Wikispecies:Administrators' Noticeboard: Difference between revisions

There are archives of this Noticeboard:
2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
The archives are searchable:

Welcome to the Administrators' Noticeboard.

This space is for anyone who needs to contact an administrator ("sysop") for actions such as protecting a page, deleting spam, or blocking vandals.
If you rather need to reach a Translation administrator, please use the Translation Administrators' Noticeboard instead. For general conversation, see Wikispecies:Village Pump.

Start a new conversation.

I would just like to note that there are some pretty old edit requests at Category:Wikispecies protected edit requests. Maybe someone can proceed them. Thanks and best regards --Ameisenigel (talk) 10:04, 11 December 2021 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for the heads-up. I'll get them all sorted next week. –Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 11:09, 12 December 2021 (UTC).Reply

Attention fellow administrators Accassidy—AlvaroMolina—Andyboorman—Burmeister—Circeus—Dan Koehl—DannyS712—EncycloPetey—Faendalimas—Floscuculi Franz Xaver—Geni—Hector Bottai—Keith Edkins—Koavf—Mariusm—MKOliver—MPF—Neferkheperre—OhanaUnited PeterR—Pigsonthewing—RLJ—Thiotrix

Please note that we now have some activity from a new user account called StephenThorpe1 (talk • contribs • block log • all projects) , registered earlier today. –Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 13:56, 25 December 2021 (UTC).Reply

yes the account AucklandNaturalist (no contributions at this time) also uses same ip, ran a check. The data from his original account is too old now for comparison. @Dan Koehl: @Koavf: please take a look. Meantime I am blocking both accounts for one week for now. Open to discussion on this. Cheers Scott Thomson (Faendalimas) ^talk 14:25, 25 December 2021 (UTC)Reply

It seems like he miss WS. Dan Koehl (talk) 14:32, 25 December 2021 (UTC)Reply

For what it's worth, no change in his not following wikispecies style guide on ref citations - MPF (talk) 14:40, 25 December 2021 (UTC)Reply

Indeed. Also, even though all of the actual data in the new edits seems correct and legit (afaik), sockpuppetry is still a big deal from a Wikimedia policy point of view. –Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 15:06, 25 December 2021 (UTC).Reply

​ Well, he just got suspended from iNaturalist. He can make it all about expertise as much as he wants, what I see is the same old story: he tried to use a publicly edited website as his own, sole personal database, ran into trouble because he kept fighting other people's edits, and is now spending a lot of effort badmouthing that website. Six years on, nothing's changes. Circeus (talk) 15:42, 25 December 2021 (UTC)Reply

This is a pretty clear case of walking like Anatidae, quacking like Anatidae, and having usernames like Anatidae. With single-user login, these users can appeal at Meta or post to someone's talk page on Wikipedia but they are clearly him. Merry Christmas folks. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 16:21, 25 December 2021 (UTC)Reply

I've now wikified all the edits by the user, in regards to layout, author-, reference- and Taxonavigation templates, journal links, categories, and so forth. –Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 18:17, 25 December 2021 (UTC).Reply

Ok I note the blocks have been changed to indefinite, thanks for that. I could not do indefinite until either Dan or Justin confirmed my check. All done now. @Dan Koehl: @Koavf: we should keep an eye on the IP which must remain undisclosed here. We should also update the CU file with the current info.

Yeah he has been banned for life from iNat for doing exactly what he used to do here. I guess that's why he stopped pestering us. I am guessing we may be in for some more socks now. Cheers Scott Thomson (Faendalimas) ^talk 21:55, 25 December 2021 (UTC)Reply

@Faendalimas: I already updated CU a few hours ago. Thanks for spotting it and for encouraging the documentation. I sincerely feel sorry for the guy: he sounds so terribly unhappy. :/ —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 21:57, 25 December 2021 (UTC)Reply

Hi admins, currently Wikispecies has over a thousand broken links. Some for at least nine years.

• automatically generated list

As some redirect to pages that were previously deleted, I think they should be checked/deleted by administrators. Edu! (talk) 13:57, 28 December 2021 (UTC)Reply

Having reviewed and sorted many of these broken redirects I would suggest that taxon specialists need to take over this mammoth task! Andyboorman (talk) 20:17, 29 December 2021 (UTC)Reply

I agree with Andy, however there are a few fairly clear-cut issues. For example there are about 40 user/user talk pages that are redirected due to that fact that the user names were changed sometimes in the past. The majority of them are not linked or transcluded by any other pages, and I guess deleting them is okay? Checking whether they are linked/transcluded is fairly easy, since it's only ≈40 pages all in all. There are also about 50 broken redirect "taxon" pages regarding hybrids, and they could easily be deleted since we don't do hybrids. Or am I wrong? Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 11:51, 30 December 2021 (UTC).Reply

We do natural hybrids in plants, as they are relatively common for some families. However, artificial hybrids a no-no. I notice MABot has done a sterling job on double redirects, big thanks for this tidy up. As to user/user talk pages without tranclusion, they can go. Andyboorman (talk) 14:59, 31 December 2021 (UTC)Reply

I've started to deleted non-transcluded user- and user talk pages, as well as unused subpages to them. –Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 18:27, 2 January 2022 (UTC).Reply

┌─────────────────────────┘ Please note that some of the user pages listed as broken redirects in reality "import" their user page data from Meta-Wiki. See for example User:Pikolas (currently listed as a broken redirect). It is redirected to User:NMaia which has a user page copied from Meta. Several pages links to the User:Pikolas page, hence it should probably not be deleted. (Please note that I chose this example at random: all pages should of course be investigated individually.) –Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 03:51, 4 January 2022 (UTC).Reply

Hello. Could you delete Category: William Wayt Thomas taxa, I've created by mistake, since it's duplicated with Category:Wayt Thomas taxa.
Thank you. Gerardgiraud (talk) 12:38, 30 December 2021 (UTC)Reply

@Gerardgiraud: Thanks for notifying. Actually, per Wikispecies naming conventions the main pages for this author should be William Wayt Thomas and Category:William Wayt Thomas taxa. I'll make the proper arrangements, but it may take an hour or so since there are about 50 other pages related to the main author page that needs to be redirected as well. –Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 13:36, 30 December 2021 (UTC).Reply

 Done. The pages are now saved as William Wayt Thomas and Category:William Wayt Thomas taxa, and all redirects have been corrected (with the exception of archive- and log files, which shouldn't be changed). –Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 14:39, 30 December 2021 (UTC).Reply

@Tommy Kronkvist: thanks a lot. Gerardgiraud (talk) 16:20, 30 December 2021 (UTC)Reply

The {{Welcome-belated}} template seems broken. It renders the text string

Please see our [[Special:MyLanguage/Wikispecies:Autobiography|advice and guidance for taxon authors]]

on line five, yet hasn't been edited since June 22 (when I'm quite sure it worked). What's up with that? –Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 14:36, 31 December 2021 (UTC).Reply

@Tommy Kronkvist This has clearly something to do with substituting translation syntax onto a non-translatable page; however, I've only ever seen such templates being transcluded, not substituted. I have just added translation-aware transclusion to the page in an attempt to fix it, so maybe you could try it again. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 13:38, 7 January 2022 (UTC)Reply

@1234qwer1234qwer4: Looks like it's working. Thanks! –Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 13:53, 7 January 2022 (UTC).Reply

Hi, persuant to ther VP thread, I am requesting my username be considered to be 'approved' for AWB access on Wikispecies.

Specfically , It is my understanding that my username needs to be added to Wikispecies:AutoWikiBrowser/CheckPage to allow AWB to perform the required login and access needed.

The addition has to be performed by a local admin/sysop, I can't just add myself obviously. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 20:58, 9 January 2022 (UTC)Reply

Highly-trusted user. Recommended. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 21:35, 9 January 2022 (UTC)Reply

Agree with Justin. Recommended. Andyboorman (talk) 21:37, 9 January 2022 (UTC)Reply

Hmm seems AWB was also looking for a name on Wikispecies:AutoWikiBrowser/CheckPageJSON , Apologies. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 23:57, 9 January 2022 (UTC)Reply

(Aside: The latter seems to be able to openly edited, which would seem to be mistaken?) ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 23:59, 9 January 2022 (UTC)Reply

Hello! I'm not familiar with the protection policy here, but I'd like to let you know that Sus is a target for vandalism. While edit frequency is low, nearly all edits by new users over the past year or two have been vandalism. Tol (talk) 22:44, 9 January 2022 (UTC)Reply

Hello Tol and thank you for the note. Usually we don't protect taxon-, journal- or author pages in main namespace, nor categories and templates related to those pages. For the most part we only protect MediaWiki files, cross-Wiki critical templates plus archives and such, and at present only 407 of Wikispecies 1,633,552 pages are protected (including both semi- and fully protected pages). However, some taxon pages have been heavily targeted by vandals, hence last year I protected for example Gorilla and Pongo plus their subpages. I've long been thinking of protecting Sus as well, for the same reasons you mention above. It was protected earlier today by admin RLJ, together with Sus scrofa. Please rest assured that we're constantly (albeit mostly silently) looking out for maleficent edits and will not hesitate to take all actions needed to counter any form of vandalism. That said, ideas and suggestions such as yours are always welcome! Best regards, Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 15:46, 10 January 2022 (UTC).Reply

That makes sense. Thank you, @Tommy Kronkvist! Tol (talk) 15:52, 10 January 2022 (UTC)Reply

Most suprised this was able to be edited by non-admins. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 09:15, 10 January 2022 (UTC)Reply

 Done --DannyS712 (talk) 09:27, 10 January 2022 (UTC)Reply

Hello. I think Nicolas Ramirez can be granted autopatroller rights. Any objections? Andyboorman (talk) 08:58, 15 January 2022 (UTC)Reply

Hello. No objections – I've actually been thinking about it myself for a couple of days. A few inconsistencies here and there, but all in all his edits are good. I've now set the autopatrolled flag for his user account. –Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 10:57, 15 January 2022 (UTC).Reply

Please block User:69.124.229.237, thanks --Samuele2002 (talk) 16:09, 22 January 2022 (UTC)Reply

 Done Burmeister (talk) 16:12, 22 January 2022 (UTC)Reply

Hello. Please could you change the public visibility of the foul edits by the IP at User talk:Wizzito? Cheers in advance. Cromium (talk) 19:39, 2 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

 Done By someone else. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 23:00, 2 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

See Special:Contribs/Mateus Santos Santos Lima. Monster Iestyn (talk) 21:26, 6 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

And another: Special:Contribs/2804:D47:6222:5800:557A:B44F:6AE:43AB. Monster Iestyn (talk) 22:01, 6 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

Blocked this second one and deleted the two pages as out of scope. Scott Thomson (Faendalimas) ^talk 22:29, 6 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for the heads up Iestyn, and thank you Scott for your welcome admin actions. Based on the content of their edits the IP and registered account are clearly used by the same person – no checkuser action needed there as far as I'm concerned. Also, both the IP and registered account created other pages that were deleted by Andy Boorman and me earlier today, prior to Scott's deletions.

As a consequence of the above I have now also blocked the "Mateus Santos Santos Lima" account. By the way the account is considered a vandalism-only account at English Wikipedia as well, hence was indefinitely blocked there about a week ago.

–Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 00:28, 7 February 2022 (UTC).Reply

Hi everyone, its been a while since we did it, it was due last October so we should do an activity check on our admins and crats. As per our policy "An "inactive admin" is one who has made fewer than 5 edits and 5 admin actions on Wikispecies in the past 12 months." per Policy. Could we please have a look and suggest any admins I should contact. As per previous discussion this does not apply to Translation Admins. Cheers Scott Thomson (Faendalimas) ^talk 19:50, 8 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

• Admin list
• Active user list filtered by admins

Users on the former but not the latter:

• User:AlvaroMolina
• User:Circeus
• User:EncycloPetey
• User:Franz Xaver
• User:Geni
• User:KoehlBot
• User:Mariusm
• User:OhanaUnited (semi-retired)

Seems like a good starting point. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:27, 8 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

I am in and out here, but I am active regularly on en.Wikisource right now. If a notice comes out, I do pop in to read it. --EncycloPetey (talk) 20:34, 8 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for checking in @EncycloPetey: I am aware of your work on Wikisource its no problem. Cheers Scott Thomson (Faendalimas) ^talk 22:01, 8 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

I'm still around but at Wikiversity for WikiJournal stuff. OhanaUnited^{Talk page} 00:55, 9 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

Thanks @OhanaUnited: yep seen you often at WikiJournal and you do come here when needed. Cheers Scott Thomson (Faendalimas) ^talk 01:08, 9 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

Mariusm seems to have left after July 2021. But that's only 6 months ago. OhanaUnited^{Talk page} 01:11, 9 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

@Dan Koehl: Koehlbot is yours is this still being used? Scott Thomson (Faendalimas) ^talk 22:02, 8 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

I'm about and occasionally do a bout of activity around special:UnusedTemplates, as well as checking my watchlist, but admittedly I'm mostly coordinating this with Iestyn for IRMNG. Circeus (talk) 01:28, 9 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

@Faendalimas:, Koehlbot hasnt been used for long time, and I think its OK to deactivate. Should a need rise for this Bot, its easy to reactivate again...? Dan Koehl (talk) 13:40, 9 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

this is more about making sure accounts with zero activity and likely even logins do not sit around with the admin flag. If your active its fine. Cheers Scott Thomson (Faendalimas) ^talk 01:35, 9 February 2022 (UTC)Reply