Jump to content

Wikipedia:Requests for investigation

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Nico~enwiki (talk | contribs) at 20:50, 22 October 2003 (rv (Wik, you may try to prove you are not a vandal, but you cannot remove information about yourself. )). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.


The purpose of this page is to provide instant notice of vandalism taking place. You can use the format under the Current Alerts heading: IP address, pages touched, damage done. For a more comprehensive guide for dealing with different types of vandalism, see Dealing with vandalism.

For a list of currently blocked IPs and usernames and the reason why they were blocked, visit: Special:Ipblocklist.

Tools for finding information on an IP number:

However, please do not label isolated instances of text deletions, replacements or odd additions as VANDALISM unless they seem intentionally overly lewd or offensive. More often than not, this is just a visitor to the site experimenting with how to use it (also see newbie test) -- labeling them as a VANDAL is a sure way of ensuring they will not become contributors. Only add alerts to this page of true VANDALISM such as a systematic attack on several articles. Above all, please be polite at first and give the person the benefit of the doubt until they prove they deserve otherwise.

Please note that deliberate vandalism of this page is likely to lead to your being blocked from editing the Wikipedia.

If you disagree with someone's edits, please see the following pages:

  • Note: Please add new alerts at the top of this list.


Current alerts

  • Now User:Wik removed the discussion of himself from this page. Nico
  • User:Wik vandalized Silesia. He removed the link to the article at another Wikipedia, which I added, and he removed the external link to the German-Silesian organisation, when leaving links to 4 Polish-nationalist organisations. Additionally, he replaced the introdudution with an extreme Polish-revisionist version. I and other users like Ruhrjung have tried to make a compromise also the Polish nationalists could accept, but this user is clearly just a vandal, reverting for having fun. Could someone protect Silesia? Nico 19:56, 22 Oct 2003 (UTC)
    • User:Nico keeps trying to fit his German-nationalist views into Silesia, for example by listing the German name of this Polish region before the Polish one, and filling the external links section with links to reactionary German organizations. If it is decided to protect the page, please don't forget to revert to a stable version. --Wik 20:08, Oct 22, 2003 (UTC)
      • User:Wik is lying. I invite anyone to have a look on my last version and the vandal Wik's version. The Polish name is mentioned first, see http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=Silesia&oldid=1607931 . But for that sake, why shouldn't the German be? I guess that the German name is in more common use in English than the Polish! [User:Nico|Nico]] 20:19, 22 Oct 2003 (UTC)
Once again, please keep discussions about edit wars and differences of POV to appropriate talk pages or report them at Wikipedia:Edit wars in progress. This page is for reporting vandalism and nothing else. Kosebamse 20:16, 22 Oct 2003 (UTC)

This is not about different point of views. User:Wik is clearly just a vandal. [User:Nico|Nico]] 20:19, 22 Oct 2003 (UTC)

  • I have now IP blocked 64.12.96.71 -- The Anome 13:50, 22 Oct 2003 (UTC)
  • 64.12.96.71 (cache-mtc-ac02.proxy.aol.com) and 64.12.96.199 (cache-mtc-ak02.proxy.aol.com) appear to be the same or related vandals: common characteristics: same ISP's proxies with apparently related names, same /24, vandalism of admin pages, similar timespan, liking for interpolating text with the word "penis". -- The Anome 13:37, 22 Oct 2003 (UTC)
  • User:64.12.96.71: vandalized Wikipedia:Protected_page. -- BCorr ? Брайен 13:30, 22 Oct 2003 (UTC)
  • User:64.12.96.199: vandalised this page. Change reverted, IP blocked. -- The Anome 13:29, 22 Oct 2003 (UTC)
  • 12.64.96.36, assorted vandalism one right after the other. IP Blocked.Ark30inf 02:53, 22 Oct 2003 (UTC)
  • User:Mythrandia has been adding nonsense articles and adding nonsense links to valid articles. User contributions show every entry by this user is now listed on VfD. Attempts to are ignored. - Marshman 17:02, 18 Oct 2003
  • A user with changing IP keeps vandalizing Paul Levesque. All the IPs appearing here should be blocked (and not just for 24 hours). --Wik 04:46, Oct 17, 2003
  • I may be jumping to conclusions, but 67.123.172.223 seems like he might be Michael, since he is making strange changes to Hephaestos' userpage. He's also been making a lot of music-related edits all day, that have gone unnoticed. Adam Bishop 02:37, 15 Oct 2003 (UTC)
    • That looks very michaelish.64.175.251.52 looks suspicious, too, sorry, can't check further as the Wiki's choking. Kosebamse 15:15, 16 Oct 2003 (UTC)
    • Yeah, those were him. He might get away with it if he didn't vandalize user pages... Adam Bishop 03:52, 17 Oct 2003 (UTC)
  • 12.228.92.12 has been making edits in the articles previously favoured by the "Ptolomaic dynasty" vandal. I can't absolutely say they are vandalism, but they are suspicious, and do require scrutiny. I have asked (on anonymous user's anonymous talk page) that they explain additions in edit fields. -- Someone else 22:18, 12 Oct 2003 (UTC)
  • Barry20lions is repeatedly vandalizing the Juventus article. If he does nothing else besides that, a quick block should take care of things. --Modemac 14:14, 4 Oct 2003 (UTC)
  • User:65.117.156.222 has been adding junk about girl scouts and the like at various articles across the board, examples [1], [2], and much more, this user has done this twice already and has been blocked twice... Dysprosia 01:36, 4 Oct 2003 (UTC)
    • Who keeps unblocking him then? --Wik 15:11, Oct 9, 2003 (UTC)
      • AFAIK blocks now expire after 24 hours, as most vandals won't come back, and rarely with the same IP. andy 15:27, 9 Oct 2003 (UTC)
    • The girl scout vandal has made a short reappearance as User:210.50.40.191. After vandalizing my User page I blocked him directly. andy 14:48, 16 Oct 2003 (UTC)
  • A user on a dynamic IP in the range 138.163.0.4x is trashing Clinton articles and removing negative links from Bush articles. [3], [4], [5] --mav 22:17, 3 Oct 2003 (UTC)


  • User:12.243.94.55's strong feeling that Danzig should be referred to only as Gdansk is...reminiscent. -- Someone else 01:45, 2 Oct 2003 (UTC)
    • Hmm..I wonder who that could be.Vancouverguy 01:47, 2 Oct 2003 (UTC)
    • Well it's not Heine this time. This is an American IP. Heine's was from Norway. Angela 01:56, Oct 2, 2003 (UTC)
      • If it had been me, I had insisted that Danzig should be referred to only as Danzig, and not the other way round. But I have no problems with mentioning the Polish name too. Heine 07:07, 9 Oct 2003 (UTC)
    • The tactics are similar, and this one isn't restricted to one page.Vancouverguy 01:57, 2 Oct 2003 (UTC)
      • I was thinking only of the fixation, which matches that of User:H.J., whose previous IP address was American but different from this one. Doesn't mean it's her, of course, I suppose there's more than one person of such mindset. -- Someone else 02:21, 2 Oct 2003 (UTC)
  • 206.172.171.1 whilst not actually a vandal this person is clearly pro-nazi and has sneaked pro-nazi POV edits into articles. Those who are concerned about such things might want to keep an eye on them.
    • Took a quick look, and it seems debatable. The guy isn't going overboard, so we'll just keep a lookout. No red alerts are necessary at this time. --Modemac 09:38, 28 Sep 2003 (UTC)
      • I'm not so sure- anyone who changes a description of the book The Turner Diaries from "race-hate fantasy" to "racial revolutionary fiction" ( on the National Alliance page) and regards violent race-hate mongers like Combat 18 as 'revolutionary' certainly needs to have an eye kept on them...
And Southboat isn't doing us any favors either. Fuzheado
Judging by the edit summaries and number of edits, I would say that if s/he comes back, they should be automatically blocked.Vancouverguy 15:40, 28 Sep 2003 (UTC)
I thought it wasn't allowed to block by user name, with the exception of previously banned users? Angela 15:43, 28 Sep 2003 (UTC)


Or cases of simple vandalism [7]. Remember the MIT vandal? Many, many logged in edits, all simple vandalism and no way to block without developer access. There should be no problem with blocking this sort of thing. -- sannse 12:20, 29 Sep 2003 (UTC)
If they come back and do the same things, we can discuss a ban.Vancouverguy 15:44, 28 Sep 2003
This is a slippery slope, folks. The revert button should be sufficient. -- Cyan 20:04, 28 Sep 2003
  • User:80.225.73.197, after a long series of edits today that seemed OK (at first glance, anyway) added Fawcett's gill-eyed frost stalk, (Fawcetociconius novazealandiae ) an entirely fictious "recently extict member of the stork familly" that lays eggs underwater. Females then pile dead fish atop the eggs, and the decay of these would warm the water, incubating the eggs. Even so, at lower than usual temperatres found in such a habitat, chicks would not be ready to hatch out until 9 months after laying. after hatching, chicks would swim up through the rotting fish carcasses, and kill their exhausted mother, whose body would provide both shetler and food in the hostile climate. And so on. Quite funny, but utter nonsnse. I deleted that page, but the user has edited heaps of other stuff today, all of which will need to be checked. I have not banned the user at this stage (everyone is entitled to one chance), but I certainly will if he/she repeats this or any similar offence. Some of the topics 80.225.73.197 has "contributed" to are within my field of competence, but others are not, so please take a look and see if there is more stuff that needs to be deleted or reverted, and implement a ban if needed. Tannin 10:02, 27 Sep 2003 (UTC)
    • OK, there is more: Dobson Teighnditch "Former British Physicist and developer of the malholnian theory of magnetic diapause dispersion. He lives in east sussex, england and also has a keen interest in breeding rare breed pigs and hard-boiled eggs." Zero Google hits. Also Hubalu lake squid - zero hits, but no obvious nonsense this time. Tannin 10:11, 27 Sep 2003 (UTC)
      • It's also interesting to note that the same IP has made a number of edits that have attempted to tone down criticism of the BNP in the British National Party article. Is the pro-BNP slant an indication of this author's real opinions, or is he/she trolling? -- The Anome 15:46, 27 Sep 2003 (UTC)
    • He is back as User:80.225.62.213. Tannin 12:37, 27 Sep 2003 (UTC)
    • I think this is the same person -- User:80.225.79.69 -- who had been adding extraneous text to articles to link to Horace Donisthorpe yesterday. I removed them myself because they didn't seem to rise to the level of vandalism, but when I looked at User:80.225.73.197 and User:80.225.16.87 they've been editing the same sets of articles. -- Bcorr
    • This user is back at 80.225.76.94. I have posted a message on their talk page. -- The Anome 18:36, 27 Sep 2003 (UTC)
    • OK, I'm finding dealing with this user tedious. The Peterborough/Cambidgeshire edits are particularly silly -- a moment's research shows his edits are wrong. I propose a IP ban unless this user changes their behavior in the next few minutes. -- The Anome 18:46, 27 Sep 2003 (UTC)
    • I agree.Vancouverguy 18:51, 27 Sep 2003 (UTC)
    • Seconded if needed. Ark30inf 18:52, 27 Sep 2003 (UTC)
    • Me three Bcorr 18:54, 27 Sep 2003 (UTC)
      • Blocked by Angela and Tannin.
      • Unblocked by Enchanter In particular, I disagree that the Peterborough/Cambridgeshire edits were silly - he had some good points - and blocking him immediately after these edits might be interpreted as using a ban to resolve a content dispute, rather than out and out vandalism. Enchanter
      • Enchanter is right: recent behavior appears to be improved. We should not ban based on content disputes. -- The Anome 22:15, 27 Sep 2003 (UTC)
        • In fairness, I don't think you can say that is what the ban was based on. It was largely based on other things. Apparently there is a chance that the user will get with the program.Ark30inf 22:20, 27 Sep 2003 (UTC)
        • I agree with Ark30inf -- this user's behavior has been problematic in a number of ways -- but I think it's fine to give the the benefit of the doubt for the time being. Bcorr 22:25, 27 Sep 2003 (UTC)
      • Perhaps I was too hasty, but it seemed s/he had been causing a lot of problems all day and there was a great deal of support above for this ban, and then I saw what I felt were unnecessary personal attacks which is what the ban was for, not for a content issue. Angela 22:27, 27 Sep 2003 (UTC)
      • Just to clarify, my comment above was not meant as criticism of Angela or Tannin: after all, I originally proposed the ban, and will re-propose it if the user reverts to previous behavior. However, they do seem to have changed their behavior for now, so the short ban seems to have been effective... -- The Anome 08:47, 28 Sep 2003 (UTC)
      • Once again, "me too." I completely appreciate your taking action as was requested, Angela -- I was just thinking that perhaps I was also too quick to jump on the banning bandwagon. -- Bcorr 20:53, 28 Sep 2003 (UTC)
    • Just noting that this person is back as User:80.255 -- so far focusing on same stuff -- Bcorr 02:20, 29 Sep 2003 (UTC)
    • Adding a note that tonight Hephaestos and I had a chat with User:80.255. In creating an article about Arthur Chesterton, the founder of the racist organization called the National Front, 80.255 minimized Chesterton's racist feelings (calling him merely right-wing) and attempted to associate J.R.R. Tolkien with the man, despite a paucity of evidence. Not the kind of behavior I'd normally report (80.255 was fairly civil and not inflammatory once I challenged the way the article was written), but as this user is apparently controversial, I thought I'd note that perhaps 80.255 does have a political agenda, though of course I have no way of knowing. Thanks, Jwrosenzweig 01:13, 11 Oct 2003 (UTC)
  • User:64.216.58.65 is systematically removing all toxicity information and external links from the elements -- 17 so far. (I'm pretty new, so if this isn't vandalism, let me know where to report this in the future....) -- Bcorr 01:28, 27 Sep 2003 (UTC)
    • That is definately vandalism.Vancouverguy 01:32, 27 Sep 2003 (UTC)
    • I've asked them why. Dysprosia 01:32, 27 Sep 2003 (UTC)
    • I've reverted his edits.Vancouverguy 01:48, 27 Sep 2003 (UTC)
    • They're back -- did the same to Vanadium and Chromium -- I'm reverting the edits now... -- Bcorr 18:34, 27 Sep 2003 (UTC)bb
    • If he comes back and does the same things, I propose an IP ban.Vancouverguy 18:57, 27 Sep 2003 (UTC)
    • I've now reverted 14:53, 27 Sep 2003 Copper, Nickel, Cobalt, Iron, and Manganese in addition...ban away! Bcorr 19:05, 27 Sep 2003 (UTC)
    • Done. -- Viajero 19:24, 27 Sep 2003 (UTC)


  • I may have to eat my words here, but I doubt it; 80.225.78.24 appears to be creating a slew of fantasy articles. - Hephaestos 23:18, 26 Sep 2003 (UTC)
  • User:Reddi steadfastly refuses to accept the consensus view regarding the terms "suicide bombing" and "homicide bombing". Already necessitated two pages to be protected indefinitely, and now going for a third. How long is this to be accepted? --Wik 03:27, Sep 26, 2003 (UTC)
    • Wik, Reddi's actions aren't vandalism. Compare what he's done will the other "contributions" listed on this page. -- Cyan 05:12, 26 Sep 2003 (UTC)
      • And what do you call it then? How many pages should he be allowed to force to be protected by insisting on inserting his personal POV (which no one else here has supported so far)? --Wik 13:50, 26 Sep 2003 (UTC)
    • I guess if I was where you are, I would call him a problem user. -- Cyan 18:22, 26 Sep 2003 (UTC)
I moved the following item (RK & Wik re: EofT) from a talk page - I forget which. --Uncle Ed 14:34, 26 Sep 2003 (UTC)
  • RK said "EntmootOfTrolls is back (he is banned for making multiple death threats; this is no joke). Please keep a lookout for the IPs he uses."
    • Wik asked "Where can I see those multiple death threats?"

BuddhaInside -> moved to Wikipedia:Problem users/BuddhaInside

  • Not sure if this is the right place to note this, but Airport (novel) is patent nonsense. DJ Clayworth 17:26, 23 Sep 2003 (UTC)
    • Mmmm - the version I just deleted only had "this book freakin blows my nuts!!!!'" in it. Nothing about patents, even though it still was nonsense (and offensive nonsense, for that matter). -- Schnee 17:37, 23 Sep 2003 (UTC)
  • Repeated vandalism by User:68.244.5.61 to Oakland Raiders page. Rude comments "Oakland Suck Ass" and the like. This occurred on 12 Sept 2003 and again on 22 Sept 2003. See example:

[8] . vudu 19:28, 22 Sep 2003 (UTC)

blocked -- Viajero 19:52, Sep 22, 2003 (UTC)
  • A burst of deliberate vandalism by User:194.83.57.170, designed to look like error messages from within the Wikipedia. See for example [9]. Seems to have stopped after requesting a halt on this user's talk page. -- The Anome 12:16, 22 Sep 2003 (UTC)
    • Vandalism continuing, alas, with Niels Bohr. Blocking. -- The Anome 12:23, 22 Sep 2003 (UTC)
    • This user has now posted an apology (from 217.168.35.200, giving the name Breneric), and promised to change behavior. I'll unblock the IP. -- The Anome 13:08, 22 Sep 2003 (UTC)
  • User:68.5.127.81 [10] removed VFD notice from, then blanked User:Kkawohl's Transcendentalist_Hypothesis_of_the_Fourth_Dimension, then deleted comments on VFD about it. -- Jake 10:02, 2003 Sep 20 (UTC)
    • traceroute points to a cox.net address in Irvine, CA. Kurt Kawohl lives in southern CA and has a cox.net email address.... -- Jake 10:09, 2003 Sep 20 (UTC)
      • Hmmm....Vancouverguy 14:53, 20 Sep 2003 (UTC)
      • Can I ask if the WikiCommunity is yet ready to talk about a ban on User:Kkawohl and his anonymous incarnations? I know he does far less damage to Wikipedia than users like Michael or DW, but I feel he's beyond reasoning with, and it seems to me that at least an auto-revert policy might end the constant Transcendentalism problems that Kurt has been creating the last 4-5 weeks. Jwrosenzweig 07:09, 22 Sep 2003 (UTC)
  • User:24.93.236.73 Have just reverted three pages vanadlised by this user: Harry Houdini, George Washington and John Ritter. May be more to come. Graham  :) 04:31, Sep 20 2003 (UTC)


  • User:Poposho (contribs) -- blanked a few user pages, and made some minor corrections to music related pages. Shares a taste in music with Michael. -- Tim Starling 04:54, Sep 19, 2003 (UTC)
  • User:Michael's Vandalism - Guess who's back. - Efghij 22:53, Sep 18, 2003 (UTC)
    • Blocked. Note that any sysop can now block by username, using Special:Blockip. Sysops may only use this facility to enforce bans already approved by Jimbo. This qualifies. -- Tim Starling 02:33, Sep 19, 2003 (UTC)
  • User:207.172.44.152 blanked the article wave earlier today. Only activity indicated on "user contribution" so maybe an accident? - Marshman 04:43, 18 Sep 2003 (UTC)
  • User:172.165.228.225 removed a paragraph about a study regarding homophobia from Sexual arousal. Although just an isolated incident, the fact that this was labelled as a "spelling" change seems to hint that it was not just a newbie experimenting, but rather someone who wanted to remove material he personally didn't like from the page and tried to conceal the fact. -- Schnee 07:43, 17 Sep 2003 (UTC)
    • Spelling was deceptive but that piece did need work. I've revised it to reflect the actual conclusion and title of the study but I'm not sure it belongs on the page at all - it's probably better on a page about homophobia or homosexuality. However, I'll leave that choice for someone else. JamesDay 12:39, 30 Sep 2003 (UTC)
  • User:Liam modified several articles about Nazi Germany to give them racist meaning, most notable his change of Adolf Hitler. I reverted all, but we need to keep an eye on it. andy 18:09, 16 Sep 2003 (UTC)
    • It should be noted that, in apparent return for his work restoring NPOV to the articles that were changed, andy's user page was vandalized by User:Liam about ten minutes after the above post was made. Jwrosenzweig 05:48, 17 Sep 2003 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_investigation&oldid=1608096"