Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Current issues and requests archive 16

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

User:Pio

Just a heads up that PIO, who is banned from editing Wikipedia [1] has come over here as User:Pio, and has been pretty active today [2] after the blocking yesterday of his latest two socks from the English Wiki. It's simple ban evasion, as, without regard for the tenets of the Simple Wiki, he has been copy-pasting his favourite articles from English Wikipedia, such as Istrian-Dalmatian exodus, on English Wiki as Istrian exodus [3]. I'd also point out a problem with copyvios, such as Dalmatia, a copyvio from here [4] and here [5]. Sorry if I'm dragging issues over here from the English Wiki, but I thought you should know. Alasdairgreen27 (talk) 18:22, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Banned on English Wikipedia only means banned on English Wikipedia. Quite a few users here (Da Punk '95, ChristianMan16, and formerly Swirlboy39) were banned on the English Wikipedia but became regular contributors here. Swirlboy was in fact unbanned after demonstrating good work here. Cass andra 18:25, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OK, that's fine, but copy-pasting articles from English Wiki and copyvios probably are not. Alasdairgreen27 (talk) 18:27, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And also, just spurred from this discussion, should he be allowed to link to a porn site like that? Especially when he says that it is a page of "some my friends." -- America ^†alk 18:31, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm one of the En-Wiki admins whose dealt with and been harassed by PIO, currently he's banned from en.wiki, spanish wiki, meta, I believe commons and I think quote and italian wiki. I know the projects are independent and Simple may make its own ban's as it sees fit, but I would urge the Simple admins reviewing this matter to carefully review his behavior here in deciding which actions to take. MBisanz (talk) 21:32, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, definitely also blocked from Italian Wiki [6] Alasdairgreen27 (talk) 21:40, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, we'll just see if this user does anything wrong or against our policies, and then we will go from there if we need a block or ban. Cheers, RyanCross (talk) 21:41, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. Thank you for your attention. :-) When I brought it over here I was thinking that "banned from editing Wikipedia" meant all of it. Happy to see he's got the chance to redeem himself here, and maybe head back to en.wiki after a period of good editing. However, the early signs (wholesale copy-pastes of his favourite en.wiki articles without the slightest attention to Simple guidelines, copyvio copy-pastes from other websites, and turning his attention to very active editing here the day after his latest two socks got busted) lead me to suspect - possibly unfairly, you never know - that the wellbeing of this site might not be his top priority. Anyway, I've drawn it to your attention, and now I return whence I came. Best wishes, -- Alasdairgreen27 (talk) 22:29, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(unindenting) His contributions seem okay at the moment, but the link on his user page might be inappropriate. I know this may be against WP:CENSOR, but this is Simple English Wikipedia, and we have plenty of teens and kids around here. Chenzw Talk 02:00, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

At least one. I'd say he should be asked to remove it, it is an unneeded porn site link - not his "friends." -- America ^†alk 01:54, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(unindenting) I think that some of the articles that he has ported over here from the English Wikipedia including a few copyright violations, combined with the porn site link on his userpage may be grounds for a block, but probably not. We would probably need a few more incidents with this user before we can do anything as drastic as a full site-wide ban. Let's just watch and wait and see what this user does. Cheers, Razor flame 02:03, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Could someone explain to me the warning I've received at [7]? Is this standard operating practices at this wiki? MBisanz (talk) 14:07, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's not a template. He just put the stop hand there and wrote out his own message. I find it abhorrant that Pio would issue a warning himself, since he is obviously not a neutral party. The notion of "personal attacks" requries another user to say this, not just the person who feels that way. Cass andra 18:08, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ahh thank you, does Simple permit me to remove comments from my talk page? MBisanz (talk) 09:23, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I do believe so, yes. -- RyanCross (talk) 09:25, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You are allowed to remove comments from your own talk page. I find it strange that a user such as this would go ahead and issue his own warnings when it is obvious that he is biased towards certain users. Cheers, Razor flame 17:58, 5 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User:Alasdairgreen27

I consider Alasdairgreen27 a sockpuppet on English wiki and in violation for vandalism, incivility, canvassing, harassment, POV, edit warring, disruption, stalking and personal attack against me. Yesterday Alasdairgreen27 like as a strange child logged here only for personal attacks against me. Luigi and Ciolone are not PIO socks and Luigi is valid editor in Italian wiki: nobody suspect him as a sock! I am editor in Spanish and French wiki too. I elected MBisanz as admin in English wiki but he insulted me. You all consider this: in my user page I linked a calendar of Italian soldiers. Best wishes,--Pio (talk) 12:36, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You have to be a sockpuppet of someone. Whose the master account that's allegedly harassing you? Alasdairgreen27 is not an account on the English Wikipedia, so who do you think this person is on en, and why do you think he is harassing you? Provide diffs, please. They've proven that you've been banned on the Italian (Pio) and English (PIO) Wikipedias. There is no PIO or Pio account on the Spanish Wikipedia, so unless you disclose that user name, we can't prove who you are. Cass andra 20:22, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Based on the interwiki links on his user page his spanish account is Jxy. -Djsasso (talk) 21:34, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On Eng Wiki I am AlasdairGreen27. I'm nobody's sock, and nor is PIO; he's a banned user [8] and multiple sockpuppeteer. His known puppets at Eng Wiki, all blocked, are User:Agazio [9], User:Ciolone [10], User:Luigi 28 [11] and User:Jxy [12]. Best wishes, Alasdairgreen27 (talk) 14:08, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am an old editor in this project for many languages then I have many accounts too. In English wiki Alasdair logged during this case and restriction against DIREKTOR which is account involved in several edit warring pushing fanatic anti-Italian POV and harassment, canvassing, stalking against me and Luigi then like as this precedent harassment. But some inappropriate admins banned Italian accounts of Luigi, Jxy, Ciolone for simple suspects and no evidence! I consider Alasdairgreen27 a sockpuppet of DIREKTOR or Kubura or banned user N.13: I suppose Alasdair is from Lubiana or Zagreb; in fact DIREKTOR/Alasdair are either shadows like as one person solo! They suspect Alasdair as sock then like as DIREKTOR and Kubura but admins not yet ban them. DIREKTOR/Alasdair/Kubura is in all articles pertinent Dalmatia and Istria pushing fanatic anti-Italian POV in English wiki and now stalking me here! I request to admins for advice Alasdair in connection with his inappropriate or insane stalking against me in this language of the project. Regards,--Pio (talk) 16:10, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Take this dispute off this noticeboard. This is for contacting administrators about editing on this wiki, not others. All the above links go to English wikipedia, not simple. We've been warned about these users, we get it, move on. - EchoBravo contribs 14:42, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

birefringence

This word, "birefringence" appears under the "b" section on the simple english word list. Others have commented on the talk page about it. Should it be removed or am I missing something?? Peterdownunder (talk) 09:27, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This Probably should have been on WP:ST but I agree it should be removed.-- † Christian Man 16 18:11, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Quick deletion request

Can an Administrator delete Treaty of Waitangi? It's been tagged for about 4 hours. Thank you, Ryan†Cross (talk) 03:44, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Done by Oysterguitarist. - Huji ^reply 07:41, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. -- Ryan†Cross (talk) 07:52, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RFPP

Wikipedia:Options to not see an image/badimages.js; page protect please, as it is easy to simply change the code to malicious content. Microchip 10:17, Sunday, June 22 2008 Utc

Done although I doubt it will be vandalized any time soon either way, but safety first, eh? --Gwib^-(talk)- 10:27, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted contribs

Can an admin please e-mail the history of my deleted contribs? Thanks, Maxim_{(talk | editor review)} 22:34, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Actually we can't; you did not set your Email address in your profile. --Eptalon (talk) 13:48, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Srsly? Strange... Dunno how it got disabled. Try again. Maxim_{(talk | editor review)} 13:51, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Oysterguitarist 20:36, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please rename User:WW to User:Dwi Secundus

Please rename me from WW to Dwi Secundus for SUL. --WW (talk) 09:02, 28 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Done --vector ^_^ (talk) 09:16, 28 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Would an admin...

Please fix the redirect for User talk:Schlechter Wolf doppelganger, it is very annoying because it has been the only double redirect for a while now and is protected. Thanks -- America ^†alk 23:11, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Increased Copyright Violations

There has been an increase of copyright violations from new pages, so please remember to check them, thanks Oysterguitarist 00:23, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

1709 again

Two days ago, a user was replacing pages with "1709" again. Thinking that it was the 1709 vandal again, I soft-blocked the IP range for a week (refer to the post on top). Please keep a lookout for this vandal after his block expires. Chenzw Talk 12:21, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Will do. I always watch recent changes anyway, and if the IP did start vandalizing again, I would just report it to WP:VIP when appropriate. Thanks, RyanCross (talk) 12:23, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Template:VIP

By the way, I have created Template:VIP, copied from EN's en:Template:AIV. Please tell me what you think of it. Thanks. Chenzw Talk 12:28, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I actually think it could be useful. But I don't think we will be using them often or at all. WP:VIP generally gets about 1 or 2 reports per day (although there were 4 reports so far today and they were all mine :D) which again are generally accurate ones. {{done}} and {{not done}} are the only templates used currently. {{not done}} is used for any case that turns out to be a no block no matter how the report was. If no block was issued, that would be the template used no matter what was the reason why the user was not blocked. Chenzw just gave us more icons to use for different cases and situations. Some users might think that those two templates we use already is enough. Comments on that? -- RyanCross (talk) 13:13, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

VetäkääKäteen!‎

This user has been extremely abusive. He first started by redirecting a user talk page to the article Penis, which I reverted and gave a level-two warning for (page since deleted). He then lifted RyanCross's userpage and tried to pass it off as his own [13] He changed the last part of my name to "Gay" [14] and spoke something in Finnish which I have roughtly translated to "Hello the whore mua does not interest sun, a shit" [15] He then proceeded to call me a "a pussy ämmä stuff a slut in the ass, sun," again in Finnish [16] after I warned him for trying to impersonate RyanCross. In another deleted edit, he asked me to give fellatio to him. This is very upsetting, but it's not the easy kind of VIP report, so I'm bringing it here. Cass andra 03:57, 7 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I used sunda to translate his Finnish. Cass andra 03:58, 7 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Done - Possible socks of the last 2 VIP reports, according to his deleted contribs (both blocked user's talk pages). Blocked 72 hours for now. Chenzw Talk 04:52, 7 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed socks. I extended to block on the account to indefinite. -- Creol(talk) 05:03, 7 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Grateful thanks to both of you for solving this problem. Cass andra 05:41, 7 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The "Removing all content from page." vandal

I've been noticing off and on that there's a vandal that will always hopefully tell us when he/she is vandalizing with an edit summary that says "Removing all content from page." Is thia annoying? Is this being done by one person only? They seem to be changing their IP addresses; the last one, by 71.161.38.171 (talk · contribs), is the user's only edit. Would a CU or rangeblock be out of the question? Cass andra 01:36, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's an automatic edit summary, like this

. You can read en:WP:AES for a bit more info. Maxim_(talk) 01:39, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ahhh. I was used to seeing the "Blanked the page" message over on the English Wikipedia. Cass andra 01:42, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Also en has the left-pointing arrow to indicate that the software did it. Cass andra 02:35, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Both of those are caused by MediaWiki: namespace messages, though I forget which ones. If anyone's interested I'll go searching. —Giggy 06:12, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Move account User:Petar Petrov

Hi. As SUL is now enabled, please do the following:

Unblock my main account User:Петър Петров
Move my account User:Petar Petrov to User:Петър Петров (if it is possible, as User:Петър Петров is a SUL unified account). --Petar Petrov (talk) 10:56, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have requested confirmation of this change on the user talk on the home wiki of the SUL account. Not entirely certain if this can work, but the bug susposedly was fixed, so this will test it for me. -- Creol(talk) 12:22, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Done - confusing, and not exactly certain where the talk page from Petrov went (not in any of the histories, it does not appear there was an original user talk page..) -- Creol(talk) 12:44, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed. I reunited both accounts to SUL. All works fine. Thank you. P.S. I think there was no talk page for Petrov. --Petar Petrov (talk) 15:13, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalised Page

Hi,

I just noticed that this page has been a bit vandalised.

[17]

I'm not sure if I'd do more harm than good trying to fix it, so I thought it might be best to post here to let someone know.

cheers! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.129.170.255 (talk • contribs)

That page (en:Kelly Jones) in on the English wikipedia, not here. -- Creol(talk) 15:26, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

We have no control of the regular English Wikipedia.-- † Christian Man 16 01:02, 11 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Seems to be fine now anyway. - tholly ^--Turnip-- 20:12, 16 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted edits

Hello. Could an administrator email me all my deleted contributions? I just wanted to see how my QD tags are doing. Thanks, RyanCross (talk) 07:35, 12 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Done - I think there are about 200 of them. Chenzw Talk 10:44, 12 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I saw. Thanks! :) -- RyanCross (talk) 10:47, 12 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Mine too plese (email) -- Da Punk '95 talk 20:57, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Has anyone done it? If not, I will work on it. Chenzw Talk 00:47, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm waiting - emails fixed. -- Da Punk '95 talk 20:37, 17 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Done - Chenzw Talk 01:36, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Avril Lavigne vandal

For anyone who just witnessed an Avril Lavigne message popping up and not going away on a number of pages, this is your explanation. I tracked it down to the {{Commonscat}} template being vandalised. I've repaired the damage, just thought you should all know in case it happens again. I'm tempted now to identify all templates which have a number of transclusions and fully protecting them. Thoughts would be appreciated. The Rambling Man (talk) 10:45, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Since this is a high-risk template (and also unlikely to be edited by new users), I semi-protected it for the next month; we do not want imitators.--Eptalon (talk) 10:48, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) Full protection is not really needed, though semi-protection would be nice. That user should have been blocked for having an unacceptable username. Some time ago, we were hit by someone mass-creating users with names containing illegible (Latin?) characters. Chenzw Talk 10:50, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well he's been indef blocked anyway. He vandalised pretty quickly after registering the name. The Rambling Man (talk) 11:47, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Prior to SUL, it was common to Bad Username block non-latin names but now that realy should not be done anymore. -- Creol(talk) 13:37, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This isn't the only place its happened. I have been trying to track down the other one. It's showing up on some hockey pages, I think its coming from somewhere in the navbox template. -Djsasso (talk) 14:18, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Has multiple accounts User:Altwiki was the one who caused this issue. Perhaps a checkuser is in order. -Djsasso (talk) 14:23, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Definitely. I've fixed the navbox template now. The Rambling Man (talk) 14:24, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And another hit the cite template User:Havriling. Haha I am so not used to being able to block them myself. Don't suppose you could block these two eh Rambling Man? -Djsasso (talk) 14:27, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've registered an initial checkuser. I'm onto the other, thanks Djsasso. The Rambling Man (talk) 14:30, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

All accounts dealt with, there were no hidden socks but there are known good accounts on the IP (school ip) so I went with a short term soft block (second offense). -- Creol(talk) 14:38, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nice work everyone. The Rambling Man (talk) 14:39, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It definitely helps that the watchlist notifier even alerts me to changes when I am AWB'ing -- Creol(talk) 14:42, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Protection for templates in heavy use

I'm not sure why we don't follow English Wikipedia's example of protecting our most heavily used templates (e.g. {{navbox}}, {{stub}} etc. The Avril Lavigne episode (above) shows how destructive a single edit can be and it can take time to track it down during which all pages using such will have, effectively, whatever the vandal wants on display all the time. Anyone against at least semi-protecting the major templates? The Rambling Man (talk) 14:42, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nope, I think anything in heavy use should be protected. -Djsasso (talk) 14:46, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just to let you know...

I have created this. mc8 14:58, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Special:Contributions/92.2.101.184

We really need to do something about this. This IP has created a million pages, just trying to add {{stub}} to his creations is a nightmare. I've noticed many NPOV problems with his changes. Many of his pages have cluttered Category:Cleanup needed. He been kindly given tips - which have been mostly ignored. I can no longer keep up with the trail of messes that have been started. Thoughts? -- AmericanEagle (talk) 19:49, 16 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I know what you mean, a raft of Pakistan/India based stubs which are directly taken from en-wiki. I'd suggest persisting with communication and then, if all else fails, we need to take stronger action. If nothing else, the IP's edits are a breach of GFDL being a copy-and-paste-without-attribution from en-wiki. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:56, 16 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There is a wikiproject Pakistan.. perhaps they know him/her? --Eptalon (talk) 20:19, 16 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The main problem here is that he (or she. probably he) is acting in good faith. We do not have many options; he is not really distrupting (so blocking is not an option, IMO); and since I pointed him to that this discussion on simple talk his edits became less controversial (Gwib deleted some tehsils, on the grounds of notability; but we have had a similar action from a different editor with cities/towns/villages in belgium; so no ground for action there either). We should really get them to communicate.. Anyone speaking Urdu here? --Eptalon (talk) 20:24, 16 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Gwib and me were talking about this, and yes, many of the are NPOV violations. I actually added {{stub}} to some of his creations, but why waste adding the template to hundreds of articles. It just shows that I care more about quantity edits than quality, which I don't; quality edits are much better. I think a strict warning would be fine, just not too strict to the point that you will WP:BITE the IP. If he ignores it, the only thing to do now is to live with the "nighmare" as we can't block him since I'm assuming good faith. -- RyanCross (talk) 20:51, 16 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(unindenting) I still think there may be a language problem; The official languages of Pakistan are Urdu, and English - It might be easier to communicate to him in Urdu (supposing he learnt that in school). According to a leaflet from the Pakistani government, most people in PK have Punjabi as a mother tongue. Supposing I knew the language and people left messages on my talk page, why would I not respond if I wanted to contribute? --Eptalon (talk) 21:25, 16 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

To slow down the problem, maybe we can blacklist all articles containing "tehsil" (AGF?) and continue to establish communication. Chenzw Talk 23:32, 16 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have written a rather long post to them; I would like to wait if they react to that before any further steps are taken.--Eptalon (talk) 23:48, 16 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have gone through and tagged roughly 150 of this users articles with {{stub}} and {{cleanup}}, but I am starting to wonder if a lot of them (like this and many others like it) should just be deleted. This user has created countless articles since being told multiple times to, at the very least, put a stub notice on the page. As AE said above, just doing that is a nightmare. This user is clearly not interested in following the rules. Anyone else think a short block might fix that? --Andrew from NC (talk) 01:03, 17 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No, I see no block is needed as of now. I'm assuming good faith. But if the IP totally ignores the messages Eptalon gave him, and continues to create NPOV articles and such, maybe one would be necessary. I don't think it's disruptive though, just makes things harder for us. -- RyanCross (talk) 01:06, 17 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think he should be blocked, but I propose that all those page (like Marwari) with just some unreferenced and hard to understand information be deleted. But before anything to do with blocking (which, at this point, should not be done) let's see what happens with Eptalon's message. -- AmericanEagle (talk) 01:09, 17 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Whenever you get around to deleting, you can find many unreferenced articles under Category:Languages of Pakistan. --Andrew from NC (talk) 01:24, 17 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry but I cannot find any good faith in his her edits. By coincidence i came across this edit today itself[18] from a different IP but possibly the same person. It matches the anti-Indian edits of this editor(possibly other Ips too). Is there any way to stop him /her by blocking a range of IPs untill someone can look into the existing crop of new articles. The pakistan related articles may not violate any rules but he/she insists on reffering to India as "Republic of India" (no such prefixing for Pakistan! Why? Im curious!!!). Reffers to Jammu and Kashmir as "Indian occupied Kashmir", Arunachal Pradesh as "South Tibet" and so forth. I really dont want to do any edits now(including this one since I am sorting out SUL issues. I'll place a message on the India talk boards to loook into these edits --D D (talk) 11:43, 17 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please give a few examples. I can't find what you mentioned in the great sea of articles created by him. Chenzw Talk 11:47, 17 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(Unindenting) well, India is officially called Republic of India in English, since 1947, at least; before that it was called British Raj (and included what are now Pakistan, Bangladesh, and Burma, possibly other countries as well). Pakistan is officially the Islamic Republic of Pakistan. They reason why they refer to India as Republic of India is to make a difference between colonial India (British Raj) which included Pakistan, and modern-day india (which does not). For Pakistan this distinction is not necessary, since it has only existed since 1947. Again, all we are looking for at the moment is to be able to talk to them. This is not a witch-hunt --Eptalon (talk) 12:10, 17 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Here are some:

Occupied Kashmir is wikilinked to Jammu and Kashmir
Only those parts held by India are "disputed" Pakistan occupied parts of Kashmir are not!!!
rebranding of Indian states as per users whims . Btw Tripura is never disputed by Bangladesh.
The song is about Hindustan(India) not Pakistan.
reffering to India as Republic of India

I could go on but it really is a pain goung through all his/her edits. Im sorry, but I fail to see where is the witch hunt. The English wikipedia does not differentiante between India and Republic of India. The term British raj means "Britis rule" not "British India"(British india is the preffered term to refer to colonial India since India referes to a geo-political entity that is 5000 years old. When people say India it could be at any point of time. --D D (talk) 12:18, 17 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Very briefly: We are aware of some of the problems of the contributions this editor made; thats one of the reasons we want to comminicate with them. The song you mention was written in 1910; there was no Pakistan then. It is clear that it has been adapted to local usage (see en:Saare_Jahan_Se_Achcha for more.) India is officially called Republic of India (see en:India); All those issues rleating to Kashmir will have to be sorted out by the people who know (i.e. those with Indian or Pakistani, or Chinese) background - not by us. --Eptalon (talk) 12:35, 17 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Also look at en:Official names of India--Eptalon (talk) 12:41, 17 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Protection of Water

Hello. Administrators, I think the article water should be protected from editing by anons. It seems it has a good record of vandalism recently. Maybe a protection for a week or two would be good? If an administrator thinks no protection is needed, then I'll go with that. Thanks, RyanCross (talk) 23:53, 16 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for 1 week. Repeated vandalism by IP's. -- AmericanEagle (talk) 01:00, 17 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The only recent IP vandalism was on July 15 and June 30. You have to go back to April for the next prior occurrence. Just block the IPs. Page protection is rarely needed. - EchoBravo contribs 15:09, 17 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, yeah. I guess it was mainly one IP. He stopped his vandalism after only warning - we'll see what happens with him. -- AmericanEagle (talk) 21:50, 17 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think the protection there was significant enough to require protection, and IP editors are very valuble. Could you please unprotect it, American Eagle? If there is a lot of vandalism over a short period of time from lots of IPs it could be protected for a short period of time. —Giggy 23:57, 17 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, unprotected now. Protection was partly needed, and can be now be unprotected. But we'll watch for vandalism in near future. -- AmericanEagle (talk) 02:42, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. :-) I've watchlisted it and will help in cases of vandalism. Cheers —Giggy 09:14, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

MediaWiki:Article

Could an admin please change this message to "article" as per en:MediaWiki:Article. Thanks. —Giggy 10:27, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Done - Chenzw Talk 11:23, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

MediaWiki:Gadget-HighlightAdmins.js

Just a quickie to say that American Eagle needs adding. mC⁸ 16:08, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Done Majorly ^talk 16:10, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I also noticed that TRM was not highlighted. I guess this is why? Cass andra 16:37, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Added. Are there any more? Majorly ^talk 20:00, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nope. Not yet, anyway. Microchip 12:13, 19 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Request for protection of disclaimers

I think Template:Disclaimer-header should be indefinitely protected. It was previously, but only for a month. As it's used on each of the Disclaimers, I think it would be unacceptable legally for simple: if it was vandalised.

Although I really think full protection is called for, I'd support semi-protection if that's what others want. After all, each Disclaimer page is only semi-protected, and so the template could be removed from them by a vandal. My reason for suggesting full protection is that Template:Disclaimer-header is just a header and so will need few edits; in addition, it contains the vital legal message that it's then en: version of the disclaimers that's binding.

I am also requesting indefinite semi-protection for:

Again, for the reason that it would put simple English Wikipedia in unacceptable legal danger if they were vandalised. On en:, all of them are fully protected (although I wouldn't support this on simple: as they don't use fully simple language yet and need improvement).

Thanks, Drum guy (talk) 01:02, 19 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I support indef protection FULLY for all disclamers. -- Da Punk '95 talk 05:18, 19 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

All disclaimers semi-protected. Da Punk: When you say "fully", do you mean full protection? Personally, I feel that it's a bad idea. Once on EN, I saw a typo on those pages, but I can't correct them. Chenzw Talk 06:08, 19 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I see typos all over EN and I can't correct a lot of them because they are pointlessly protected. No need to employ full protection unless there is vandalism from registered users. --Andrew from NC (talk) 07:30, 19 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(unindenting) Most registered (auto-confirmed) users don't vandalise. There are a few of them that are banned here; but this usually is not because of them vandalising. So semi-portection is enough; like with most pages.--Eptalon (talk) 09:23, 19 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's good for Simple English Wikipedia to be unique compared to the big one :D Chenzw Talk 11:23, 19 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Chenzw - Admin only editing because they can put us/ the WMF in danger. -- Da Punk '95 talk 21:24, 19 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry - just pointing out that Template:Disclaimer-header (at the top of each disclaimer) is not protected. I propose indefinite full (administrator-only) protection for it, as it contains that sentence "For our official legal version, please see the the English-language Wikipedia.", which legally is what binds simple:. It also shows the reader that there is more than one disclaimer, so it is really important. Also, as it is so short/simple (it has no typos!) it will need very few changes.

Also the possibility of semi-protection for Category:Wikipedia disclaimer notices? It's also linked to from the main disclaimer pages and is probably the safe option. I agree with your points about pointless protection and typos, but I really think disclaimers are a whole different kettle of fish -- I was even surprised to find they also used the wiki format!

Thanks a lot everyone. It's great work you're doing. --Drum guy (talk) 00:34, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Special:Unwatchedpages

I don't pretend to set a RfA self-nomination record ;-))) but I could have some regrets if still nobody answers my recurrent question about Special:Unwatchedpages.

I'm posting here and not on the Village pump alias because only Admins can be kind to check them and tell me if they are organized same way other wikis and (main point) if they are frequently updated.

To remind you the context, my first RfA failed the month I made 400 edits; I was applying saying I'll work much more quicker when given access to the Special:Unwatchedpages. ONaNcle (talk) 06:44, 19 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What is your question? Majorly ^talk 06:48, 19 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nevermind - yes they are. Majorly ^talk 06:53, 19 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) Are they updated more frequently than Special:WantedPages ? ONaNcle (talk) 07:06, 19 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. From the page: "NOTE: The information on this page was last updated at 07:41, 18 July 2008." Majorly ^talk 07:10, 19 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]