Vandalism reports

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Jump to: navigation, search
Vandalism reports Archive index
Before reporting, please take note of the following premises:
Most Wikimedia wikis are able to deal with vandalism on their own. This page is intended only for certain reports.
Reporting requirements
  • The username(s) or IP address(es) of the offenders.
  • A description of their vandalism (spamming, adding junk, removing legitimate text, etc), preferably with diffs to examples.
  • The Wikimedia wikis affected.
  • Suggestions for monitoring strategies, blocks etc.

When reporting please use informative headings like:

=== username(s), IP address ===
*{{luxotool|IP address}} <!-- for IP addresses -->
*{{sultool|Username}} <!-- for usernames -->
Description, evidence, diffs, etc. --~~~~
Note on spam
  • If the spamming is cross-wiki, malware sites, repeated or severe, please report it to the spam blacklist.
Related pages
Notice
If the username is clearly offensive, libellous or contains private information do NOT post it here. Email the private OTRS queue for stewards at stewards-at-wikimedia.org or using our wiki email form.
Cross-wiki requests
Meta-Wiki requests
Filing cabinet icon.svg
SpBot archives all sections tagged with {{Section resolved|1=~~~~}} and sections whose oldest comment is older than 7 days. For the archive overview, see Vandalism reports/Archives. The latest archive is located at 2016-06.

Current cross-wiki vandalism[edit]

User:Hypocritepedia using 69.178.192.107[edit]

Yes check.svg Done. -- Tegel (Talk) 00:46, 23 June 2016 (UTC)
69.178.194.92 cross-wiki-contribsIP inforobtexgblockglist is also spamming now. Mrschimpf (talk) 01:04, 23 June 2016 (UTC)
It's already rangeblocked. :) Matiia (talk) 01:06, 23 June 2016 (UTC)
Thank you; I was just about ready to turn off all my notifications. Thanks for your quick work. Mrschimpf (talk) 01:59, 23 June 2016 (UTC)
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. —MarcoAurelio 21:56, 27 June 2016 (UTC)

User:Peadar (User:Borgatya at enwiki)[edit]

Crosswiki vandalism in en:Ágnes Csomor (Revision history), hu:Csomor Ágnes (Revision history), ja:チョモル・アーグネシ (Revision history) and de:Ágnes Csomor (Revision history): He removed much content. In dewiki and enwiki he stopped his vandalism (after his account has been blocked). Salute --Jivee Blau (talk) 15:41, 19 June 2016 (UTC)

I refuse the accusation of vandalism, and I firmly ask JiveBlau to stop the continuous crosswiki insults. Another editors also already have accused me of vandalism earlier but I was claimed that I was not a vandal, I am a confirmed editor, I have created a lot of articles crosswiki in several languages, I have created the article of this Hungarian actress in question, so as a wiki creator I can change its contents, this is not an abuse. I am a useful editor and I am working for wikipedia with pleasure and my interest is to create new articles and to improve the other articles. JiveBlau exaggerates this problem and he decries me, so I ask you all who read this to tell him to finish decrying me and accusing me of vandalism and abusing. Thank you.Peadar (talk) 11:11, 20 June 2016 (UTC) (crosswiki but Borgatya (talk) 11:15, 20 June 2016 (UTC) at enwiki)
???
1. I have never insulted you!
2. You removed near 99 % of the contents of the articles without stating any understandable reason; for example, see ja:Special:Diff/60082164, hu:Special:Diff/17625344 and ja:Special:Diff/59883936. Nowhere an understandable reason is given. This is vandalism. Bgwhite (talk · contribs) told to you that „you are indeed vandalizing the article by removing 99% of the content [and that you have to] give a reason why the entire article was wiped“, see en:Special:Permalink/723142165#June 2016.
--Jivee Blau (talk) 21:55, 20 June 2016 (UTC)
Atleast on enwiki, Peadar/Borgatya is vandalizing the article by continuing to delete most of it and refusing to say why. However, I don't see Peadar/Borgatya's actions across all the wikis as vandalism, but more page ownership. They either have created the articles or has been the main contributor. They refuse to offer any indication why material was removed or added. They just revert other people's edits and continue on. Even after multiple people revert their edits, they continue on. This is the classic symptoms of disruptive editing. Page ownership, vandalism and disruptive editing is abusing the system. Does it warrant a global block? I don't know. On individual wikis, it is a blockable offense and they have been blocked on enwiki. Bgwhite (talk) 00:08, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
I think, if one accuses another person of abusing and vandalism falsely, in our culture insults are called. You have never watched my words, and you are not right, these articles in each languges was edited ONLY by me, I have created, I have improved, I have expanded them, so nobody may call me an abuser or a vandal, only a false accusatory may. The blocking on me was an ABUSE!!!!Peadar (talk) 13:27, 21 June 2016 (UTC) Borgatya (talk) 13:29, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
Please do not remove edits by other users. In the articles en:Ágnes Csomor (Revision history), hu:Csomor Ágnes (Revision history), ja:チョモル・アーグネシ (Revision history) and de:Ágnes Csomor (Revision history) are edits by a lot of other users, you are not the only editor. You are the creator but not the owner of these articles. Wikipedia is a free encyclopedia. Regards --Jivee Blau (talk) 17:59, 21 June 2016 (UTC)

Multiple IPs primarily in sdwiki and cywiki[edit]

Page creations at sdwiki reported to local admin there, but not elsewhere. - dcljr (talk) 02:24, 21 June 2016 (UTC)

Cross-wiki edits by sockpuppets of Messina[edit]

Status:    Done

Messina is a global banned user. His cross-wiki edits should be deleted. --Lernaea secunda (talk) 16:37, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

Accounts are globally locked by other stewards now. Thanks. —MarcoAurelio 21:55, 27 June 2016 (UTC)
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. —MarcoAurelio 21:55, 27 June 2016 (UTC)

2602:30A:2C48:EB10:8CBA:C520:6F13:EECB[edit]

Can we please globally block this address for more than a few days (IP of longtime vandal)? And delete all of the recent contributions? - dcljr (talk) 08:07, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

I see the latter action (page deletion) has already begun (on at least crh: and gv:). How 'bout the former (global block)? - dcljr (talk) 08:18, 26 June 2016 (UTC)
Comment mass deleted and locally blocked--Infinite0694 (Talk) 08:31, 26 June 2016 (UTC)
This user is not going to stop. He needs to be globally blocked. - dcljr (talk) 19:18, 27 June 2016 (UTC)
Gave the IP a 6 months global block. —MarcoAurelio 21:49, 27 June 2016 (UTC)