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 A message may therefore have been archived.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.

Protect Jartypory

People keep vandalizing Jartypory. canadachick (talk) 18:36, 24 December 2025 (UTC)

 Not done but watching. While it appears the article is being vandalised by lots of different people, in reality it is likely only two different editors at worst. This can be addressed by blocks instead. --Ferien (talk | join TBA!) 13:08, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

Ferien, they will protect to continue prevent edit war for the temporary accounts are being disrespectful and trying to engage not to mess it up. Esteban McKeever (talk) 21:34, 6 January 2026 (UTC)

While dealing with a vandal or an edit war can be frustrating, this kind of change summary is not the best look. Take a deep breath and step away from the situation from a moment. You've reported the situation here and the account to VIP. Admin will eventually take a look and determine if there's anything needed to address it.

Admin, I note that this article has been locked on the English Wikipedia twice since September with the current one being a year-long semi-protection expiring in December. I'd imagine that some of the vandal traffic got pushed to here instead. CountryANDWestern (talk) 21:57, 6 January 2026 (UTC)

@Ferien I think you need to reconsider PieWriter (talk) 03:31, 7 January 2026 (UTC)

 Done, thanks! --Ferien (talk | join TBA!) 18:50, 7 January 2026 (UTC)

End-of-year RfDs

Greetings all, I hope you all had a Merry Christmas for all those who celebrate. As of yesterday, all RfDs set in 2025 now have an expected closure date in 2026. While the RfD closer script now accounts for this, if you are closing RfDs remaining from this year manually, it is important that, when you delete the article, you ensure you are linking to the RfD page for 2025 and not 2026 in your delete reason. Other than this, you should treat RfDs as you usually would. Looking forward, it might be a good idea to include a prefill option for the year before in our delete reasons, however this applies to <2% of our RfDs each year. --Ferien (talk | join TBA!) 13:05, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

@Ferien: Would you mind pointing to documentation on using the closer script? Thanks. -- Auntof6 (talk) 01:47, 27 December 2025 (UTC)

Auntof6, I don't think there is any documentation on it that I can find. I personally still close RfDs manually. --Ferien (talk | join TBA!) 12:30, 27 December 2025 (UTC)

BarrasBot removing stale requests

I am not sure it's a good idea for BarrasBot to remove stale requests on WP:VIP. Here are two cases where I believe leaving the request would have been better:

• Special:Diff/10687032 - the temporary account has continued to vandalize after the report was removed
• Special:Diff/10689964 - the report was based on the IP range which had edits going back at least a month (according to the filer, I can't confirm myself). Waiting eight hours would be insufficient.

canadachick (talk) 07:19, 27 December 2025 (UTC)

The second one is definitely way too stale for a block to be considered. Their last edit was in November 16, over a month at this point, and since the issue is cross-wiki, a report to SRG would have been better. — *Fehufangą ♮ ✉ Talk page 07:31, 27 December 2025 (UTC)

In the case of the first one it would have been stale at the time but needed to be watched so removing it was indeed to no benefit. Overall I do agree it should be up to admins to decide whether a report is stale or not almost all of the time, and there was a consensus that that was the case on previous VIP bot requests. There have been quite a few times now where good reports have been removed by the bot and having to check back in the history to find older reports is not a good use of time. --Ferien (talk | join TBA!) 17:07, 27 December 2025 (UTC)

Flood

If there is an admin around who could grant me the flood flag for approx 1/2 hour, I would like to make ~69 changes to remove "Monster Energy" from the "Monster Energy Nascar Cup Series" title on the pages listed at Special:WhatLinksHere/Monster_Energy_NASCAR_Cup_Series. All would be changed to simply NASCAR Cup Series. The Branding is now years old and the name should be updated. It's an uncontroversial change, often in the infobox. If I don't hear back within the hour I'll try again later, unless somebody else gets to it. Thanks. --Gordonrox24 | ^Talk 07:46, 27 December 2025 (UTC)

@Gordonrox24  Done, let me know if you need me to extend it or if you're done with it. — *Fehufangą ♮ ✉ Talk page 08:04, 27 December 2025 (UTC)

@Fehufanga All done. Much appreciated. I found a ton of mistakes to fix in this process..... Some day I will return to deal with those. The monster name remains on many pages in the form of categories, and they will need to be updated as well. But that should be done without Flood, I think. Thanks alot. --Gordonrox24 | ^Talk 08:41, 27 December 2025 (UTC)

@Gordonrox24: Also be aware that the rule of thumb is to use the flood flag if you're going to do more than about 100 similar uncontroversial changes, so it would have been OK for you to go ahead with those without the flag. Yes, people sometimes complain if they see any repetitive changes, but 100 changes in recent changes isn't really that much. -- Auntof6 (talk) 14:06, 27 December 2025 (UTC)

• It would be helpful I think if I could also have somebody import en:Template:NASCAR Cup Series races to Template:NASCAR Cup Series races. There isn't much that requires simplification here, it is just current data. Our data is many years old. I can do it manually, but importing it may be the more correct option to carry over attribution. --Gordonrox24 | ^Talk 09:45, 27 December 2025 (UTC)

   Done -Barras talk 11:26, 27 December 2025 (UTC)

Template:track listing doesn't work

Happy holidays! I was using Template:track listing when I noticed the writer_n, lyrics_n and music_n parameters don't work. I checked other articles with the template to see if I was doing anything wrong, and none of them had the parameters show up either. Writing. credits are valuable information in music, so I'm wondering if anyone can fix this Lord Petrus Steele (talk) 18:35, 27 December 2025 (UTC)

Lord Petrus Steele, thank you for letting us know. I imported some of the templates/modules used on that template again from enwiki, and the issue now appears to be fixed. Let us know if there are any more issues. --Ferien (talk | join TBA!) 20:10, 28 December 2025 (UTC)

Concerns over User:Werner100359's Patroller Rights

I was going through several of Werner100359's articles earlier, and I have several concerns over them having patroller rights.

Just by looking at their articles from the past month alone, there have been several issues across multiple of them, including forgetting punctuation (Katja Wienerroither, Moses Häusler), the placement of references in articles (SV Gloggnitz), forgetting to add Template:Reflist in articles (Stefan Skoumal), not using en-dashes for dates in infoboxes (Rudolf Schlauf, Heribert Sperner, although I've noticed a majority of their articles have this issue), not tagging articles as stubs, even though they should be (Leonhard Machu, Anton Wegscheider), and even straight-up having wrong information in articles (this edit on Riquelme (footballer, born January 2006), where he put the player as being born in Burkina Faso, despite actually being from Brazil). Additionally, I've gone through several of their older articles, and I've noticed several with similar issues listed above (primarily the issues with en-dashes), which is concerning since they've had patroller since 2011.

I understand they've create a large amount of articles (currently 1177, with almost 200 in the past year alone), and I respect the work they do when it comes to Austrian football here, but I feel like these issues can't be overlooked. Also, I know I'm now an admin here and can just remove it myself, but I'd much prefer to have a second opinion here before I do anything. ShadowBallX (talk) 20:48, 27 December 2025 (UTC)

@ShadowBallX: after a quick look through, I agree with what your concerns. The autopatrol permission mainly exists to make sure people are creating pages that don't need any or need very little review and this isn't the case here. Werner100359 could get patroller again in the future if the issues improve, these certainly aren't issues that can't be fixed over time, and I don't want this to reflect too badly on them given how much work they've done on this wiki. By the way, your comment pretty much says so but never be afraid to get a second opinion - actions like this especially are much harder to quickly reverse than they are to do, so there is no rush in doing this. It is probably even worth hearing what Werner has to say before taking action. --Ferien (talk | join TBA!) 20:58, 27 December 2025 (UTC)

Im not so worried about stub tags or dash type, but the rest are pretty bad. I'd support a removal of permissions for now. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 22:55, 27 December 2025 (UTC)

I've gone and removed their rights. As I said here and on their talk page, if their articles become immediately patrollable, they can regain the patroller right at any time with no opposition from myself. --Ferien (talk | join TBA!) 22:09, 1 January 2026 (UTC)

Lua error

Pages like Talk:Julius Caesar have a Lua error on {{Translated page}}. It says "This Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module Module:Pagetype/setindex not found. contains a translation of Julius Caesar from en.wikipedia." I think an admin needs to import something. canadachick (talk) 07:02, 30 December 2025 (UTC)

@Canadachick The error is not caused by the Lua template itself, but because the cache of the page hasn't been cleared after the template was import earlier today. — *Fehufangą ♮ ✉ Talk page 13:52, 30 December 2025 (UTC)

User:Cewbot

one day, User:Cewbot

• added the unsigned templates to a sandbox (MediaWiki talk:Blockedtext/sandbox), it is vandalism.
• accidentally misleads the sandbox as my comments, this is also misleading.
• accidentally signed my comment while testing. this is an edit conflict and vandalism.
• added a notice to User talk:AV Commons. this is incoherent, deliberately, and unrelated to reporting mistakes by AntiVandal. this notice was later identified as vandalism.
• then signed back my test page as a comment, this broke formatting and vandalized the page.

maybe, it is incoherent, potential vandalism, and misleading. ~2025-40595-29 (talk) 22:44, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

maybe it should be warned like {{Uw-vandalism1}}, {{Uw-test1}} or {{Uw-spam1}}. ~2025-40595-29 (talk) 23:15, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

This is a bot, it doesn’t “understand” warning so there is not point doing that. PieWriter (talk) 00:46, 1 January 2026 (UTC)

@~2025-40595-29 I am pretty sure the bot thinks that all the edits on talk pages will be comments, therefore it signed your edits. PieWriter (talk) 00:45, 1 January 2026 (UTC)

that was a mistake ~2025-40595-29 (talk) 17:51, 1 January 2026 (UTC)

Cewbot (block)

if this bot is breaking templates like MediaWiki talk:Blockedtext/sandbox, please disable this bot in order to prevent vandalism. ~2025-40595-29 (talk) 18:00, 1 January 2026 (UTC)

@~2025-40595-29, Why did you put your template sandbox on a talk page? Shouldn't you use MediaWiki:Blockedtext/sandbox as a testing space? The problem is that the talk pages are for discussions and the bot is misinterpreting your edits as comments that should be signed. Ternera (talk) 22:03, 1 January 2026 (UTC)

Please don't use talk pages for testing sandboxes. What was wrong with using MediaWiki:Blockedtext/sandbox? The bot is doing exactly what it is supposed to do, reminding users to sign posts in talkspace. It's certainly not vandalism.

I'm not sure why it posted to that users talk page. Perhaps that is a better question for the bots operator. Kanashimi. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 22:28, 1 January 2026 (UTC)

the sign comment reminder is invalid.

this page MediaWiki talk:Blockedtext/sandbox is a sandbox, no signature required, no need to add comments and no need to add unsigned templates. ~2025-40595-29 (talk) 23:30, 1 January 2026 (UTC)

Not quite. It is the talk page of a sandbox. Why are you using this for testing? The bot is programmed to give signature reminders in talk spaces.

This is no different from any other talk page. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 09:15, 2 January 2026 (UTC)

Protect

Please protect Charlie Kirk. PieWriter (talk) 01:09, 3 January 2026 (UTC)

It doesn't appear like the vandalism is difficult to keep up with right now. Usually protection is only added if we cannot keep up with the level of vandalism. Ternera (talk) 01:22, 3 January 2026 (UTC)

Okay, I am sorry for disturbing you. PieWriter (talk) 04:06, 3 January 2026 (UTC)

No worries! Ternera (talk) 15:54, 3 January 2026 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppetry and POV pushing

I am reporting three users for suspected sockpuppetry and disruptive POV pushing on the page 2025 India–Pakistan conflict.

Users involved:

• The OSINT Guy (talk · contribs)
• HarryinLondon (talk · contribs)
• Rhi12345 (talk · contribs)

Behavior: All three accounts appear to be Single Purpose Accounts (SPAs). They have only edited the "2025 Indo-Pak conflict" page and have no other contributions.

User The OSINT Guy who created their account yesterday, made the same edit as user HarryinLondon They both deleted over 700 bytes of content, claiming the sources were not credible, even though the sources are reliable. Rhi12345
TP discussion will be help full too

And almost all in their edits they mostly trying to delete the content and all 3 is Mobile users. Please have a look.

Update:~2025-42149-27 this ip user has now joined this disruption. This IP address made theexact same edit he deleted the same data with same excuse without any evidence. Same editing behavior

Update 2: User HarryinLondon (talk · contribs) has returned just now to continue the POV pushing. In this edit , they removed sourced text from The Washington Quarterly This confirms the disruption is ongoing and the user is refusing to edit neutrally. And he's claiming Pakistan lost 5 aircraft without citing any neutral source.

Zubarkokar (talk) 20:18, 3 January 2026 (UTC)

That might be something for the checkuser to explore. Please see WP:RFCU. -Barras talk 11:16, 4 January 2026 (UTC)

Ok Zubarkokar (talk) 11:23, 4 January 2026 (UTC)

The same IP continusly removing the sources and adding unsourced data, again. isn't we could add the page protection? On this page? Until the inquiry is ongoing. Zubarkokar (talk) 13:24, 4 January 2026 (UTC)

Import needed

I need help of an admin to import all the templates for Template:Time zone/zone.tab cols wiki6 from english wiki. PieWriter (talk) 09:45, 4 January 2026 (UTC)

 Done -Barras talk 11:19, 4 January 2026 (UTC)

Error with {{talk header}}

I have noticed some errors with {{talk header}} on a few pages, but can't work out the cause. Talk:Top of the Form (film) is the one I can find most easily - I know it's G8 but IAR for the moment, please :D (unless we can find another example of it not working, as viewing it in Preview doesn't reproduce the error). Could someone help find the error - it seems to mention Module:Pagetype/setindex which I was going to import but Auntof6 had already imported about a week or so, perhaps as a result of the same error? --Ferien (talk | join TBA!) 01:41, 5 January 2026 (UTC)

Ah, the "error" I noticed earlier was on Talk:Tirey L. Ford with it mentioning WP:N but this is not related (and looking at the source, not an error) - so the above example is actually the only page this has been an issue on. --Ferien (talk | join TBA!) 01:43, 5 January 2026 (UTC)

@Ferien: Yes, I imported it to try to clear that error, even though we don't use set index pages. I saw the error on multiple pages. I just cleared it on Talk:Computer and Talk:Astronomy by clearing the cache. -- Auntof6 (talk) 01:59, 5 January 2026 (UTC)

Auntof6, hmm, I see - that fixed it for me as well. Odd. Thanks! --Ferien (talk | join TBA!) 02:00, 5 January 2026 (UTC)

RevDel request

Please revision delete as threatening. ~2026-78814 (talk) 21:48, 5 January 2026 (UTC)

@Barras: ~2026-78814 (talk) 22:51, 5 January 2026 (UTC)

This edit is years old so there is no need to go around pinging specific admins. It is a bizarre comment but I'm not sure it's quite threatening or up to the standard of RD2. --Ferien (talk | join TBA!) 23:02, 5 January 2026 (UTC)

 Not done. The edit is simply too old to warrant revdel. While the comment might not be very nice, it's not really enough for RD2. -Barras talk 23:30, 5 January 2026 (UTC)

User talk page protection

The following user talk pages are being repeatedly vandalized by multiple accounts:

• User talk:TornadoLGS
• User talk:ChrisWx
• User talk:Hurricanehink
• User talk:WeatherWriter
• User talk:Hurricane Clyde
• User talk:Camouflaged Mirage

Protection is needed at this point. TornadoLGS (talk) 17:53, 8 January 2026 (UTC)

Adding User talk:Esteban McKeever. TornadoLGS (talk) 21:08, 8 January 2026 (UTC)

I've done this now. 1 week autoconfirmed. Happy to remove/increase on request by users in question. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 21:29, 8 January 2026 (UTC)

You may have to consider extending the protection on my talk page because the vandalism is still continuing on discussion pages relating to me on other wikis. A few hours ago, I got a fake block message on Wikidata from someone pretending to be an administrator. I have a sneaking suspicion that the incident on Wikidata is probably connected to the vandalism that has been occurring here. Because it started on WD less than 48 hours after my talk page here was protected. Hurricane Clyde (talk) 02:16, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

Interface page that does not exist which should be deleted

Please delete MediaWiki:Protectedpagestext, because it does not exist in the MediaWiki software. It is no longer necessary. Thanks. Codename Noreste (discuss • contribs) 05:01, 9 January 2026 (UTC)

 Done --Ferien (talk | join TBA!) 01:25, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

The Bracketmatch gadget

MediaWiki:Gadget-Bracketmatch.js's code style is very old: It attaches event handlers using javascript: URIs. These URIs rely on functions being global variables, but ever since the introduction of ResourceLoader in 2015, gadgets are no longer run in global context. This means the gadget doesn't work and has been for more than 10 years.

I'm not sure what the gadget was intended to do, but it's probably fine to remove it entirely from MediaWiki:Gadgets-definition. NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 16:17, 9 January 2026 (UTC)

 Done --Ferien (talk | join TBA!) 10:33, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

Requesting autoconfirmed protection for self page and talk page

being User:Casspedia and User talk:Casspedia. Persistent cross-wiki vandalism that has necessitated WP:OVERSIGHT intervention already. Would request permanent create and edit protection for my talk page, and permanent protection for my user page. Casspedia (talk) 16:17, 9 January 2026 (UTC)

 Already done on the talk page. We rarely do indefinite protections here, so I will keep an eye on it when it expires and extend for a much longer period of time if it reoccurs. Thanks to abuse filters, no vandal will edit your userpage on this wiki. --Ferien (talk | join TBA!) 16:19, 9 January 2026 (UTC)

Edit war continues at 2025 India–Pakistan conflict

2025 India–Pakistan conflict has received locks before due to edit wars and content disputes. The back and forth is continuing. Could admins please determine if further blocks or locks are needed to prevent further concerns? CountryANDWestern (talk) 16:30, 10 January 2026 (UTC)

In this, I only reverted 2 times and in both times I restored the sourced content that's supported by reliable sources like Airforce Monthly and Washington Quarterly.

• In this my edit i restored 400 bits + 600
• In this edit i restored 3000 bits

After this I even makes a section on talk page of 2025 Indo-pak conflict here about this dispute and invite the HarryinLondon here . But despite that he again deleted the 3,000 bits .

• After this 1 hour later The OSINT Guy he makes the same edit deleted 3,000 same bits here
• Here I invite the both again for discussion of TP after this I makes not edit only 2 previous reverts not violated any wiki policy.

Zubarkokar (talk) 18:42, 10 January 2026 (UTC)

The user The OSINT Guy responded to my attempt to start a discussion with hostility. Here Instead of explaining why he removed the sources on the Article Talk Page, he replied on his user talk page: "Who are you to justify or tell me... It's you who is trying to do vandalism... I think it's time to complain to administration".

Update - Forum Shopping & Unreliable Sources: User HarryinLondon has admitted to two significant policy violations on the Talk Page:

1. Cross-Wiki Forum Shopping: He stated: "I complained Wikipedia numerous times that it's wrong... they didn't took any action." This admits he is bringing this dispute to Simple English Wikipedia only because his arguments were already rejected by the consensus on the main English Wikipedia.
2. Use of Unreliable Sources: To justify removing citations from the established UK magazine AirForces Monthly, he is citing an "X account" (Twitter) and Indian news blogs (IDRW). Under WP:RS, social media and blogs cannot be used to remove citations from reputable publishers.

Request for Investigation into Tag-Teaming (Meatpuppetry): In addition to the forum shopping mentioned above, the edit history shows clear evidence of coordinated "Tag Team" editing to bypass the 3-Revert Rule.

• Phase 1: HarryinLondon removed the sourced content.
• Phase 2: I reverted (1st time) and immediately opened a Talk Page discussion to resolve the dispute.
• Phase 3: HarryinLondon ignored the discussion and reverted me again.
• Phase 4: I reverted (2nd time) and placed a formal warning/invitation on his User Talk Page.
• phase 5: Immediately following my warning to Harry, The OSINT Guy appeared and reverted to the exact same version Harry was pushing.

Conclusion: I stopped at 2 reverts to follow WP:BRD. However, when Harry stopped, The OSINT Guy immediately took over. This hand-off allows them to continue reverting the article to their preferred version while bypassing the 3-Revert Rule.

Zubarkokar (talk) 18:53, 10 January 2026 (UTC)

As you probably know, this is a small wiki. So, if there are peopel editing articles on a subject, that is a good thing, even if the subject may be controversial (I am in Europe, and not familiar). A situation where editors edit constructively (and perhaps talk to each other, on subjects where they don't agree) is generally better than having to protect the article (which would have to be reset to the "last known good" version). Eptalon (talk) 19:30, 10 January 2026 (UTC)

Talk:2025 India–Pakistan conflict#Alan Warnes i would be happy if u or anyone will participate to make consensus regarding dispute. Zubarkokar (talk) 19:41, 10 January 2026 (UTC)

Persistent useless edits

KittyCat039 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) keeps making useless edits and then self-reverting. I asked them to stop and they responded "no". I don't know any simplewiki policies, but these edits are disruptive. I request a pblock from mainspace. lp0 on fire () 15:54, 12 January 2026 (UTC)

I've already blocked them - it looks like an LTA. Ternera (talk) 15:55, 12 January 2026 (UTC)

The account belongs to a long-term vandal (though they usually just use IP/temp accounts). I reported them to WP:VIP and they, and an associated, active temp. account, have already been blocked. CountryANDWestern (talk) 15:56, 12 January 2026 (UTC)

Thanks. Sorry to bother you. lp0 on fire () 15:58, 12 January 2026 (UTC)

Protection for Peter Scully

The article Peter Scully has been subject to repeated and persistent vandalism for months by Temporary accounts/IPs. I will note that the enwiki version also has semi-protection for this reason. I think there's a good argument for semi-protection here also. Garsh (talk) 15:15, 14 January 2026 (UTC)

I've looked at the history and it seems like we're keeping on top of it. I don't see the need for protection at this point. fr33kman 05:19, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

Disruptive editing at 2025 India–Pakistan conflict

I am requesting administrative intervention regarding User HarryinLondon on the article 2025 India–Pakistan conflict. Summary of Events:

• Dispute: The user removed long-standing citations from AirForces Monthly and The Washington Quarterly, claiming without evidence that the authors are "paid agents."
• Consensus Process: I opened a Talk Page discussion and waited 72 hours. The user failed to provide any reliable sources (admitting reliance on Twitter/Blogs) and ceased discussion.
• Resolution: I declared consensus via WP:SILENCE and restored the sourced content today.
• The Violation: Less than 30 minutes later, HarryinLondon reverted the article without engaging on TP.

Request: This behavior constitutes (Refusal to get the point) and disruptive edits. I have NOT reverted him back to avoid edit warring.I request that an administrator restore the consensus version and protect the page to prevent further disruption.

Update: Continued Refusal to Provide Reliable Sources

User HarryinLondon has finally replied on the Talk Page, but he is engaging in circular argumentation.

• He admits: "I don't [know] whether AirForce Monthly is a credible source or not..." yet continues to remove it.
• He continues to rely on the same "Indian Defence Research Wing" (IDRW) blog and his personal analysis of satellite imagery ("Original Research") to justify the deletion.
• He has provided zero reliable sources (WP:RS) to support his claims of "paid bias."

This confirms that the dispute is not about conflicting sources, but about one user refusing to accept Wikipedia's sourcing standards. I maintain my request for page protection.

Zubarkokar (talk) 20:16, 14 January 2026 (UTC)

URGENT UPDATE

The disruption has escalated significantly:

User HarryinLondon is now edit warring with a second editor, CountryANDWestern. He reverted CountryANDWestern's removal of "extremely POV" content immediately. After facing opposition, the user appears to have logged out and used an IP address to continue pushing the same content. The user is adding content that uses inappropriate/non-neutral language.

This is no longer a content dispute; it is a behavioral crisis. The user is fighting multiple editors and circumventing policy. Please block the user and protect the page immediately.

Summary: Here is a concise summary of the sockpuppetry evidence for administrative review.

• HarryinLondon and The OSINT Guy these 2 accounts are comfirmed sockpuppet account on English Wikipedia. Here is the evidence: source
  
• HarryinLondon explicitly admitted to in his talk page at English Wiki. Here: source
  
• These accounts were exposed just 4 days ago on English Wiki but on Simple English Wiki i reported them 11 days ago for sockpuppetry here source and here source . Point is that these 2 account is doing sockpuppetry in both wikis but in English wiki they got banned but here they are not.

Zubarkokar (talk) 17:30, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

I note that they are blocked as a sock at En. based on en:Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/SkyLordAbhi. Checkuser concluded they are not connected. I asked at WP:RFCU for that conclusion to be revisited. CountryANDWestern (talk) 18:19, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

Whatever. This topic comes up every few days here (or at least it feels like it). I protected the page now for a month. If something needs to be changed after discussing it on the article's talk page and getting consensus for the change, please use the {{edit protected}} template to get an admin implementing the change. -Barras talk 16:29, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

RfR archives

I was thinking of doing this immediately but thought it wouldn't hurt to ask for a couple of opinions if anyone feels strongly first. RfR archives are not easy to run through and are usually in the form Requests for permissions/Rollback/Archives/YEAR/Month/(Done/Notdone). I see no good reason why we need to archive requests that are done and not done separately and further to that, there probably isn't a need to do it monthly most of the time. SpBot was responsible for archiving all rollback requests during 2025 and all 22 requests fit nicely into Wikipedia:Requests for permissions/Rollback/Archives/2025 which is much easier to navigate through for all requests through the year. Any thoughts? --Ferien (talk | join TBA!) 00:17, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

Given the current number of active users and the low volume of requests, I agree with you. A simple yearly archive is sufficient for now. However, if we are flooded with requests, we can switch to monthly archives as needed. -Barras talk 00:22, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

A block request

Hello! I request a block for user Desaded-Lode. He has vandalism changes. Me and other user has send warning templates but he/she is not stopping. --Julius 12345 (talk) 15:26, 20 January 2026 (UTC)

 Done Julius 12345, thank you for the report. In future, please report any vandalism like this to Wikipedia:Vandalism in progress. If someone edits after an only warning (or, usually, final warning), they can be reported straight away and don't have to be warned again. Thanks! --Ferien (talk | join TBA!) 15:28, 20 January 2026 (UTC)

Okay and thank you very much. Have a nice day. Julius 12345 (talk) 15:30, 20 January 2026 (UTC)

Mihira Bhoja semi-protection request

Mihira Bhoja (change · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete)

There's been a fairly determined temp account hopping editor that's been pushing some caste POV nonsense on this page. It's stuff that's been rejected firmly on en wiki. The edit summary on the last sceed crossed the line though. Would someone please semi-protect this article to shut this down? Thank you. Ravensfire (talk) 15:49, 20 January 2026 (UTC)

Hello! I am not an admin, but I recommend that share that request on email. That is very inappropriate. Julius 12345 (talk) 15:54, 20 January 2026 (UTC)