Wikidata:Administrators' noticeboard

Administrators' noticeboard This is a noticeboard for matters requiring administrator attention. If you wish for something to be deleted, please use Wikidata:Requests for deletions. If you want to report a bug in Wikidata software, please use Wikidata:Report a technical problem or Phabricator. Matters not requiring administrator action should be raised at Project chat. Matters that may involve CheckUser should be raised at Wikidata:Requests for checkuser. To report vandalism on wikidata: please click here. Please add {{section resolved|1=~~~~}} to resolved sections. IRC channel: #wikidataconnect

Translate this header box! Start a new discussion

On this page, old discussions are archived. An overview of all archives can be found at this page's archive index. The current archive is located at 2024/07.

SpBot archives all sections tagged with {{Section resolved|1=~~~~}} after 1 day and sections whose oldest comment is older than 7 days.

Requests for deletions high ~132 open requests for deletions.

Requests for unblock empty 0 open requests for unblock.

Report concerning JMagalhães

A user has been exhibiting disruptive editing behaviour, focusing on removing aliases and modifying genders. Here are some examples:

• [1]
• [2]
• [3]
• [4]
• ...

We can also see they are removing terms without including them on the alias in several other moments:

• [5]
• [6]
• [7]
• [8]
• [9]
• ...

This behaviour is problematic for the following reasons:

• Information Loss: Removing aliases hinders the searchability of entities with different names.
• Disruption: Edit warring disrupts the collaborative editing process by repeatedly undoing other editors' work.

The core concern is removing information and edits warring, not just modifications. These actions violate established practices and confuse users relying on accurate and consistent information.

• Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton (talk) 17:49, 9 June 2024 (UTC)

 Comment The fact that this account has been persistently pushing for controversial and/or blatantly wrong changes through edit warring, and then complains in this noticeboard posing as the victim is absolutely puzzling. The first half of the links are simply controversial changes being undone. That's it. Stop POV-pushing through edit wars and get consensus for the changes. The second half... I'm just clueless about whatever this editor is trying to prove or claim.

Beyond that, I would like to point out to administrators the systematic disruptive use of edit summaries by this account. Among its last 500 edits, 83 summaries are used to engage in personal attacks to users who simply undid one of his controversial changes or made some sort of edit he didn't like, systematically calling them "vandals" and "trolls". And this is not the first time this user opens blatantly nonsense incident reports. For example, last year he opened an absolutely bizarre and nonsense claim against me claiming, with no proof whatsoever, that I was "doing vandalism driven by sexism". Being an administrator myself for 10 years, I've dealt with many bizarre things, but this is hard to beat. I'm considering open a T&S case against this user because his claims are so outlandish and out of touch with reality that I'm afraid there's underlying issues that should be handled privately. JMagalhães (talk) 18:10, 9 June 2024 (UTC)

The fact that you attacked me, not defending your actions, says loudly about you. Also, it is not only me that you attack and enter into edit wars. It is not me who is removing information from Wikidata.

• Sysops: after this discussion is opened, they answered it; these are their edits:
  • 18h03min de 9 de junho de 2024
  • 18h03min de 9 de junho de 2024
  • 18h16min de 9 de junho de 2024

It is a clear no-posture when discussing his actions.

Moreover, this "his claims are so outlandish and out of touch with reality" should be enough for a long block. Attacks that no one should receive. Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton (talk) 22:02, 9 June 2024 (UTC)

 Comment It has already been explained to this user that when his controversial edits are undone, he should not be pov-pushing through edit wars and should instead engage in consensus building. Yet, not only he keeps pushing unwanted edits and massively using summaries for personal attacks. But, in a bizarre move, he pretends to be some sort of victim and opens incidents reports with completely made-up stuff and claims that are beyond outlandish. Honestly, an administrator intervention would be nice to help this person return to reality. JMagalhães (talk) 10:00, 10 June 2024 (UTC)

+ 2 days of impunity Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton (talk) 05:16, 17 June 2024 (UTC)

+2 days of impunity Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton (talk) 20:26, 18 June 2024 (UTC)

+2 days of impunity. Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton (talk) 21:35, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

+ 5 days of impunity Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton (talk) 01:03, 26 June 2024 (UTC)

Again, another attack in front of all admins, and nothing is done. Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton (talk) 20:56, 12 June 2024 (UTC)

Nothing they have said here appears particularly like an attack, particularly given you have dragged them before this noticeboard. What I see, reviewing items like Wikimedia Commons (Q565), is you making a change, and someone else reverting. You should stop edit warring to re-add your content in and discuss on the talk page. See w:Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle - make a change, it gets reverted, then you discuss. You are being more disruptive here than the other user. Please step back and discuss, preferably on the relevant items' talk pages. -- Ajraddatz (talk) 13:18, 26 June 2024 (UTC)

@Ajraddatz:, first thing, do never remove a comment from another volunteer.

Second thing, "Nothing they have said here appears particularly like an attack." I will call you delusional and see how long it will take to be blocked.

Moreover, after years, since 2019 of him removing again, r e m o v i n g content, not only from my edits but from a wide variety of content, you say to me that I am the one wrong, enter in the provided links to make a comment at least.

And this is not wikipedia, a Wikipedia rule, especially from a single language, can never be used here.

Of course, I am "disruptive here." No one is taking care of that, and I and other volunteers have had to deal with this for years, so I am done. Do something, enter, and see that they are removing information from Wikidata and that no one is taking action.

You are more worried about "+2 days of impunity" than a person removing content from Wikidata; this is very problematic. Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton (talk) 19:16, 27 June 2024 (UTC)

+ 2 days of impunity Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton (talk) 00:00, 30 June 2024 (UTC)

+ 3 days of impunity Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton (talk) 04:56, 3 July 2024 (UTC)

If you continue your pattern of disruptive editing here, you will be blocked. Figure out a way to stop edit warring and discuss on the talk page, and cut out the uncivil messages here - final warning. -- Ajraddatz (talk) 03:42, 4 July 2024 (UTC)

@Ajraddatz:

"discuss on the talk page"

Did you not notice that JMagalhães is not open to dialogue on his talk page?

And a final warning for a volunteer: try to solve years of issues and nothing to the real problem. It is totally unbalanced; the problem is to bother the sysops; if they do not bother a sysop, they can do whatever they want.

Very concerning how sysops deal with problems. The others are in total silence. Nothing is happening.

"uncivil messages here"

What are the uncivil messages?? List they.

Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton (talk) 08:08, 5 July 2024 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘

And they keep doing:

Removing of description that includes other countries who speak Portuguese: 22h40min 14 jun 2024

Removing of alias: 20h29min 9 jun 2024

... Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton (talk) 23:56, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

Report concerning User:161.0.63.21 / RSR2003

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

RSR2003 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL (for IP: GUC))

Possible vandalism (multiple statements removed) and edit warring by the apparent same editor, 161.0.63.21 / RSR2003, on Chalatenango Department (Q522221) (33 claims removed), Cuscatlán Department (Q1130677) (16 claims removed), and possible other items. -- DCflyer* (talk) 06:46, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

IIRC, there has been a recent change in the administrative division of El Salvador. Perhaps the statements should be deprecated rather than removed, but the changes seem to be in good faith. I'll do some more research once I'm at a computer. –FlyingAce^✈hello 12:39, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

Yes, @FlyingAce, there has been a relatively recent change in the administrative division of El Salvador. Thank you for confirming this. I will search for reference(s) to add to the statements.

However, the fact that a statement is no longer true is not a justification for its removal. The qualifiers start time and end time, along with preferred rank, are used to state the currently valid or most recent value(s). A deprecated rank indicates that a claim was always erroneous or never known to be true, and that may or may not be applicable to these items.

Also, most or all of the values of contains the administrative territorial entity (P150) (the statements which the editor(s) removed and then repeatedly reverted without explanation, apparently both logged in and anonymously) contain the inverse value of located in the administrative territorial entity (P131), so these items would need to be updated, as well. Additionally, unrelated statements were removed multiple times. For example, the value for elevation above sea level (P2044), was removed on 19 April 2023 and 8 July 2024, by the editor. -- DCflyer* (talk) 19:38, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

Disruption: non-standard additions

Greetings,

Currently I'm tracking some disruption of limited scope. There is a new editor who's adding non-standard aliases, names, descriptions to certain obscure items.

• Zygmunt Gorazdowski (talk • contribs • logs) (see contributions for a list of items affected)
• 37.0.245.25 (talk • contribs • logs) - geolocates to Lithuania
• 181.117.11.47 (talk • contribs • logs) - geolocates to Argentina

The subject matter appears to be Polish-American Catholic clerics. I'm unsure why the geolocation is going all over the place; perhaps this user has resorted to proxies. No communication was established with the user account, but today they have been apparently editing while logged out.

Admins, could we protect these items, and issue another warning to this user? This is not vandalism nor malicious; it's simple ignorance of our policies and standards. The material being added would be fine if it were relegated to the proper place. Elizium23 (talk) 18:47, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

Shall we add 152.166.51.188 (talk • contribs • logs) to the list of today's disruptive IPv4 addresses?

Also, this may be a random coincidence, but I feel that it may be worth mentioning here and now: the Wikipedia interface (Wikidata, in particular) has just notified me that someone has unsuccessfully attempted to log in to my account, multiple times, just at exactly the same time my edits were reverted by the above IP editor.

I have no proof that this IP was attempting to access my Wikidata account, and I'm not too concerned about its ultimate security, but it does seem a rather antisocial thing for someone to do, perhaps in retaliation for such a minor dispute here. Thank you. Elizium23 (talk) 19:37, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

109.241.182.168 (talk • contribs • logs) from Poland, is now accusing me of "being drunk".

I am unsure whether this is a separate case from the other Polish crap being spewed, but the personal attacks are rather over-the-top and I'd appreciate not being harrassed here, especially if someone is actually trying to sign in to my account. Elizium23 (talk) 20:27, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

@Estopedist1, @Lymantria, please take action. It is unambiguous now that one of these users is attempting to access my Wikidata editor account.

• 181.47.220.80 (talk • contribs • logs) said "still drunk" and at the same time as his edit, I received a notification that there were multiple failed access attempts.

Elizium23 (talk) 14:49, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

@Elizium23: nowadays it is very easy to change IPs and hence to harrass any user. Nothing I can do here. Just keep his reverting and be calm. Once I also had same situation when a vandal tried to access to my Wikidata editor account. I hope your password is good and not easily to be unlocked Estopedist1 (talk) 14:59, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

I blocked indef user:Zygmunt Gorazdowski. I don't see range-block possibility for IPs Estopedist1 (talk) 15:02, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

There are only a few affected items; would you consider semi-protecting them please? Particularly Carlo Acutis (Q2939142) who is in the news as canonisation approaches. Elizium23 (talk) 15:04, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

Tried some IP blocks and semiprotections as well. --Lymantria (talk) 15:12, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

Thank you kindly; would you consider also semi-protecting the corresponding talk page? IPv4 disruption continues there, with edit-summary insults upon my person, and yet more attempts to compromise my very editor's account. Elizium23 (talk) 18:33, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

This is a WMF-banned user who uses a VPN. When frustrated he starts trying to hack your account. I strongly suggest protecting anything he touches, because he'll just keep reverting to his preferred version (and his "edits" invariably contain some kind of original research or other nonsense, including spam and delusional claims about his own expertise or something). Antandrus (talk) 21:40, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

 Done by a mix of myself, other local admins, and stewards. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 03:46, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

Q126478914

Can we protect Jackson Dlamini (Q126478914). The subject keeps editing, claiming to be royalty and removing references that they are a pretender. RAN (talk) 02:54, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

 Protected for six months Estopedist1 (talk) 06:11, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. Estopedist1 (talk) 06:49, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

Report concerning User:FelixBot

FelixBot (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL (for IP: GUC)) — Reasons: Please block temporary, see [10] XReport ―--Wüstenspringmaus _talk 09:54, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

 Done temporary for one week. Can be unblocked if the bot is stopped. --Ameisenigel (talk) 10:22, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

Check Croatian descriptions

Dear colleagues, could someone understanding a bit of Croatian check Special:Contributions/Milafkgkrifkfkfkpfm? They seem vandalisms, but I can say it only on the basis of Google Translate and I would like a double check. Thanks! --Epìdosis 11:22, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

I'm not understanding Croatian but edits like this and that edit + vandalism on other projects let me strongly believe that these edits are vandalism. If a native Croatian speaker thinks that some of the changes are still useful, they can feel free to restore this user's versions. The account is now also globally locked. --Wüstenspringmaus _talk 12:01, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

https://web.archive.org/web/20240118155146/https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q124311410

Undelete this. There were sources. Additional: https://aktualnosci.aksim.edu.pl/pamietamy/odszedl-do-pana-brat-ojca-dyrektora/ https://ddtorun.pl/pl/722_wspomnienia/51440_radio-maryja-tv-trwam-i-aksim-w-zalobie-nie-zyje-miroslaw-rydzyk.html https://polityka.se.pl/wiadomosci/rydzyk-przekazal-tragiczna-wiadomosc-nie-zyje-jego-brat-z-zakonu-aa-mwxe-AcGH-Gcg9.html https://www.se.pl/torun/grob-rodziny-rydzyka-utonal-w-kwiatach-poruszajace-pozegnanie-kochanemu-tacie-aa-Pcvj-zFjZ-DG6P.html https://ototorun.pl/artykul/torunski-duchowny-w/1518737 https://goniec.pl/najpierw-klopoty-finansowe-a-teraz-to-tadeusz-rydzyk-stracil-bliska-osobe-ar-wbc-250124 77.255.4.137 17:09, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

courtesy ping to the deleter: @The Squirrel Conspiracy Estopedist1 (talk) 06:29, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

Process Question: Proposals to Make Changes to Existing Properties

I understand that there is a process in place for proposing new properties in Wikidata. If a user wants to propose changes to existing properties, such as adjustments to allowed values, additions of property constraints, or changes to data types, is there a process in place for this as well? I was planning to do this by putting a detailed proposal (as well as an implementation and data cleanup plan) in the Project Chat, waiting for a period of time (would a week be sufficient?), and then going ahead with the changes if/when something close to consensus is reached. I am not a property creator, however, and wanted to check in to make sure I wasn't going to be going against Wikidata established practices beforehand. Please let me know whether there are best practices I should be following. Thank you, --Crystal Yragui, University of Washington Libraries (talk) 18:28, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

Yes, this is indeed one of the possible processes, pls go ahead. Ymblanter (talk) 18:38, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

Will do, thank you! Is there an amount of time that is acceptable to wait before I go ahead and make the proposed changes? What if nobody comments? --Crystal Yragui, University of Washington Libraries (talk) 23:03, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

@Clements.UWLib: a couple of additional steps I'd recommend:

(1) Also start a discussion - at least link to the project chat proposal - on the property talk page

(2) ping people who have been involved - those who have edited the property, and those who discussed its creation on its property proposal page.

Thanks! ArthurPSmith (talk) 18:43, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

Thank you! There has been consensus on the property talk page, so I will link to the project chat discussion from there and ping those who have been involved. Is there a way to ping everyone who has edited a property at once if it is a property that has been edited by many different users? Or, would I need to go through and mention many many people individually? Crystal Yragui, University of Washington Libraries (talk) 23:02, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

Block request

Same user for Nama24Pok, please see [11] and [12].--MCC214 (talk) 12:33, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

 Comment: Most of them don't edit recently except User:Courageous.Contributor.--S8321414 (talk) 14:26, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

S8321414, all in list confirmed in zh.wiki (duck or CU), this user used other wiki illegit and abuse restart.--MCC214 (talk) 08:50, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Second opinion re: revoking Soufiyouns's email access

Hello! I just received an email from user:Soufiyouns asking me to undo a block (user:باسم was the blocking admin). I revoked their email access for the duration of the block, explained that email unblock requests were inappropriate, and pointed them towards the unblock template via a talk page message. Was that the correct course of action? The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 13:58, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

I received the same email. --Crystal Yragui, University of Washington Libraries (talk) 17:38, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

I wouldn't have necessarily removed their ability to send emails, but correct to direct them to the unblock template as the preferred method of appeals I think. -- Ajraddatz (talk) 18:25, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

I also received this e-mail, for the record. Ymblanter (talk) 19:22, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

There are a few aspects that concern me here. @باسم has been actively editing but hasn't weighed in here, as the original blocker. @Soufiyouns appears to have sent email to at least one editor who's not an administrator, and can't, therefore, unblock anyone. Soufiyouns hasn't responded on their User talk page, either, despite retaining access to write there. @The Squirrel Conspiracy has received no support for the action in question, but hasn't modified the block to restore email access to this user. I suppose it's a moot point, as the block expires in a few hours, but in principle, I see no reason that email access should've been revoked. While it's "preferred" to request unblocks out in the open, it's not mandatory anywhere that I've seen, and Wikidata has no policy about this, so hopefully, admins can WD:AGF here. Because it seems to me that, before and during this block, Soufiyouns has been making use of the User talk page to calmly and rationally discuss the issues with the blocking admin. Elizium23 (talk) 19:26, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Report concerning User:Hamka Azizan

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

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

Hamka Azizan (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL (for IP: GUC)) — Reasons: Sockpuppet, already blocked indefinitely in idwiki as of duck test. It is the same LTA that operates the Pramesta Cahyani and Zildzi. Nyilvoskt (talk) 16:37, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

@Nyilvoskt: all accounts blocked indef. Should we revert all actions done by user:Hamka Azizan? Estopedist1 (talk) 06:28, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

The first and third accounts are Likely the same, technically. Please report further instances to WD:RFCU as LTA cases often involve sleepers.--Jasper Deng (talk) 06:33, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

Protection request per persistent vandalism

From some time ago, several IPs are vandalizing an amount of entries about royals, changing deliberately the labels and descriptions in English and some other languages (1, 2, 3, 4 and 5) without obtaining any consensus for doing that, and removing deliberately statements (6, 7 or 8), and other major modifications. This is not the first time they do this class of long-term editions. See User talk:Epìdosis/Archive/2024#Protection requests per vandalism for a similar previous case (@Epìdosis, @Hjart).

I restored the entries to their stable versions, but it is known that some of those IPs come back for restore their versions (more information at the previous discussion at Epìdosis talk page). For that, please consider protect all this entries and restoring them to stable versions if the IPs change them again before protection is applied. FYI, the entries affected are listed above:

• Q152260
• Q20504475
• Q518846
• Q76343
• Q356522
• Q1765834
• Q16477242
• Q16477243
• Q12678590
• Q12678592

Thank you in advance. Yours sincerely. 81.41.177.91 22:09, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

 Done 3 months semi, except for Q76343, for which the edit history does not justify protection. --Lymantria (talk) 05:55, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

Q1765834 wasn't protected. Now  protected. Reverting to stable version is not trivial and still not done Estopedist1 (talk) 06:18, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Protection request for Q24060074

Please semi-protect Q24060074. Reason: Excessive vandalism XReport ----Wüstenspringmaus _talk 08:23, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

 Protected for six months Estopedist1 (talk) 12:40, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. Estopedist1 (talk) 06:11, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Report concerning User:77.255.4.137

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

As per [13] i want to bring to attention of administrators, that IP 159.205.181.252 is continuing in edit warring at Alioshkina (Q126726300) with a new IP 77.255.4.137. The last edit of 159.205.181.252 was at 3. 7. 2024, 07:48, the 77.255.4.137 first edit was on 3. 7. 2024, 08:09. The IP actions were discussed here. Silesianus (talk) 11:00, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

Alioshkina (Q126726300) is semi-protected for six months Estopedist1 (talk) 06:16, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

repurposing items

Hello, please protect items d:Q524656, d:Q21869232, d:Q83837230, as they have been repurposed from films, albums, ... to literary works, sitelinks have been removed, etc. Thanks a lot!M2k~dewiki (talk) 00:03, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Bash222 ( talk  · contribs  · logs )

Swunnam ( talk  · contribs  · logs )

I have identified a bunch of other items repurposed by Bash222. It also looks like this person's previous account was Swunnam and they changed for some reason. Both have created items for literary works that don't appear notable. A greater cleanup and possibly blocks are needed. William Graham (talk) 01:21, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Iddih0061 ( talk  · contribs  · logs )

Alhassan1234 ( talk  · contribs  · logs )

Yussifabdulfatawu ( talk  · contribs  · logs )

Ibrahim Zeinab ( talk  · contribs  · logs )

And also these accounts. William Graham (talk) 01:24, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

There is the possibility that there is some sort of new editor outreach group program running that has not identified or declared itself anywhere. William Graham (talk) 01:31, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

I came across at least these three who attempted to repurpose an item and seem to be related:

• Abdul Fatawu123 (talk • contribs • logs)
• Headsympathy (talk • contribs • logs)
• Wunitira123 (talk • contribs • logs)

Contributions are clearly Ghana-oriented, so it should be possible to track them using a list like [14]. --Matěj Suchánek (talk) 07:32, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

... and now I found [15] which had been repurposed since 2022. I will fix this later. --Matěj Suchánek (talk) 07:37, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

I indeffed Bash222, as he was warned in July 2023 to not repurpose items, which he apparently ignored. --Lymantria (talk) 06:53, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Special:Contributions/74.88.68.91

I want to report that this IP is lock evasion of Special:CentralAuth/Dataminerfr, Special:CentralAuth/Sascestvrai, Special:CentralAuth/Saonnotice, etc. Please check their deleted contributions here. Please also see w:Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Stluciainformation/Archive for their other accounts. Thank you for your attention. MathXplore (talk) 13:38, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Fixed links. MathXplore (talk) 13:39, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Global blocked for 1 week.--S8321414 (talk) 13:47, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protection for Q85867923

Unfortunately nothing has changed (still not reverted) since last time, the anonyms continue their disruptive practices. Regards Kirilloparma (talk) 00:13, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

 Protected for one year (2nd protection). I reverted 55 edits to reach to stable version. Hopefully it is acceptable, pinging to @Kirilloparma Estopedist1 (talk) 06:24, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Report concerning 2803:C600:6103:808D:FDAF:BB4A:F234:4F5A

2803:C600:6103:808D:FDAF:BB4A:F234:4F5A (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL (for IP: GUC)) — Reasons: Vandalism only. (see 1, 2. 3, 4. Please revert all edits ) Ovruni (talk) 03:15, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Edits are reverted and IP is blocked by an abuse filter for one day. --Wüstenspringmaus _talk 06:09, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

range-blocked (2803:C600:6103:808D::/64). All edits are not patrolled Estopedist1 (talk) 06:25, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Giuseppe Verdi

I want add the wikiquote of Giuseppe Verdi in the ID Q7317. Thanks 2806:107E:22:6F3E:C93:2E4A:FB8E:9527 04:43, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

which language Wikiquote are we talking about? And please use {{Edit request}} at item's talk page, so everyone can see it in Category:Wikidata protected edit requests Estopedist1 (talk) 06:28, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

They meant the Spanish Wikiquote article. Added. --Wolverène (talk) 07:10, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. Wolverène (talk) 07:10, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Report concerning User:1.46.141.38

1.46.141.38 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL (for IP: GUC)) — Reasons: nonsense desc. mass experiments ―Mykhal (talk) 06:08, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

 Blocked for three months Estopedist1 (talk) 06:29, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. Wolverène (talk) 07:10, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Report concerning User:83.26.199.75

83.26.199.75 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL (for IP: GUC)) — Reasons: Harassment XReport ―--Wüstenspringmaus _talk 09:27, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

 Done: Blocked for 1 week.--S8321414 (talk) 12:02, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. Estopedist1 (talk) 06:51, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

ZI Jony

ZI Jony (talk • contribs • new items • new lexemes • SUL • Block log • User rights log • User rights • xtools)

I would like to request the Rollback rights again to work more actively against vandalism. please note that my rights were revoked earlier (April 2020), I believe that I know the process of use of rollback also I've good experience in the same. @DannyS712, Jasper Deng, Liuxinyu970226, GZWDer, Camouflaged Mirage, KonstantinaG07: @Ymblanter: Regards, ZI Jony ^(Talk) 04:21, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

I would like to mention Zi Jony have been an unsung hero with creating properties, approximately 300 of them in 2024. This is amazing! Thank you. Infrastruktur (talk) 06:54, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

We have Wikidata:Requests for permissions/Other rights. --Matěj Suchánek (talk) 08:33, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

@Matěj Suchánek, DannyS712 mentioned in the closing summary that when I'll request the Rollback rights again, should request here, and ping all of those users who was involved in that discussion. Regards, ZI Jony ^(Talk) 10:11, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

last appearance (P12878)

Could someone make it so this property shows up right below first appearance (P4584) on items? Trade (talk) 13:30, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

NiferO

• NiferO (talk • contribs • logs)

[16] [17] [18] [19] [20] [21] [22] — this doesn't seem to be OK. 2A00:1370:8186:125E:356B:CE70:F19D:24A8 13:31, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

user is warned, but I think such kind of edits are actually good faith Estopedist1 (talk) 15:21, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

Some of "good faith edits" lead to very bad results: particularly this edit [23], which went into infoboxes in many Wikipedia language editions, has eventually stated that bread was invented in Australia about 30,000 years ago (despite of lack of definitive evidence for it). No thanks, this is "almost disruptive" (IMHO). 2A00:1370:8186:125E:356B:CE70:F19D:24A8 16:21, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

I agree. Mass-reverting is possible outcome but maybe we will get some answers from user:NiferO Estopedist1 (talk) 16:59, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

It is a problematic case. Several his edits are not wrong but they can be called as "reduction to nonsense", e.g. Special:Diff/2204411587. If the user doesn't feel that his edits are nonsense, then it is probably best (for Wikidata) to block him.--Estopedist1 (talk) 06:19, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Report concerning User:To the fmnfnfnc

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

Vandalised over 100 times Midleading (talk) 05:46, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

 Blocked indef by Lymantria. All edits are patrolled Estopedist1 (talk) 06:20, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. Estopedist1 (talk) 08:08, 15 July 2024 (UTC)