Harry Potter Wiki:Requests for administrator attention

User:Emma Joyner

This user is a vandalism-only account. Check the history of the Trio article. — evilquoll (talk) 04:08, January 4, 2018 (UTC)

Given a warning for now, but will take further action as needed. Thanks for shedding light on it (lots of editing happening over the holiday break it seems). Cheers --Ironyak1 (talk) 04:15, January 4, 2018 (UTC)

Poppy (Bowtruckle) -> Poppy

Could an admin please do this move? I can't because there's already a "Poppy" page, but it just redirects to "Poppy Pomfrey" and there are no links to it other than from "Poppy (Bowtruckle)" and "Candidates for renaming", so there's no need for the disambiguation. — evilquoll (talk) 08:48, January 15, 2018 (UTC)

User:Lbluck8

Perhaps this is a case of ignorance rather than malice, but this user just doesn't seem to get what being a wiki editor is all about. Has twice created a blog post in the main article space (one has been moved to their user space); has created two blog posts, neither of which is about improving the wiki; has uploaded a picture, which not only is nothing to do with the Potterverse but is also not on any other topic I can discern (except perhaps "how not to take a picture"); and, worst of all, has removed the delete notice from the one article remaining in the main space. Needs a good talking-to at the very least — evilquoll (talk) 23:28, January 18, 2018 (UTC)

User:Umaconta

The user has continued to vandalise Newt Scamander's page even when warned, and then vandalised two other pages. They only appear to have made an account to remove information from the pages and will need to be banned if they will not stop. - Kates39 (talk) 12:32, January 26, 2018 (UTC)

This is a vandalism-only account active across multiple wikis. As such, it's a VSTF matter. — evilquoll (talk) 13:38, January 26, 2018 (UTC)

Huge flood of videos, especially File:Harry Potter and The Goblet Of Fire (2005) Official Opening Scene in 3D HD - DVD QUALITY

I have several concerns about these.

1. The fact that there are so many of them — over 50. Are we really going to use each and every one? If not, what is the point of our having them?
2. The one mentioned in the title of this thread is badly misnamed; it's not 3D, it's not HD (1920x1080) and it's not even DVD quality (1024x576). It is in fact just 480x269; not even VGA quality.
3. The maker of these videos (and of the fake "Cursed Child movie trailers" which I flagged for deletion) is labouring under the delusion that all he has to do is use the magic words "Copyright Act 1976", "fair use" and "entertainment purposes only", and he is thereby entitled to steal any and all clips he fancies. This to my mind is nonsense:
   1. As far as I am aware, the latest UK Copyright Act, and thus the one applicable to this and to any other UK copyright case, is the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 — unless of course a more recent one has been enacted.
   2. I doubt that "entertainment purposes" is sufficient to establish "fair use".
   3. In any case, how much use is "fair" is dependent upon extent as well as upon purpose. A five-second clip might be fair use; a ten-second clip is probably pushing it; a clip of over four minutes is almost certainly not "fair use" by any reasonable definition.

I think the maker of these videos is going to get a nasty shock one day, once Warner Bros. find his YouTube channel. In the meantime, I think we should isolate ourselves from what I see as blatant piracy. — evilquoll (talk) 21:30, February 14, 2018 (UTC)

I agree. I haven't personally been paying much attention to this (and am at fault for that), but now that I've skimmed through the Videos category it appears to be filled with either unnecessary videos, or movie clips that fly in the face of "fair use" (by either not actually being currently used in a constructive manner, just in video galleries and the like, or by being unreasonably big). --  Seth Cooper  owl post! 21:59, February 14, 2018 (UTC)

User: Gilderoy Lockhart Kitwennerbom

He's at it again, uploading fanon images and vandalising the Gryffindor page. Clearly needs another, longer block. — evilquoll (talk) 09:38, February 25, 2018 (UTC)

User:HistoryhasitseyesonyouHermione

Has re-uploaded the image File:Unknownhh.jpg, despite the fact that it was deleted for several reasons (memetic, fanon, possibly others) and re-added it to the Hermione Granger article in defiance of the warning notice in the text, and indeed removing the notice in the process. It looks to me that this is another user who cares more about her fanon than the Harry Potter universe. — evilquoll (talk) 19:23, March 1, 2018 (UTC)

She's banned now. --CosmicChronos | Sweden, the land of Meatballs 14:13, March 2, 2018 (UTC)

Magicalbeastbiologist

Another obvious sock of Hpfanjianjie. ― C.Syde (talk | contribs) 12:45, April 26, 2018 (UTC)

While I agree with your "walks like a duck" interpretation, a warning has been given for now. Please note the problem here if it happens again and thanks for the clean up work! --Ironyak1 (talk) 17:20, April 26, 2018 (UTC)

They are still at it. ― C.Syde (talk | contribs) 03:28, April 27, 2018 (UTC)

Temporary block in place - ban will be next if behavior repeated. --Ironyak1 (talk) 04:33, April 27, 2018 (UTC)

They've created another sock-puppet. Here. ― C.Syde (talk | contribs) 09:38, April 28, 2018 (UTC)

Both accounts permanently banned now. Thanks --Ironyak1 (talk) 01:24, April 29, 2018 (UTC)

Brilliant! :D ― C.Syde (talk | contribs) 01:46, April 29, 2018 (UTC)

HM naming issue

Hi! We might need the attention and opinion of an admin here. Lady Junky 15:02, April 27, 2018 (UTC)

Problem user profile and sock puppet

The profile of User:Kaitlin Malfoy, who appears to have been permanently banned (although her contributions page doesn't bear the usual block notice; is this an artefact of this user having moved from Jenna4617 after the block?), still has content other than the {banned} tag; as any and all such content is usually removed by the admin who applies the tag, is this an oversight?

Also, this user uploaded four user images, one more than the limit stated in the policy; and flagged only one of them as a user image, and two of them are the same picture. Also, surely perma-banned users aren't allowed any user images? They certainly shouldn't be.

Finally, User:Jenna17 is clearly a sockpuppet of the banned user. — evilquoll (talk) 14:06, April 29, 2018 (UTC)

Their user images have been deleted, and the block settings show that she is blocked permanently (not sure why it's not showing on the contributions or block log though). I'll put in a request for CheckUser to verify if Jenna17 is a sockpuppet, just to be sure. If so, they can be banned too. - Nick O'Demus 16:10, May 15, 2018 (UTC)

User:R.i.orittro

This user keeps vandalising the Bangladeshi Ministry of Magic page by adding fanon details and images, even after I kept reverting his edits and saying that they're fanon. I'm not sure if I've been going about this wrong, though, but thought I'd put this here. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by TheTARDISLegilimens (talk • contribs).

Gave a Fanon warning. They can be blocked if they come back. - Nick O'Demus 16:04, May 15, 2018 (UTC)

User:Edhiu

This user vandalized the Ravenclaw page, i already reversed it but she/he deserves a warning. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 3DMcBali (talk • contribs).

Gave a Vandal warning. They can be blocked if they come back. - Nick O'Demus 16:04, May 15, 2018 (UTC)

Wikia malfunction

Earlier today I did experienced something totally odd while editing; all the <ref></ref> disappeared after I published an edit (I did not remove them or accidentally remove them during my edit, it was entirely Wikia being funky.) I do not know if I'm encountering this crap weirdness again, because I certainly have no intention of spamming. When I tried to upload File:HM friendships Bill Weasley (with Prefect badge).png via in-article upload, nothing happened like it usually would when clicking "add photo," so I clicked it a few times (still nothing happened.) After a few minutes, to my horror, I saw on Special:Recentchanges that I apparently uploaded a bunch of new versions. If you look at the file history, only the LAST (current) version was actually successfully uploaded, so I'm blaming Wikia on this again. Please delete the 8 first useless versions. I don't spam, and I don't want the site's fault to reflect and mistaken to be my actions. Thanks! --Sammm✦✧(talk) 07:01, June 3, 2018 (UTC)

Damn it, only meant to delete the specified versions, but accidentally deleted the whole thing. Try re-uploading it. --Cubs Fan (Talk to me) 07:13, June 3, 2018 (UTC)

OMG, I'm a retard (it's 1:18AM.... sorry for the lameness), I accidentally uploaded it as File:HM friendships Bill Weasley (with Prefect badge).png.png (an EXTRA and unwanted ".png") Can you help renaming it? So sorry for the inconvenience! --Sammm✦✧(talk) 08:19, June 3, 2018 (UTC)

Done --Cubs Fan (Talk to me) 16:59, June 3, 2018 (UTC)

User:Boooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooob

This user vandalised several pages (probably using the "Random Page" button) with the intention of changing the entire page with fan fiction, presumably for fun. I have warned them, but due to their unhelpful nature, I think a ban could do better at putting them off from doing it again? - Kates39 (talk) 16:37, June 3, 2018 (UTC)

He certainly chose an appropriate user name, one which can be interpreted as "Idiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiot". — evilquoll (talk) 16:03, June 25, 2018 (UTC)

Infobox image preference

Hi there! This is going to sound so petty, but I really do want some clarification on the matter. My observation on this wiki is that, image used in infoboxes for characters, generally are headshots, and some are even cropped to get as zoomed in as possible.

What sprung the matter is character pages from the game Harry Potter: Hogwarts Mystery; previously the following articles have respective images used in their infoboxes:

• Ben Copper
• Penny Haywood
• Tulip Karasu
• Barnaby Lee

The later two are dark, because in the game, before the characters are unlocked, they are displayed like that; so after I unlocked them, I proceeded to upload the unlocked ones, along with ones that hadn't been uploaded:

| | | And used them on the respective articles (which turned out to be very short-lived.)

I want to make it clear that I have nothing against User:Yechezkelb as a person, and this isn't even about "hey, you HAVE TO use what I uploaded, because I said so!" I said it as much when I tried to communicate with this user on their Talk page, that should higher quality of the headshots are available, I welcome the files to be updated and replaced.

What I do find somewhat offensive is that, either unintentionally or just not caring, the user went undoing edits without explanation or discussion, AFTER the message I left them.

The images this user are bent on placing in the infoboxes are as below:

| | |

Again to be clear, they aren't bad images; but suitable for being the one in the infobox? I think not. It makes the infobox LONG, and on the bottom of site, when random pages are previewed, it'd show the character's midsection instead of the face!

Please tell me I'm not the oddball in this situation! Well, if I actually am, please also tell me so I can move on. But if headshots ARE in fact preferred, please then talk to this user, since I've clearly failed. I do not want to constantly undo what image was placed. Thanks! --Sammm✦✧(talk) 23:30, June 3, 2018 (UTC)

I fully support Sammm鯊 in the above. This has now become a full-blown edit war, with Yechezkelb constantly altering the images to his preference, and the only "justification" he has given is "many infoboxes have full-body images" — the ever-popular Appeal to Democracy fallacy. And surely changing an infobox image without discussion with other users is a violation of this wiki's policies? Something needs to be done. — evilquoll (talk) 09:32, June 6, 2018 (UTC)

I'm sorry, and as you have seen, I have stopped replacing images with full body images.
yechezkelb (talk) 01:05, June 11, 2018 (UTC)

User:GinnyPotter1233

She is breaking the rule that one's user page must not be one's main contribution to the wiki; especially in the sheer size of the thing, and the fact that most of it is non-HP stuff. Maybe something should be done. — evilquoll (talk) 18:36, June 7, 2018 (UTC)

Done. User page protected from editing; user alterted to the fact that protection may be reversed once they start making useful article edits. --  Seth Cooper  owl post! 03:31, June 11, 2018 (UTC)

Infobox image preference 2

Question for pages Godric Gryffindor, Rowena Ravenclaw, Helga Hufflepuff, and Salazar Slytherin.

The images before:

| | |

and were changed to:

| | |

by User:Misskatniss1546. I don't believe the changes were discussed; while I can't exactly say the original images are of higher quality, but they focused on the face more than the current ones? Just wanted to know if this switch is preferred.--Sammm✦✧(talk) 23:09, June 17, 2018 (UTC)

User:Savannahbug23

This user has vandalized three images (I’m not sure if the exact word is vandalized) on this wiki. I have replaced them with the original images as soon as I had saw them. Below are those three images (one is not existing anymore):

Wizardry Screenshot.jpeg

Can you please bring this to your attention and try to make them stop doing this in the future (such as blocking, warning etc.)
yechezkelb (talk) 03:39, June 18, 2018 (UTC)

World Cup spam

For the third time in two days, the pages Skiing and Tug-of-war have been vandalised by a spammer replacing them with adverts for a World Cup site. I recommend that they be locked for editing until the World Cup is over. — evilquoll (talk) 12:42, July 5, 2018 (UTC)

User:Flyte Dragoon

Please take a look at Special:Contributions/Flyte Dragoon; at the time of this report, this user has removed Harry Potter: Hogwarts Mystery content from 4 articles, when those info are relevant. Please do something about it, like warning if not temporarily blocking. IDK if they thought it'd be fun, personally I find it humorless and an act of vandalism. --Sammm✦✧(talk) 06:56, July 14, 2018 (UTC)

User:Flowertje

Has made a series of edits to the Credence Barebone page which I for one find dubious, on the basis that his birth name of Corvus Lestrange (V) is his "real" name. (Personally, I prefer the view that a character's "real" name is the one by which they are most commonly known throughout the work; by the "logic" applied to Credence, Molly Weasley should be known as Molly Prewett.)

The latest change was to move Credence Barebone to Harry Potter Wiki:Corvus Lestrange V, which is definitely wrong, as it removed the article from the article space and moved it into the meta-space. This change at least definitely needs to be reverted. — evilquoll (talk) 09:36, October 4, 2018 (UTC)

Looks like you fixed the article rename, and I cleaned up the text so Done? --Ironyak1 (talk) 16:52, October 4, 2018 (UTC)

User:Koppadasao

I want to first start with, I think this person, does, to some extent, bring up some great point in Talk: Badeea Ali. I am never going to judge a person due to having a different opinion from my own, and in this case, I'm not even sure I disagree with what this person brought up, HOWEVER, this person has demonstrated poor etiquette when attempting to reply specific passages from someone else's text, forcibly splitting them, namely my comments, into multiple ones, just so they can insert their two cents. I don't mind hearing what they wanted to say, as long as they don't alter how I originally posted mine to begin with.

On top of that, when I pointed out I'm not a dude when the person called me a mister, the reply was to not be offended because it's a show of treating me as an equal, which, to me is actually way more offensive than the previous highly possible innocent mistake, so I said as much. And got the reply calling me to be "mad." That was the last straw. I don't have to sit here and let some angry judgmental SJW insult me. I emphasize, the actual debate, if on topic, doesn't exactly feel problematic to me at this point, but the response I received is inappropriate and a personal attack. Please do something about it. Thanks. Also, I have not read anything beyond the "mad" comment, because I don't want to waste more time if this person is just going to be aggressively defensive, to someone that's not even really disagreeing with the points they brought up, I genuinely wanted to understand the legitimacy of the claim, and reply I got was way out of proportion.--Sammm✦✧(talk) 22:32, October 8, 2018 (UTC)

Warning has been given - hopefully no further actions will be needed. Cheers --Ironyak1 (talk) 23:20, October 8, 2018 (UTC)

User:Carlie Rose Luckenbill

This appears to be a vandalism-only account. Latest edit was to completely wreck the Emma Watson page (thankfully restored by another user). — evilquoll (talk) 11:18, October 11, 2018 (UTC)

Template:Official post infobox/Draft

Hi, please consider protecting the currently not existing, but will be generated whenever someone felt the need to "Migrate [this infobox] ( {{Official post infobox}} )", template draft page. The infobox template in question, is already using the "new markup " (now relatively old, tbh;) so it makes no sense trying to generate the markup again when it's already using them, not to mention incorrectly generating them, thus breaking the template.

I am not asking to lock {{Official post infobox}} itself, but the "draft" subpage, so that people who don't know how markup works (I'm saying this in the nicest way) won't be able to break the template when trying to "fix" a nonexistent problem.

I'm bring up this issue because of the two following edits:

• https://harrypotter.wikia.com/wiki/Template:Official_post_infobox?oldid=1166203
• https://harrypotter.wikia.com/wiki/Template:Official_post_infobox?oldid=1166688

I'm sure User:CosmicChronos is doing this with the best intention, but anyone is free to check that those two revisions, while different, both broke the infobox. What's worse was that both times, the changes were just left there for hours, as if, voilà! bam, converted the infobox, job now done! The job is not done when the infobox isn't working properly! Don't just take my word for it; test out the markups from those two revisions and see how pages with the infobox would look like.

I don't know how to make it clearer than my first revert edit summary: "breaking infobox. it was already migrated by the looking of the source code." But the action was done a second time. My second revert edit summary is considerably more aggressive because the message wasn't getting across, and I'm not sure it will, so instead of waiting for a potential 3rd time, I'm bringing this up, hoping it could be prevented.

Just to be clear, I think it is absolutely okay to experiment and wanting to improve templates, but I think using the migrating infobox tool is the wrong way to go, as demonstrated by those two revisions themselves. If something needs to be improved, work on the template itself, not generate something from scratch, and wrongfully generated to boot, without following up and checking how it works. --Sammm✦✧(talk) 18:49, October 21, 2018 (UTC)

I'd also like to add, I'm not sure what triggered the "templatedraft-module" module (the one that will display this message), but I think it's safe to say it is somewhat glitchy and not always accurate: Prior to the second attempt (during the first revert plus some reductions,) the infobox did not trigger the module, unless it is incredibly slow to catch on; after the second attempt, the module is, however, visible, even after its revert.

What's peculiar, is that, the pt-br counterpart of this template, as seen at pt-br:Predefinição:Posto oficial infobox, which uses the exact format just in Portuguese, does not trigger the module.

I think perhaps there should be a warning message, hinting to only take that module with a grain of salt, so that users won't make it a top priority to act on, when chances are, nothing needed to be acted on in the first place. --Sammm✦✧(talk) 19:59, October 21, 2018 (UTC)

Jjdewigglyfan10102

Hpfanjianjie is back again with another sock. ― C.Syde (talk | contribs) 10:10, November 21, 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for handling the clean-up! Block applied --Ironyak1 (talk) 17:25, November 21, 2018 (UTC)

User:华强

Hi there, I'm still assuming good faith, but please check Special:Contributions/华强; so far, while not all of the claimed "official account" are false, most of them are. Please consider warning the User as the action has now been done for the 4th time. --Sammm✦✧(talk) 02:34, November 28, 2018 (UTC)

Oddly enough, the action is now done by Special:Contributions/Leeandersonch; unsure if it's a sockpupet. Same problem, a bunch of the added links aren't official. --Sammm✦✧(talk) 16:28, December 6, 2018 (UTC)

User:Wand Of Death

The User insists James Potter I is a Seeker and deliberately edited the article to display as such, despite being specifically warned not to do so via the editor's notes. Argument provided makes little sense. While, admittedly, I personally had also mistaken the situation, (since, well, it was pretty misleading to have JP showing off with catching the Snitch in OOTP) however, I had no problem swallowing the policy and leave it at that.

Please consider informing the User what "canon" is on this wiki. Attempted and failed via reverting edits. --Sammm✦✧(talk) 10:31, November 29, 2018 (UTC)

User:Ryker11

The user is again spam-editing to add redundant family category; obviously not learning from then previous block. --Sammm✦✧(talk) 01:06, December 16, 2018 (UTC)

User:Amanda82828282828282828

After vandalizing User:ThanatodoraSage's User page, the User also attempted to remove the vandal report of the said action. --Sammm✦✧(talk) 22:16, December 18, 2018 (UTC)

Warned. --  Seth Cooper  owl post! 01:08, December 19, 2018 (UTC)

User:Amanda82828282828282828

2nd act of vandalism on User:ThanatodoraSage 's talk page and profile page in less than a week.

-- User:Reverb frost

Blocked. --  Seth Cooper  owl post! 16:19, December 22, 2018 (UTC)