Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Current issues and requests archive 73

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 Edit War

The user XXBlackburnXx has engaged in an edit war with me. An IP made a comment and it is not been nor has it been reverted. It was the only comment the IP made. The editor (I will mention this is now the second time they have been brought here for their global rollback issues) keeps reverting the my revert of what GRP has done tonight. I asked this editor to not revert and remove the IP statement and against me asking them a couple times, they continued reverting it and I even told them I would post a warning if they continued with no proof that this was a "WMF banned user" as they are claiming. The IP was glocked for being an open proxy and I explained in the warning that simple does not always get the proxies and that with GRP he makes a comment or two and then moves to another proxy, therefore it is a waste of our time and a waste of the stewards time to report these to SRGL. I also stated if they make another reversion it is a violation of WP:3RR and despite this warning, they decided to revert my agf rollback of their revert and then made an attack on me by their statement of "i haven't even used rollback, please leave it to users who have experience reverting him, thanks!" as seen here in this diff. Sorry but you are using rollback when you do revert someone else and the tags even state reverted. I have stopped now in reverting this editor and will notify them of this conversation. I will also ask they not be allowed to use roll back on this wiki as this is the 2nd time in a matter of days they have been brought up for their issues in using the tool. Thanks - PDL^{Talk to me!}_{Please don't eat da 🐑!} 08:53, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I also want to add for this person to be an administrator of a wiki, the attack should not have been made by an admin, as they should know better. Thanks - PDL^{Talk to me!}_{Please don't eat da 🐑!} 08:56, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@PotsdamLamb You have misidentified multiple IPs as GRP. It's in your best interest that you leave any IPs that you may think is GRP alone, and IPs that more experienced users think is GRP alone. This could have been resolved with a talk page comment instead of directly reverting XXBlackburnXx's edit, instead of going to edit warring. — *Fehufangą ♮ ✉ Talk page 12:11, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Fehufanga The ip involved had one comment on the page which has never been reverted. All the other ones have been. I did not identify it as GRP but this editor said it was a banned user and reverted it back. Stewards don’t Glock GRP IPs because if they did no one in the world would be able to edit. It was glocked for a year as an open proxy. So I do not feel either one of you are right. There was a message in the edit summary stating so. However, anyone who is assuming anything and making comments like that to an editor on here is still an attack on me. In experienced in his edits and the ones I marked and reported to VIP do not say anything about GRP they say VOA (vandalism only account). I know what his summaries say and the vip board is getting filled with his IP addresses and they are putting up GRPs info. I am not sure where you got I have misidentified multiple IPs from as I only put a couple up that are him. And I also put up a talk page message of which he did not respond to he just ignored it and reverted my edit and stopped after that. Because a proxy got blocked indicates nothing of it being used by an LTA as there are many out there that get through so to blame me for this is not true at all. I’ve rolled back quite a couple hundred of GRPs edits, as have others the past week as well as other vandals. Thanks - PDL^{Talk to me!}_{Please don't eat da 🐑!} 12:42, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Fehufanga The couple I did list as him were a copy/paste because he was doing vandalism as well at the same time. So for those (I believe mostly ipv6 accounts) I apologize. Thanks - PDL^{Talk to me!}_{Please don't eat da 🐑!} 12:49, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Firstly, I hope there's some realization that this thread is doing more harm than good. The amount of harassment towards me has been significantly increased on and off-wiki because of this and it's not going to get any better anytime soon. Besides that, I didn't revert the edits just because the particular IP been globally blocked, if you looked closely, I even reverted *prior* to it being blocked. How do I know it's a proxy belonging to that LTA? That's something I'm unfortunately unable to explain publicly because en:WP:BEANS (something about undisclosed tools something something), so you'll have to take my word for it.

Secondly, I just want to kindly ask any administrator to close this thread and just move on. Formally revoking my rollback permissions, which I didn't even abuse or have used in this case, is not going to do the project any favors. Same goes for criticizing my adminship on the Dutch Wikipedia, where I earned unanimous community support, just feels like a personal attack and ultimately benefits only the LTA.

If there's any concerns about my actions, please consider asking first, and not in a way that stipulates your subjective POV about the policies and common practices right away. It will do me and probably yourself a big favor. XXBlackburnXx (talk) 03:33, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@XXBlackburnXx So first off I did not attack your adminship, I stated I would expect better behavior from an admin. I posted on your talk page about it and instead of commenting there, you reverted the edit and with comments about it. Had you stopped and responded on your talk page, then this would not be an issue. Secondly, you did use rollback. It says right there, reverted. Right on the tag. Then you insult me by your comment as noted above and then right at the end of your statement above, you again throw insults at me. The dialog you are asking for was attempted, however, you refused to participate and instead kept rolling back the changes. As an admin you should know to respond when something is posted on your tp about your actions, however, you insisted on rolling back, despite the warning on your TP, which you could have commented on instead of just rolling back the edits. Whether they are allowed to post or not, this individual is persistent, as you know. The comment posted on the talk page posed zero issues and was actually a compliment to someone who found an error. Not everything gets reverted of his as we deal with his other bigger issues that he brings on to the wiki (of which thousands over the years have required RevDel). For you to imply I do not know what I am doing basically accusing me of being incompetent and then turning around and saying I am being a subjective POV pusher on policy and common practices is still an attack, regardless of who it is coming from. Lastly, asking for an admin to just close this thread and move on is pushing this issue under the carpet. That is not the appropriate way to handle an issue. If someone has an issue with what you are doing, especially since you are an admin, you have the responsibility to acknowledge the issues and respond and work it out. Otherwise you are just trying to dismiss it and get rid of it without any accountability. This does not look good for anyone with global permissions or admin rights. As far as being a target on and off wiki, all I can say is welcome to the club and with this particular editor, if you stop engaging for a bit, he will find a new target. Now with all of this said, I am willing to let this go, provided that you acknowledge that next time someone posts on your talk page about something you have done, you take the time to respond and not engage in an edit war with summaries about why. That is all I am asking of you. Thanks - PDL^{Talk to me!}_{Please don't eat da 🐑!} 06:42, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Even if one has rollback rights, they can still manually revert edits. If the edit tags say "Undo" or "Manual revert" instead of "Rollback", it probably isn't considered abuse of the rollback tool. As I've seen, those reverts by XXBlackburnXx are labeled as "Undo" and "Manual revert", not "Rollback". – Cyber.Eyes2005^Talk 12:46, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Cyber.Eyes.2005 The point is not whether they used the tool or not. They still engaged in an edit war despite being asked not to and to communicate with me. They failed in that aspect and reverted me for a 4th time. That’s the definition of an edit war as I am not a vandal. Not to mention my rbs were all done as agf edits where theirs were just rollbacks. Either way point still stands. They exceeded 3 reverts of mine and failed to communicate on their tp. Then add the insults to it. Thanks - PDL^{Talk to me!}_{Please don't eat da 🐑!} 13:00, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Manoj Anand

A QD A4 case; forwarding deletion request here as an editor is repeatedly removing the QD template, also requesting semi-protection as the page is being re-created persistently. – Cyber.Eyes2005^Talk 11:56, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Done by Macdonald-ross. – Cyber.Eyes2005^Talk 12:47, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion building up

Hi Admins,

I came across this as an IP editor made a new template called Quick Deletion2. I have marked it for QD under housekeeping. I have also explained to the IP we have standard templates we use that are community approved and to refrain from making anymore. The category it went into is Category:Quick deletion templates, which has 35 templates in it. Some may be used by another template (and if that is the case it is because they did not wrap QD in it). I can fix those if you can provide me a list of what is being kept. Thank you all so much. Thanks - PDL^{Talk to me!}_{Please don't eat da 🐑!} 16:03, 28 February 2024 (UTC) Comment: If an admin can just delete the quick-delete2 template in this category it would be much appreciated. Thanks - PDL^{Talk to me!}_{Please don't eat da 🐑!} 20:20, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Taken to RfD. Not G6 or another criterion. Justarandomamerican (t • c) 03:39, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I feel that as it’s a duplicate of something we already have it does not need an RfD. A QD would be fine. Just because it has a different coloring does not make it an exception as all of our QD tags have the red background. The blue ones are for other templates that mention about something needed to complete the article and even then do not match what this template looks like. It was also made by an IP editor whose 13 out of 16 contributions was to make this template. Two on one article and one minor edit on another. RfDs are meant for something that would cause a debate if deleted (I.e. a claim to notoriety being the most common and almost always the case). This is far from meeting the criteria of being in an RfD. Thanks - PDL^{Talk to me!}_{Please don't eat da 🐑!} 05:16, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RfD isn't something a page has to qualify for; that's QD, where a page has to fit one of the defined QD criteria. Being a duplicate is not a QD criterion. Neither is being an unused template, unless WP:QD#T2 applies (which it doesn't apply, because it requires that the template either was actually in use over time and is no longer needed or has been replaced by a newer template). RfDs are for things that need discussion (not necessarily things that would cause debate) but also for anything that doesn't exactly fit a QD criterion. -- Auntof6 (talk) 09:46, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Need an admin decision please

Hello admins, we need an uninvolved admin to decide a consensus where it is one oppose and one support for merging. The article 2024 attack on the Khalissa is a stub and matches all of the others we have discussed which have no direction to be expanded beyond. The vote can be seen at Talk:16 January 2024 missile strikes against Houthi#2024 attack on the Khalissa 2. Please let us know your decision on this article via closing the vote for that section with the decision. If you want me to handle a merge, should you decide that, please also ping me and ask me. Thanks - PDL^{Talk to me!}_{Please don't eat da 🐑!} 11:15, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Done. There is no consensus yet for the merge yet.--BRP^ever 13:04, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@BRPever So basically if there is a tie it goes to no consensus? Great to know. Will help me in the future. Thanks - PDL^{Talk to me!}_{Please don't eat da 🐑!} 18:05, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@PotsdamLamb, it usually depends on the arguments presented. BRP^ever 20:55, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@BRPever Ok. Thanks. Thanks - PDL^{Talk to me!}_{Please don't eat da 🐑!} 20:55, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The user blocked in wikipedia

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Log/block?page=User:PotsdamLamb

This user blocked in Wikipedia , can he continue in Simple wikipedia ??

Koradass (talk) 17:59, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, he can. Usually, users who are blocked on other projects can continue on Simple, subject to restrictions. JustarandomamericanALT (talk) 18:00, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Answer is nice , but he blocked in Wikipedia ,how can we trust him ? Koradass (talk) 18:06, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Koradass Wow really? You just created your account and this is your only post? I think an admin needs to look into this account if they would please. Something smells fishy. There should be no more responses to this editor making attacks on me. Thanks - PDL^{Talk to me!}_{Please don't eat da 🐑!} 18:08, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You are blocked in Wikipedia .I so surprised, you are here with live Koradass (talk) 18:10, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Is this your first account? JustarandomamericanALT (talk) 18:14, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

100% yes Koradass (talk) 18:15, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's not attack .Just information about your block in English Wikipedia .Admins of Simple wikipedia must know about your block . Koradass (talk) 18:20, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Koradass: the Simple English Wikipedia is not related to the English Wikipedia and PotsdamLamb is welcome here. Your immediate singling out and attempting to harass this user is, however, not. It's also troublesome that you are a brand new account with no history, so I wonder what other accounts you've had. Hmmm... I'll echo this on your talk page, but this is your only warning. Harassment of other users is not tolerated. Operator873 ^connect 20:08, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Saurabh Sudam Tamhane

QD A4 was tagged but the author is repeating QD tag removal, I will forward the request here. MathXplore (talk) 12:35, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There is an account that the person who wrote the about himself here. 84Swagahh (talk) 16:25, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There's a discussion on my talk page at User_talk:Ravensfire#Saurabh_Sudam_Tamhane_Article with another editor on that article who claims to be their manager (so w:WP:PAID issues). I tried to help them understand what's needed in an article for it to remain here, but I'm not really sure I got through to them. A google search didn't turn up anything I'd call anything above a poor quality source, so I think it's still a QD on A4 reasons. Ravensfire (talk) 17:47, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Already

Done. MathXplore (talk) 09:14, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Osbern FitzOsbern

QD tag removal has been repeated at this page. Please have a look at here. MathXplore (talk) 14:43, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If this page is going to be kept, please delete revisions with incivil comments at Talk:Osbern FitzOsbern. MathXplore (talk) 14:53, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Already

Done. MathXplore (talk) 09:13, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Page Protection Request

Can we get page protection on Talk:Clyde Bruckman please? Thanks - PDL^{Talk to me!}_{Please don't eat da 🐑!} 07:13, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Suggest we let him keep doing null edits, else he'll move somewhere else with probably more disruptive edits. 89.144.222.232 (talk) 01:41, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Crat/IA admin needed

Hello - Can someone please reimport en:MediaWiki:Gadget-Prosesize.js into our version please? It has been updated and it should work. Please let me know when it is done. Thanks - PDL^{Talk to me!}_{Please don't eat da 🐑!} 06:20, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@QuicoleJR Once an interface administrator gets this over to simple, the tool should work. I emailed the list just now to try to get it fixed. Someone should post here when it is fixed. Thanks - PDL^{Talk to me!}_{Please don't eat da 🐑!} 08:20, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@PotsdamLamb:

Done --Ferien (talk) 19:28, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Gabrielle Nevaeh Green

Seems to be a QD G5 case but QD tag removal has been repeated so I will forward the request. MathXplore (talk) 03:04, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Already

Done. MathXplore (talk) 09:27, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lyle the Kindly Viking

The author has repeated QD A4 removals and started Wikipedia:Requests for deletion/Requests/2024/Lyle the Kindly Viking to interrupt the QD procedure. As a repeated QD tag removal case, I will report here and forward the request. MathXplore (talk) 03:17, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I used RfD to see what other users think about the notability of the movie. If many users don’t think it is notable and suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia than I would accept that. 174.251.160.148 (talk) 03:25, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
When a QD is in place you cannot remove it and you need to stop removing it. You need to stop the reverting of all the changes as you are disrupting this project. When a QD is in effect (as is the case and it has been deleted numerous times) you cannot put it up for RfD plus why would you as the author even put it up for RfD? You need to stop reverting the changes or you will be blocked. Thanks - PDL^{Talk to me!}_{Please don't eat da 🐑!} 03:28, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Already Done MathXplore (talk) 09:13, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Item that didn’t make it to RfD

I have found an item that is marked RfD but look like no discussion was made:

August 2023: Category:Mammals of Great Britain

Because it’s from August 2023, I did not want to touch it. It shows in April 2014 it survived an RfD and the IP who nominated it has not edited on that ip since September 2023. Thanks - PDL^{Talk to me!}_{Please don't eat da 🐑!} 14:21, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Done Thanks Mac and I cleared the articles out of the cat. Thanks - PDL^{Talk to me!}_{Please don't eat da 🐑!} 18:53, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Macdonald-ross:: Please remember to delete associated talk pages when deleting pages. I just deleted this one. Thanks. -- Auntof6 (talk) 21:42, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism: Harry Caray's Italian Steakhouse

IP address 205.178.41.92 is putting incorrect and disturbing information on the company's webpage. We would like them to be blocked from making edits to this page 12.215.48.227 (talk) 15:58, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: They also posted this on the VIP talk page. We do not have that article on simple. I am also assuming they have a COI based on this post. Thanks - PDL^{Talk to me!}_{Please don't eat da 🐑!} 16:18, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Semi Protect Request - We the People Party

On We the People Party - Numerous IP editors keep changing the information and it’s a big edit war. Thanks - PDL^{Talk to me!}_{Please don't eat da 🐑!} 19:32, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Do we need these?

There is a ton of articles on the 2020 US Election results titled 2020 United States presidential election in (insert state name here). I do not think we need these as we already have 2020 United States presidential election. All of these articles are stubs and cannot be expanded and the main article already has the same details in it. Thoughts? Thanks - PDL^{Talk to me!}_{Please don't eat da 🐑!} 06:18, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Since there have been no comments on this in almost 5 days, I am requesting an admin do a mass deletion on the articles title "2020 United States presidential election in (insert state name here)". There are ~ 50 of them and do not want to do a QD on all of them based on existing in another article. I am sure you do not want me to fill it up either, however, if you would prefer that, please let me know and I will mark all of them.

Thanks - PDL^{Talk to me!}_{Please don't eat da 🐑!} 05:22, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Done Manually marked all of them and they were deleted. Thanks - PDL^{Talk to me!}_{Please don't eat da 🐑!} 01:32, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Module:InfoboxImage and Module:Collapsible list

These modules seem to have 500+ transclusions. Please consider some level of protection. MathXplore (talk) 01:07, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Also Module:Pagetype/config (28,000 transclusions). Thanks. Kk.urban (talk) 01:11, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: This is a known LTA, and their accounts are being globally locked (pretty fast). The IPv6s though I am not sure what is being done as I did post one (today's) to the global steward for their attention. I cannot remember the one from yesterday. I think we need to do protection on all Modules. Thanks - PDL^{Talk to me!}_{Please don't eat da 🐑!} 01:11, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

User:23.80.143.27

This fits Wikipedia:Deletion_policy#User_pages (QD U2), but since it includes SPI information, I suggest the move to user talk space without redirect. Since I'm not allowed to tag QDs to pages made by an experienced editor, I will forward this here. MathXplore (talk) 11:51, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@MathXplore You tagged me as being a part of this. That page (either the user or the talk) has no history of an SPI. In fact the only edit to the page was me putting the proxy block template on the page. If something needs to be QD because of a history it can be asked for a revdel on the history but again this one has none and all contributions have already been wiped when it was blocked. Thanks - PDL^{Talk to me!}_{Please don't eat da 🐑!} 05:33, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In this case, I'm not talking about page history. It is about where the page has been created. Wikipedia:Deletion_policy#User_pages says user pages of users who don't exist or are not registered are subject to quick deletion. If you have any difficulty understanding our deletion policy, please let us know. MathXplore (talk) 05:42, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

First off, no personal attacks. You are implying I do not understand policy. Secondly, it does not apply to blocked IP addresses that are blocked as a proxy. It applies if it were being used by an individual as their user page. Thanks - PDL^{Talk to me!}_{Please don't eat da 🐑!} 05:46, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I do not aim to attack anyone. I only want to help others trying to learn things (including myself). I apologize if my language was confusing. MathXplore (talk) 05:49, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@MathXplore I am very experienced. I am aware of our policies. Your first statement was the IP contained SPI, it does not. Secondly, an IP is not a user. It is an IP address. The policy has always stood that if an IP editor uses the user page like you or I do, then it falls under QD (it is then being used as a user page for all intents and purposes). Putting a template on it that it is blocked as an open proxy does not violate any policy and is widely used. Look at en wiki for thousands of examples. Some templates go on the talk pages like the welcome school user IP but when an IP or IP range is blocked, it is normal to put that block notice there when it is for a long time (such as this one which is two years). Short ones don’t get them (like GRP ones). Thanks - PDL^{Talk to me!}_{Please don't eat da 🐑!} 05:57, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the details. I didn't know that IP user pages of proxies are used for awareness in enwiki. While I do not recognize any local discussions about this case, now I believe that this will be accepted per WP:FOLLOW. In addition, to avoid confusions like this in the future, you may want to have your words being reflected to the deletion policy. For policy updates, please discuss with others at your availability. Thank you for taking your time for additional explanations, and please keep up your good work. MathXplore (talk) 06:09, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I cannot find any documentation that QD U2 does not apply to blocked IP addresses that are blocked as a proxy. Have I missed anything? If there are any previous discussions about this, please let me know. MathXplore (talk) 05:51, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@PotsdamLamb I suggest you not create userpage of unregistered users. @MathXplore U2 applies in this case, I will move the user page to the user talk page for this particular case. If the similar situation occurs in the future, and if the talk page already exists, then I recommend just copying the note to the talk page and marking it for U2. Thanks,--BRP^ever 07:28, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@BRPever: One of my previous comments in this thread above (special:diff/9427904) has been marked as a personal attack. May I have secondary opinions about this? MathXplore (talk) 07:33, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I see no personal attack, or any offensive material whatsoever. I would recommend @PotsdamLamb to assume good faith as much as possible. BRP^ever 07:35, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Done Dealt with, I guess...-BRP^ever 07:33, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@BRPever I disagree. If a user is going to say If you have any difficulty understanding our deletion policy, please let us know is not assuming good faith towards me and if I were to say this to the editor I would be blocked on the spot since every admin has a different way they see this. Also since when does this editor speak for the admins as stated above as they flat out refused the nomination but yet are acting and stating things like they are an admin. The CUs who are aware of what I am doing have blessed me with what I’m doing and a regular user is not privy to this as previously explained to them. They could also try asking me instead of taking me right to the AN. Reminds me of exactly what happened at EN wiki. This was considered done but now they have gone and grabbed another admin to pull into this. I have already spoken with a CU tonight via email and it was handled until once again this editor has now involved you and they are upset because I will not release information to them. They started this off with this particular IP address having SPI, of which it has none whatsoever. It doesn’t even have an edit.

This is the 4th time I’ve been attacked by users on this project (not counting the spam account) but counting others who are very new and do not have much under them and that seems to be absolutely ok. If I were to say that, oh wait I have, I would be blocked in a heartbeat no questions asked. Thanks - PDL^{Talk to me!}_{Please don't eat da 🐑!} 07:53, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And again this is a whole mix of what one admin wants versus what another admin wants vs what a cu wants. All of you need to get on the same page. Especially after the post on my story page and the fact if someone has an issue try to discuss it on my page instead of just taking it to AN, as is the habit for this editor. Thanks - PDL^{Talk to me!}_{Please don't eat da 🐑!} 07:55, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You are clearly overthinking the case. What Math wants to know is if the userpage has such notice on them, is it eligible for QD as U2 or not. I am not sure who the CU are, but I am certain that unless there is a very good reason, we don't tag proxies in the userpage. We would just be creating a millions of userpage for no good reason. Just ping the admin who thinks we should tag proxies in the userpage, and we can have a good discussion here. Thanks,-- BRP^ever 08:04, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@BRPever I saw you moved it to the talk page. WP:FOLLOW puts Sockpuppets, etc on the user page and not on the talk page as the talk page contains the block notice. Since this seemed to have upset an admin from another wiki and my point about the personal attack was once again just thrown to the side, it’s time to hang up simple as nothing has changed it seems. So I’ll be done here again. 4 personal attacks on me and not even a warning. But yet again I say something close to what MathXplore said I’m autoblocked. I’m done. Thanks - PDL^{Talk to me!}_{Please don't eat da 🐑!} 08:12, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think of it as personal attack. Why do you think it is Personal and attack? Our practices and policies clearly state that the userpages are only for registered account as is reflected in the deletion policy. As someone who initially supported your unlock/unblock, I am more than surprised by this bizarre behavior. I will leave it to other admins to deal with it. BRP^ever 08:23, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@PotsdamLamb: I would probably extend what BRPever said a bit further. I have fully read the thread above and again, I don't see any personal attack in what MathXplore wrote. At the very worst, I see a slightly clumsily-written comment, but not to the extent it is uncivil or a personal attack. The U2 deletion criterion does not specify whether a userpage is part of SPI, and we don't put sockpuppet templates on userpages here. There was a misunderstanding of the quick deletion policy here, and I wouldn't have written it the way MathXplore did, but that doesn't make pointing it out uncivil.

Relatively recently, I made an effort to remove many of our stale IP sock templates on user talk pages, and then we deleted the IP sock template as well, in Wikipedia:Requests for deletion/Requests/2023/Template:IPsock. There was also Wikipedia:Requests for deletion/Requests/2021/Category:Temporary Wikipedian userpages. I think there is a consensus at this time for no templates/categorisation of indefinitely blocked users and IP sockpuppets, and non-administrators are generally discouraged from tagging sockpuppets on their own.

For the future: you retired this morning (at least, for me) and have came back this evening. So I appreciate you are probably wanting to move on from this situation, but accusing editors of making personal attacks without evidence can be characterised as casting aspersions, which editors have been blocked for before. I would just like to make that clear for you so you are aware moving forward. --Ferien (talk) 22:15, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Ferien This is what I see as a personal attack (as stated above) If you have any difficulty understanding our deletion policy, please let us know. That is assuming I am incompetent, which does fall under a personal attack. When I have said something to those words I was immediately taken to AN on en wiki and ultimately blocked. Having a personal feeling about this is not casting anything other than my feelings because that never ending block has affected everything lately that I’ve been trying to do. If you’d like to chat on IRC, hmu there so this isn’t dragging on here. As far as this goes, I can say we’re done. Thanks - PDL^{Talk to me!}_{Please don't eat da 🐑!} 22:25, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to agree this was not any kind of a personal attack. It may be time for you to take a break and walk away for a bit PDL. They were offering to help you if you didn't understand why a User: page for an IP address was deleted. The deletion was correct. The only behavior issue here is becoming you, @PotsdamLamb:, and I implore you to let it go. Operator873 ^connect 22:28, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Operator873 I already stated as far as this goes I’ve let it go. Thanks - PDL^{Talk to me!}_{Please don't eat da 🐑!} 22:30, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And to add those templates were not re-created. The pages I’m adding are to categories already created and had pages in them. If CUs don’t have or want to take the time to link these pages to a sockmaster then it makes it harder for us "normal folk" to be able to tie Sockpuppets to each other to request any blocks or checks. We have so many of them one cannot keep track so these categories help. Especially the ones of Sockpuppets of (user) as it shows what they usually do to make it so we are requesting the correct cu checks. Thanks - PDL^{Talk to me!}_{Please don't eat da 🐑!} 22:29, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

┌─────────────────────────────────┘
On this project, we do not have a SPI project and CUs are not expected to do such exhaustive cataloging. This is not the English Wikipedia. Operator873 ^connect 22:31, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pm998

Pm998 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) - account of cross-wiki abuser Papa2004, need block him. Кронас (talk) 21:18, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Кронас

Globally locked Thanks - PDL^{Talk to me!}_{Please don't eat da 🐑!} 12:03, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Protection Request - Dani Alves

Please protect Dani Alves as many IP users are putting a death date on this BLP, which is not reliably sourced. Checking the web, it shows it is a rumor with his family denying it. Thanks - PDL^{Talk to me!}_{Please don't eat da 🐑!} 09:42, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Done by Eptalon. Thanks - PDL^{Talk to me!}_{Please don't eat da 🐑!} 09:47, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Protection request for Talk:Clyde Bruckman

The WMF-banned vandal in question came back and is doing his rampage. Please semi-protect it for up to a year. Thanks. Codename Noreste 🤔 talk 18:50, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It is rarely necessary to semi-protect talk pages, let alone for a year. So much edit warring seems to have happened on this page over some new lines that just didn't need to happen. I'd also add that having a WMF-banned editor on rarely viewed talk pages is better than affecting our mainspace articles or harassing editors. For those reasons, this request is

Not done --Ferien (talk) 20:19, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection please - Talk:Clyde Bruckman

He’s back again on Talk:Clyde Bruckman Thanks - PDL^{Talk to me!}_{Please don't eat da 🐑!}SWMT 07:15, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not done For particular reasons brought up by Sysops. Thanks - PDL^{Talk to me!}_{Please don't eat da 🐑!} 20:30, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly no big hurry

Many of the, Edit remarks, indicate vandalism etc:

See Special:Contributions/96.11.49.66. 2001:2020:307:ADAF:C5B3:2BD2:353D:F5CB (talk) 20:36, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Done by Fehufanga --Ferien (talk) 20:11, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please consider revdel for special:redirect/logid/2658798

Reason: Possible personal attack and threat against our editors at edit summary. MathXplore (talk) 01:50, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@MathXplore That is interesting as I have been helping clean up their articles they are bringing over. LOL Thanks - PDL^{Talk to me!}_{Please don't eat da 🐑!} 01:58, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Done --Ferien (talk) 20:09, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Protection request - Sadhu Sundar Singh

Hi admins, kindly protect Sadhu Sundar Singh temporarily as it is currently a target for LTAs. Jianhui67^T★C 17:41, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The issue seems to have stopped for now, but I will keep an eye on it to see if the vandalism returns. --Ferien (talk) 20:09, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Anexo:Supercentenarios mexicanos

A5 but user keeps removing QD tags MCGAMER YOUTUBE (talk) 00:16, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Done Thanks - PDL^{Talk to me!}_{Please don't eat da 🐑!} 12:55, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

FTLoG Please Protect - Cristiano Ronaldo

Please protect Cristiano Ronaldo. This is getting ridiculous with all of these IPs adding libel and constantly vandalizing the page. It is getting tiresome to keep on top of this IP hoppers. Thanks - PDL^{Talk to me!}_{Please don't eat da 🐑!} 19:45, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Done by Ferien Thanks - PDL^{Talk to me!}_{Please don't eat da 🐑!} 20:29, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Admins - Two items

I think to help both admins and editors, can we add to the top of the page the following:

If requesting page protection, please use the header of == Page Protection Request - [[Name of page]] ==. In the discussion area, explain if it is permanent or semi-permanent and why.

This will help in preventing duplicates. If there are any diffs or something, list them in the discussion section. I wanted to be bold, but I think this is best left to the administrators to decide. I know we have a couple on here that are duplicates.

Can you adjust the archive to 7 days instead of 14 so the board is not so long? 14 is a long time and some of the discussion sare done and can be moved imo.

Thanks - PDL^{Talk to me!}_{Please don't eat da 🐑!} 20:28, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

For item 2, I oppose shortening the archive time. It's better to leave some things out there longer than to archive things before people get a chance to discuss. I know our official discussions, such as RFD, RFAs, etc., officially run for 7 days, but this page is different. -- Auntof6 (talk) 22:32, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Auntof6 I think when it comes to any discussion that proposes a change it should be open a minimum of 7 days and not be closed earlier (unlike a RfD where if there is an obvious snowball). Thanks - PDL^{Talk to me!}_{Please don't eat da 🐑!} 22:38, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And some of the older stuff is discussed and just hanging out there. Thanks - PDL^{Talk to me!}_{Please don't eat da 🐑!} 22:39, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@PotsdamLamb: Minimum of 7 days, yes. I was thinking of things that might run longer. -- Auntof6 (talk) 22:43, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If they run longer because of not reaching consensus for some things I don’t see any issue with that as it’s the norm. But issues that were brought up over a week ago and not acted on or died should be archived to help keep the board cleaned up. This is why posts can be searched with any word. Thanks - PDL^{Talk to me!}_{Please don't eat da 🐑!} 22:53, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please review recent changes to Template:Banned user

At special:diff/9399624, an editor has made changes to a highly visible template. I do not see relevant discussions of these changes. Our admins may want to have a look at it. MathXplore (talk) 08:31, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: For now, I have reverted the template, as they took out the image as well. This account is also very new. Thanks - PDL^{Talk to me!}_{Please don't eat da 🐑!} 08:45, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The changes they made match enwiki, but I don't see why we need to match them. I'm fine with how the template looks at the minute. --Ferien (talk) 16:24, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection on modules and templates

Lately we have had a lot of vandalism on templates and modules. Can you semi both spaces please? These, on occasion, have been pretty nasty and since they are are targeting high use ones it gets reflected throughout the wiki. Sooner is better than later please. Thanks - PDL^{Talk to me!}_{Please don't eat da 🐑!} 17:58, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not all modules and templates need semi-protection. Some, particularly location maps actually benefit from having IPs edit as they're the ones who are usually bothered to create them here. That being said, there are many high-use modules and templates that should be protected that are not and those are occasionally protected when we notice they're unprotected. --Ferien (talk) 16:18, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Ferien Would you like me to go through them and generate a list? Basically anything that uses LUAs needs to be protected. Thanks - PDL^{Talk to me!}_{Please don't eat da 🐑!} 16:23, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@PotsdamLamb: some key Lua modules should definitely be protected, but there are many that still don't need it. The Lua modules in Category:Location map modules, for example, don't need protection. --Ferien (talk) 16:31, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Ferien I understand. I’m looking at the high end ones, like the ones the LTA changed that killed a majority of pages. Thanks - PDL^{Talk to me!}_{Please don't eat da 🐑!} 16:34, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Page Protection

While subtle, it is an ongoing issue, with the most recent a few minutes ago. I am requesting that Cristiano Ronaldo be semi-protected. Unnamed editors keep changing/removing information from the BLP, which is not true. Thanks - PDL^{Talk to me!}_{Please don't eat da 🐑!} 10:19, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Done --Ferien (talk) 16:15, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

request move

please rename Category:Red Sea Crisis as Category:Red Sea crisis, as the name of the main artical, Red Sea crisis. איש עיטי (talk) 12:37, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Done --Ferien (talk) 16:23, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ameen Younas

We have an article where the QD tag removal is being repeated, please decide what to do with this page. MathXplore (talk) 03:46, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I sent AN-notice to involved editors, User talk:Mr.Mobeen9012, User_talk:Haadi_Meer, and User_talk:Amin_Fun. Should I take them to CU? MathXplore (talk) 03:48, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@MathXplore Please! Thanks - PDL^{Talk to me!}_{Please don't eat da 🐑!} 03:49, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Done. MathXplore (talk) 10:49, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@MathXplore Both have gone beyond 3RR and block request has been sent and admins pinged on IRC. Thanks - PDL^{Talk to me!}_{Please don't eat da 🐑!} 03:48, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding User:PakistanHistorian

Wasn't sure if WP:ONESTRIKE applies here, so I'm reporting the user here instead of on WP:VIP. This user is pushing a POV on Punjabi-related articles, portraying Lahnda languages as dialects of the Punjabi language and Saraiki, Hindkowan, and Pahari people as Punjabis, especially on the page Punjabi dialects and languages. POV pushing is one of the reasons the user got blocked on English Wikipedia. Additionally, this editing pattern is similar to a POV-pushing IP farm that I've been watching, but per Wikipedia's policies, can't comment on IPs. – Cyber.Eyes2005^Talk 16:21, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Indef as ONESTRIKE for disruptive editing. This and this definitely seem like POV pushing without a source. Justarandomamerican (t • c) 16:24, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please see en:Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Cyber.Eyes.2005/Archive and en:Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/PakistanHistorian/Archive. Both users are banned on English Wikipedia for disruptive editing and sockpuppetry. This is a content dispute, and it's unfair to block one user just because the other reported them first. If you block both users, that's not particularly helpful either, as it will just mean that nobody's left to edit Pakistan topics. This kind of dispute should be resolved by consensus on how to resolve the issues, not merely indeffing someone because editors can't get along. Kk.urban (talk) 16:32, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The reason for reporting is WP:ONESTRIKE (!?) They're doing the same thing that led to the block on English Wikipedia. I advised PakistanHistorian to build consensus on talk pages before making such changes, but my edits keep getting reverted. I thought it would be better to report it here instead of getting involved in an edit war. – Cyber.Eyes2005^Talk 16:46, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that reporting here is better than edit warring, but I don't think they should be blocked per WP:ONESTRIKE. You were also blocked on English Wikipedia, and someone claimed in the SPI that your edits had a pro-Pakistan POV. Also, in your unblock request, an admin suggested that you be banned from Pakistan/Indian topics when you get unblocked. In summary, I don't think one user should be indeffed without warning from an admin just for reverting edits from another user, who may be biased on this topic. Kk.urban (talk) 16:59, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm reporting here instead of on WP:VIP because I wasn't sure if WP:ONESTRIKE applies here and I never suggested that someone should get indefinitely blocked for reverting my edits. Additionally, It wasn't an admin who suggested I be blocked on Pakistan/Indian topics, but rather an editor I got into an edit war with on English Wikipedia. – Cyber.Eyes2005^Talk 17:09, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, looks like a nightmare - Aman.kumar.goel kept saying you should be banned but then they were banned themselves. However an admin, 331dot, agreed with them. Kk.urban (talk) 17:13, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I admit I lacked the maturity to make constructive edits back then. – Cyber.Eyes2005^Talk 17:24, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

To be quite honest, I don't exactly understand why you used generic rollback in a content dispute, nor why both of you are apparently perpetuating that dispute with mere contradiction without source. Look for a reliable source and follow it. If no source can be found, then a version should be decided by consensus. Justarandomamerican (t • c) 16:42, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly what I wanted: to build a consensus before making such changes. But my edits kept getting reverted. When it was clearly POV is when I used generic rollback and reported it here. – Cyber.Eyes2005^Talk 16:51, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In light of the above discussion and the diffs you and I have linked, I would like to support 1 of 2 options, a warning to PakistanHistorian, or simply no action. I am neutral on which exactly should be taken. Justarandomamerican (t • c) 17:42, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am not POV-pushing but just keeping the information intact. I was banned from English Wikipedia for sockpuppetry and not referencing edits. But, the edits that I have made on Simple Wikipedia have been backed up by references, instead Cyber.Eyes2005 has continuously reverted the edits without any accepted reference and has used terms such as "Punjabic" or "Greater Punjabic" to refer to the Punjabi dialects, but that term is not applied to the varieties of "Punjabi proper" and instead is a broad group encompassing "Punjabi proper" and some other varieties, that has been rejected as lingusitic classification. PakistanHistorian (talk) 22:18, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Edit War in Progress

On the Vandalism In Progress board, an edit war is currently in progress between User:Go on hoedown and User:Resili, with a third party User:Justarandomamerican involved too. User:Go on hoedown has broken the 3 Revert Rule, and both User:Resili and User:Justarandomamerican both at 3 reverts each. Please could someone intervene and block User:Go on hoedown to prevent possible breaches of 3RR. Thank you. DaneGeld (talk) 21:07, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Go on hoedown has been blocked for various vandalism. Thanks for the thread.

No further action needed. Justarandomamerican (t • c) 21:08, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I wasn't aware of his block at the time I posted this, and have notified all parties including yourself of the discussion. I was just concerned that things were getting close to the line! Thank you for responding! DaneGeld (talk) 21:13, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

PP for We the People Party

Due to ongoing IP edits of what they stand for and a slow edit war please semi this one for 3 months. Thanks - PDL^{Talk to me!}_{Please don't eat da 🐑!} 21:39, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think this one needs semi-protection. I can't find any edits that have been reverted since February, or any problematic edits within the past few days. --Ferien (talk) 21:57, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Ferien I’ve just been letting them go as of late so no reverts from me for that reason. But I know some of what has been put in there is not true. Thanks - PDL^{Talk to me!}_{Please don't eat da 🐑!} 22:05, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protect - Talk:Clyde_Bruckman

Talk:Clyde_Bruckman (change · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete)

Can anyone lock this page please? I'm seeing a target of vandalism by LTA's. Thanks! kleshkreikne. T 04:16, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment:One revision on the page should probably be revdel'd.- FusionSub (Talk page) (Contributions) 09:04, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

By protecting you’ll move the disruption elsewhere, better to just leave it. Deleting the page and restore only the good versions might be a good idea. 89.150.129.15 (talk) 09:51, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. That way would be better in my opinion. kleshkreikne. T 13:25, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah,

Not done for the reason the IP mentioned. --Ferien (talk) 17:06, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

IP recreating deleted pages

The following IP has recreated two pages deleted at RFD (Anurag Dixit and Dinesh Shetty):

2402:3A80:1CA8:70FA:D5AA:DFA2:FA09:AC7C/64 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · block user · block log)

Kk.urban (talk) 18:57, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Kk.urban: The IP (not the 64 range) has been blocked by Macdonald-ross, and this should work for now. If you'd like us to block the /64, reporting the /64 range is usually ok but in this case, please note the deleted contributions interface does not work for ranges, we can only see undeleted contributions from those. --Ferien (talk) 21:07, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Ferien That's up to the admins to decide. I reported the /64 range because IPv6's usually change often, but I didn't know that about the deleted contributions. Kk.urban (talk) 21:09, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Protection request for multiple pages

Please semi-protect the following due to slow vandalism (all by the same person using different IPs):

Thanks - PDL^{Talk to me!}_{Please don't eat da 🐑!} 12:55, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'll keep a watch on these for now, but may consider a wide IP block of these pages instead of protection. --Ferien (talk) 20:08, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Ferien It is a slow edit change and every time one of the IPs gets a warning, they hop to another IP and do the same thing. However, I trust your judgement. The pages are on my watchlist. Thanks - PDL^{Talk to me!}_{Please don't eat da 🐑!} 20:11, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That /64 was actually previously blocked for disruptive editing, so I've just gone ahead and blocked it again which should solve this issue. --Ferien (talk) 21:20, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Ferien Thank you so much! I’ll get them fixed today back to standards. Thanks - PDL^{Talk to me!}_{Please don't eat da 🐑!} 21:36, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I am striking out ones I’ve made not all capitals and removed the other issues. Thanks - PDL^{Talk to me!}_{Please don't eat da 🐑!} 08:43, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protect request on Talk:Clyde Bruckman

Please semi-protect the Talk:Clyde Bruckman page for me! I cannot stand that stupid IP address vandal anymore vandalizing on and messing around with the page all day and every day! And nothing is working at all! I tried to get him out of there with several children's TV show picture threats, and other people trie to semi-protect the article, but none of that just didn't work and doesn't work at all either! Just please get him out of there right now, block and globally lock every single one of his IP addresses and IP address ranges, and semi-protect that talk page for a very long time for me please!— Preceding unsigned comment added by VetsaWare2024 01:29, 19 March 2024 UTC (talk • contribs)

@VetsaWare2024 It will not be protected for all the same reasons as stated before. You are also newly registered, so Check User requested please! Thanks - PDL^{Talk to me!}_{Please don't eat da 🐑!} 01:23, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Forogh Nilchi Zadeh

QD A4 case where the author is repeating QD tag removal. Admins should decide what to do with the article. MathXplore (talk) 04:36, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Already

Done. MathXplore (talk) 08:25, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Flood Flag

~~Requesting flood flag. Numerous cleanup categories need to be created, which will flood the recent changes panel.~~ – Cyber.Eyes2005^Talk 12:42, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Striking. – Cyber.Eyes2005^Talk 14:54, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If my understanding is correct, flood flag can hide edits but not for page creations. MathXplore (talk) 14:56, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ahh! So, even with the flood flag, new page creations will still be visible on the recent changes panel? – Cyber.Eyes2005^Talk 15:08, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That is what I previously experienced. I can understand the use of a flood flag for re-categorization (cat-a-lot), but that is different from this case. MathXplore (talk) 15:21, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I see, thanks for clarifying. – Cyber.Eyes2005^Talk 15:40, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Christian Lorenzo Bautista

QD G5 case, Wikipedia:Requests_for_checkuser/Archive22#Christian_Joy_Lorenzo_Bautista. Please take care of this page. MathXplore (talk) 09:15, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

~~Already Done.~~ MathXplore (talk) 11:49, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The page has been recreated, please take care of them. MathXplore (talk) 12:25, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Already

Done. MathXplore (talk) 02:26, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Maleesha kharwa‎

QD A4 and G5 case (Wikipedia:Requests_for_checkuser/Archive22#Christian_Joy_Lorenzo_Bautista), but the author is repeating QD tag removals. Please take care of this page. MathXplore (talk) 12:24, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Already

Done. MathXplore (talk) 02:26, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Page protection request for CaseOh

Please semi-protect CaseOh, it's a new article attracting some juvenile IP vandalism. The en version of the article shows they are clearly notable, but the unsourced vandal edits are annoying. Ravensfire (talk) 13:59, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: The page has been deleted as QD G10. – Cyber.Eyes2005^Talk 04:36, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ChatGPT/LLM article

I don't know what to do with an article like Mifflintown, Pennsylvania. It's clearly generated from ChatGPT/ a large language model, and cites references that don't exist. Kk.urban (talk) 15:54, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

i exported from enwiki and made it into a real page. SI (talk) 16:29, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Import Template:Infobox U.S. state

Would an admin please import {{Infobox U.S. state}}? I would also suggest semi-protecting it. Kk.urban (talk) 19:12, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Done, let me know if you need it done differently fr33k man 19:18, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Fr33kman Somehow your import did not seem to work. The current infobox here still looks different from the enwiki version. Kk.urban (talk) 19:21, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What parameters are you referring too? There are things that can live in an infobox that isn't native to the actual template Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 23:00, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Lee Vilenski I mean the actual source code of the template is different. Kk.urban (talk) 23:01, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like it's the same until {{#invoke:Check for unknown parameters|check|unknown={{main other|[[Category:Pages using infobox U.S. state with unknown parameters|_VALUE_{{PAGENAME}}]]}}|preview=Page using [[Template:Infobox U.S. state]] with unknown parameter "_VALUE_"|ignoreblank=y| 2000Density | 2000DensityUS | 2000Pop | 2010Density | 2010DensityUS | 2010Pop | 2020Density | 2020DensityUS | 2020Pop | AdmittanceDate | AdmittanceOrder | anthem | area_footnotes | area_land_km2 | area_land_sq_mi | area_rank | area_total_km2 | area_total_sq_mi | area_water_km2 | area_water_percent | area_water_sq_mi | Capital | dimensions_footnotes | elevation_footnotes | elevation_ft | elevation_m | elevation_max_footnotes | elevation_max_ft | elevation_max_m | elevation_max_point | elevation_min_ft | elevation_min_m | elevation_min_point | etymology | flag_alt | flag_border | flag_link | flag_size | footnotes | Former | government_footnotes | Governor | image_flag | image_map | image_seal | IncomeRank | iso_code | Judiciary | Languages | LargestCity | LargestCounty | LargestMetro | Latitude | Legislature | length_km | length_mi | Lieutenant Governor | Lieutenant Governor_alt | Longitude | Lowerhouse | map_alt | MedianHouseholdIncome | module | motto | name | native_name | nickname | nicknames | official_name | OfficialLang | OfficialLangs | population_as_of | population_demonym | population_density_rank | population_rank | postal_code | Representative | seal_alt | seal_link | seal_size | seat | Senators | timezone1 | timezone1_DST | timezone1_location | timezone2 | timezone2_DST | timezone2_location | TradAbbreviation | type | Upperhouse | utc_offset1 | utc_offset1_DST | utc_offset2 | utc_offset2_DST | website | width_km | width_mi }}

Looking for unknown parameters might not be suitable here. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 23:05, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

┌────────────────┘
@Lee Vilenski Also it has {{{seat|}}} instead of {{{seat|{{{Capital|}}}}}}; it's missing the 2020Pop, 2020Density, and 2020DensityUS parameters; it's missing a link to Largest county or equivalent (which might not matter), and it doesn't have a link to United States (which I don't care about). In short, Fr33kman's import didn't seem to change anything at all, and I'm confused how that happened. Kk.urban (talk) 23:11, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Kk.urban Try again please. I just imported it again and it did pull in more information that did not come over from the previous import. The items you stated were missing I see imported now when I did it. Please ping me and let me know. Thanks - PDL^{Talk to me!}_{Please don't eat da 🐑!} 02:53, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@PotsdamLamb It's working now. Thanks! Kk.urban (talk) 03:15, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@PotsdamLamb: Did you actually import it, or just copy the code? You don't appear to have the importer right. Sometimes it's better to do an actual import so that the history shows the people that did the original change(s). That's why people request import instead of copying/pasting for themselves. -- Auntof6 (talk) 08:34, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Kk.urban Anytime! — Preceding unsigned comment added by PotsdamLamb (talk • contribs) 03:18, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Auntof6 It had just been imported and no changes had been made prior so I c/p it over. I’d prefer to have import rights, but they aren’t granted here. The last change was on December 5th, 2023. See Special:Diff/9425409 Thanks - PDL^{Talk to me!}_{Please don't eat da 🐑!} 08:55, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And PS the second sentence by Fr33kman says he did the import. Thanks - PDL^{Talk to me!}_{Please don't eat da 🐑!} 08:56, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

FYI the reason it didn't work is the imported edit was older than the most recent edit here so our version trumped it. If you import and the imported edit is older than ours just revert to the edit you imported. -Djsasso (talk) 11:22, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]