Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard

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

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 A message may therefore have been archived.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

Are you in the right place?

• This is the Simple English Wikipedia. Click here for the Administrators' Noticeboard on the regular English Wikipedia.
• Use Vandalism in progress to report serious and urgent vandalism from other users to administrators.
• Use Requests for permissions to request administrators to give you tools that can help you do things faster on Wikipedia, such as rollback.
• Use Simple talk to ask general questions about Wikipedia and how to use it.
• See meta:Steward requests/Username changes to change your user name or take another user name.
• See WP:RFCU for CheckUser requests.
• See WP:OS for oversight.

Year-end RfD closures...

Hello, We currently have quite a few open RfDs. As I don't know how well the system handles closing RfDs that started last year, we should try closing as many of them as possible before the year ends. Eptalon (talk) 10:22, 22 December 2024 (UTC)

It is ok to close RfDs that started last year. Admins can resolve any issues with closures by simply entering a custom delete reason by creating their own link to the RfD they've closed to delete the article in the edit summary, which has become increasingly done recently with grouped RfDs and so on. If we're feeling ultra lazy... we could create a new deletion reason prefilling a variable of "current year-1" for these half a dozen of RfDs that will be overdue by 1 January? :P --Ferien (talk) 00:05, 23 December 2024 (UTC)

I feel super excited for new year. Not lazy at all.BRP ^ever 02:53, 29 December 2024 (UTC)

That number is now around 70, not a half dozen, so I'd think it could be useful. 2601:644:907E:A70:E94C:27E:1ACA:A669 (talk) 09:18, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

Protection request for Pope John Paul II

Reason: Repeated vandalism by IP editor.

Pope John Paul II ✿༺ 𝒜𝒹𝑒𝓁𝒶𝒾𝒹𝑒 ༻✿🆃🅰🅻🅺 💌 18:30, 22 December 2024 (UTC)

 Comment: The vandalism has stopped but you can look at the history [[1] here, it shows that the IP has vandalized a lot of the page, and I have reverted some of it, so did other editors, and this IP is using edit summary to attack other editors. ✿༺ 𝒜𝒹𝑒𝓁𝒶𝒾𝒹𝑒 ༻✿🆃🅰🅻🅺 💌 18:37, 22 December 2024 (UTC)

The long-term abuse on the page has stopped for the time being, but I will keep a watch on it. With this editor, it is best to avoid protection, as he'll then boast about him "winning the battle" and will go around harassing a bunch of other editors through other methods. --Ferien (talk) 00:07, 23 December 2024 (UTC)

 Comment:@Ferien Okay thank you. ✿༺ 𝒜𝒹𝑒𝓁𝒶𝒾𝒹𝑒 ༻✿🆃🅰🅻🅺 💌 13:50, 23 December 2024 (UTC)

Invasive Spices

Invasive Spices (talk · contribs) has been active here since November 2023, shortly after they were blocked indefinitely on enwiki for "Persistent creation of unhelpful redirects despite many being deleted at WP:RfD, and repeated personal attacks against RfD nominators". Some of the redirects they've created recently have been taken to RfD and I'm concerned that the pattern is repeating itself. I don't mind as much a discussion at RfD, but their responses recently at Wikipedia:Requests for deletion/Requests/2024/Coercive sterilization of Native American women are crossing the line into WP:HOUNDING and WP:NPA. Specifically, [2], [3] and [4]feels more like hounding than a good faith discussion. Their responses at [5] are hostile, show bad faith and again are more hounding and hostile than healthy discussion. This needs to stop from Invasive Spices. While it's not always fun to see someone disagree with your perspective, it's part of the Wikipedia process and hostility like this does not help the goal of working together to improve the project. Ravensfire (talk) 03:57, 25 December 2024 (UTC)

(Non-administrator observation):Yeah, I saw invasive spices's supposed "CE" when it was actually a hostile response. Which I would totally remove. because hostile comments like that are not okay, and they scare away users who are trying to help out the project. 𝓐𝓭𝓮𝓵𝓪𝓲𝓭𝓮 ^{(𝓽𝓪𝓵𝓴 ♡ 𝓬𝓸𝓷𝓽𝓻𝓲𝓫𝓼)} 03:59, 25 December 2024 (UTC)

Pinging Chenzw, Griffinofwales, Ferien, Lee Vilenski, BZPN who have commented at the RFD discussions mentioned above. Ravensfire (talk) 04:02, 25 December 2024 (UTC)

 (change conflict)  I agree it is getting increasingly concerning. I engaged with the editor in a few of those RfDs and noticed the same trend. For what it's worth, I think it is very unbecoming to essentially stalk an editor's past edits, and use them to call out alleged hypocrisy in an unrelated RfD. It would have been a different matter had those diff links contributed anything substantive to the RfD, but I don't think they did, and that is going into the NPA territory. Chenzw  Talk  04:06, 25 December 2024 (UTC)

(Non-administrator observation) The editing pattern is bizarre. As they were blocked on enwiki for similar behaviour, maybe we need to remind them that WP:ONESTRIKE exists. And, if you do look through the links they provide, most of them are nonsense, and a lot of the arguments they make are also nonsense. Apparently raising RfDs is against WP:NOT... Somehow.

Personally, I think they are not here to create an encyclopedia. I don't think those redirects are worth much, Wikipedia search is capable of searching for a term without these overkill redirects. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 08:49, 25 December 2024 (UTC)

Thank you @Ravensfire for raising this issue. It seems to me that this user simply wants to continue his disruptive behavior on simplewiki because he has been blocked on enwiki. I think it's WP:NOTHERE, and we should follow WP:ONESTRIKE. Best regards, BZPN (talk) 09:26, 25 December 2024 (UTC)

@Lee Vilenski: Regarding the NOT issue, I believe what they were trying to point out is the guideline mentioned on Wikipedia:Requests_for_deletion#Before_nominating:_checks_and_alternatives: The main four guidelines and policies that inform deletion discussions: notability (WP:N), verifiability (WP:V), reliable sources (WP:RS), and what Wikipedia is not (WP:NOT). However, as I mentioned at Wikipedia:Requests for deletion/Requests/2024/Coercive sterilization of Native American women, while a redirect does not fall under WP:NOT, not being on WP:NOT (note the double negative) does not necessarily mean that said RfD is groundless. If we were to interpret WP:NOT and only WP:NOT when considering RfDs, then all virtually all redirects would be immune to the RfD process, which would be an absurd conclusion. Chenzw  Talk  09:38, 25 December 2024 (UTC)

I suppose. But that just says "main guidelines". We generally use enwiki's guidelines where we don't have our own. W:Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion could maybe be imported or a version of it simplified to have it here. Specifically w:WP:RFD#DELETE point 8 is the one that most redirects for deletion topics end up at.

Realistically, though, the issue is with the editing history. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 10:30, 25 December 2024 (UTC)

Blocked per WP:ONESTRIKE, a textbook case in my view. Almost identical behaviour as they were blocked for on en. --Ferien (talk) 10:36, 25 December 2024 (UTC)

Archie Moore

Archie Moore (change · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent Disruptive Editing. 𝓐𝓭𝓮𝓵𝓪𝓲𝓭𝓮 ^{(𝓽𝓪𝓵𝓴 ♡ 𝓬𝓸𝓷𝓽𝓻𝓲𝓫𝓼)} 14:28, 25 December 2024 (UTC)

Protection would likely just move him along to other pages. Watching recent changes and bot rollbacking to hide the editor from it when I can. --Ferien (talk) 14:31, 25 December 2024 (UTC)

Okay, thanks 👍 𝓐𝓭𝓮𝓵𝓪𝓲𝓭𝓮 ^{(𝓽𝓪𝓵𝓴 ♡ 𝓬𝓸𝓷𝓽𝓻𝓲𝓫𝓼)} 14:32, 25 December 2024 (UTC)

Talk:Pope John Paul II

Semi protection, longer than a month due to longterm LTA target. See also relevant abuselogs. ToadetteEdit (talk) 10:08, 28 December 2024 (UTC)

Protection on this page that generally gets very little attention would likely move the editor onto mainspace pages that affect our readers more, therefore  Not done --Ferien (talk) 10:23, 28 December 2024 (UTC)

Move request

Hi, Could someone move Seven & i Holdings to Seven & I Holdings please as per enwiki, Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 13:13, 28 December 2024 (UTC)

looks like on enwiki there was a discussion and there wasn't much more than "retain what we already have". If we had a similar RM, then we'd retain it how it is. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 14:26, 28 December 2024 (UTC)

@Lee Vilenski I had no idea an RM was done but either way I'm not seeing where the problem is ? .... Enwiki has the article as "Seven & I Holdings" so it's common sense just to follow suit?.... If Enwiki changes it to the lowercase i then sure we should follow suit with that too,

It seems nonsensical to have the enwiki article as Seven & I Holdings and we have it as Seven & i Holdings.... –Davey2010^Talk 14:35, 28 December 2024 (UTC)

(Non-administrator observation) We don't have to match exactly, I do think we should have a discussion, and not just blindly follow what other wikis do. From looking at the last RM, observers suggested that around half of sources used an uppercase I, and others just "i".

There was no consensus to move in that case. From looking at a few sources, it seems to me that the uppercase I is more of an anglaphone interpretation than anything else. I'd personally suggest that we go with whatever the company calls themselves in these cases. That's obviously difficult because it's a Japanese brand. There logo is clearly that of a lowercase "i", and the company website in English suggests it is too.

Happy to move if someone has a strong feeling on this, as it's clear a lot of sources use the uppercase I. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 14:43, 28 December 2024 (UTC)

No we don't but it makes just to follow them, Seems daft to have the enwiki article at one name and Simple at another. "it's clear a lot of sources use the uppercase I" .... so your comment here is pointless then?, If you have a problem with the name you're more than welcome to file a request at RM or start an RM at enwiki, Whilst we're not enwiki I still don't believe we should be mismatched with enwiki for the sake of it,

I should also point out in case no one's aware this isn't a RM request, Seven & I Holdings redirects to 7-Eleven, Seven & i Holdings is an article, I guess technically Seven & I Holdings could redirect to the lowercase i but again we shouldn't be mismatched, Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 14:58, 28 December 2024 (UTC)

A few thoughts here..

1. In general, I think it's a good idea to follow enWP. (WP:FOLLOW)
2. Our MOS does not provide guidance on this subject.
3. The enWP guideline MOS:TMRULES says Follow standard English text formatting and capitalization practices, even if the trademark owner considers nonstandard formatting "official".
4. Both the Seven and i and Seven and I articles should point to the same place.
5. As stated in the enWP RM, there is not a consistent use of "and i" or "and I" in sources (this appears to be still true).
6. This is more appropriate for a ST/talk page discussion rather than AN.

With all that being said, I believe that per points 1 and 2, we should move the article to match enWP unless the community believes that we should update our own MOS to use the local language's formatting, something I would not be against. Griff (talk) 16:06, 28 December 2024 (UTC)

┌─────────────────────────────────┘
 Done --Ferien (talk) 23:04, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

@Ferien Thanks so much, Thank you for also reopening this (the grumpy a-hole in me wanted to close this as soon as you opened it but I figured I wouldn't get me far other than being blocked so decided against it - Very glad I did now! :)), Thanks again its much appreciated, Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 00:03, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

Move request for a template

Hello! As of now, {{Strongly support}} displays Strong support ("Strong support"), but Template:Strong support is a red link. The template can only be moved by admins, so can you move it for me? Please and thank you :) :D ✩ Dream Indigo ✩ 21:32, 28 December 2024 (UTC)

(Non-administrator observation) I've turned it into a redirect, so it'll show up when used. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 21:45, 28 December 2024 (UTC)

@Lee Vilenski: thank you! I still believe that the title should match the content, but this way is much better than before :) ✩ Dream Indigo ✩ 16:09, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

Notice of steward action

Hello, I wanted to let you know that I locally blocked an account here (Jagomago7288). The account had been vandalizing for 40 minutes straight after warnings while no local administrator was available to block and was ultimately reported to us for action, thus why I proceeded with placing a block.

Since the block was placed in my steward capacity, let me know if you have any further questions. EPIC (talk) 21:13, 29 December 2024 (UTC)

Same for 194.83.36.203, though I see a local admin returned the same minute I did that block. I'll leave any further action to the locals. EPIC (talk) 21:23, 29 December 2024 (UTC)

@EPIC: Thank you for letting us know and for making those actions. --Ferien (talk) 21:32, 29 December 2024 (UTC)

Move request 2

Hi, Could someone move Discord (software) to Discord please, I've already moved Discord to Discord (disambiguation) but can't move the article back to that title, Move is per enwiki too, Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 16:05, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

 Done Chenzw  Talk  16:22, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

Brilliant thanks Chenzw much appreciated, Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 16:41, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

Protection request for Jimmy Carter

In light of his passing, there has been some unproductive edits being made by unregistered users on Jimmy Carter's article. Perhaps protecting the article until the end of his funeral/mourning period on January 9th might be the best move. TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 16:58, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

• Update There's been a little uptick in unregistered vandalism since posting here. Perhaps protecting the article for a month or two might be best. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 17:26, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

I agree. Many IP's keep vandalizing it. 2601:644:907E:A70:893:48AB:B5F2:4E3F (talk) 18:40, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a month. -- Auntof6 (talk) 00:06, 31 December 2024 (UTC)

Template:Cite encyclopedia and Template:Delink

It's quite unusual to see both of those templates having cascading full protection. I think regular full protection would do just fine. What do we think? Kurnahusa (talk) 17:20, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

Request for semi-protection - Whopper

Can I please request edit protection on the article Whopper? The article has been subject of many edits which have introduced bad information and vandalism into the work. The current version is correct, as far as I can see (last edited 28th December 2024). Thanks. DaneGeld (talk) 21:12, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

Request for semi-protection for Chandragupta II's conquest of the Vahlika Hunas

The article Chandragupta II's conquest of the Vahlika Hunas is being repeatedly disrupted by random IPs [6], [7], [8], [9], [10], [11], [12], likely the same user. The edit pattern is very similar—they repeatedly change "Vahlika" to "Bactria/Bactrian" and add unsourced information in the infobox, such as replacing "Persians" with "Sassanid Empire." These edits are unconstructive and make it hard to maintain the page's accuracy. I request semi-protection to stop this ongoing disruption. Shakib ul hassan talk! 08:53, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

Already  Done. MathXplore (talk) 15:55, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

Request for full-protection for Chandragupta II's conquest of the Vahlika Hunas

Asking for full protection of Chandragupta II's conquest of the Vahlika Hunas. The article has been semi-protected following recent disruption. But an User placed another RFD for the same reason [13]. I have dealt with the second RFD as inappropriate, but I feel that a full protection is necessary to block any further disruption and keep the article stable in the future. Shakib ul hassan talk! 09:02, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

(Non-administrator observation) Articles are never fully protected and there has been only one reverted change since the article was semi-protected. ✩ Dream Indigo ✩ 11:50, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

Lee Vilenski's RfA

There is an RfA overdue for closure. Is there any bureaucrat available to close it? 2601:644:907E:A70:BDED:6B39:2CA6:DC80 (talk) 02:28, 4 January 2025 (UTC)

User removing pages from a category

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. No further changes should be made to this discussion.

---

I noticed that QuantumFoam66 had removed a lot of pages from Category:Elephants, put some of them in Category:Elephants and humans, then now removed them from that category. I don't think this is good, but I want to get admins' opinions on this. 2601:644:907E:A70:E5B9:8B7B:A42C:77C (talk) 21:52, 4 January 2025 (UTC)

I think this would be a more appropriate conversation to have with that editor on their talk page and does not require administrator involvement at this time. Griff (talk) 21:55, 4 January 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for your comment Griff, and you were an administrator before so I decided this discussion is not needed here, and I'm marking it as archived. 2601:644:907E:A70:51EF:4EA8:35C0:87E (talk) 22:18, 4 January 2025 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.

94.67.103.49

User keeps removing references. BigKrow (talk) 22:20, 4 January 2025 (UTC)

Hi BigKrow! I notice that this user has not been warned or contacted about the removal of references. For content disputes, discussions should first begin on the article talk page and all users involved should be asked to participate. If it is vandalism, the normal warning process should be followed, with a report to VIP if necessary. Administrator involvement through AN is typically only needed if the user is continuing to vandalise and has not responded to multiple warnings. Griff (talk) 22:25, 4 January 2025 (UTC)

Non-urgent semi-protection request

Hi :) I'm not sure it's allowed or not, but can you please semi-protect these pages? I want to discourage inexperienced users from editing the wrong page when they message me.

• User talk:Dream Indigo/Archives
• User talk:Dream Indigo/Archives/2024
• User:Dream Indigo/Editnotice

Thank you :D If it's not allowed because they weren't changed by other users or vandalized yet, no problem at all, we'll leave them like that. ✩ Dream Indigo ✩ 01:14, 5 January 2025 (UTC)

@Dream Indigo: It's allowed and it's  Done! -- Auntof6 (talk) 03:48, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

@Auntof6: Thank you a lot :) ✩ Dream Indigo ✩ 12:00, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

User:Loveconnection

Seems like a promotional account, looking into please? Thanks. BigKrow (talk) 01:56, 5 January 2025 (UTC)

RFD created for all Love Connection articles, COI warning sent. I suspect there may be a connection, or at the very least, it is a single-purpose account creating these types of articles. Griff (talk) 02:18, 5 January 2025 (UTC)

These are all Instagram based "shows" - see [14]. Left comment on the RFD page (and thank you for making one for all of them!). Ravensfire (talk) 16:08, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

User:Trollni2

Seems suspicious because name "Trolling" is in username if you jumble the letters. Thank you. BigKrow (talk) 01:59, 5 January 2025 (UTC)

Administrators should note that this appears to be a sockpuppet of Schizo.communist (VOA) based on behaviour. Griff (talk) 02:17, 5 January 2025 (UTC)

Please nuke the articles created by this IP

Special:Contribs/182.178.11.41. 2601:644:907E:A70:2893:F30F:5902:6608 (talk) 08:18, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

Working on it -- need to deal with some categorization as well. -- Auntof6 (talk) 09:25, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

I think I got everything. Let us know if there's anything else. -- Auntof6 (talk) 09:35, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

UrSdg

• UrSdg (talk · contribs)

Sockpuppet of blocked user:SODIPLAYER, per WP:DUCK (recreating false Qajar-Wahhabi war article). BZPN (talk) 13:25, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

P.S. not reported on VIP because it's not literally vandalism. By the way, it would be better to protect the creation of this page only for autoconfirmed users. BZPN (talk) 13:29, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

Request for semi-protection for Mihir Bhoja

The article Mihir Bhoja is being repeatedly disrupted by IPs, likely due to caste bias [15] [16]. I warned the user twice [17], but they continue to add unacceptable content, especially from non-RS sources. I also invited the user to discuss the matter on the article's talk page [18], but they did not engage. Recently, another IP reverted my edit and possibly abused me by saying "tuadi mkc bro" [19]. I have reverted the caste POV-pushing edits and restored the article to a neutral version. I request semi-protection for the page to prevent further disruptive editing. Thank you very much. Shakib ul hassan talk! 15:42, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

The user @103.46.201.42 reverted my edit and made it the same as what other IPs were doing, continuing the POV-pushing: [20]. Mr.Hanes Talk 20:00, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

Another instance of vandalism [21], I just reverted it. Shakib ul hassan talk! 08:59, 8 January 2025 (UTC)

Repeat removal of Quick Deletion template

Could an admin please look at Liceo juan de Dios Puga? The IPs keep removing my quick deletion template. Thanks, Mdaniels5757 (talk) 16:31, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

Personal attacks and Abuse

Once again, while reverting my changes [22], user @2409:40D0:39:8278:5025:6E0E:9727:AECC has resorted to personal attacks, used offensive slang, and made racist remarks directed at me based on my name and religious beliefs. I have not reverted their edits due to WP:3RR. Additionally, I suspect that @2409:40D0:12D3:1A47:1956:7251:3EDF:D5F6 may be the same individual, as they have also reverted my edits and subjected me to abuse. Shakib ul hassan talk! 17:56, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

Hi @Shakib ul hassan, these abusive words in edit summary is in Hinglish, for example one of his edit summary :

Correctt✅katuye suar teri mkc bro😘 which translated as
" Correct ✅ circumcisioned pig your mkc bro😘 ".

MKC is too much offensive. NXcrypto Chatting 18:20, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

Hi @Crypto, thank you for clarifying the exact meaning and helping overcome the language barrier. I truly appreciate it!. Shakib ul hassan talk! 18:23, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

Ahir-Rajput Connection

There was an RfD for this page, which was closed as delete, but it seems the page was never deleted. Am I missing something? 2601:644:907E:A70:6102:D339:5958:92DB (talk) 18:30, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

Hi there! It seems like the page has been indeed never deleted... There could be a possible recreation of the article, or I think the administrators changed their mind about the deletion and decided to keep it instead. 𝓐𝓭𝓮𝓵𝓪𝓲𝓭𝓮 ^{(𝓽𝓪𝓵𝓴 ♡ 𝓬𝓸𝓷𝓽𝓻𝓲𝓫𝓼)} 18:34, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

@Auntof6 looks like you forgot to delete the page. BRP ^ever 18:42, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

• So sorry I reverted a whole bunch of people and in the process removed the QD too - The oldrfdfull wasn't on the talkpage and the RFD link in the article didn't work so I assumed it was never nominated... turns out it was the template using the /2025 subpage and not /2024 and also turns out I !voted in that RFD too!, Anyway I've restored the QD - so sorry again, Thanks,–Davey2010^Talk 18:49, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

•  Done - Article deleted by Fr33kman per G4, –Davey2010^Talk 19:36, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

  Well... I guess I was wrong but at least my thinking was right. 𝓐𝓭𝓮𝓵𝓪𝓲𝓭𝓮 ^{(𝓽𝓪𝓵𝓴 ♡ 𝓬𝓸𝓷𝓽𝓻𝓲𝓫𝓼)} 19:42, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

A bug admins should be aware of

I am using the Wikipedia app for iOS and something really weird happened. A few minutes ago, someone started Smith's Friends with just Im a dinosaur. I was going to QD it, but when I clicked on the article I read Les personnes qui vont vivre éternellement instead. I look at "View edit history" and I read Updated 1416 days ago, then I click on "Page issues" and I read that a user asked for QD on 21 February 2021. Btw I ended up not tagging it for QD, because I literally see a different version of the page. I should probably report the issue somewhere on MediaWiki I guess, but I wanted to let you know that sometimes deleted pages can "come back" via bugs, so that you are prepared to take some extra steps such as revdel before deleting – for example – a page for copyright violations until said bug is fixed. Thank you for your attention. ✩ Dream Indigo ✩ 16:56, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

I see the current version of the page since BigKrow tagged it for QD btw. ✩ Dream Indigo ✩ 16:57, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

Request Protection for Mihir Bhoja

Can you protect Mihir Bhoja The IP had Edit War. Here is [23], [24] and [25] Raayaan9911 14:48, 8 January 2025 (UTC)

Another act of vandalism by the IP [26], accompanied by an edit summary containing abusive language. Shakib ul hassan talk! 17:21, 8 January 2025 (UTC)

I've chucked on semi-protect for a week. Any other admin who has strong feelings for longer/less feel free to change. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 17:25, 8 January 2025 (UTC)

@Lee Vilenski thank you! Raayaan9911 20:26, 8 January 2025 (UTC)

Block and delete request

Hi, Could someone delete all of 66.216.210.4s page creations per A3 and block them please?, They're still pasting content from Enwiki and aren't bothering to simplify it,

I did tell them to simplify articles they create here but they've continued regardless so I don't know what else I can do to make them understand, Thanks –Davey2010^Talk 20:51, 8 January 2025 (UTC)

Davey2010

It looks like Davey2010 is being rude to users yet again and has got other people to do so on User talk:167.98.197.136, I think they all need blocking as they're all goading the IP (and are probably Davey2010 behind them). 151.230.148.34 (talk) 23:04, 8 January 2025 (UTC)