Jump to content

Wikipedia:Requests for investigation

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Jdavidb (talk | contribs) at 18:31, 31 October 2005 (→RU Severe: Nivik77 blocked indefinitely by Dmcdevit). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.


Shortcut

To update this page, purge the cache. For the old version of this page, see /Old version.

For blatant vandalism within the last few hours, please see Administrator intervention against vandalism. This page is for reporting vandalism for which an ongoing response is required. This primarily includes multiple sockpuppets, pages currently being heavily vandalised, users that need to be monitored, open proxies, and vandalism which requires study on the part of an administrator before responding. Accounts that have only been used for vandalism (with no recent activity) should also be reported on this page, so that an administrator can look through their edits. Please make sure to read the first two sections before using this page.

Shortcut

This page is intended to request administrator investigation of certain types of vandalism only. Do not use this page until you read the policies, guidelines, and procedures. For most vandalism, see Administrator intervention against vandalism.

Alerts that do not belong on this page will be removed immediately, without response, and without warning.

Current alerts

IP addresses

Please report vandals who are operating under anonymous IP addresses under the appropriate severity level, at the top. N0YKG 13:44, 18 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

IP Severe

Has quit for now. · Katefan0(scribble) 22:12, 28 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Back again on 80.1.176.18 - only quit because it was night-time in the United Kingdom. Article needs reverting again. Redvers ★ Hello ★ Doings 09:27, 29 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Reverted and blocked for 24 hrs.--Cyberjunkie | Talk 09:36, 29 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Back again on 80.1.180.11 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log). Article needs reverting again. Request to protect page lodged yesterday. Redvers ★ Hello ★ Doings 10:32, 29 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Has quit for now. · Katefan0(scribble) 22:10, 28 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Looks like it's stopped for now. · Katefan0(scribble) 21:41, 27 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • I've added it to my watch list, for what it's worth (it's a very large watchlist, and I certainly don't see everything), but it seems to have stopped or slowed down for now and at least one other person is combatting it. Be sure to make liberal use of the {{test}} templates as described above. Jdavidb (talk) 20:09, 25 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm also adding to my Watchlist, for what its worth. Thanks for the report, Johntex\talk 01:02, 27 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Nearly all edits from the IP 4.242.*.* series are vadalistic. They usually hit Circuit City and Pumpkin Pie and have been doing so since early October. CambridgeBayWeather 06:50, 25 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Zzyzx11 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) trying to ask me where did I get the information about exact dates and times of this cartoon TV show, I quoted several newspapers and ABC. This person is also accusing ABC and news organizations of covering up the exact dates and times of the non-existent television show. Remove some edits on WRTV and WTHR about the show, if I remove them, would that count as blanking?

User:65.54.98.147

Already warned re Jay-Z, blocked for 24 hrs. --Zippy 05:57, 20 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Peter Vincent

An anon editor who apparently is a suscriber to NTL Internet has been creating apparent hoax articles, multivoting in AfD pages and now vandalizing those AfD pages and changing votes of registered users. Please see
Hope I found the right page to report this!---CH (talk) 22:43, 19 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I gave him a 1hr block to see what happens. --Sebastian Kessel Talk 00:06, 19 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I would be disinclined to block this user yet, his previous edits are 10 days ago and he only got one warning. To risky for a public IP. He vandalizes again, I would block. Sebastian Kessel Talk 22:37, 18 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Warned. Next time it'll be a block. Please remember that you should warn people first on their talk page before bringing a report here. · Katefan0(scribble) 19:48, 12 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

"* 81.137.244.52 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) -- still more vandalism to Robert Steadman" vhjh-->

"* 81.137.244.52 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) -- vandalism obscenity and libel to Robert Steadman" vhjh-->

"* 82.153.106.65 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) -- vandalism obscenity and libel to Robert Steadman" vhjh-->

"* 84.65.218.5 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) -- vandalism obscenity and libel to Robert Steadman" vhjh-->


Check out Q1werty own vandalistic edits, eg here, SqueakBox 16:37, 8 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
It should probably be pointed out that the IP above added by Q1werty has no contributions or warnings. --GraemeL (talk) 16:41, 8 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • On 27th September at 2.40pm BST, this person -

"host-194-46-246-153.dsl-ie.utvinternet.net/Username (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) - defaced a profile about me, making commerically defamatory remarks about me and my company, at Wikipedia." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.138.32.196 (talk) )

  • This IP has edited several wikipedia pages, including several changes to data in the human height page, changing data values such as population size of somalia. Many of these have been tagged as vandalism by others. This is subtle change of critical information. Other, older edits, see edit to Congoid are just straightforward racist abuse. Pete.Hurd 18:58, 4 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • This person has only edited once today, and his contrib history isn't very lengthy. This level of vandalism you should be able to deal with yourself; this page is for reporting persistent vandalism that rises to the level of disruption. Just revert his edits. · Katefan0(scribble) 19:04, 4 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Let me get this straight, this guy vandalized the wiki 16 (SIXTEEN) times since july, and you are not going to block his IP? Adidas
  • That's right. The point of a block isn't to be punitive, really, it's to discourage vandalism that is happening right then. Some of the problem with blocks of IP addresses, particularly dynamic IP's is that there is a large potential for collateral damage -- what if I blocked that IP for 48 hours and someone else who wasn't the person doing the vandalizing tried to edit Wikipedia, got discouraged and then we lost someone who could've been a good contributor? IP blocks are very sparsely given and usually for short periods of time (no more than 24 hours) because of this. If this IP starts vandalizing repeatedly I'll be glad to block. Beyond collateral damage issues, though, one or two vandalizing edits are annoying, but regular editors can deal with it themselves through reverting. It should only be reported here if it rises to a level that editors can't deal with, i.e., that it becomes disruptive. Best · Katefan0(scribble) 15:34, 5 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]


IP Moderate

Somehow I overlooked the block log -- user was blocked for 6 months by Brian0918 earlier today. MCB 04:29, 29 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Blocked for 24 hours. Nasty. Looks like this is his or her third time to the principal's office. · Katefan0(scribble) 22:17, 28 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
This IP has only made one edit in more than a week. This page is for reporting persistent vandalism. · Katefan0(scribble) 22:15, 28 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Geni blocked. · Katefan0(scribble) 21:49, 27 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Can't quite figure this out; recent edits to Confuscianism: [5]. Looks more like clueless newbie testing or reverting to (much) older version. But there's clearer vandalism along the way. Last edit was 2005-10-27 13:11:52. Will ban again if vandalism occurs after this tstamp; want to make sure I'm not blocking another user who just inherited this IP. Jdavidb [[talk • contribs]] 18:10, 27 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Vandal is at it again, with MAIET Entertainment recreated a third time, he even proceeded to make legal threats against Wikipedia by blanking the page to write:
"Fuck u wikipedia, dont delete my posts. I am Sam Falgor than lives in U.S. I hav a lawyer, since my family's rich. Ill sue u if u delete my posts once more, u jackass"
Despite the fact that this isn't grounds for a lawsuit. — Kjammer ⌂ 22:23, 22 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

24.8.199.100 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) Keeps deleting George W. Bush and other pages. glocks out 23:14, 19 October 2005 (UTC) 70.27.31.26 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) Kept removing parts of the WWE SmackDown! vs. RAW 2006 article and adding nonsense when I reverted it several times.  Thorpe talk 22:26, 19 October 2005 (UTC) [reply]

I'm going to block them. They just keep vandalising my page. 67.191.18.244 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) is part of the same group. Blocking them as well. They are using the exact same verbage.--Woohookitty 04:18, 19 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Tmandry 12:33, 17 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

* 219.65.248.155 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) has been doing the same thing. Twice so far.-- Ravikiran 08:23, 17 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

195.10.125.114 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) 195.10.104.111 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) 195.10.104.82 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) 195.10.104.56 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) 195.10.104.36 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) 195.10.104.10 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) 195.10.103.241 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) 195.10.103.215 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) 195.10.103.52 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) 195.10.103.26 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) and also the range 213.137.30.99 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) 213.137.30.67 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) 213.137.30.64 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) 213.137.30.62 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) 213.137.30.17 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) 213.137.30.11 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) 213.137.9.190 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log). I hope I have listed these correctly. Although the vandal seems to have some POV differences with me, and I have admitted that I was wrong on some issues, he/she has also removed categories, sourced quotations, links to foreign language wikipedias and information he/she finds uncomfortable (but which has been researched/sourced/referenced where necessary). He/she has also posted threatening messages to me. Bernard Moffatt, Mec Vannin, Celtic League (political organisation) seem to be those mainly vandalise. My previous comments can be found here with interaction with the vandal. I am not interested in a flame war, but his/her damage goes beyond mere POV problems. Poster seems angry and won't have rational discussion. I hope I have listed the multiple IPs correctly. --ImpartialCelt 18:57, 15 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

  • Has gone on a rampage of vandalism today, including blanking a heap of pages related to space and astronomy. All edits have been reverted, and warnings posted in user talk page. Dupz 07:24, 13 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • User is now blanking the talk page of the main page, and posting personal attacks on those reverting their edits. Dupz 07:33, 13 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I'm moving this to moderate because the activity continues and I'm still powerless to do anything about it. Maybe it will be noticed here. Thatdog 17:48, 11 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm, interesting. Appears to be a shared proxy server; I won't block just yet since this user appears to have stopped for the last 12h or so. Also, if you look carefully you can see a few legitimate edits scattered amongst the vandalism, which would suggest the possibility of multiple users of this particular IP. Since this user appears to be in abeyance in terms of vandalism for the time being, I won't block unless the user resumes vandalism, but have left a test4 message. --NicholasTurnbull | (talk) (e-mail) (cabal) 20:31, 8 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
User has, since the test4 warning, vandalized Joseph Stalin three times [13] [14] [15], and pasted garbage on his/her talk page three times in place of the {sharedIP} message. (There have also been several legitimate edits during the time period.) MCB 07:08, 10 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Since the 24-block, one edit with very minor vandalism to Rove McManus [16], which he/she has edited twice before [17] [18] in exactly the same way (adding quotes to the word "comedian" referring to article subject). In theory you could consider that a content issue, but I do not believe user is editing in good faith. MCB 06:07, 11 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
The Criterion Collection has been subtly vandalized at least twice since 6 Oct, changing the link to the company's official website from http://www.criterionco.com/ to http://www.thecriterioncollection.com/ both times. The first time was by 220.245.180.130; the second time it was done from IP 60.240.187.117 (talk · contribs). Whois record for thecriterioncollection.com is no help, but the URL redirects to a page on http://www.badgenious.com/ which if clicked redirects to amazon.com. I stopped investigating it at that point, since it didn't appear to be a case of phishing... 66.167.139.129 06:38, 12 October 2005 (UTC).[reply]
User has been blocked for persistent vandalism. In future, please place new alerts at the top of this section. →Journalist >>talk<< 01:13, 9 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]



IP Low

Looks like it's quit for now. · Katefan0(scribble) 22:23, 28 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Looks like it's quit for now. · Katefan0(scribble) 22:19, 28 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Only one edit, ever. · Katefan0(scribble) 21:57, 27 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • stopped 00:31, 26 October 2005 (UTC)


Registered Users

Please report vandals who are operating under registered usernames under the appropriate severity level, at the top.

RU Severe

This is a content dispute. Work out your differences on the article's talk page and avail yourselves of the suggestions in Wikipedia:Dispute resolution. · Katefan0(scribble) 20:17, 29 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]


RU Moderate

  • Looks like he's working in good faith, but doesn't quite understand policies and consensus. There is currently an RFC going on about this user, which will decide how to handle him or bring it up to a higher process. Jdavidb [[talk • contribs]] 18:00, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]


RU Low

Possible Sockpuppets

Current date is June 21, 2025; place new alerts on top.

Please note
This was originally at Wikipedia:Requests for page protection, but have added it here due to the vandal's large number of pseudonyms:
ProhibitOnions 16:24, 4 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Protected. Please copy this report to Vandalism in progress so that the usernames can be checked and, if necessary, blocked. --Tony SidawayTalk 16:47, 4 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Done. ProhibitOnions 17:12, 4 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
FYI: This user has a long history of improper sock puppetry with a very clear edit pattern and admittedly shared IPs. He is prolific and makes many good edits, but also many less-good ones. I had previously blocked many of the usernames when he began using them in deletions, and after leaving several warnings. The problem seems to have grown worse recently. See also Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#155.84.57.253/24.0.91.81/Shran/et al.. -Willmcw 06:34, 7 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I've now blocked all of the listed usernames except user:KnightsOfMalta CantStandYa (talk · contribs). -Willmcw 07:25, 7 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

--Angr/tɔk tə mi 12:47, 4 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I've just blocked him for 24 hours for persistent vandalism. --Angr/tɔk tə mi 13:29, 4 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]


Actually, having read through the recent revert war, this looks like an ordinary content dispute. The claim by ProhibitOnions that his opponents are writing "nonsense" and vandalizing is just false. They are reverting to a version of the article that leaves it uncertain whether the story of Kennedy's alleged goof is true or false. Whereas the version ProhibitOnions prefers comes down decisively that the story is false. I think on the facts of the matter, ProhibitOnions is probably correct, but disagreeing with him is not vandalism. I think Tony Sidaway jumped the gun when he protected the page. (But ProhibitOnions is correct that some of those reverting away from his version are writing misleading edit summaries.) --Nate Ladd 23:32, 4 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Nathan, this is not a simple matter of disagreement. This person has repeatedly changed the article, each time adding different nonsense phrasing that asserts something that is demonstrably false. (It is not simply a weaker prior version of the text, although it is usually based on one.) No, the vandal has never discussed the topic on the talk page. Yes, the vandal uses misleading edit summaries. Apart from creating numerous sock puppets, he has now created a user name that is visually similar to mine (Prohibit0nions vs. ProhibitOnions) and used identical edit summaries to mine ("Reverted to consensus version, vandal warned"). Sorry, this is malicious vandalism, there's no other way to describe it. ProhibitOnions 19:15, 5 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_investigation&oldid=26993288"