed; hopefully no more issues arise soon, as I've rewritten the code (and it uses a parser now, rather than trying to construct each section separately).  Hazard-SJ  ✈  03:59, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

Species duplicates

Just a reminder that there is a list of species item duplicates at User:Soulkeeper/dups if anyone fancies spamming their merge.js buttons (after carefully checking of course!) Del_♉sion23 (talk) 22:51, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

Old Template:Nutshell

Please get me old texts of Template:Nutshell/en. It seems to me that I missed something when I modified the template for the new translation system. --Michgrig (talk) 14:42, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

I've temporary restored the page. Vogone talk 15:11, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. It turned out that everything is OK. So please delete it again. --Michgrig (talk) 08:30, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

 Done. --Stryn (talk) 08:32, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks! --Michgrig (talk) 08:46, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

request for protection: Project:Request an account (Q11009153)

vandalism, [2]--GZWDer (talk) 11:08, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

"Vandalised" just twice, I would say no need for protection at the moment. --Stryn (talk) 11:10, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

Agree with Stryn, only vandalised twice of which once today.  Not done for now. TBloemink _talk 11:25, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

Project chat/ta

Anyone, Wikidata:Project chat/ta delete this page. coz i think this is a test edit page.--Aftab1995 (talk) 16:08, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

That it is; deleted. Ajraddatz (Talk) 16:12, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

Benebot* opt-in for marking deleted items

Because it doesn't seem to be well publicised, if any admin wants their deleted items at WD:RfD to be automatically marked as done, they need to add their name to User:BeneBot*/RfD-optin. Otherwise, you will have to mark them manually, as you would do if you decide not to delete an item, or are marking a bulk deletion. Del_♉sion23 (talk) 17:31, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Wait, Benebot* won't work on bulk deletions at RfD? Sven Manguard Wha? 20:43, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

True, you need manually to mark them as deleted. --Stryn (talk) 20:45, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Also, if you delete not the item proposed for deletion, but the one into which the information was merged (for instance, because it had a significantly higher number), the result must be added manually, the bot does not understand it.--Ymblanter (talk) 07:25, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Because it seems like Benebot* stopped working on May 20, we will have to go back to manually marking as done, at least temporarily. I've left a message on Bene*'s talk page, but I think he's busy in RL since he hasn't edited in 9 days. The Anonymouse (talk) 15:57, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Can someone else make a new bot since he seems to be gone for longer.--Saehrimnir (talk) 08:34, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

Perhaps we should make a project on labs for wikidata bots where shared and crucial wikidata bots (such as this) can be run by and maintained by multiple operators? ·addshore· ^{talk to me!} 08:42, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

SamoaBot 31 is already approved and running. It also features the improvement suggested by Ymblanter above. You can take the source and run it on Labs, of course; I have a Labs-Tools account, too. --Ricordisamoa 09:11, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

Awesome! I am working on a similar thing on enwiki so I will likely do everything together! I will let you know when the project is ready etc :) ·addshore· ^{talk to me!} 09:15, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

Special:MostRevisions not being updated anymore?

I'm writing a bachelor thesis concerning Wikidata and I'd like to use the information shown on Special:MostRevisions, but the statistics shown are half a year old. Could someone update them? --GhostGambler (talk) 19:34, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

Updating that on a daily basis would be too much overhead, although a manual SQL query may be possible.--Jasper Deng (talk) 19:32, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

One could just update this once? I think that's easier than me creating a query by hand for a functionality which is already there. --GhostGambler (talk) 19:34, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

I think select page_title, count(*) from revision join page on rev_page=page_id where page_namespace=0 group by rev_page order by count(*) desc limit 100; will work. I'm running it against labs' copy of wikidata right now. Legoktm (talk) 19:56, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

Cool, thanks :) --GhostGambler (talk) 20:03, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

Top 100 pages. Let me know if you want a larger number. I can also set it up to run regularly (and format it nicer) if you'd like. Legoktm (talk) 20:06, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, that's perfectly fine for me --GhostGambler (talk) 20:13, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

I just made a similar list from the last database dump (2013-05-27) with all namespaces. Wikidata:Requests for deletions had most revisions (43,180), and 5.760.794 pages (of which 5.722.616 are items) only had one revision. Byrial (talk) 22:25, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

Q5178908 & Q425182

Hello, en:Covarrubias_(disambiguation) seems to be use by 2 differents pages : Q5178908 and Q425182, is it a merge case? -- Speculos (talk) 07:27, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

Yes, so  Done. You can do it in future also yourself, see Help:Merge. --Stryn (talk) 07:38, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

Notable?

I'd like another admin's input as to whether Jan Pieter Balkenende (Q13418237) meets WD:N. He's currently listed as the father of Jan Peter Balkenende (Q133386), which is indeed encyclopedically true (according to en and nl), but I'm not sure whether family relations qualify as "fulfill[ing] some structural need". I've mostly stayed out of the drafting and enforcement of the more complex parts of the notability policy, so I haven't had much experience with cases like this. — PinkAmpers&^{(Je vous invite à me parler)} 19:09, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

• I  Support deletion, mostly per PinkAmpersand. --Jakob ^{Scream about} _{the things I've broken} 19:13, 5 June 2013 (UTC)
• Not notable in my opinion, because it doesn't form a logical connection between at least two other items.--Jasper Deng (talk) 19:45, 5 June 2013 (UTC)
• I am on the fence with this one, it does form a link between entities, but, the link doesn't really add much, other than the name ie. the entity as no statements of itself. ·addshore· ^{talk to me!} 23:08, 5 June 2013 (UTC)
• Also if I am not an Admin, I think this is notable because it is used as a link for a person with many sitelinks. --Pyfisch (talk) 15:05, 6 June 2013 (UTC)
• I  Support deletion. This is not a database for every notable person's parents. --Stryn (talk) 15:22, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

New editor removing statement

Please make a AbuseFilter tagging this, such as [3].--GZWDer (talk) 03:24, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

60.36.244.69

this user keeps replacing "disambiguation" characteristics of several items by "surname" characteristics (GND main type, description etc.), and ignores that it is wrong. Holger1959 (talk) 14:17, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

see User_talk:60.36.244.69 ("I will revert 1001 times, after if you 1000 times edited."), permanent link. Holger1959 (talk) 14:24, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

The user stopped for the moment. I followed the contributions on Wikipedias from today and now I think the IP is en:User:Sheynhertz-Unbayg (pt:Especial:Contribuições/Sheynhertz-Unbayg, Serkin edits related to Q1183067). Don't know if this is important or if it helps. Holger1959 (talk) 15:03, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

follow up at the project chat [4]. Holger1959 (talk) 22:44, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

Anton Leszczewicz

• http://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q2042435#sitelinks
• http://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anton_Leszczewicz
• De sitekoppeling Anton Leszczewicz wordt al gebruikt door het item Q2731152.
• like merge. --Lidewij C J. (talk) 13:48, 7 June 2013 (UTC)
  • Take a look at Help:Merge, probably it's what you need. --Michgrig (talk) 14:59, 7 June 2013 (UTC)
    • Michgrig, Help:Merge, did not help me. Abracadabra. Code Q2731152 deleted. Mvg,--Lidewij C J. (talk) 16:28, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

I assume this was merge from Q2731152 to Q2042435. If so, I have deleted as appropriate. John F. Lewis (talk) 17:48, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

Out of curiosity...

Other than Lydia and Katie on the WMDE side of things, do we have any female administrators? And, if not, do we have any viable candidates that someone can talk into running? Wikimedia has something of a reputation for being what you might call a sausage fest, especially when it comes to technical things (despite the fact that some of our best developers are women). Off the top of my head I can't think of any female admins, and out of 77 volunteer sysops that's kinda a problem. — PinkAmpers&^{(Je vous invite à me parler)} 15:57, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

No, it isn't a problem. The reason for the male-dominated admin list is the fact that the vast majority of contributors here are male. When it comes to searching for admins, we should be looking for capable candidates, not a particular sex organ. Ajraddatz (Talk) 16:01, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

User:Andreasmperu is female.--Ymblanter (talk) 17:35, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

A simple JavaScript query to get the job done:

$.get(
	mw.util.wikiScript("api"),
	{
		action:"query",
		format:"json",
		list:"allusers",
		aulimit:"max",
		auprop:"",
		augroup:"sysop"
	}
).done(function(data){
	$.get(
		mw.util.wikiScript("api"),
		{
			action:"query",
			format:"json",
			list:"users",
			usprop:"gender",
			ususers:$.map(data.query.allusers,function(e){return e.name}).join("|")
		}
	).done(function(users){
		$.each(users.query.users,function(i,e){
			console.log(e.gender+Array(12-e.gender.length).join(" ")+e.name);
		});
		console.log(
			"out of "+users.query.users.length+" admins:\n"+$.map(users.query.users,function(e){return e.gender=="male"?e:null;}).length+" are male, "+
			$.map(users.query.users,function(e){return e.gender=="female"?e:null;}).length+" are female, and ",
			$.map(users.query.users,function(e){return e.gender=="unknown"?e:null;}).length+" are unknown."
		);
	});
});

Run it in your browser's console, and see the results. --Ricordisamoa 21:03, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

That relies on people admitting they are women, many (most?) do not. Secretlondon (talk) 19:26, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

Of course; many could even have added the correct gender in their home wiki, but not here... --Ricordisamoa 17:12, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

IP bot

Bot editing without logging in? Special:Contributions/10.4.0.64. Del_♉sion23 (talk) 17:20, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

Doesn't seem to be doing it anymore, so I guess problem solved. Ajraddatz (Talk) 17:22, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

one more seems benebot* don't logged on it's account.--DangSunM (talk) 17:36, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

10.4.0.64 resolves to i-000000e8.pmtpa.wmflabs which in turn resolves to bots-4 on the bots project on wikimedia labs. So just a logged out bot on labs :) ·addshore· ^{talk to me!} 17:42, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

Wikidata:Administrators' how-to guide

Me again! Over the months there have been various small slip ups (I think mainly in item deletion) that have occurred due to administrators not necessarily knowing everything that should be checked before performing an action (ie. deleting an item). So I have taken an idea from enwiki that could help us, I have created Wikidata:Administrators' how-to guide. Currently the page is just a list of empty sections that need to be filled with useful information. Naturally all input is appreciated and lets see if we can make this page useful for our new administrators! (of course if you all think it is a silly idea i will delete the page ;p)·addshore· ^{talk to me!} 17:49, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

I think that a how-to is a good idea, but we have everything already on other pages, maybe we only need to make them clearer and give them every new Admin to read. --Pyfisch (talk) 18:18, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

I agree with Pyfisch. Everything relevant is already written down somewhere and might only need some clarification. Maybe an additional central page (like proposed) could be linked in the Template:AdminWelcome. Vogone talk 18:22, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

You can probably steal a lot of it from Commons or the English Wikipedia. --Rschen7754 20:44, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

Repeated refusal to listen by Docu

(I'm seeing this just now) I would have supported removal of the Property Creator right, but opposed a block. Anyway, he's retired. --Ricordisamoa 23:14, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

(Also just seeing it now) It's a shame it came to that. Something that could have been fixed with a reasoned discussion (usual circumstances) ended in a retirement. Though from what I can see, it's through no fault of the concerned admins that were enquiring about edits. In the end it's just turned into a "toys out of pram" moment. The admins involved acted just as they should have. Del_♉sion23 (talk) 19:46, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

Edit protected request

Change in Q1231 the interwiki and label by Kosovo. --Vivaelcelta (talk) 16:13, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

Which label are you referring to? There are dozens. TCN7JM 16:35, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

Could you please be more specific and state it at Talk:Q1231 please. The reason I fully protected it was due to edit warring based around interwiki links. Commenting there and elaborating on the discussion which has taken place their would be great. Thanks, John F. Lewis (talk) 16:38, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

Oh sorry, the language is Galician. --Vivaelcelta (talk) 06:26, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

User Karl Katarn

Can someone please check the work of User:Karl Katarn? They are scrambling up many pages, and I have seen nothing good that didn't need to be undone. Seems like they are "not here". Regards, Codex Sinaiticus (talk) 22:03, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

User:Aristomenis12

The user has made some strange edits. I warned him/her but please someone watch him/her for some more time. --Michgrig (talk) 09:24, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

Edits do indeed look odd, the final post to PC was in greek. Not sure if it was spam, a tes, accident or totally misplaced. Will keep an eye on them ·addshore· ^{talk to me!} 10:47, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, I saw the Greek letters. And I tried to put Greek parts of their post to Google Translator. The result was pure rubbish. --Michgrig (talk) 12:14, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

If the edit on the project chat is not spam (I think this is spam, btw), then it's utter garbage TBloemink _talk 12:33, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

New database dump

A new database dump for Wikidata became available today, and that means more work to do!

I placed a bulk deletion request for 4666 items found in the database dump which had no sitelinks, no statements, and were not used as value in any statements at:

• Wikidata:Requests for deletions/Bulk
• Wikidata:Requests for deletions/Bulk/2
• Wikidata:Requests for deletions/Bulk/3
• Wikidata:Requests for deletions/Bulk/4
• Wikidata:Requests for deletions/Bulk/5
• Wikidata:Requests for deletions/Bulk/6

And at User:Byrial/Deleted item values is a list of deleted items which is used as values in statements. I see that some of them already are undeleted now. Byrial (talk) 15:19, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks a lot, I've mass-deleted many of them. --Ricordisamoa 01:50, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

Special:Contributions/Smart Art Project Limited

(Non-administrator observation) Should this user be blocked, as they are spamming (see the contributions) and their username is clearly promotional? --Jakob ^{Scream about} _{the things I've broken} 13:09, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

Locked. Vogone talk 13:33, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

Benebot* opt-in (again)

Could I get some thoughts on simply making Benebot* a non opt-in bot for deletions now (ie. it will just look after everyone on the page)? Will save admins having to find the page and sign up, or potentially flip it on its head and make the list opt-out? So if anyone really really doesnt want their deletions tagged they can say so? :) ·addshore· ^{talk to me!} 23:06, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

 Support, my bot got many requests skipped 'cause admins simply didn't know of it. --Ricordisamoa 23:42, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

...but then it should be called User:BeneBot*/RfD-optout :P --Ricordisamoa 23:45, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

No need for the opt-in IMO. Ajraddatz (Talk) 23:46, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

 Support John F. Lewis (talk) 06:46, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

Fine with me.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:55, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

Also fine with me but some users made quite much trouble when it was a non-opt-in bot [1]. I don't know whether their opinion has changed. Vogone talk 10:20, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

Sure, but I thought the bot was broken. --Rschen7754 10:22, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

@Vogone: Thats why we make it opt out? ;p So people that don't like it can still have the option to not use it! ·addshore· ^{talk to me!} 10:25, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

@Rschen7754: BeneBot* is inactive, but another can do the job fine. --Ricordisamoa 10:33, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

@Ricordisamoa: does SamoaBot use the same opt in list? ·addshore· ^{talk to me!} 17:12, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

@Addshore: I think so, according to RfD-optin page. The Anonymouse (talk) 17:15, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

@Addshore: Yes, it does, but now BeneBot* came back. --Ricordisamoa 17:10, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

 Support opt out instead of opt-in.--Saehrimnir (talk) 19:11, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

 Support as proposer. ·addshore· ^{talk to me!} 19:30, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

 Support --DangSunM (talk) 17:05, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

Consensus is reached, I'm going to create User:BeneBot*/RfD-optout in 24 hours. --Ricordisamoa 23:17, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

Any update on this? :> It still appears to be a lovely red link for me ;p ·addshore· ^{talk to me!} 10:31, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

I've updated the bot and created a new list. -- Bene* ^t_a^l_k 12:23, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

Awesome! ·addshore· ^{talk to me!} 12:36, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

What to do with pages like Special:Undelete/Talk:Q13444735?

As most of you probably know, one of the preloaded delete options (put in the list by yours truly) is "Wikidata does not host original encyclopedic content"; I use it fairly frequently, and I've seen others doing so as well. People confusing projects like Wikidata with the encyclopedias we support is understandable – see this piece of policy on Commons, for instance, made necessary by the same misunderstanding. Now, when I find pages like this, often they're just copy-pastes of Wikipedia articles... but today I stumbled on Special:Undelete/Talk:Q13444735, which, as far as I can tell, is a legitimate Romanian explanation of Q13420597, and isn't available on the Romanian Wikipedia, and I hate to delete potentially useful encyclopedic content. I've found ones like this before. Now, we could just come up with some sort of templated message offering to email people a copy, but I think it would be cool if we could set up some sort of program on Meta where we offer pages like this to other projects. Thoughts? — PinkAmpers&^{(Je vous invite à me parler)} 22:40, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

We should probably create a friendly welcome message orientated towards such users, that would guide them to the right place. Something else is to stop deleting them, but instead, blanking them, so non-admins can recover the content.--Jasper Deng (talk) 22:42, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

I would think we'd want to contact an admin on one of those projects so that they can import the page history, perhaps in parallel with speaking with those users. --Izno (talk) 00:16, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, there is the potential for import there that might be impeded with deletion. That being said, if there is just the one revision, we could let the user know what happened and offered to give them the deleted content to create again on the intended project. Ajraddatz (Talk) 23:25, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

KLBot2

I've blocked it for 6 hours (after a notice) for having imported date of birth (P569) and date of death (P570) with Wikipedia as the only source, while the relevant discussions on these are still pending. --Ricordisamoa 05:35, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

Oops, that was 3 hours. --Ricordisamoa 09:14, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

User:BeneBot*/RfD-optout

I'm going to notify all non-opted-in admins, if they would like to opt-out explicitly. --Ricordisamoa 03:16, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks to everyone who's combined genius made it opt-out instead of opt-in. Definitely a good change! (also, no desire to opt-out here, just saying thanks :P) Ajraddatz (Talk) 06:08, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

edit a protected item

can someone add oc:Republica de Kosova to Q1246 (Republic of Kosovo)? see legitimate request on Talk:Q1246. Holger1959 (talk) 23:24, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

This and Q1231 are currently protected due to edit warring, and so it'll probably only happen when the edit war is resolved.--Jasper Deng (talk) 23:28, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

i know, but I this is an unambiguous new article. oc.wikipedia now has oc:Kosova (already linked on Q1231) and oc:Republica de Kosova (not yet linked on Q1246). not linking the new article – only because there was an edit war on Wikidata about the sorting of some of the Kosovo/Republic of Kosovo articles – means a disadvantage for Wikipedia readers in my opinion. Should Wikipedias with new articles generally wait for interwiki links the full time items were protected? I thought that admins are allowed to carry out legitimate requests during protection. What if an admin protects an item for 2 months or even longer? i don't think that, as in this case, 4 weeks qualify as "short amounts of time". Maybe use common sense? Holger1959 (talk) 00:49, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

 Done because of the lack of ambiguity here. My main thing was that editing something disputed should be avoided in the event of edit warring protection.--Jasper Deng (talk) 00:54, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

thank you! Holger1959 (talk) 23:55, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

persistent problem with a user (IP of Sheynhertz-Unbayg)

A week ago I reported the problem at the administrators' noticeboard [5], but got no attention or help. Now I try here. I hope that someone can handle this issue, because my time is limited in the next days.

The user Special:Contributions/60.36.244.69 keeps removing or changing items in a wrong way. A typical edit is this [6] (changing to unallowed value for entity type; adding "family name" to Property:P107). He often mixes up disambiguations and surname articles, and changes descriptions and property related things almost randomly, which leads to inconsistent data and wrong interwiki links. I tried to explain, but he only reacted once, see User talk:60.36.244.69. In the last days I corrected at least some of the mess he made, also on Wikipedias, which took me in total some hours.

Now I am very sure that the IP user is identical to a user called "Sheynhertz-Unbayg". Because his focus is surnames/disambiguations and interwiki linking, the problems with his edits known from Wikipedia seem to have doubled effects on Wikidata. This project (Wikidata) is a perfect place for such mess making ("one click, dozens of Wikipedias affected"). Quoting from en:Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/Sheynhertz-Unbayg#Outside_view_7: "The main problem with his behaviour is that he creates huge amounts of work for other Wikipedians."

Useful links that I found:

• 60.36.244.69 global contributions
• Sheynhertz-Unbayg global contributions
• Sheynhertz-Unbayg SUL Info
• en:Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/Sheynhertz-Unbayg

I don't know how long he will use this IP (60.36.244.69), but I think that I should report the problem anyway, so that other users or admins can deal with it. Holger1959 (talk) 22:43, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

Blocked 1 week for disruptive editing. The comment where he shows his willingness to revert is quite disturbing. I find it plausible that he could be the LTA from enwiki, but the behavior was disruptive here by itself. --Rschen7754 23:38, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

Thank you. If someone looks for indications why I think that the IP is identical to Sheynhertz-Unbayg, see for example the edits and timestamps:

• pl:Demel (nazwisko) / Q1185273 (Demel)
• fr:Chouraqui / Q2964604 (Chouraqui)
• pt:Sorokin (sobrenome) / Q2303615 (Sorokin)
• commons (editing a file uploaded by S-U).

Holger1959 (talk) 00:09, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

Now active with new IP Special:Contributions/60.34.240.107. Holger1959 (talk) 03:48, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

Blocked 2 weeks for block evasion.--Jasper Deng (talk) 03:56, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

GSoC Genewiki

I'm still a new admin, so I am going to ask for a second opinion. Is it Ok if I create three properties as strings that should actually be numbers (Wikidata:Property_proposal/Term#GenLoc_chr). We could probably convert them later. They are needed now, because a couple of participants of GSoC want to work with them. There are two more string-properties under the same link that I want to speedy create after two positive votes. They are also for the GSoC Genewiki participants. --Tobias1984 (talk) 15:21, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

IMHO it's ok, as long as they will be converted when the numeric datatype is available. --Stevenliuyi (talk) 15:36, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for the quick response ;) --Tobias1984 (talk) 15:46, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

Special:Contributions/Mr.Rosewater

I'm busy sorry. Does somebody check user:Mr.Rosewater's contribution [7]? It seems he made subpages (archive) item. So It is not meets WD:N In opinion. Please Check his contributions. Thanks--DangSunM (talk) 17:06, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

Technically I feel this item actually passes WD:N. The Portal namespace is not included on WD:N. Potentially we need a tiny bit more discussion to clear up the notability page further? ·addshore· ^{talk to me!} 08:52, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

I have asked the user to cease the addition of these items per the spirit of the exclusion rules that form a part of WD:N. I suspect that adding these pages to the rules (perhaps change how we've classified the pages into a more broad "Wiki(pedia) infrastructure subpages" would deal with the problem). --Izno (talk) 21:59, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

wiki (Q171)

I'd say it's a close call, but it seems to be fairly heavily vandalized, so maybe semi-protection? PC protection would be better, but of course we don't have that here. --Jakob ^{Scream about} _{the things I've broken} 22:28, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

It hasn't been that vandalized this month, although others might choose to protect it based on the long-term pattern.--Jasper Deng (talk) 22:30, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

Hasn't been vandalized this month? It was vandalized today. --Jakob ^{Scream about} _{the things I've broken} 22:38, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

No productive non-autoconfirmed in around two months, I'd say it's worth protecting. Ajraddatz (Talk) 01:59, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

I wouldn't object to such a protection. However, my personal view is that it's not necessary at the moment.--Jasper Deng (talk) 02:03, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

I have gone ahead and semi protected the item. ·addshore· ^{talk to me!} 10:10, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

Monitor edits of 112.203.160.147

Please monitor edits of this IP. Posibbly an unregistered bot and usually work in tamdem with a certain a user. Has many good edits so if there are mistakes pretty hard to mass revert.--Lam-ang (talk) 16:18, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

What makes you think the user is a bot? I'm thinking he/she is just a newbie. TCN7JM 10:16, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

I think he is running a kind of script: Diff. IW 11:48, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

@TCN7JM - Bot/script? User manages to add claims to all political divisions of Ilocos Region and in between those edits manages to jump to other items and add claims to them too w/o skipping a bit in about 45 min, whatever it is bot,script or human that is not a newbie. Without blatantly disclosing the user's identity you can carefully read the recent posts at community portal and you'll find your answer there.--Lam-ang (talk) 15:54, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

@TCN7JM - User say's it's a bot.--Lam-ang (talk) 16:44, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

I left a note for the IP asking them to file a request for approval. Legoktm (talk) 20:06, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

Potentially we should try and finalise the bot policy? I imagine this case would be under the policy after all. ·addshore· ^{talk to me!} 20:21, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

logged out bot

10.4.0.220 seems not logged on by Hazard-Bot. But Archived bot is still working using Hazard-Bot account but, why removing sitelink and RFD requests are working while logged-out? Regards,--DangSunM (talk) 20:17, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

They use different processes / programs to complete the different tasks. One program can be logged out while others are logged in. ·addshore· ^{talk to me!} 20:18, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

RfC's needing closing

Hi, there are a few RfC's needing someone to close them and update the relevant policy pages.

• Wikidata:Requests for comment/Disambiguation pages guidelines - no edits since May  closed
• Wikidata:Requests for comment/Several datatypes for the same property - could use more input, no comments for 2 weeks
• Wikidata:Requests for comment/Software statements - last edit on June 1st closed
• Wikidata:Requests for comment/Species and genus - not enough input, really stale though. closed

Thanks, Legoktm (talk) 07:18, 22 June 2013 (UTC)

All but the second one have been closed (by me and User:Sven Manguard). I'd be in favor of keeping that one open and readvertising it.--Jasper Deng (talk) 08:02, 22 June 2013 (UTC)

Edit filter

Can someone please explain how this edit tripped the "possible vandalism" edit filter? Thanks, --Jakob ^{Scream about} _{the things I've broken} 23:24, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

Because the raw diff added "CDDCDFB". Legoktm (talk) 23:35, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

Isn't that the kind of thing that should be fixed (or maybe it is not possible; I do not know a lot about abuse filters)? --Jakob ^{Scream about} _{the things I've broken} 23:42, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

12.197.241.32

Special:Contributions/12.197.241.32 please have a look at these contributions.--Vyom25 (talk) 14:05, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

Reviewed so far. Regards, -- Bene* ^t_a^l_k 16:00, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

User talk:Kristenpapua#Blocked

Please see commons:Commons:Requests for checkuser/Case/Kabupatentolikarapapuabarat. --Ricordisamoa 19:11, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

Besides making test edits on the user page/2 test items, I see no disruptive editing, honestly. We also do not have a policy which would justify a block based on a CU on another wiki but if you consider this as okay … Vogone talk 19:20, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

Should be globally locked actually. --Rschen7754 19:22, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

Locked. John F. Lewis (talk) 19:32, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

IP tagging for deletion

There's an IP (most recent contrib at Special:Contributions/2003:66:8F02:1601:12DD:B1FF:FEB3:C7F7 who is creating talk pages that say "the main page tagged for deletion" (which is true), quite unnecessarily. This same IP seems to change every day or so. I have tried unsuccessfully to make contact. Could someone figure out a good way to talk to the IP? --Izno (talk) 02:50, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

looks like a German speaking user. I think it's best to leave a note (that it's not needed, maybe also about the format, see [8]; wikilink, not full url) on the IP's talk page the next time someone notices the user editing. Holger1959 (talk) 10:43, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

@Holger1959: If Izno leaves a message on the IP's talk page, it might not be seen if the IP changes the next time that person browses Wikidata. All he can do, without otherwise affecting the user's editing, would be to just keep trying and hope the person sees the message.  Hazard-SJ  ✈  00:06, 30 June 2013 (UTC)

Blgh, yes, that's the issue. Part of the issue is that the IP is editing at different time periods than myself, and it takes a post at RFD to catch him. Since it's the case here that the IP changes, I'll just ask that if an admin sees a deletion request made by that particular user if they can drop a note at his talk page. :/ --Izno (talk) 14:17, 30 June 2013 (UTC)