Wikiversity:Request custodian action

Custodians' tool New request Please sign with -- ~~~~

Welcome Wikiversity support staff are trusted users who have access to technical features (such as protecting and deleting pages, blocking users, and undoing these actions) that help with maintenance of Wikiversity. Request deletion of a page Request import of a page (e.g., from Meta or Wikibooks): Request a CheckUser Comment on custodian actions Other types of custodian requests Old requests (archive) See also: Notices for custodians

Administering Wikiversity Action required The open task template Maintenance Requests for deletion Requests for speedy deletion Requests for unblock Copyright violations Proposed deletions Pending deletions Requests for custodian action Notices for custodians Templates Introduction to templates Guide to templates Welcome templates Page flag templates Navigation templates Admin templates Template taskforce Development Developing Wikiversity Wikiversity logos Service community Metadata MediaWiki Project MediaWiki Technical needs Reference Policies Custodians Custodianship (policy) How to be a Wikimedia sysop Mission Managing vandalism MediaWiki Handbook Parser functions Logs Bots Consensus Statistics Events and news Announcements Wikimania

Custodian requests	Entries
Purge cache
Edit protected page	0
Speedy deletion	9
Expired prods	0
Unblock requests	0
Possible copyvio	0
History merge	0

Deletion request

Could someone delete User:Legoktm/sandbox? The account's just been locked after it was hacked (see https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=749106316 and https://wikimediafoundation.org/w/index.php?title=Home&action=history), and the creation of the sandbox with "test test" as the sole contents was obviously the hacker's way of testing that he was in control of the account without risking discovery. Nyttend (discuss • contribs) 14:03, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

Y Done -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 14:11, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

@Dave Braunschweig: -- Just FYI: user Legoktm @phabricator.wikimedia.org actually created the sandbox as a test. I received this in an email yesterday: "Legoktm added a comment. Creating https://en.wikiversity.org/w/index.php?title=User:Legoktm/sandbox&action=history worked for me. Is this happening for anyone besides yourself?" I created T150503: Failure to save recent changes @phabricator.wikimedia.org to receiving error messages for attempts to save recent changes above about 6kB. --Marshallsumter (discuss • contribs) 21:56, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

Dave, Marshallsumter notified me about this too; I'm sorry about misunderstanding what was going on, and yes please undelete it. Nyttend (discuss • contribs) 22:28, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

Y Done -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 23:01, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

Blocking needed

208.118.25.182 - I've already gone ahead and blocked him on WB due to his harmful editing routine on Wikipedia, Wikibooks, and Wikiversity. It's clear that this IP-Address is here to only vandalize, and not benefit WV. I recommend a temporary block to make sure this user takes time to realize his edits are of no good and he needs to put a stop to this, or this user could simply lose interest and leave. ---Atcovi (Talk - Contribs) 21:11, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

Y Done before you posted. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 21:30, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

Block

Special:Contributions/Realreferz - Account specifically made to promote his company/service with no intent to positively edit here at Wikiversity. Please block. ---Atcovi (Talk - Contribs) 12:59, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

Y Done -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 13:40, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

Spambot

Special:Contributions/Amplesearch98 ---Atcovi (Talk - Contribs) 12:36, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

Url blocked. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 13:39, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

Block for MIKEL S. SARWONO

Special:Contributions/MIKEL S. SARWONO - please check his centralauth. He is nothing but a vandal who is here to cause disruption. He is part of this group that aims to change/alter the block/warn templates and mediawiki texts. These types of users have been blocked in the past, and hopefully will continue to have that fate. Please block fast. -Atcovi (Talk - Contribs) 15:18, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

[1] - Blocked at en.wikiquote for disruption

[2] - Blocked at meta for LTA/Disruption

and more wikis as well -Atcovi (Talk - Contribs) 15:18, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

• • NVM, user has been globally locked! -Atcovi (Talk - Contribs) 15:30, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

Mass copyright violations

Please take into account that files, uploaded by Special:Contributions/Shustov and Special:Contributions/ShustovVal are all copyvios, and both accounts are indefblocked on Wikimedia Commons (1 and 2). Regards, Sealle (discuss • contribs) 14:39, 5 February 2017 (UTC)

For the record, the discussion of the copyright violations is at Commons:Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Shustov. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 15:02, 5 February 2017 (UTC)

The photos containing Shustov can be treated as fair use here. --Marshallsumter (discuss • contribs) 15:31, 5 February 2017 (UTC)

Not as labeled. They are not the contributor's own work, and do not have proper licensing information. See Wikiversity:Uploading files. "Wikiversity content that is used under the fair use doctrine must be properly attributed to the copyright holder." -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 15:38, 5 February 2017 (UTC)

The files containing Shustov have been tagged as missing license information. The contributor has seven days to provide accurate licensing information for these files. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 15:38, 5 February 2017 (UTC)

• Thank you. Sealle (discuss • contribs) 15:53, 5 February 2017 (UTC)

Protect Wikiversity:Guided tour

The Wikiversity:Guided tour was vandalized last year; I reverted it. Now it needs semi-protection. --George Ho (discuss • contribs) 01:59, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

@George Ho: Y Done Good catch! —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 02:09, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

Mass copyvio uploads

Please check this user contributions.--Darwinius (discuss • contribs) 13:46, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

Y Done -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 14:26, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

Ologies

The Ologies page has been vandalized, especially recently. --George Ho (discuss • contribs) 08:14, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

@George Ho: It seems like one IP and he's moved on. I can protect the page for a bit but I don't think that there's much to do here. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 09:32, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

...I'm fine with temporary protection if that's necessary. Thoughts? --George Ho (discuss • contribs) 09:33, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

@George Ho: It was Y Done before you posted the above comment. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 09:35, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

Should this user - Brad Watson, Miami - be allowed to run around?

User:Brad Watson, Miami was blocked forever ago on Wikipedia for... well, lots of things. Like at Wikipedia, he seems to be here to promote his blog, push fringe theories based on his "divine" insight,* and creating POV-forks.

*(he's the second coming of Jesus even though he's somehow Einstein reincarnated, you know! And that somehow doesn't make Einstein the second coming and Brad the third...)

Is there some reason he's allowed to "teach" here? 218.32.21.214 (discuss) 01:23, 12 March 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for sharing your concerns. Please focus your comments on content rather than contributors. As to why content is allowed at Wikiversity when it has been rejected elsewhere, see Wikiversity:Mission. You are welcome to enhance the learning opportunity for others by either improving resources that you feel are inadequate, rebutting resources that are inaccurate, or proposing deletion using {{subst:prod}} for any resources that you feel do not support Wikiversity's mission. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 02:24, 12 March 2017 (UTC)

So it's totally OK for someone to promote their blog and add spurious information that would be rejected by any real learning center, all on the basis of magic math and claims of godhood? Because, if you actually looked at the diffs I linked to, that's what your response sounds like. 218.32.21.210 (discuss) 02:55, 12 March 2017 (UTC)

@Dave Braunschweig: @218.32.21.214: I have to admit that some of this is also concerning to me but the problem of forking isn't necessarily an issue. If someone wants to set up an alternative method, that's not inherently a problem. In this case, I am definitely concerned with the blogspam and some of this being so far off-base as to be almost unintelligible. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 03:18, 12 March 2017 (UTC)

@218.32.21.214: No, it is not okay to promote a blog. But you have already demonstrated at [3] that you are capable of addressing these concerns yourself. Editing an article doesn't require custodian action. I suspect that you posted here because you were seeking action against the user, for edits that are now more than a year old. As I tried to explain above, this is a content issue, not a user issue. If the user reverts your changes, I'd be glad to intervene on your behalf. Otherwise, please improve the resources that you feel are inadequate, rebut the resources that are inaccurate, or propose deletion for any resources that you feel do not support Wikiversity's mission. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 04:28, 12 March 2017 (UTC)

@Koavf: I don't disagree at all, but removing the blogspam doesn't require a custodian, or a curator. Other than that, the community, so far, has been exceedingly tolerant of {{fringe}} and {{essay}} content. But the Wikiversity:Deletions options are always available for content that doesn't belong. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 04:28, 12 March 2017 (UTC)

Brad Watson, Miami's edits to Biblical Studies (NT)/III. THE SEVEN SEALS seem okay, although they were not Discussed first, and adding an external link to a dot com is not in itself a promotion. --Marshallsumter (discuss • contribs) 23:04, 12 March 2017 (UTC)

"Please focus your comments on content rather than contributors." My religious views or anyone's religious views should never be the issue when it comes to their editing articles. Is it ever appropriate for an atheist to edit or moderate any article on the Bible or Qur'an? They obviously have a bias towards the subject matter as do strict fundamentalists. The Truth is what everyone should be seeking at all times. When it come to the "7 Seals", I AM the leading expert on them. These 'Beyond Einstein Theories' are on the cover of the "book/scroll" referred to in Revelation 5:1 and they can be found at <external links removed> . I realize how this makes many people feel uncomfortable, but everyone has to deal with the fact that they exist and are correct. - Brad Watson, Miami (discuss • contribs) 20:33, 19 August 2017 (UTC)

@Brad Watson, Miami: As above, content is the issue. Promotion of external sites is not accepted. External links have been removed. Please be careful, as there have already been requests to block your account for self-promotion. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 22:59, 19 August 2017 (UTC)

Protection needed for more tour pages

• Help:The original tour for newcomers
• Help:Creating educational content at Wikiversity

The above pages and their subpages need protection. They have been vandalized for years, especially this year. --George Ho (discuss • contribs) 19:35, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

Regarding Help:The original tour for newcomers, five of six vandals were registered users. --Marshallsumter (discuss • contribs) 22:11, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

Regarding Help:Creating educational content at Wikiversity, four of the seven vandals were by registered users. --Marshallsumter (discuss • contribs) 22:15, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

@Marshallsumter: True but the goal is for these to be very outward-facing pages, so I don't think protection is a bad idea. If anyone feels otherwise, please feel free to unprotect or ping me to do so myself. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 02:12, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

@Koavf: Thank you for your interest! Protection level set at Custodian! --Marshallsumter (discuss • contribs) 02:20, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

Page Recovery

A while back I wrote a Draft Communications Bill either using this account or my abandoned alterante User:Sfan00_IMG, which I requests a user deletion on. However I was wondering if a custodian was able to retrieve the deletion so it could be worked on further? ShakespeareFan00 (discuss • contribs) 23:06, 7 June 2017 (UTC)

• @ShakespeareFan00:Draft Communications Bill has been restored. --Marshallsumter (discuss • contribs) 23:38, 7 June 2017 (UTC)

I've not removed the RfD tag yet, I mayy userfy th page in a few days if there is no interest in working on it ShakespeareFan00 (discuss • contribs) 00:57, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

User talk:Vanished user ij3rnfkmclk3tkj4ncknefkjnadmcnbgrju

The former user name should be hidden from the history. 83.31.75.34 (discuss) 17:14, 24 June 2017 (UTC)

Why? --Marshallsumter (discuss • contribs) 20:01, 24 June 2017 (UTC)

User:Ben Steigmann

I'm aware of the prior discussion regarding this user from two years ago but I thought it might be worthwhile to post an update. For those who don't want to bother looking, Ben Steigmann, known on Wikipedia as Blastikus and by a variety of other names through sockpuppet accounts was indefinitely for disruptive POV-pushing.

He recently posted a message on my Wikipedia talk page indicating that he believes that the continued presence of his materials on this site entitle him to continue to disrupt Wikipedia.

I'm aware that Wikipedia and Wikiversity have distinct goals and methods. I don't want to believe that one site would condone and remain complicit in disruption of the other. Ian.thomson (discuss • contribs) 23:23, 19 August 2017 (UTC)

Oh, and he's spamming his "course" as well. Ian.thomson (discuss • contribs) 23:34, 19 August 2017 (UTC)

@Dave Braunschweig: I looked at Ian.thomson's request and he (Ben Steigmann) does seem to be soliciting. I will remove the solicitations,here and placed then here but have no idea what else to do. --Guy vandegrift (discuss • contribs) 02:17, 21 August 2017 (UTC)