Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Current issues and requests archive 66

User page semi-protection request

May I have User:MathXplore/QD log/202210 semi-protected? An IP user appeared here but I don't think any IP user would need to change this place. MathXplore (talk) 09:00, 2 November 2022 (UTC)

 Done -- Auntof6 (talk) 09:17, 2 November 2022 (UTC)

RFDs

Just in case anyone was wondering, I've been trying to keep on top of closing RFDs, but there are a few I'm not closing because I commented on them. Someone else should do those. -- Auntof6 (talk) 18:00, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for keeping up on them. I'm currently traveling for a week or two, but will try to get back on top of them as well when I return. --Gordonrox24 | ^Talk 04:31, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

Just closed two overdue ones, still two left but was involved with those. --Ferien (talk) 22:54, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

Page protection of Surendra Singh Gour

• Surendra Singh Gour

Request for semi-protection for 1 month due to repeated creation.-- Dibyojyoti^{let's chat} 16:46, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

@DRC-B5: Done by Eptalon. -- Auntof6 (talk) 18:09, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

However, semi-protection might not help, because the page was created by a registered user at least once. --— Preceding unsigned comment added by Auntof6 (talk • contribs) 18:10, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

Nude photography

A commons user have requested for the last picture in the gallery to be removed. Should we oblige? --Trade (talk) 21:21, 8 November 2022 (UTC)

'with this photo I am threatened by spreading them everywhere with hate messages.' Sounds serious--Trade (talk) 21:24, 8 November 2022 (UTC)

@Trade: Do you mean the request to remove the photo from Commons? As long as it is still in Commons, we can use it here. The photo illustrates exactly what the article is about, so there's no reason to remove it. If it gets removed from Commons, they will remove all uses of it in Wikipedias. Wikipedia is not censored, after all. -- Auntof6 (talk) 21:43, 8 November 2022 (UTC)

Don't think Wikipedia:NOTCENSORED applies if he never consented to the image being uploded here Trade (talk) 21:45, 8 November 2022 (UTC)

@Trade: If that's the issue, it needs to be resolved at Commons. If they determine that the image should be removed, then it will be removed here. You can join the discussion on Commons if you like. -- Auntof6 (talk) 21:50, 8 November 2022 (UTC)

Shortdescription on Template:Bot

Should the use of {{Short description}} be removed from {{Bot}}? That template is generating most of the transclusions of {{Short description}}. Lights and freedom (talk) 23:51, 12 November 2022 (UTC)

done. It seems the edits were made by copying the bot template over from enwiki. I don't see why that was done,as it only made the bot template more complex and added the short description to loads of pages. Thanks for letting us know. --Ferien (talk) 23:58, 12 November 2022 (UTC)

List of Canadian artists

Article made by an LTA. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.20.62.211 (talk) 10:12, 10 November 2022 (UTC)

This page promotes Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/Ananny. Macdonald-ross (talk) 14:36, 13 November 2022 (UTC)

Research Project: Plain English Questions For You

Hello! I am a master's student working on a project regarding the use of Plain Language, which I believe is a similar concept to Simple English. As the people behind this offering I am wondering if I could ask some questions to someone on this forum regarding Simple English, if you have any statistics on the usage of the Simple English Wikipedia, and how the process goes for translating a page into Simple English.

If this is another forum or channel you'd like me to direct my questions to, or other contacts in the Simple English space please let me know.

If you'd be open to answering some of my questions, I posted some exact questions on on my talk channel and we can discuss there. Thank you for your help :)

Primarysorcerer (talk) 19:54, 16 November 2022 (UTC)

Hi there Primarysorcerer! You could also add this topic to Simple talk. I plan to answer the questions soon. Thanks :) --Ferien (talk) 20:10, 16 November 2022 (UTC)

Thanks! I will post in Simple talk as well Primarysorcerer (talk) 20:27, 16 November 2022 (UTC)

TeenNick Smile Kids Preschool

A hoax article that I mentioned at CU has returned. Can we have this entry protected? MathXplore (talk) 03:59, 19 November 2022 (UTC)

Nova Lee LeClair

Non-notable actor BLP but an IP editor continues to remove QD tag. MathXplore (talk) 13:15, 19 November 2022 (UTC)

Request block Special:Contributions/Forever-Young-At-Heart

Special:Contributions/Queen-Divas ‎sock.--MCC214 (talk) 17:18, 20 November 2022 (UTC)

• Now this account have been globally banned, so admin can ignore this block request.--MCC214 (talk) 04:32, 21 November 2022 (UTC)

Request for removal of rights

Hi there! Please remove rollback from this account. Thanks! EpicPupper (talk) 22:26, 20 November 2022 (UTC)

 Done--Ferien (talk) 22:43, 20 November 2022 (UTC)

Yahya jamaaoui

I would like to have this article reviewed, requested QD G4 but contested by the creator. MathXplore (talk) 15:55, 21 November 2022 (UTC)

Anurag Dixit

Seems to be a copy from here but an IP user is contesting the QD. MathXplore (talk) 07:19, 22 November 2022 (UTC)

The creator agreed to remove enwiki copypaste, so I will withdraw QD A3 for now. MathXplore (talk) 07:38, 22 November 2022 (UTC)

User:Viet146

This user was blocked due to a bad username (bot in account name), but changed the user name. I think this account can be unblocked. MathXplore (talk) 07:22, 22 November 2022 (UTC)

@MathXplore: That is something the user can request if they want to. -- Auntof6 (talk) 07:54, 22 November 2022 (UTC)

Request

Please consider blocking and deleting pages created by 31.190.195.83: Long-term abuse, see en:Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/Alec Smithson (global block already requested). Thanks, --Mtarch11 (talk) 07:44, 21 November 2022 (UTC)

@Mtarch11 Blocked, though pages are not deleted for now. — *Fehufangą ♮ ✉ Talk page 23:57, 24 November 2022 (UTC)

Violet's Life

This TV series article does not claim notability but an IP editor is contesting the QD. I would like to have an admin to review this page. MathXplore (talk) 06:50, 25 November 2022 (UTC)

@MathXplore: Reviewed; deleted as not notable. FYI, I don't consider removing a QD tag to be contesting. Using the {{wait}} template would be contesting. -- Auntof6 (talk) 08:26, 25 November 2022 (UTC)

Helpinver

Hello! I came from ruwiki. Can you delete and then protect the article Helpinver so no one could recreate it? This is a spam article, it has been created in multiple Wikipedias. Thanks in advance. Radmir Far (talk) 17:19, 26 November 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for the notice. Appropriate action has been taken. Best, Griff (talk) 17:53, 26 November 2022 (UTC)

Dexter's Laboratory

Dexter's Laboratory has been getting constant attention from IPs. They tend to be adding a large amount of off topic and/or unsourced information. Ive reverted and/or cleaned up the article multiple times in the last few days. While not unmanageable, if no one was watching it and pruning constantly, it would get out of hand. Short term partial protection (confirmed users+) may be needed for a while. Pure Evil (talk) 19:07, 30 November 2022 (UTC)

 Done --Ferien (talk) 16:49, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

Mudros Armistice

Please check the page Mudros Armistice one time and you will know what is going on. The page is a type of vandalism. Koqkpa - TALK 15:44, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

 Deleted. Thank you. --Ferien (talk) 15:45, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

Request for Protection for User talk:郊外生活

I would like to request semi-protection for User talk:郊外生活 due to excessive vandalism by cross-wiki long-term abuse Sidowpknbihihj (ja:LTA:HEATHROW) socks. This LTA uses multiple accounts in order to post abusive language at my user talk pages on multiple Wikimedia projects, and my userpages on enwiki, meta, commons, and wikidata are now semi-protected. --郊外生活 (talk) 13:55, 3 December 2022 (UTC)

 Comment: The user is not so much active at here, so I think indefinite semi-protection is possible. MathXplore (talk) 13:58, 3 December 2022 (UTC)

 Done for a year --Ferien (talk) 15:10, 3 December 2022 (UTC)

What two breeds make a pomeranian

Delete this page What two breeds make a pomeranian. It is a vandalism page on Wikipedia, some kind of test page? Koqkpa - TALK 16:10, 3 December 2022 (UTC)

Koqkpa  Done Thank you but there is no need for you to also report on Administrators noticeboard unless the quick deletion tag is being reverted multiple times. Quick deletion requests automatically go to a category that admins monitor: CAT:QD. --Ferien (talk) 16:24, 3 December 2022 (UTC)

Template:Talk header

The search bar doesn't work on {{Talk header}}. For example, on Talk:History of the United States, if you search for something, it searches in pages with the prefix "?'"`UNIQ--nowiki-00000002-QINU`"'?" and doesn't find any results. Lights and freedom (talk) 19:58, 4 December 2022 (UTC)

 Fixed — *Fehufangą ♮ ✉ Talk page 02:21, 6 December 2022 (UTC)

Juiceslf (singer)

The IP user who created Juiceslf (singer) claimed that it is "different from the deleted version", probably to avoid WP:QD#G4, so an admin can verify if it's really different enough or otherwise quick delete it. The RfD is at Wikipedia:Requests for deletion/Requests/2022/Juiceslf. Lights and freedom (talk) 22:14, 4 December 2022 (UTC)

 Done by Op873. Thank you! Griff (talk) 01:46, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

Quick deletion review needed

Folkloristic anthropology was put up for quick deletion G7. The request was declined with the reason given as "original author did not write most of what was on the page before blanking"

There have been 2 editors. The first was the creator. the page was created at 7180 by that person. Another editor added 3 tags to the page (simplify, more sources and cleanup needed) and headers and moved the page to the proper title. (total size now 7389). OP then blanked 6958 of the content (pretty much all of what they put up) The other editor then tagged it as qd-g7. This was denied saying the OP who added 7180 of 7389 did not write most of it. The only thing on the page is 3 tags, an empty reference section and an external sites section with a link to example. G7, no content and test edit could all be valid reasons but as it has been denied, this needs upper level attention to deal with it (and the redirect what was created in the move) Pure Evil (talk) 06:57, 6 December 2022 (UTC)

WP:QD#G7 says "only if most of the page was written by that author and was created as a mistake". I don't think the page was created as a mistake. I do apologize for misinterpreting the edit reason "add sections", though: I was thinking it meant that sections of text were added, when it was really just section headings. (That's what I get for not paying attention to the character count.) If another admin wants to delete, I won't protest although I think it was not created as a mistake. -- Auntof6 (talk) 07:07, 6 December 2022 (UTC)

Emma Tate

An IP editor continues to put RFD tag at here, but I don't see any recent RFD about this page. I would like to have admins to check this page if it is OK to clean up the RFD notice. MathXplore (talk) 07:45, 6 December 2022 (UTC)

Looks like they've stopped. --Ferien (talk) 17:33, 6 December 2022 (UTC)

Jalierium, possible QD A6

I think this page is a possible hoax but the author continues to remove the QD tag without meaningful improvements. MathXplore (talk) 17:24, 6 December 2022 (UTC)

hi fella MarcusAAA76 (talk) 17:33, 6 December 2022 (UTC)

 Done Deleted. --Ferien (talk) 17:33, 6 December 2022 (UTC)

Sari Katha

This is a page about a cartoon studio, but I don't think it claims or explains the notability as a studio. Although the author does not agree and continues to remove QD tags, so I would like to have admins for a review. MathXplore (talk) 05:47, 18 November 2022 (UTC)

QD tag was restored by Hockeycatcat. MathXplore (talk) 07:07, 18 November 2022 (UTC)

QD declined, as I don't think it's a clear case of A4 and not everyone agreed it wasn't notable (with the author removing the QD tags). Hockeycatcat or MathXplore, please feel free to send to RfD if you wish. --Ferien (talk) 07:20, 18 November 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for the review, I will take this to Wikipedia:Requests for deletion/Requests/2022/Sari Katha. MathXplore (talk) 07:26, 18 November 2022 (UTC)

The article has been recreated. I think it is different from the former version discussed at the last RFD, but I don't think it claims notability. Since the author does not agree to QD, I would like to have admins to check it again. MathXplore (talk) 08:53, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

Move request

Is there anyone who can move patriot to Patriyotlar? Patriyotlar has past history and I cannot move with my user rights. MathXplore (talk) 13:13, 7 December 2022 (UTC)

I would withdraw this request because Patriot was blanked by the author. MathXplore (talk) 13:21, 7 December 2022 (UTC)

Its done, you can see Nalanidil (talk) 13:23, 7 December 2022 (UTC)

50.89.178.84

50.89.178.84 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) has an extended history of questionable editing to Lists of television programs by XXX articles. Their talk page shows a long history of warnings they have been given. They also have a prior 1 week block for abusing multiple accounts. Currently, I am dealing with them on List of Nickelodeon Animation Studio productions where I am going through item by item and trying to weed out the false info. The IP has a habit of reverting these edits or just readding things. These actions are adding false information as I am removing programs that are not NAS productions only to have him re-add them. Some of his most recent edits were valid typo cleanups but the also include adding Kappa Mikey which is broadcast on Nick, but wasn't produced by it (let alone created by NAS) If his actions are this bad here, what is being done to other articles. I have enough of a problem clearing existing damage and the base articles linked in ( a host are attribbed to Canada when the en. infobox shows no connection to Canada so I also have the clean up those articles to make sure we have the correct info on the list)

There is also the issue that if they are getting 4-5 warnings a month for the last year, how many of his edits either slipped through or were reverted without a warning? Pure Evil (talk) 23:27, 7 December 2022 (UTC)

• added note. The IP is currently sitting out a one year block on en. for disruptive editing. Their editing is reminiscent of the Disney IP LTA vandal that was here in the past. This one is also from Florida so it may be more than reminiscent. Pure Evil (talk) 04:16, 8 December 2022 (UTC)
• 150.176.175.191 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) is having the same effects on the same group of articles. As with the above user, this one is also on a 1 yr En.wiki block and geolocates to Florida. Pure Evil (talk) 16:28, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

  Should be blocked for disruptive editing. Lights and freedom (talk) 18:59, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

• This is now edit warring. As of this time, I have stopped trying to correct the errors in all program lists due to the constant uncontrolled edits from IP with a long history on disruptive edits. Pure Evil (talk) 02:25, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

 Done - Blocked for disruptive editing. — *Fehufangą ♮ ✉ Talk page 02:40, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

@Fehufanga Can you block the 150. IP too? Lights and freedom (talk) 03:02, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

 Done - I see the same pattern of disruptive edits. — *Fehufangą ♮ ✉ Talk page 03:11, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

Double redirects from User:Hulged

Hello, could an admin please delete all the redirects to my userspace on Special:DoubleRedirects. User:Hulged and User:Baggaet were my previous usernames. --Ratekreel (talk) 07:33, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

 Done — *Fehufangą ♮ ✉ Talk page 06:56, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

The Land of Skulls

I don't think the article claims notability in page, but the author contested the QD, I would like to have review from admins. MathXplore (talk) 11:33, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

Taken to RFD. MathXplore (talk) 12:11, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

I propsed it at Rfd, which is the standard procedure for such cases. Since I proposed it, I likley won't be the closing admin. Eptalon (talk) 12:11, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

2600:8805:d609:3d00::0/64

The user 2600:8805:d609:3d00::0/64 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · block user · block log) is making many disruptive edits. They have added false information to a number of articles, for example: [1] [2] [3] [4]. They have been warned a number of times (level 1, level 2, level 3, level 4/final, level 1, level 1), but their IP keeps changing, so people may not see the warnings. I think they should be blocked for some amount of time, maybe a month. Lights and freedom (talk) 23:45, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

thought I had blocked them for longer, done for six months. — *Fehufangą ♮ ✉ Talk page 00:11, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

Movie redirects

Hi everyone. The original code for movie redirects (previously discussed here) has been lost and needs to be remade. It's been about two and a half years since then, which is a really long time! So I was wondering if anyone had any thoughts on it, or if there is still community approval for it. Let me know. Naleksuh (talk) 06:16, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

I have no problem with it myself. --Ferien (talk) 12:51, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Alexander Shtanko

I thought this page was deleted per RFD but now it has been recreated, QD G4 has been contested. I would like to have admins to compare this one with the deleted versions. MathXplore (talk) 09:09, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

Besides a few images added, no significant difference. Deleted. — *Fehufangą ♮ ✉ Talk page 09:32, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

Going to liberal/woke

you're loosing a great deal of your audience.... falling too far left. GOOD BYE. 216.164.103.160 (talk) 16:36, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Dear IP, this is a Wikipedia, where anyone can edit. It is clear that the articles will reflect the views of those who edited them. If a particular article shows a bias,so that it no longer represent a neutral view, it can be flagged (with {{NPOV}}. I invite you to flag articles which show this bias, so that they can be fixed. As to my personal political ideas: they are irrelevant, as we are creating a wikipedia, and an article with a lot of bias hopefully won't stay that way for long. I again invite you to create an account, and edit here; anger/hatred and vctim blaiming don't serve us in the long run. Eptalon (talk) 18:08, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Questions from Koqkpa at User talk:MathXplore

It might be needless to mention that I welcome everyone to my talk page if their messages are constructive enough and helpful for the project, or otherwise provide assistance to me, but I strongly doubt the quality of the questions from Koqkpa to here. The things that generated my concern is

• former user page visibility question
• special:diff/8585739
• special:diff/8590860, today

I can hardly understand the question intent for these as a Wikipedian, and I cannot imagine how these things will lead to a helpful conversation for the encyclopedia. How can these be justified or needed? Maybe its too fast to label as extraordinary trolling or activate WP:ONESTRIKE, but how much should we offer free Q&A social networking services for Koqkpa? MathXplore (talk) 16:32, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

It is perhaps worth noting that I sanitized Koqpa's user page a few days ago, as they were quite liberal as to the information they shared with the wiki. I also left a message on their talk page. And to answer the question: yes, probably a few wiipedians know me, but I don't think it matters. Eptalon (talk) 18:44, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

This User@Koqkpa, also reverted what I have written on the simple talk page, but then changend it back. Everyone can see if they have a Look on the Simple Talk page. I have no idea what that should be Nalanidil (talk) 18:51, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

I didn't check that. We must be sure about how and how not to use talk pages. MathXplore (talk) 06:34, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

This case seems to be answered at Koqkpa's talk page. MathXplore (talk) 06:38, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello Eptalon, thank you for taking care of the user page incident. We must make sure that this is an online encyclopedia, and user page features are just a part of the project. MathXplore (talk) 06:33, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

While the questions aren't the sort of questions I would go around asking users, I don't think it's trolling and newer users ask a lot more questions than users who have been around for a while, even if they are less related to the project. Most importantly, I would strongly discourage any other administrator from blocking Koqkpa under the ONESTRIKE policy, as Koqkpa has done a lot of good work here and has massively improved since his enwiki block. --Ferien (talk) 22:12, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

I generally agree to you evaluations, but I did not see those improvements brought to my user talk page. The most doubtful thing (special:diff/8590860) just appeared recently and that is why I brought this agenda to the noticeboard. MathXplore (talk) 06:37, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

1,000 edits is a milestone that you are told about through notifications, and is a pretty big number. Perhaps he just wanted to tell someone about it. I don't think it alone shows that Koqkpa is focused on edit count and not on building an encyclopedia. --Ferien (talk) 12:48, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

(Non-administrator observation) I don't like involving in this matter, still. After checking their track record, it is clear that the user is quite not serious about the user talkbacks. If you refer to their enwiki talk page, he did even give threats about creating another account, which lead to TPA revoke. Maybe he is doing good contributions here but asking unnecessary questions all the time might be considered disturbing to them, for Math I don't know. I must recommend a strong warning for Koqkpa to avoid trolling and making him aware about the onestrike rule. Dibyojyoti^{let's chat} 16:32, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

I think the onestrike rule is already recognized. I just wanted to give opportunities to focus on encyclopedic works instead the questions as above, so he/she can avoid wasting time on user talk pages. MathXplore (talk) 16:40, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

Yeah I guess they are aware now. Perhaps a notice must be given to them of not wasting our time with trolling. Dibyojyoti^{let's chat} 02:59, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

Advertising

Could someone take a look at the contributions of 2401:4900:1C48:84FE:ED75:A595:C52A:C229 (talk · contribs · WHOIS)? They dropped a couple ads into articles. The edits were reverted but the summaries are still there with their advert in it. Best to just nuke the whole thing and prevent them from having a free advert. Pure Evil (talk) 21:47, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

Bhargav Polara

The QD is contested but I don' t think notability is claimed in the latest version. MathXplore (talk) 05:16, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

Since @Koqkpa: has contested notability, I have sent it to RfD.

Koqkpa: A listing of an artist's works on their biography does not show notability by itself. I can make the claim that I wrote a Mass and a symphony but that wouldn't make me notable enough for Wikipedia. — *Fehufangą ♮ ✉ Talk page 05:19, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

Orphans of Stars

The author does not agree to QD A4 but I only see a plot and character list, possibly missing claim of notability. MathXplore (talk) 05:41, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

Angel Tsvetkov

A new account (already reported to checkuser, possible block evasion) has made this page which is related to Wikipedia:Requests for deletion/Requests/2022/Angel Valeriev Tsvetkov (2nd nomination). Since I cannot check the deleted versions, I would like to have admins to review and compare the pages. MathXplore (talk) 09:55, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

Minor differences, G4 applied, user blocked. — *Fehufangą ♮ ✉ Talk page 10:08, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

President of Argentina-related articles

Some user/users have been constantly adding fake information onto Alberto Fernández's, Mauricio Macri's, President of Argentina's, Cristina Fernández de Kirchner's and Miguel Ángel Pichetto's articles.

The user continues to add fake information that Macri is the 'current' president of Argentina having assumed office in December 2023 (a year from now) and modifies Fernandez's infobox as being the former president (even though he's the incumbent president). Continued edits include making Kirchner a former VP (even though she's the incumbent VP) and Pichetto's infobox by listing him as the incumbent VP (assuming office one year from now).

These edits have been ongoing for a solid month, largely by unregistered user 186.141.135.185 and @Marcos365:. They even go as far as to reverting my edits undoing their vandalism. Is there a way to protect these articles (mainly Fernandez and Macri) and having a more watchful eye on the rest? Some of these false information have been visually public for days.

Thank you. 73.110.175.228 (talk) 19:09, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello, thank you for alerting us. I have edit-protected the articles for a week (so that only autoconfirmed users can edit them). I invite you to create an account, it makes many things easier. Eptalon (talk) 19:19, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

Time for a block of

See here and here amongst others. We have been patient enough. --Gotanda (talk) 13:12, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

I think I've seen enough. Blocked for incivility and violation of ONESTRIKE. — *Fehufangą ♮ ✉ Talk page 13:17, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

Thank you! --Gotanda (talk) 14:03, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

Girdhar Swami

The page was deleted per RFD, but it was recreated today. I would like to have a comparison and review with the former deleted versions. MathXplore (talk) 10:10, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

•  Comment: The article has been renominated for deletion (2nd nom) but the user who created it keeps removing the RfD tag. The comparison may be able to get it QD as recreated RfD and bypass this issue. If so. salting may be in order as a casting director is not likely to ever be notable. Pure Evil (talk) 21:02, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

  Unfortunately, it is not able to be quick deleted as if an RfD gets no comments (as that 1st nom did) then it should be treated as a "soft delete". That being said, if the constant reversion of the RfD template continues then the article could be semi-protected for the remaining duration of the RfD. --Ferien (talk) 21:29, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

  The problem there is that the rules for a soft delete have been violated twice. One by the user as they must request it be undeleted, there is no statement in the rule that they can just recreate a similar article. No request was made. Also, the closing admin is supposed to annotate that it is a soft delete. Auntof6 did not do this. According to what the policy is, there is no indication that a soft delete was done. Also there is no clause in the en. soft delete policy that says a soft delete can not be quick deleted if it is in violation of a valid policy. I find it questionable to defend keeping something based on a policy that the article's existence is a violation of.. Using the rule being broken to defend what is breaking the rule... Pure Evil (talk) 00:21, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

  And currently, the user has removed the qd twice and the RfD 2x. 4 instances of removing a deletion tag should be enough to constitute "constant". Pure Evil (talk) 00:25, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

  Regarding soft delete: while process wasn't perfectly followed, a soft delete is basically a prod delete. As we have already gone through that one prod, we cannot delete again as that prod only allows us to delete the article once. By deleting this as G4 we would be going directly against what SOFTDELETE says, that soft deletes should be treated as prods. While the guideline on enwiki says that labelling it as a softdelete should be done, it isn't a requirement for a soft delete being a soft delete. It is very clearly a soft delete and IMO can be treated as such even if it was not labelled as one by Auntof6. Finally you warned the user after they reverted the rfd notice and now they have stopped. That's why I said if the reverting does continue it would be protected but from what we have seen so far your warning has stopped them so there is no need to protect the article anymore.--Ferien (talk) 00:44, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

  Are we reading the same policy? The one you linked to has no mention of the article being redeleted. There is nothing that a G4 quick delete could possibly violate. Soft delete states a few basic things. the article can be deleted, the article can be requested to be undeleted, the deletion should be marked as such. there is a second paragraph but it deals with redirecting the page in applicable which is not applicable in this case. Of those 3 steps, only one was followed. It was deleted. No request, no tagging. Not perfectly is a bit of an understatement. Not marginally would be an overstatement. Not at all would be more accurate.

  As to "we cannot delete again as that prod only allows us to delete the article once". that is completely wrong and violates the deletion policy. The entirety of g4 is all about redeleton after an RfD (not a prod... this is not en.) G4 would not apply if a discussion took place or it was created in the User space. Neither of these took place. This is entirely about an article that was deleted after an uncontested RfD being recreated in a similar form in the article space. this entire thing (the article, the refusal to follow policy, the rfD part 2, this discussion) is just wasting time that could be used to improve things... Pure Evil (talk) 15:19, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

• Delete. Users must not be allowed to game the system when we have a consensus. Macdonald-ross (talk) 06:49, 26 December 2022 (UTC)

  When there aren't any comments, there's not really a consensus. We can avoid any possible "soft delete" results by having more people comment at RfD. --Ferien (talk) 20:24, 26 December 2022 (UTC)

  The lack of comments can be from complete consensus. There is often little reason to pile on the delete train if there is no opposition. If someone agrees with the delete reason and no one is opposed, little is achieved with a "me too" / "per nom" post. If nothing was said, take it as either agreement or the fact that it got overlooked/ ignored. Non oppose often equals agree / no opinion. Pure Evil (talk) 20:44, 26 December 2022 (UTC)

Acceptable Mountain

I don't think a claim of notability is included at this page, but the creator repeats QD tag removal. May I have someone else for checking? MathXplore (talk) 06:31, 26 December 2022 (UTC)

Spam, with no evidence of notability. Macdonald-ross (talk) 06:40, 26 December 2022 (UTC)

Teeth blackening

I think this page needs semi-protection. IP users continue to make unhelpful and/or non-English changes. MathXplore (talk) 09:59, 26 December 2022 (UTC)

Protected for 1 week. — *Fehufangą ♮ ✉ Talk page 12:01, 26 December 2022 (UTC)

Deletion request

Per User talk:WindTempos#Deletion requested, could I request User:ZudoMC/huggle3.css be deleted under QD U1/U2/any other applicable criteria? It's a double redirect from a very old username of mine. Cheers, WindTempos (talk) 19:12, 26 December 2022 (UTC)

@WindTempos: Done. -- Auntof6 (talk) 19:24, 26 December 2022 (UTC)

List of programs broadcast by Universal Kids

Requesting page protection of this page as this going through IP vandalism. YIEWI talk 20:21, 26 December 2022 (UTC)

197 line items and 8 refs.. there is little doubt that article is full of fake information. Its the case with IP edits to most lists of this kind. Pure Evil (talk) 20:52, 26 December 2022 (UTC)

Friendship in the Imagination Parade

Tagged QD but an IP user wants to replace with RFD. How should we take care of this? MathXplore (talk) 16:31, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

QD:A4 requires that it be uncontested. If it is contested, RfD is needed (or an admin going IAR). As the editor is pushing for RfD, that would indicate they are contesting the A4. Just ensure it is tagged properly for RfD (tagged, request page, add to RfD page) and move to the next issue. Pure Evil (talk) 17:18, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

@MathXplore @Pure Evil: I have declined the QD request because A4 does not apply to events such as parades. A4 applies only to "people, groups, companies, products, services or websites".

If anyone wants to go to RFD, that's fine. However, it isn't enough to just put an RFD template on the page -- an actual request page has to be created, and that page has to be added to the main RFD page. -- Auntof6 (talk) 18:30, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

Tunceli Province

Possible content dispute, protection needed. MathXplore (talk) 16:57, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

I 100% agree here. 🄰🄽🄸🄼🄰🄻 🄴🄳🄸🅃🄾🅁 - 𝙇𝙚𝙩'𝙨 𝙏𝙖𝙡𝙠 (talk) 16:58, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

I've protected the page and warned both users involved. --Ferien (talk) 21:17, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

Module needed

(sort of)

The template {{Pp-move-indef}} is generating a "Script error: No such module "Pp-move-indef" error. This is not a big deal as the template is only used on one page and it is in the User space. Unfortunately, the template is part of {{Protection templates}} so while it is not used, it is linked to on many pages. The pp-indef template also has an internal error showing on its own page. As it is not used, we may want to just remove it from the nav template and delete the pp-indef template as it is unused but that call is above my paygrade. Pure Evil (talk) 16:10, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

We appear to have done the same change as en where the indef template actually isn't necessary anymore so I have gone ahead and redirected {{pp-move-indef}} to {{pp-move}}, and removed it from the nav template. --Ferien (talk) 23:24, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

Vanessa Hehir

I don't think a claim of notability is included but an IP user continues QD tag removal. MathXplore (talk) 17:26, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

Sent to RfD. --Ferien (talk) 17:29, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

Notice on closing RfDs...

As it's year end-again, let me point out that when an RfD is closed, the 'current year' will be taken for the default reason (generated for the RfD). Therefore, you'll manually have to the enter the reason when you close RfDs that started in 2022, in early 2023. Eptalon (talk) 12:05, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

I've gone through and added "|year=2022" to all our pages currently at RfD to avoid any problems getting from the page to the RfD page as we go into 2023. Happy New Year everyone! --Ferien (talk) 16:18, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

We can also set up redirects from the /2023/ page (which is what the MW software will detect) to the /2022/ page (where the actual discussion took place). — *Fehufangą ♮ ✉ Talk page 22:57, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

@Fehufanga: We can, but that could cause conflicts if pages are recreated and nominated again for deletion in 2023. I wonder if it would be good to use the year parameter on all RFDs all the time. -- Auntof6 (talk) 23:03, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

If we wanted to do that, it would be fairly easy to achieve. Looking at MediaWiki:Gadget-Twinkle.js, it appears just one line has to be changed if we want to add the year parameter. --Ferien (talk) 23:16, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

@Ferien: That change isn't affecting the close reason when I go to close a request. We still have to do something manually. -- Auntof6 (talk) 01:27, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

Auntof6, yes, it only fixes the link between the article nominated for deletion and RfD so it doesn't come up with "please create a discussion page" on the article. Although another thing we could do to prevent extra work in the new year is have the RfD fill out the delete reason, like in the QD template. --Ferien (talk) 10:47, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Proposed very good articles

It's few months past, we have two requests already under pending for conclusion. It would be better if an admin/closing admin would keep an eye on this matter. @Elytrian last requested to close the request at the talk page on the 30 September 2022. Dibyojyoti^{let's chat} 11:11, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

DRC-B5, that message was posted in 2021. There is currently one request open, I have just closed the other as not successful. While the page states that Proposals run for three weeks., in reality, proposals run for quite a bit longer to allow for more comments. Sometimes, proposals will not even get a single comment in three weeks. Proposals are not closed simply because it has been three weeks since the discussion started, admins would usually wait a bit longer than that before closing. --Ferien (talk) 16:53, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for the action. Dibyojyoti^{let's chat} 18:06, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

Raditya Adi

I don't think a valid claim of notability is included, but author continues to remove QD tag. MathXplore (talk) 16:07, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

 Deleted --Ferien (talk) 16:54, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

Page has been recreated again; after it is deleted I would recommend the page be protected. InfernoGaming46 (IG46) (talk / changes) 19:02, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

the two users Indahkusnul and Marwah16 (likely the same person as this has happened before when the page was created) are removing the QD templates, but the page should still be up for QD InfernoGaming46 (IG46) (talk / changes) 19:09, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

I tossed it up for RfD to make it harder on them. They can remove the tag all they want but it wont stop the RfD. A4 could still be applied though not everyone beleives it does so that gets tricky. Snow could still resolve the case quickly but it will eventually get to a decision without it. Salting may be in order if deletion is the result. As there is a good likelihood of sockpuppetry here, a CU may want to be standing by in case this becomes an issue later. Not fishing, just staying vigilant. Pure Evil (talk) 20:37, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

I went and requested CU attention after I had deleted it. It appears they're using socks to make it look as though more people have an opinion against its deletion than is actually the case. I will let a CU deal with it from here. --Ferien (talk) 20:51, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

User:Oakland City block

The first warning posted on their talk page (see this, first contributions) ends up to the last warnings (for a new user, 1 warning left) and is blocked indefinitely on the English Wikipedia and so the one-strike rule applies. As well as beyond the talk page, around a day ago there has been blanked pages and some talk pages replaced with Kim Jong-un. SikiWtideI (Speak to the backwards police) 02:37, 5 January 2023 (UTC)

@SikiWtideI: Thank you for reporting, but the user is already globally locked. You can see this at m:Special:CentralAuth/Oakland City. That means that they cannot do anything using that account on any Wikimedia project. Admins can still block the user locally, but since the user has been blocked, it's not really useful.— *Fehufangą ♮ ✉ Talk page 02:50, 5 January 2023 (UTC)

@Fehufanga: Ok then that’s fine, and also thanks for blocking the second account. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SikiWtideI (talk • contribs) 17:43, 5 January 2023 (UTC)

Fehufanga, I've heard it sometimes can be useful. I don't usually bother but I have seen other admins do it as global locks do not block the IP from editing automatically like a local block will do. --Ferien (talk) 17:48, 5 January 2023 (UTC)

Yeah! I agree with you, technical problem yet to fix. Precaution first. Dibyojyoti^{let's chat} 17:50, 5 January 2023 (UTC)

Might I suggest, in the same vein as you don't tell kids not to put certain things in certain places, you should be careful about saying how a block can be avoided in an open discussion. ie. don't give them ideas. Pure Evil (talk) 18:05, 5 January 2023 (UTC)

Demotion of Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis

Due to this demotion, an admin should do the following things:

• Delete Wikipedia:Very good articles/Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis
• Retarget Main Page/Article 3 to Wikipedia:Very good articles/Billy Graham
• Delete Main Page/Article 26

There should be 26 VGAs (0 through 25).

Also, a minor issue: at Wikipedia:Very good articles, it says there are 28 when there are actually 26. This could be resolved if someone could remove User:Etamni/EnWiki Featured Articles and User:Fhones/En Wiki Best Articles from "Category:Very good articles". Lights and freedom (talk) 22:19, 5 January 2023 (UTC)

First three  Done by Ferien. I fixed the categorization.— *Fehufangą ♮ ✉ Talk page 22:33, 5 January 2023 (UTC)

Thanks. I tried to take a look at the categories but apparently my laptop just can't handle loading the source of a user sandbox now... --Ferien (talk) 22:35, 5 January 2023 (UTC)

Russian film bot

I believe a Russian bot is adding Russian films based on its scraping of IMDB. If so, it should be perma-banned and its contributions nuked. Macdonald-ross (talk) 09:56, 29 December 2022 (UTC)

Macdonald-ross, I'm assuming you're talking about the user Nikolai Kurbatov (talk · contribs)? --Ferien (talk) 10:23, 29 December 2022 (UTC)

I don't use a bot. I have almost finished adding the actors and plan to start writing the plots. Nikolai Kurbatov (talk) 10:27, 29 December 2022 (UTC)

I take information from the English Wikipedia. Nikolai Kurbatov (talk) 10:32, 29 December 2022 (UTC)

If others are happy with that explanation, then I am also. Macdonald-ross (talk) 10:40, 29 December 2022 (UTC)

I am happy with @Nikolai Kurbatov's explanation of this issue In addition, most of their edits are constructive. 🄰🄽🄸🄼🄰🄻 🄴🄳🄸🅃🄾🅁 - 𝙇𝙚𝙩'𝙨 𝙏𝙖𝙡𝙠 (talk) 17:25, 29 December 2022 (UTC)

I am not happy with that explanation. Just copying and pasting from EnWP or elsewhere is not acceptable under QD A3. The editor is not writing the plots; they are copying them. --Gotanda (talk) 03:56, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

WP:ONESTRIKE possible, see Special:CentralAuth/Nikolai_Kurbatov. MathXplore (talk) 05:13, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

At this moment, the users last 50 edits are timestamped from 5:33 to 5:38. At best (first sec of 33 to last second of 38) that would be 50 edits in 360 second or a tad over 7 seconds each for six minutes straight. 10 edits a minute for most of the time. Not botting it? seems unlikely. That said, I would advise against OneStrike as this discussion has told him that it is currently OK to keep going. Decide if a warning to stop is in order, issue it if it is then arm the OneStrike. Pure Evil (talk) 05:49, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

I swear I don't use a bot. I think I did everything I wanted and could. Nikolai Kurbatov (talk) 06:15, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

I just have a very fast typing speed and a lot of free time because I'm disabled. Nikolai Kurbatov (talk) 06:23, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

From 6:07 to 6:13, 48 edits to movie articles. The next 2 edits were to this page and took the next 10 minutes.. that fact typing only seems to work when working on certain things. Pure Evil (talk) 06:35, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

Because I thought after a few minutes that I needed to explain and I did it. Nikolai Kurbatov (talk) 06:48, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

Also: from 5:19 to 6:13 (3420 max seconds), 498 edits made. That's 4.4 second per edit for an hour straight. 958 edits in less that 2.5 hours.. that is fast. Pure Evil (talk) 06:47, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

So what? Does this mean I'm not human? My typing speed is up to 509 characters per minute. Nikolai Kurbatov (talk) 06:51, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

Nikolai Kurbatov, It wouldn't be a problem, but now you are REMOVING the plots from articles. Why? Lights and freedom (talk) 07:11, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

Because they wrote to me that it is forbidden to copy plots from other Wikipedias (in this case, English). Nikolai Kurbatov (talk) 07:16, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

Ok, I see. In this case, the speed of editing seems perfectly plausible to me. There is probably a list of links somewhere, and then this user just clicks on each link, deletes the plot section, and saves the edit. I don't think Nikolai Kurbatov should be under suspicion for this reason. Lights and freedom (talk) 07:21, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

At this point they should demonstrate that they are going to make constructive edits to the articles they already created by making simple additions. This should happen before going on another article creation spree. They have over a thousand low quality stub articles to work on. Let's see that edit speed continue. --Gotanda (talk) 10:16, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

I am just impressed that in 4.5 seconds they can open the page, edit it, verify/preview their work, save it (and check it if they didn't preview) and move to the next to repeat. 498 times in one hour. 959 times in one day (2.5 hours). Between cramping and eye strain, my hands and eyes would have given out in just a couple minutes at that pace. Pure Evil (talk) 16:50, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

And for reference, I just finished 15 edits in 9 minutes. What was needed was open in visual, select infobox, hit edit, untick image size, save changes, save page, ok save, last page back to the category page, repeat 15 times of each set. Average 36 seconds per edit with a decent connection speed. 8 times slower with only needing to unclick a box when I knew exactly where it was going to be. Pure Evil (talk) 03:45, 8 January 2023 (UTC)

┌─────────────────────────────────┘
Perhaps my memory doesn't serve me right but the user Gay Yong Hernandez was also blocked for one edit about every 5-10 seconds (and not declaring a bot). Edits were all small such as adding a template. While I agree that it is possible to do an edit in 3-5 seconds, keeping up this pace for long is difficult for a human.-Eptalon (talk) 18:45, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

Erica Durance

There's an edit war on Erica Durance. Technically, both users have violated WP:3RR. I guess the solution is for other people to discuss which is better, or for an admin to protect the page. Lights and freedom (talk) 04:16, 8 January 2023 (UTC)

Page protected for one day, both warned. — *Fehufangą ♮ ✉ Talk page 05:15, 8 January 2023 (UTC)

Maybe a block

User:45.91.20.101 (because of {{Colocationwebhost}}) SikiWtideI (Speak to the backwards police) 03:23, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

 Done along with 511 other IPs for a year. — *Fehufangą ♮ ✉ Talk page 03:25, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

Davide Lo Surdo RfD issue

Hello fellas, sorry to bother you again but I got a case. An IP 79.18.35.8 posted me a question on my talk page about the verification of the topic above. I visited the page and saw the RfD tag, which makes me apparent to give consent. But I didn't after I saw numerous IP with User:Enrico Manni voted to keep the page. Then I checked their contributions and saw that their edits are totally based on this topic. I'm listing the IPs involved on this topic/RfD issue:

• 91.80.10.156 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) (creator/not involved on RfD)
• 91.80.12.159 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
• 79.18.35.8 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
• 46.15.87.134 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)

I suspect these IPs are used by single person (User:Enrico Manni) in order to protect the page from getting deleted. What actions must be taken against them? Dibyojyoti^{let's chat} 05:17, 8 January 2023 (UTC)

45.15 is most likely not involved while the other 3 are almost certainly the same person (2 from Rome, 1 from 50-60 miles away) It is not really an issue though as none of the IPs have even voted. So far, there is one keep (Manni). one merge (IP not from Italy) and one delete (Fehufanga). All the rest have not declared an opinion so there is no case of sock voting at this time. One person can comment from multiple IPs as long as they are not voting from them. It gets confusing at times but as long as the closing admin is only using official positions, the comments will not matter individually. Pure Evil (talk) 07:40, 8 January 2023 (UTC)

An IP from Italy 151.31.113.116 has voted to keep the page, another suspicion IP. Dibyojyoti^{let's chat} 11:51, 11 January 2023 (UTC)

Dushyant Karani

I don't think a claim of notability is included in the page, but an IP user repeats QD tag removal. MathXplore (talk) 11:24, 11 January 2023 (UTC)

A question @MathXplore, why didn't you report it to WP:VIP? Dibyojyoti^{let's chat} 11:26, 11 January 2023 (UTC)

Final warning has not been sent, so I thought it's too fast to do that. MathXplore (talk) 11:29, 11 January 2023 (UTC)

Oh good then, actually I was about to send a final warning, but I got a call from someone, so I didn't send the warning. Dibyojyoti^{let's chat} 11:32, 11 January 2023 (UTC)

Page creations from Ivan P. Clarin

Ivan has made many pages for our project, I would like to appreciate this. Although, despite the heavy work, Ivan is not allowed to return to enwiki due to "Persistent addition of unsourced content: refusal to communicate" (Special:CentralAuth/Ivan_P._Clarin). Since I cannot review the deleted contributions, I would like to have admins to check if he is doing the same thing as well as enwiki, or doing a good job. The reason for this concern is:

• Since he joined here he has received many RFD opening notices, although I don't remember when we have heard from him. He was recently invited to several RFDs but he remains silence. This status might be counted as "refusal to communicate".
• Many pages have been made from him, although some of them have been challenged or quickly deleted, as can be seen in the RFD backlog or my QD log etc. I don't think he is repeating the creation of deleted pages (pages that will be deleted by QD G4), but some users may count this as "Persistent addition of unsourced content".

Should we tell him that WP:ONESTRIKE might be coming closer, or should we just continue monitoring? If we are going to allow him to stay, how can we help him to make pages with better quality? MathXplore (talk) 16:51, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

That is a large number of RfDs for an account with no non article space edits other than their own user page (ie. no wikipedia, wiki talk or user talk edits to show they are trying to deal with issues.) Pure Evil (talk) 17:26, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

As he has not responded, the account should be banned on this wiki. Macdonald-ross (talk) 09:34, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

The user has not been editing at all since before MathXplore reported him. And it's Christmas-New Year time in a lot of the world, often meaning less wiki-editing time. There's no rush to ban anyone especially if they're not editing currently. --Ferien (talk) 15:59, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

I have looked at a few of his edits, and they look like normal content work. I also notice that several of the newly-created articles are translations. It is clear that if you write/contribute to many pages, the likelihood of one of your pages getting deleted is bigger. There are no wonership issues, so once the page is translated, anyone can edit, without him opposing.I currently don't think that him not communicationg, and doing content work instead is too much of an issue at the moment. Isn't a content editor, who focuses on content what this Wiki always wanted?- So when we see him back, editing, we should drop a line, perhaps also mentioning this discussion. Eptalon (talk) 17:03, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

He's back with Joshua De Sequera now Qd'd. 38 pages deleted out of a total of 199 edited. No communication. Not constructive and wasting the time of everyone here. Everyone may contribute, but not everyone is able to. --Gotanda (talk) 10:22, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

It seems like that user is doing the same thing as he were doing at enwiki. And since he refuses to communicate, it becomes difficult for us to reach him. So, the only option left is to ban him from this community, that would be my recommendation. Dibyojyoti^{let's chat} 10:40, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

Zanam Foundation

103.170.81.209 (talk · contribs) is writing articles about Zanam Foundation, an article that was created before and QD'd. The article they've created most recently (Mohd .Zaki) could potentially be QD's as well as an advert, but I wanted to inform the admins about the situation, as the IP may continue promoting the subject. Lights and freedom (talk) 07:30, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

So next time such an article gets created, we can go through a regular RfD... Eptalon (talk) 10:30, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

Funland, Rehoboth Beach

It's been nine months since the article was created and five since I last touched it. Since then, the IP user who created the article is still edit warring on the article. Suggestions were given here and on the English Wikipedia talk page on how to improve the writing. But the IP user continued to edit war and threatened to continue the edit war on the English Wikipedia (see here and here), and so the page is currently indefinitely semi-protected there. I've given up on trying to improve it, as even the most recent attempt by an uninvolved user to revert the IP user's changes ([5]) was met with a revert.

The IP user is now asking for an editor to make proxy edits for them on the English Wikipedia ([6]). I find this behaviour to be disruptive at this point.

Since I am involved, I am asking for another administrator to take a look at this. Thank you. — *Fehufangą ♮ ✉ Talk page 05:44, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

I just wanna emphasize something, the last edit I had made to the page was back in November. I've not touched the article since November. The most recent edit was done by DestinyinDestiny and I think the change is a good faith change, so I haven't touched it. If you look at other edits on the history, there have been a few other changes that also haven't been reverted or changed as well. Most of which have been good faith edits by MathXplore. The only edits I revert back are edits that are bad faith edits removing important information from the article. I'm not against people editing the page, but I am against people doing bad faith edits, removing stuff that is important about the park from the article, espically when they've stated they know nothing about the park. Feel free to message me if you have any questions. Thanks. 108.31.92.88 (talk) 06:01, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

The page is protected for six months and the changes have been reverted. Any big changes to the page should be discussed and done after consensus.--BRP ^ever 06:10, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

Understood, and what MathXplore is accurate. I have no problem if I see somebody doing something productive an article somwhere, asking them if they can do the same productive change to another article that needs it. That's just an editor doing there job, and there's nothing wrong with that. I admit I had done it, and have no shame in admitting that. As far as the article, I'd like to say a few things on that. First, how are we supposed to reach consensus with people that know nothing about the park? I don't think it's possible, but am certainly open to the idea. Lastly, after taking a closer look at the history, Fehufangą last editied in back in August, which is not 9 months ago, so 9 months is inaccurate info, as that would've been April, not August. Looking at regular Wikipedia, they last edited the regular Wikipedia article shorlty after April, but that isn't 9 months yet either, so not sure where they got 9 months from. This should be noted as well. If you're gonna report somebody for doing something, you should make sure that you have your facts right. 108.31.92.88 (talk) 06:25, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

My initial comment: ...and five since I last touched it. No point in arguing about this any further.

As for how consensus is achieved with people that know nothing about the park? It's less about what we don't know about the park, and more about what the community considers editing standards. This includes verifiability, no original research, and reliable sources. Adding unreliable resources and original research is not encyclopedic. Further discussion about the article should take page at the article's talk page, not here. — *Fehufangą ♮ ✉ Talk page 06:31, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

In other words, what people reading it that know nothing about a person or place would think is interesting or important. Got it. As far as articles on what I've put in the article, that has since been removed, there are some. I'll address those on the talk page. Thanks for the response. 108.31.92.88 (talk) 06:37, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

There is no point in tug of war here. If others in the community agree with the additions, if it is properly sourced and meets community standard then it is likely to get consensus. Many different editors reverted the additions, it's time you stop and seek consensus before proceeding.--BRP ^ever 11:23, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

I'd have to look back at the history a bit more to confirm this, but I think I had originally put more sources in the article than the sources that were there in the last correct version of the article. I had been asked to remove a few sources at that time. Can't remember why though. That was a while ago now. There really hasn't been much work done on the article recently. I just noticed a typo in that version as well, so somehow I didn't edit it well. Don't know how nobody including myslef didn't notice it till now. Evidently I'll have to fix that typo at some point. Not sure when though, as of course the page is uneditable right now. As for the consensus, I'm all for getting consensus, but if people wanna edit the page, they should tehir research on the park. I've done my homework on it, as I neeeded to for a project I've been working on to promote it. That's why I know so muchc about it. 108.31.92.88 (talk) 05:27, 11 January 2023 (UTC)

Hey, just wanna appologize for my error in my comment that I wrote saying that you put wrong info in the report. I just read through this again and realized I totally misread it somehow. So I'm the editor in the wrong in this case, so I wanna take accountabilty with this and admit that as I'm not afraid to admit when I'm wrong. So sorry about that, and I'll try to be more careful before accusing people of stuff when I don't have evidence to back up my claim. So sorry again about the wrongful accusation, I'll try to make sure it doesn't happen again. 108.31.92.88 (talk) 10:50, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

It should be memorized that this type of cross wiki edit request was not the first time, another example emerged at User_talk:MathXplore/2022/09#Funland,_Rehoboth_Beach (the discussions soon after I simplified the page title). MathXplore (talk) 06:16, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

User:76.129.158.37

76.129.158.37 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) has been running wild and unnoticed for at least the last several months. I caught them today and went on a rollback blitz. There is a chance I got a bit overzealous as I gave up checking each edit one by one after a dozen and just blasted everything today. I went through many of their non-reverted posts back through September and undid many of them. This is not to say I caught them all nor that I didn't over do it at times.... I didnt bother to warn as it was obvious they know that it is blockable and they emmed to have gone dormant.

They seem to have wandered off for now so this is just a heads up and a warning that a rested set of eyes may be needed for their edits. Pure Evil (talk) 23:48, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

@Pure Evil: Thanks. It would help if you can leave escalated warnings for their bad changes. The last warning was on December 22. -- Auntof6 (talk) 00:22, 15 January 2023 (UTC)

I could give them a warning now it you want. It would have no effect on their editing but that is no different than if I had done so when I first noticed it. They had already stopped vandalizing and wandered off. Still, they likely havent checked their page since they left so the message left now would be just as useful as one left after they went away. They may see it next month when they pop by again to cause more trouble. As to escalating.. should I just issue the first warning as its a new batch of vandalism or should I continue from where they were warned last time? Pure Evil (talk) 01:09, 15 January 2023 (UTC)

I see your point. By the time they come back again, we might not be able to consider older warnings. So escalating might not help after all. I'll be over here reminding myself to think things through more before responding. -- Auntof6 (talk) 03:39, 15 January 2023 (UTC)

Brayan Rivas, Mxta

Brayan Rivas has been recreated after last RFD, I would like to have a comparison between the last deleted versions. Mxta seems to be related to this subject but I don't know what is the claim of notability at here. MathXplore (talk) 02:58, 16 January 2023 (UTC)

 Done Both were deleted. MathXplore (talk) 02:59, 16 January 2023 (UTC)

Hello Neighbor origins

I don't see any claims of notability in this video game article, but an IP continues to remove QD tag. MathXplore (talk) 13:15, 16 January 2023 (UTC)

The user is part of the nest of vandalism I brought up a bit back on Simple talk. They also removed an RfD tag from an article they created recently. While I disagree with the RfD, I did undo the tag removal. Pure Evil (talk) 16:22, 16 January 2023 (UTC)

Move spoken Wikipedia file from Commons to simplewiki

I believe that commons:File:Simple-United States Marine Corps-article-20211121.ogg should be moved to simplewiki by an administrator because it is the spoken version of a simplewiki article. Lights and freedom (talk) 19:15, 16 January 2023 (UTC)

Actually I'm not sure, there's a bunch of spoken simplewiki articles on commons: commons:Category:Spoken Wikipedia - Simple English. Where are those audio files supposed to be kept? Lights and freedom (talk) 19:34, 16 January 2023 (UTC)

Hemorrhoid

Please "Extended confirmed protection" or "fully protection(edit only admin)" hemorrhoid forever(reason:this edit are vandalismand this edit are vandalism) Page lengthening, illegitimate — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:fb1:155:179e:61bb:d236:6ddf:7b5b (talk) 0:54, 22 January 2023‎ (UTC)

(Non-administrator observation) Alright it's enough, I would request an admin to kindly block all the involved IPs on this page (possible LTA) and protect the page for two days minimum. Dibyojyoti^{let's chat} 11:34, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

 Not done I don't see a need to protect this page at all. It has had a few IP vandal edits in the past year or so, but not enough for temporary semi-protection to be necessary, let alone indefinite admin protection. --Ferien (talk) 11:38, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

As for the block part,  Done. Recognized the user behind this. — *Fehufangą ♮ ✉ Talk page 13:06, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

Thanks both of you. Dibyojyoti^{let's chat} 16:15, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

Edit War On Jeff Goldblum

I think the page should be protected and user blocked. Friendly Human (talk) 15:52, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

• I was in the middle of a expand/cleanup when the Admin only protection was hammered in. Could someone copy over User talk:Pure Evil/1 and then delete that page? Pure Evil (talk) 16:35, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

   Done --Ferien (talk) 16:36, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

Spongebob creations

Note that 12.191.57.81 (talk · contribs · logs) is starting to create articles and templates related to Spongebob. I think some of them aren't notable: this isn't a fan wiki. I'm not sure what to do here. Lights and freedom (talk) 17:46, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

(Non-administrator comment)I agree! I have no idea what to do about this either. Friendly Human (talk) 17:50, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

In addition, User: 12.191.57.81 broke the 3rr when repeatedly removing QD template from one of the worse Spongebob articles. Friendly Human (talk) 18:04, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

Repeated Vandalism On Wikipedia

There have been many recent cases of vandalism on Wikipedia, and as it is very important/visible, I believe it should be semi-protected. Thanks! Friendly Human (talk) 18:55, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

While there has been a little more vandalism recently compared to usual, I don't think it's got enough recent vandalism to justify protection. --Ferien (talk) 19:15, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

Angel Tsvetkov - Ethical hacker

Probably QD G4, I would like to have admin's review. MathXplore (talk) 07:44, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

Recreated again as Angel Tsvetkov -. MathXplore (talk) 07:31, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

Both deleted by Fehufanga and Macdonald-ross. --Ferien (talk) 19:15, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

Protection for Teeth blackening

Please protect teeth blackening. There is constant vandalism. Lights and freedom (talk) 19:12, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

 Done --Ferien (talk) 19:13, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

Cynocephalus disambiguation

Since there's no article at the title Cynocephalus, I think Cynocephalus (disambiguation) should be moved to Cynocephalus. I can't do this because there's a redirect that's been edited at that title. Lights and freedom (talk) 02:52, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

@Lights and freedom: Done. Thanks for catching it. -- Auntof6 (talk) 02:55, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

Template:NPS area

I think an admin should import the new version of en:Template:NPS area to {{NPS area}}. Currently it's creating a dead link without archive. Lights and freedom (talk) 01:57, 1 February 2023 (UTC)

 Done, no immediately visible errors. Thanks for bringing this up. — *Fehufangą ♮ ✉ Talk page 02:08, 1 February 2023 (UTC)

Kaushal naseem

Creator repeats to remove QD A4 but I don't think it claims notability. MathXplore (talk) 17:16, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

Deleted and warned. --IWI (talk) 18:13, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

Requesting my deleted contributions

Hi, I have a strange request. I'd like to retrieve the pages I've nominated for deletion but non-admin users don't have access to contributions on pages that have been deleted. Is there a way an admin could provide these to me so I can add them to my personal deletion log? For what it's worth I've enable twinkle's QD Log now so nominations I make with that should be tracked from now on. Philipnelson99 (talk) 18:53, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

Philipnelson99, I've emailed you the pages that you tagged for deletion. --Ferien (talk) 19:33, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

Teahouse

An IP user, 122.53.47.47 (talk · contribs) has created a Teahouse page and a bunch of other pages that relate to it. If there is a teahouse, it should be approved first. So should all these pages be deleted? Or something else? Lights and freedom (talk) 16:35, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

Deleted the pages, we don't have a teahouse (that's what Simple Talk is for), and likely never will need it. If we did, it would require discussion first. --IWI (talk) 18:12, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

While I fully agree that we do not have nor need a tea house here, I have to wonder what policy the IP has broken to warrant the threat of being banned. As far as I can guess, a warning that the system of pages it was creating was not need here should have been the first step. With the standard "We appreciate all edits, and everyone can edit, but... " intro, a friendly comment should be the opening volley, not a ban threat. Pure Evil (talk) 19:36, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

@Pure Evil: The first message on the page is the standard {{subst:uw-create}} . They were properly warned. I believe @ImprovedWikiImprovment only added the {{subst:uw-create3}} only after more page creations occurred (cannot verify as I'm not a sysop). I don't think anyone suggested blocking the user. Philipnelson99 (talk) 21:19, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

Non-sysops can review page creations in logs – here for this IP --Ferien (talk) 21:21, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

Thanks @Ferien! Philipnelson99 (talk) 21:30, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

Wow, that's a lot of page creations! Definitely deserving of a stronger warning than just a welcome and instructions on what Wikipedia is, in my opinion. Philipnelson99 (talk) 21:33, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

There were, indeed, a large number of articles created after the initial warning. --IWI (talk) 00:01, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

Looking at the contributions and page creation lists, prior to the 14:23 warning, the IP has 3 edits, 1 sandbox, 1 roblox (cleaning up vandalism) and the creation of TH css page. 1 page created and they get "A page you made may not meet our rules for new pages" So I ask, what rule? The only listed policy or quide line that I see that could be involved here is "Wikipedia:Please do not bite the newcomers". And this is coming from someone with well known bitey issues.. The pot is thinking the kettle is being a bit too black here.

A dozen pages (setting up one page) later and we jump from hi directly to you will be blocked if you continue. With a minor in "Your actions are being discussed with the admins". There was no serious attempt to try and communicate with the IP. Straight from "Stop" to "Stop or be blocked" with a layover in "The bosses were told about you"

And personally I interpret " If you continue, you will be blocked from changing..." as someone suggesting blocking. Pure Evil (talk) 00:37, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

@Pure Evil: It was a mistake to add a level 3 warning here, I agree. I think I must have thought that the AN notice was a level 2 warning. --IWI (talk) 02:54, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

Although the AN notice (making the user aware of this discussion) that was added by MathXplore is standard practice. --IWI (talk) 02:57, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

I agree that the notice was completely valid. Where I'm pointing to an issue is this thread itself and generally how the IP was treated. I just feel we jumped too fast to get here rather than try to resolve the issue at the source. There was almost no attempt to solve it face to face. Yes, you mentioned it in the first post but in reality, the issue at hand was addressed secondary to warning. A lighter hand could have been used to try to resolve the issue before running here calling for help. This wasn't an earth shaking case of vandalism that needed near instant resolution. It would have caused little to no damage to take a breath and deal with it calmly rather than instantly running to the admins for help. Pure Evil (talk) 06:02, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

@Pure Evil:, I agree that the warning does say that about blocking, and I should've noticed that earlier! But I don't personally believing bringing something AN is particularly bitey, especially when the changes at issue are not constructive as it allows the admins to easily see what needs to be deleted but that is a personal belief :-) let this be a reminder to us all to use the proper warnings, thanks for bringing it up :) Philipnelson99 (talk) 06:07, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

IA help needed at MediaWiki:Gadget-Twinkle.js

Per the outcome of this discussion G11 now includes "person" among the list of things that can be promoted. An IA should update Twinkle's tooltip to reflect this, it can be found at line 6378. No further change is necessary. Thank you. — *Fehufangą ♮ ✉ Talk page 06:12, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

 Done --Ferien (talk) 08:02, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

Should Wikipedia:Schools by edited

Is Wikipedia:Schools meant to be a sandbox? If not, maybe it should be indefinitely semi-protected. I don't see a good reason for new users to edit it, as it seems to be instructional. Lights and freedom (talk) 19:28, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

Looking at the history, the last 20 edits take us back roughly 3 years. I haven't counted, but I'd say that about 15 of the 20 were by named editors, several of wich are long-term contributors. We are looking at a very low level of activing. Do we really need to semi-protect, with these levels of activity? - I don't think so. Eptalon (talk) 20:16, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

Motor Mania

Looks like an enwiki copy but the IP user who made this refuses to accept and repeats QD tag removal. MathXplore (talk) 11:12, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Deleted and blocked, known anonymous user evading a block.— *Fehufangą ♮ ✉ Talk page 11:27, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Girdhar swami

IP user repeats removal of QD tag but I think this is a recreation of Wikipedia:Requests for deletion/Requests/2022/Girdhar Swami (2nd nomination), A1 or G2 might be possible. MathXplore (talk) 11:01, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

•  Done deleted for having no content, it was just a list of references. --IWI (talk) 11:25, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

  @ImprovedWikiImprovment They created Girdhar swami again. Lights and freedom (talk) 18:37, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

  Deleted under G4; was similar to the RfD'd article. --IWI (talk) 18:41, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

69.116.218.203

I'm not sure if I should revert 69.116.218.203 (talk · contribs · count) again, but I don't agree with their changes. Lights and freedom (talk) 18:57, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Reverted and invited the user to discuss on the article's talk page. --IWI (talk) 19:08, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

24.19.126.115

24.19.126.115 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log) Repeatedly creating pages that are short, but copies from the beginning of enwiki articles. Lights and freedom (talk) 02:24, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

Blocked. — *Fehufangą ♮ ✉ Talk page 02:41, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

Long term page protection for Sami People

Sami people (change · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete)

This page needs to be protected for a long time. It gets a lot of vandalism. Nearly all edits are vandalism, or they are fixing vandalism. There are a lot of different IP addresses. Mako001 (C)  (T)  11:08, 23 February 2023 (UTC)

@Mako001: I don't think it needs protection yet. It got a lot of vandalism today, but most of it was reverted quickly and before today it hadn't been edited in almost 3 weeks. The IP that vandalized the most today has received 3 warnings and seems to have stopped editing for now, so it's not time to block it. The general rule for this is that a page will get protected if the vandalism is hard to keep up with, and I don't think we're there yet. I'll add the page to my watchlist to help keep an eye on it. -- Auntof6 (talk) 19:25, 23 February 2023 (UTC)

@Auntof6: Understood. It would be good to watch that page. I don't know why it gets so much more vandalism than good edits. Thanks. Mako001 (C)  (T)  23:11, 23 February 2023 (UTC)

Yes currently we can keep up fine, so protection is not necessary. --IWI (talk) 12:42, 24 February 2023 (UTC)

@Mako001: Much of the vandalism has come from IPs connected to the New South Wales Department of Education. Looks to be a case of a school kid randomly stopping by to play around then wandering off just to return a couple months later. The other IP is also Australian, but from the other side of the country so not likely connected unless it was the same kid off visiting his nan. The end of February is after the NSW summer break for schools so this is not likely tho. Little can be done with blocks or protection to deal with this type of problem without unwanted impact elsewhere. Vigilance is often the best solution. Pure Evil (talk) 17:10, 24 February 2023 (UTC)

Barney Bear

I think this article is a copy paste from enwiki but the author does not agree to QD A3, I would like to have others to check this one. MathXplore (talk) 05:23, 26 February 2023 (UTC)

@MathXplore: The author is not required to agree. If they disagree, the procedure is for them to use the {{wait}} template. -- Auntof6 (talk) 06:46, 26 February 2023 (UTC)

Yes, and they are not using the wait template so that's why I came here for asking admin action. MathXplore (talk) 06:51, 26 February 2023 (UTC)

Adam Bird (Ohio politician)

Created many times but all versions went to quick deletion. This entry should be deleted and semi-protected. MathXplore (talk) 17:14, 27 February 2023 (UTC)

Several times, yes, but before the one already done today the most recent was 2 months ago. Let's let it be for now: if it gets bad again, we can revisit. -- Auntof6 (talk) 17:25, 27 February 2023 (UTC)

Shaunpplgt2001

Shaunpplgt2001 (talk • contribs • CA • deleted contribs • nuke contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log) is changing release dates of movies on both enwiki and simplewiki. Lights and freedom (talk) 22:59, 28 February 2023 (UTC)

@Lights and freedom: This could have been reported at VIP. However, I'm not going to take any action at this time because 1) all the user's edits were within half an hour several hours ago, they seem to have stopped editing now, and they have received only one warning. -- Auntof6 (talk) 00:42, 1 March 2023 (UTC)

Atikur Rahman Mahi

Created again after RFD. G4 possible or do we need another RFD? MathXplore (talk) 10:40, 1 March 2023 (UTC)

Practically identical. — *Fehufangą ♮ ✉ Talk page 08:38, 2 March 2023 (UTC)

User talk:MathXplore/Editnotice

Please grant indefinite semi-protection to this user page. MathXplore (talk) 06:58, 2 March 2023 (UTC)

@MathXplore: Done by Ferien. -- Auntof6 (talk) 08:49, 2 March 2023 (UTC)

G5 proposal request for closure

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)

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

 Done--BRP ^ever 01:19, 7 March 2023 (UTC)

Nova Lee LeClair

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)

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

request for semi-protect for Kizuna AI

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

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

Anurag dixits Musicology

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)

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

Grayson Eddey

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)

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

G5 Quick Deletion criteria

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)

@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)

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)

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)

I've made the changes, and it worked during my tests. BRP ^ever 06:00, 7 March 2023 (UTC)

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)

I gave interface admin to Fehufanga for that as well. So all  Done. --Ferien (talk) 22:55, 10 March 2023 (UTC)