Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard

(Redirected from Wikipedia:ANI)

This is a message board for talking about tasks on Wikipedia that only administrators can do. Please put new messages at the bottom of the talk page or click here to start a new discussion.

Please note that the messages on this page are archived periodically. A message may therefore have been archived. Note however, that the archives must not be modified, so if something needs discussing, please start a new discussion on this page.

Are you in the right place?



Dark mode!Edit

I typically edit over on enwiki but I would like to start doing more work here, and I was wondering if the dark mode gadget could be enabled. These pages will need to be created in WP:MediaWiki namespace: w:MediaWiki:Gadget-dark-mode.css, w:MediaWiki:Gadget-dark-mode-toggle-pagestyles.css, and w:MediaWiki:Gadget-dark-mode-toggle.js. If this isn't a change that the administrators want to make, that's fine. Philipnelson99 (talk) 22:17, 2 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Philipnelson99: I use Dark Reader on both Chrome and Firefox for converting all websites (not just Wikipedia) to dark mode. It's configurable and tweakable and open source. It's not the answer to the Gadget request you're looking for, but might help anyway. Operator873 connect 23:01, 2 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Operator873 it's not the dark mode gadget but it definitely works, thanks! Philipnelson99 (talk) 20:07, 7 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Operator873 Any option available for mobile editors too? Otherwise I think the Wikimedia community needs to really think about this and provide us a dark mode tool as I usually edit on this theme only. Rejoy2003 (talk) 06:20, 28 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Rejoy2003, per m:Community Wishlist Survey 2023/Results, the community has overwhelmingly voted for dark mode to be an option in preferences, and work is now being done to add it as a feature. --Ferien (talk) 21:00, 3 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
That's great to hear! Thanks for letting us know! Philipnelson99 (talk) 21:12, 3 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
That's great! thank you for the reply. When will I know the mode has been implemented? Rejoy2003 (talk) 21:14, 3 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Rejoy2003, you can subscribe to phab:T26070 to get email updates on its progress. --Ferien (talk) 15:00, 18 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

G5 proposal request for closureEdit

The request for comment for the reinstatement of G5 has ran for 16 days with numerous opinions, should probably be closed by an uninvolved admin soon. --IWI (talk) 14:04, 25 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It's been over a week; is an admin/bureaucrat going to close this? Lights and freedom (talk) 00:07, 7 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  Done--BRP ever 01:19, 7 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This article was recreated after previous RFD but QD tag removal is repeated. Does it fit to G4 or A4? MathXplore (talk) 11:03, 26 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Deleted by Eptalon. --Ferien (talk) 20:57, 3 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

May not include claim of notability, but a new user repeats QD tag removal. Possibly related to Wikipedia:Requests for deletion/Requests/2022/Anurag Dixit. I suspect block evasion and already requested CU. MathXplore (talk) 08:29, 5 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Deleted as A4 by Eptalon. --Ferien (talk) 22:56, 10 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I don't think a claim of notability is included but an IP user repeats QD tag removal. MathXplore (talk) 13:35, 5 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Deleted as A4 by Eptalon. --Ferien (talk) 22:56, 10 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

request for semi-protect for Kizuna AIEdit

repeated vandalism by ip. Syunsyunminmin (talk) 19:58, 6 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  Done for a day. --IWI (talk) 20:02, 6 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

G5 Quick Deletion criteriaEdit

Hello everyone. This message is to let admins know that based on consensus in this discussion, I've reinstated G5 as a quick deletion criteria. Thank you and happy editing. :) -BRP ever 01:18, 7 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Eptalon, Chenzw, Djsasso, Ferien, and Enfcer: Can a bureaucrat add G5, which has just been reinstated in the deletion policy, into Twinkle. I have already added it into the {{QD}} template and created {{QD-blocked}}. --IWI (talk) 01:39, 7 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Some pointers:
  • On lines 62, 64, 3767, 3777, 3794 add "g5", after "g4",
  • On lines 3757, 3786, g5:"G5", after g4:"G4",
  • Append

result.push({ label: 'G5: Creation by blocked or banned user', value: 'blocked', tooltip: 'Created by a blocked or banned user, who is evading their block or ban when the page was created. The main contributor of that page is the blocked/banned user, and no other user has made significant good-faith edits to the page. This does not mean that an administrator must delete every article created by a blocked or banned user who is evading their block. Any other user can ask for the page to be restored at Wikipedia:Deletion review if they want to improve it.' }); after line 6330 (can't fix the indenting and newline error right now)

  • Append 'blocked': 'g5' after line 6412
Hopefully this can help.— *Fehufangą✉ Talk page 02:25, 7 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
As I'm currently unable to edit Twinkle, I'm giving interface admin access to BRPever per his request on IRC. --Ferien (talk) 05:25, 7 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I've made the changes, and it worked during my tests. BRP ever 06:00, 7 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
As a regular user of twinkle's QD function (for admins), this needs to be added as well:
'repost': 'was created by a user who is evading a block or a ban',
after line 6455, thanks. — *Fehufangą✉ Talk page 13:00, 8 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I gave interface admin to Fehufanga for that as well. So all   Done. --Ferien (talk) 22:55, 10 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

DogEdit

This page can now be done with being protected. Because it's been protected for years but now it's done. 174.27.21.219 (talk) 02:50, 8 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

While the reporting IP has been blocked for block evasion, the page has been protected for 6 years now. Macdonald-ross, are you alright if it's unprotected? If it gets excessively vandalised, we can always protect it again. --Ferien (talk) 22:57, 10 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I removed the protection. I think it should be fine to open the article up after such a long time, but it's on my watchlist just in case. --IWI (talk) 23:45, 10 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Abuse filter for cartoon IPEdit

I think an abuse filter could help us contain these IPs. Is this feasible? Derpdart56 (talk) 15:54, 10 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Derpdart56, could you give some examples of these IPs? --Ferien (talk) 23:09, 10 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Ferien: They are referring to the IPs that vandalise children's television/cartoon-related articles (such as Nickelodeon). See relevant talk on User talk:Fehufanga --IWI (talk) 23:39, 10 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Request for oversightershipEdit

This is a notice to announce that there is a request for oversightership open for comments. --IWI (talk) 00:10, 13 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Rogue Filter Blocks Specific Edits of Lautenberg ArticleEdit

I've edited Frank Lautenberg in various ways but any time I try to so much as identify his defeated opponent of 1994 as the Republican (let alone delete the implication that his defeat of that Republican was part of that year's pro-Republican wave) the edit gets "identified as harmful" and blocked. Why is there protection of particular misleading language? 12.144.5.2 (talk) 01:33, 13 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Those identifications are false positives. I have made some changes to the filter. Please try again. — *Fehufangą✉ Talk page 01:52, 13 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Protection request (GRP)Edit

Talk:List of Nobel Peace Prize winners (change · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete)

Latest target of GRP. JavaHurricane (talk) 05:26, 14 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@JavaHurricane done — *Fehufangą✉ Talk page 05:44, 14 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Semi-protection for Digital marketingEdit

Digital marketing is a spam magnet, which has been spammed by 3 new users in the last 24 hours. Can it be semi-protected? Lights and freedom (talk) 08:04, 14 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

(Non-administrator observation) According to xtools, I have made 20+ edits to here and I remember almost all of them were anti-spam reverts. I would welcome a longer term of semi-protection to reduce the counter-spam workflow of our community. MathXplore (talk) 08:08, 14 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Semi-protected the page for 6 months. Let's see if that helps. Eptalon (talk) 11:45, 14 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The article was created again without any improvements, should be deleted and semi-protected. MathXplore (talk) 08:54, 15 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Deleted, and semi-protected. Eptalon (talk) 09:12, 15 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

uw-spamblockEdit

Currently, the {{uw-spamblock}} template is the only blocking template pertaining to spamming/advertising that the Simple English Wikipedia has. The wording on it implies that it should be used for cases where the user is blocked for spamming and having a promotional username (Your account has been blocked... because it is being used for advertising. followed by See Wikipedia's username policy for more information.). The current wording also doesn't flow quite well either. After explaining that the user should read the username policy, it tells the user that This kind of activity is considered spamming, except this is neither related to the previous sentence, nor is this activity explained.

I suggest that we split {{uw-spamblock}} into two versions: advertising/spamming and having a promotional username, and advertising/spamming without having a promotional username. — *Fehufangą✉ Talk page 13:50, 15 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Personally in the past, I have just used {{uw-block3}} giving advertising as a reason for any account that is used for advertising without a promotional username. I don't see a need for a new template for promotion-only accounts without bad usernames, as we don't get too many of those to warrant a new block template. The {{uw-spamblock}} template definitely needs rewording though. --Ferien (talk) 18:58, 17 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Fair enough. I'll try to rewrite the current blocking template sometime next week. — *Fehufangą✉ Talk page 09:23, 19 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A4 reword proposalEdit

  • A notice that I am proposing a change to the deletion policy here to reword the A4 quick deletion criterion. Thanks, --IWI (talk) 02:05, 16 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Another admin might want to take a look at revoking talk page access for the user above. — *Fehufangą✉ Talk page 13:47, 16 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

(Non-administrator observation) I think there is enough evidence to do that. MathXplore (talk) 13:55, 16 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  Done Revoked. --IWI (talk) 19:03, 17 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

There seems to be a content dispute at here, maybe protection needed. MathXplore (talk) 14:20, 16 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Looks more like long-term abuse to me. — *Fehufangą✉ Talk page 14:23, 16 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
May I ask what type of LTA is doing this? MathXplore (talk) 14:24, 16 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
not all are known by names, but because a bigger range has been doing a similar thing for almost two years, i'd say it's long term enough. — *Fehufangą✉ Talk page 14:27, 16 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Twinkle interface edit request (QD R2)Edit

In the current Twinkle interface, the description of QD R2 says "Redirects from mainspace to any other namespace except the Category:, Template:, Wikipedia:, Help: and Portal: namespaces". But since our project doesn't have Portal namespace, I think this should be "Redirects from mainspace to any other namespace except the Category:, Template:, Wikipedia: and Help: namespaces". MathXplore (talk) 16:05, 17 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  done --Ferien (talk) 18:51, 17 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Page move request (Ogendegbe)Edit

I think these page should be moved per enwiki title, but they seem to require admin permissions. MathXplore (talk) 16:12, 17 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  Done --Ferien (talk) 19:31, 17 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Can TPA be disabled? They're just using it to continue vandalism. Thank you, Justarandomamerican (talk) 17:10, 17 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  Done Revoked TPA and reset the block to last another 31 hours. --Ferien (talk) 18:52, 17 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

ChatGPTEdit

I noticed that there is a user making articles with ChatGPT. I know that this project does not allow unauthorized bots, but do we allow chatbots to make articles? MathXplore (talk) 12:12, 18 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@MathXplore: (Non-administrator observation) This probably needs discussion at a wider venue, as it could become a real problem. That's just my two cents, though. Justarandomamerican (talk) 12:15, 18 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I just posted here because the articles may need to be taken care by admins, but I do not mean to oppose against taking this discussion to WP:ST. MathXplore (talk) 12:20, 18 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I think that's what I am going to do, as there doesn't appear to be anything against semi-automated article creation in the manner that this user does. Justarandomamerican (talk) 12:31, 18 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I thionk an article should say why it's notable, so if you ask some piece of computer program to write an article for you which then gets accepted that's fine. But I think at the moment, such bots are easy to recognize. Remember, we have specific rules how to write articles; simple EnWP copy-pastes usually get deleted quickly. Also note, that the training data that was used for ChatGPT likely doesn't allow it to write unrecognizable pages in Simple English. So, likely not a problen. Eptalon (talk) 12:32, 18 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The problem isn't unrecognizability, it's factual inaccuracy. ChatGPT and other LLMs do not have access to the internet, unfortunately, so they can be very inaccurate, especially in technical subjects. Justarandomamerican (talk) 12:36, 18 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The problem mentioned above may be solvable through scrutiny, of course, but it's still a problem. Justarandomamerican (talk) 12:38, 18 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Technical inaccuracy isn't the isssue; thats fixable. But if the article I just deleted was produced by such software, then it is really easy to recognize, and to make a difference between a piece of software writing the article, and a real person doing this. Also, in the past, people have been blocked for not declaring automated tools they use. If we get a few articles from the same user showing the pattern that's what's likely going to happen. Eptalon (talk) 12:43, 18 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I suppose you're correct, let's just wait and see what happens to ChatGPT in the coming years. Justarandomamerican (talk) 12:48, 18 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Another thing that is specific to the Simple English Wikipedia: ChatGPT cannot write in Simple English, and its tone is often too unencyclopedic. Whether or not we should allow AI to generate articles is a discussion worth having with the community. — *Fehufangą✉ Talk page 13:41, 18 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It is a discussion worth having. See WP:ST, I posted it there earlier. Justarandomamerican (talk) 13:42, 18 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Category move requests (UK-related, organization -> organisation)Edit

Per enwiki and their parent category, I request these categories to be moved. MathXplore (talk) 12:26, 18 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  Done --Ferien (talk) 13:49, 18 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

These entries are duplicate content but "Jonathan d ross" is not a good title (not capitalized) so I think this should be moved (history merge). MathXplore (talk) 12:10, 20 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  Done by Fehufanga. --Ferien (talk) 19:05, 22 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Could another admin perhaps take a look at the page above? Anonymous editors and one registered editor keeps removing the RfD template. Since I created the deletion discussion, I refrain from taking administrative actions here. Thanks. — *Fehufangą✉ Talk page 02:02, 22 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

(Non-administrator observation) I agree to semi-protection, IPs with similar behaviour still appear. MathXplore (talk) 06:53, 22 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  Done --Ferien (talk) 19:05, 22 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Protection Request for Adolf Hitler- at least semiprotected for 1 yearEdit

Looks like there's been tons of WP:VANDALISM there lately, judging from the changes log. Shadow of the Starlit Sky (talk) 18:11, 22 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  Done I've started the protection off at a month, although it has been protected before. We can always protect it for longer if necessary. --Ferien (talk) 19:08, 22 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Change in GA/VGA processEdit

A discussion at Simple Talk about changing the article promotion process (PGA/PVGA) died and was then archived after no comments in 2 weeks. Will anything become of this, or will it just be treated as unsuccessful? Lights and freedom (talk) 04:37, 23 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Ideally, we take it as an input to get the process going again. We know what the problems of the process are, this was a suggestion to move forward. Eptalon (talk) 18:10, 23 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Create protection for History of timekeeping devicesEdit

Can an admin block IPs/new users from creating History of timekeeping devices? Lights and freedom (talk) 17:46, 23 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Protected it (autoconfirmed needed for creation) for two weeks. Eptalon (talk) 18:11, 23 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Can someone block them from article namespace? They're repeatedly inserting all caps section headers, after 4 MOS warnings. They must have no clue that their talk page exists, as there has been no response from them. Justarandomamerican (talk) 12:59, 24 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Page protection request for SingaporeEdit

Semi protection for 1 year recommended- persistent IP vandalism from User:112.118.119.40. Shadow of the Starlit Sky (talk) 16:34, 24 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Oh, and as an additional note, said IP's been blocked for 1 week as of now because of WP:VANDALISM. Shadow of the Starlit Sky (talk) 16:34, 24 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]