Request for comment/Global ban for IPhonehurricane95

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

The following request for comments is closed. Requesting user do not meet the requirements to start a valid global ban request. Requesting user is not in good faith either as evidenced by blocks on enwiki and a global lock on their account. Invalid. Closed.


Statement by Cruizir

Within the past three to four years, there has been a very active vandal on Wikimedia, mostly affecting en.wikipedia but also causing damage to Commons and occasionally other language sites such as es.wikipedia and ca.wikipedia. He has dozens upon dozens of sockpuppets, a good deal of which are blocked for crosswiki vandalism on sites such as the ones listed above, Meta-Wiki, and more. He has thoroughly exhausted the patience of the WMF community and as such, while not deserving of a legal or WMF ban, is easily deserving of a project-wide ban.

IPhonehurricane's socking behavior is particularly problematic compared to other vandals, as he will keep accounts dormant for years before suddenly going on a vandalism spree with them. He has also attacked almost every steward in the book and is oddly obsessed with 9/11 imagery, often using it either as an attack or on his talk page in unblock requests. There have been periods of time as long as 3 months where staff have thought he disappeared due to him carrying our his vandalism via IP to avoid detection.

IPhonehurricane is tied to another account known as UnderArmourKid, which also has a history of cross-wiki vandalism and is an LTA on en.wikipedia. It is not known if UnderArmourKid is a meatpuppet or simple vandalism helper of IPhonehurricane, but they have incredibly similar behavior which combined has caused major disruption of many WMF projects over the years.

The reason I posted this RFC was because, recently, IPhonehurricane has been extremely problematic, doing lots of undercover IP vandalism across several projects and reviving old sleeper accounts, although the latter is exclusive to en.wikipedia for most of the accounts. At this point a global ban is the only way to stop the rampant harrassment, vandalism, and abuse that has happened within the last four years from this account. Cruizir (talk) 13:56, 1 April 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Statement by IPhonehurricane95/UnderArmourKid



  • Oppose Speedy close as the global ban nominator did not fulfil one of the requirements (specifically, "have at least 500 edits globally (on all Wikimedia wikis)") -ArdiPras95 (talk) 20:21, 5 April 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]



@Trijnstel: Per the 3rd rule of Global bans#Obtaining consensus for a global ban, the global ban nominatee must have a chance to explain his statements here, if that user is currently blocked on Meta-Wiki, then that user should be temporary unblocked for some minutes (and ask them to quickly make a statement, when making done they should continue be blocked), should you do it? Or probably close this RFC for some untouchable reasons? --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 13:43, 4 April 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I'm not sure how to receive a statement as he's hard to contact; thankfully his main account is one of his only unlocked ones.
@Cruizir: You may try en:Special:EmailUser/IPhonehurricane95. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 07:40, 5 April 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]