Wikibooks:Reading room/Administrative Assistance/Archives/2009/January

Possible Copyright Issue - How to Proceed
Editor has uploaded this, licensing it under CC-BY-SA 3.0 stating that one of the authors of the book has given permission for its use. However, the original book source states that the copyright is held by The Benjamin / Cummings Publishing Company. If this copyright includes the image, and there is no indication that it doesn't, then the author probably can't re-license it this way (or so I understand). On WP there is a procedure for getting this kind of copyright clearance communicated to the project, but I can't find a similar process here.... any advice on how I should proceed gratefully received. Have left similar note on uploader's talk page too. Sorry if this is the wrong page for this question, but couldn't find a more appropriate one! Thanks. Unusual? Quite TalkQu 01:42, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Looks like the editor has updated the page (the one that uses the image, not the image itself) to state that it is available from a different online source with an appropriate license. So, no help required now, thanks. Unusual? Quite TalkQu 20:38, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

Vandalbot
Hi Administrators....

Another example of "Hi. Good site" from 89.162.143.238 today (just in case you want to check / block the IP). Cheers. Unusual? Quite TalkQu 14:38, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks - monitoring that one already. &mdash; Mike.lifeguard &#124; talk 14:40, 5 January 2009 (UTC)


 * And another 140.113.152.201 Unusual? Quite TalkQu 17:21, 5 January 2009 (UTC)


 * And another 201.47.187.245 Unusual? Quite TalkQu 13:02, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Got those ones too. Most of them have been blocked here, but I'm still tracking them cross-wiki. &mdash; Mike.lifeguard &#124; talk 20:48, 6 January 2009 (UTC)


 * 207.245.247.196 one more today. Unusual? Quite [[User talk:QuiteUnusual|TalkQu] ]|undefined 11:12, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
 * 24.47.80.245 and again. Do you want these here, or should I, for example, add them to Mike's talkpage here or on Meta? <font color="#E66C2C">Unusual? Quite <font color="#306754">TalkQu 15:17, 8 January 2009 (UTC)


 * m:User talk:Mike.lifeguard/malbots would be ideal - I'll sort them from there onto the tracking pages. &mdash; <b style="color:#309;">Mike.lifeguard</b> &#124; talk 20:34, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

Repeated Vandalism from an IP
Spate of vandal edits by 66.154.145.22 today. A similar spate (with similar characteristics) from the same IP three days ago. Might be worth keeping an eye on. <font color="#E66C2C">Unusual? Quite <font color="#306754">TalkQu 20:30, 12 January 2009 (UTC)
 * ✅ &mdash; <b style="color:#309;">Mike.lifeguard</b> &#124; talk 20:32, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

History Merger
I am requesting a history merger from the pages of the Alaska book. --Xxagile (talk) 01:32, 13 January 2009 (UTC)


 * All the pages from Wikijunior:Alaska have been merged into Wikijunior:North America/United States/Alaska. All the pages should probably be merged into that one page. The text merger is already done, only the history of it needs to be merged. Anybody want to experiment with it? --Whiteknight (Page) (Talk) 02:18, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I can do it if the task is clarified. Here's what I think it is; let me know if I'm right or wrong:
 * Wikijunior:Alaska, Wikijunior:Alaska/Alaska, Wikijunior Alaska/Nome, Wikijunior Alaska/Wasilla &rarr; Wikijunior:North America/United States/Alaska.
 * &mdash; <b style="color:#309;">Mike.lifeguard</b> &#124; talk 02:27, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes, that is what I meant. Thanks. --Xxagile (talk) 03:24, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
 * ✅ &mdash; <b style="color:#309;">Mike.lifeguard</b> &#124; talk 03:32, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

A note on the closing
On January 19th, after reading through the entire discussion and a conversation with User:Panic2k4 about this and related issues on IRC, I finally decided to close the matter by rejecting this request for administrative assistance. I did so with the following note: "This issue has been open for three and a half months. The administrators who have reviewed the case have concluded that despite the lack of objections cited on the discussion page, there is still no consensus that would warrant the requested action. I am hereby formally closing this request and allowing it to be archived (note the date change in a comment above: 3008 to 2008). Please take the opinions stated above and inaction over the past four months as sign of non-consensus. --Swift (talk) 10:59, 18 January 2009 (UTC)" User:Panic2k4 reverted my edit, completely adding to the top of the discussion: "This is not a settled issue, the request is still pending to existing and future administrators since it requires administrative flags to be resolved, it is a valid request under active policies and guidelines. --Panic (talk) 17:13, 18 January 2009 (UTC)" A revert battle with User:Mike.lifeguard ensued, ending with a block on Panic2k4. Mike.lifeguard left a note on the Reading room/Administrative Assistance notice-board. --Swift (talk) 13:48, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Repeated Vandalism from Users
Hi Dear I am having hard time and not enough understanding to why the user backed by another user such Tajik continuously change stuff and when sources are provided they ignore it by calling "3rd party, blogs, personal pages. I have actually listed the sources as being liable and accurate and yet they seems not to care but rather continue with their own believes. I have also requested sources! and they provided non. Please help. --99.245.115.47 (talk) 22:53, 16 January 2009 (UTC)


 * I'm sorry, that IP has not edited the English Wikibooks project. The only contributions I can see from that IP are on English Wikipedia, you should probably as for help there. &mdash; <b style="color:#309;">Mike.lifeguard</b> &#124; talk 22:58, 16 January 2009 (UTC)


 * This is Wikibooks, not Wikipedia. We can't help you with problems on Wikipedia. I believe your after w:Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard. --<span style="font: bold 10pt 'courier new', comic, sans, ms;"><font color="midnightblue">dark lama  23:00, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Tulibudibudoucho
Hi,

I've tagged this page for speedy deletion as it is being used to plan a football team's matches of all things. The editors have removed the speedy tag (which I've re-applied, but I suspect it'll keep being removed), so I'm posting here so a passing admin can check it out. Thanks. <font color="#E66C2C">Unusual? Quite [[User talk:QuiteUnusual|<font color="#306754">TalkQu] ]|undefined 15:04, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Gone, thanks. &mdash; <b style="color:#309;">Mike.lifeguard</b> &#124; talk 15:19, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

I pulled a minor stupid...
looking for information on how to start a new book, I hit "create a book" on the main page, which seems to have had the effect of creating a book consisting of only the main page.

I'm a little afraid to undo that now, for fear of removing the main page.

Could someone with more experience please let me know how to undo that? Thanks... Chazz (talk) 18:27, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
 * That's a collection - you can use "clear book" or whatever with impunity. No harm done. &mdash; <b style="color:#309;">Mike.lifeguard</b> &#124; talk 18:51, 18 January 2009 (UTC)


 * I think it says "clear collection" there. That looked right... but it could also mean "wipe out everything in the collection", it's not the clearest thing in the world, and it's not even obvious initially that it's an action rather than a link. Oh, well... Chazz (talk) 20:02, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Probably calling that section "create a collection" or something would be clearer. Suggestions are welcome - I can submit them to the bug tracker for you (it's separate from bugzilla). &mdash; <b style="color:#309;">Mike.lifeguard</b> &#124; talk 20:05, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I would suggest that the name "create a book" is very misleading, as it seems that what you are doing is creating a personal collection; though it doesn't say that anywhere in the Help that I can see, it seems that a collection, as written, is associated with a user, and is not visible to anyone else. If that is the case, I would make the heading "personal collection", with options "Add this page", "Remove this page", "Show collection", "Empty collection", and of course "Collections help". Chazz (talk) 04:11, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

See ticket 401. &mdash; <b style="color:#309;">Mike.lifeguard</b> &#124; talk 21:07, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Do we allow this here? User name is an advert, user page is an advert.... <font color="#E66C2C">Unusual? Quite <font color="#306754">TalkQu 13:27, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

and this one User:Buy Tramadol Online, although the advert has been removed <font color="#E66C2C">Unusual? Quite <font color="#306754">TalkQu 13:34, 20 January 2009 (UTC)


 * We don't have anything in our policies (that I can remember) which forbids this. It is, after all, a fairly harmless thing: No-one is going to accidentally come across this.
 * Of course, as soon as the user leaves a signature on a module, he violates WB:SOAP. --Swift (talk) 13:42, 20 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Ah okay, I genuinely wasn't sure - it's cause for an immediate block on WP, but it can be mad there. <font color="#E66C2C">Unusual? Quite <font color="#306754">TalkQu 13:53, 20 January 2009 (UTC)


 * I didn't consider it harmless, so I deleted the pages and put an indef block on the users. In the "reasons to delete" menu, "spam" figures prominently, and if this isn't spam, I don't know what else would qualify. --Jomegat (talk) 14:06, 20 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Hi Jomegat, as I (just now) mentioned on your userpage; the speedy deletion policy is restricted to pages in the main namespace. We don't have anything in the policy that allows us to delete user pages without their permission. --Swift (talk) 14:22, 20 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Hi Swift. I didn't realize that user pages were exempt from this.  I will undelete and unblock until the community decides something else should be done.  Thanks for the education. --Jomegat (talk) 14:59, 20 January 2009 (UTC)


 * I think there also isn't anything in policy that specifically forbids speedy deleting user pages. IMO saying that speedy deletion only applies to pages in the main space is a bit of a stretch. Even if that was what was intended when it was written, every admin would be guilty of having ignored it at one time or another, the policy would no longer reflect "best practice" or what admins actually do. I think common sense and using your best judgment is important here. I think if WB:SOAP applies, there isn't a need to wait until they leave a signature on a module. --<span style="font: bold 10pt 'courier new', comic, sans, ms;"><font color="midnightblue">dark lama  15:29, 20 January 2009 (UTC)


 * I'd say that the inclusive definition of speedy deletions implies that everything else is out.
 * As agreed upon, we must follow policies when we have official ones. I hate to be so pedantic on such a poor example (which is why I didn't suggest that it be undeleted or the users unblocked). We've come a long way from the early days and should be able to evolve policy without setting a precedence in violating it. I'd be happy to review the deletion policy. Leaving in wiggle room for "common sense" or "administrators' discretion" is certainly an option.
 * But that discussion belongs elsewhere, I guess. --Swift (talk) 16:04, 20 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Try reading point #4 of WB:DELETE, which is what I suggested applies here. --<span style="font: bold 10pt 'courier new', comic, sans, ms;"><font color="midnightblue">dark lama  16:24, 20 January 2009 (UTC)


 * This is a set of guidelines which should be followed (when executing the policy, is how I understood it). The rest of the policy must be followed. See Policies and guidelines. I'm fairly certain that the intent was not to let "common sense" trump every aspect of this policy. --Swift (talk) 17:19, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I think <span style="font: bold 10pt 'courier new', comic, sans, ms;"><font color="midnightblue">dark lama  16 was referring to Item number 4 under WB:SPEEDY, which says "A page which was created solely for the display of spam, unwarranted advertisements, or other nonsense." That does seem to cover my previous action pretty clearly. --Jomegat (talk) 01:55, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Deleted again - totally unacceptable use of WMF wikis. The spam domains & users are being dealt with on Meta. &mdash; <b style="color:#309;">Mike.lifeguard</b> &#124; talk 17:36, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Vandalism In Progress: user Big Fuk
been spreading junk all over WB for the past while; I can't RB at present because of an apparent "login session" problem. Chazz (talk) 07:28, 26 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Noticed him in the move logs. Just blocked him! --Swift (talk) 07:30, 26 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Apparently I cannot undo the moves. I copied some of the original pages and uploaded a new version of the image that was used for vandalism. Someone (with more power than I have) should clean up the mess soon. Here is a thought: If there is no better protection against vandalism (and no will to substantially improve it): then, for heavens sake, STOP WIKIJUNIOR! --Martin Kraus (talk) 10:17, 26 January 2009 (UTC)


 * I've just reverted the page moves. The issue of accessing House of Buttfucks and Help talk:Herman's Left Testicle is unresolved. They seem to redirect to one another. I've got to leave this for later. Going to bed... --Swift (talk) 14:20, 26 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks, Swift! I would like to add that I'm still unable to access Contact us. --Martin Kraus (talk) 14:28, 26 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Looks to me like that part of it was prepped for by edits through user account Flying Rock. --Pi zero (talk) 14:49, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I put an indef block on Flying Rock, and started to rollback and delete the "contributions", but all I'm getting are errors from Wikimedia. I don't really have time at the moment to deal with this, so if someone else wants to get out the mop... there's plenty to do. --Jomegat (talk) 14:52, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Looks like the reverts did take hold in spite of the Wikimedia errors. --Jomegat (talk) 15:25, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

Finished cleaning this. It's a cross-wiki vandal hitting a bunch of wikis - their IP has been blocked now and account locked. &mdash; <b style="color:#309;">Mike.lifeguard</b> &#124; talk 15:27, 26 January 2009 (UTC)