Steward requests/Global

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
< Steward requests
This is an archived version of this page, as edited by Mtarch11 (talk | contribs) at 09:48, 4 July 2022 (request). It may differ significantly from the current version.
Shortcut:
SRG
This page hosts requests for global (un)blocks, (un)locks and hidings.

If you are here because you have been affected by a global block, please see Global blocks/FAQ for more information about global block and routes to appeal.

Note: (un)blocks apply to IP addresses; and (un)locks apply to global accounts.


Cross-wiki requests
Meta-Wiki requests

Requests for global (un)block

Please be sure to follow the instructions below:
Your request might be rejected if you don't follow the instructions.
Please also review Global blocking . Only IP addresses can be globally blocked at this moment. Please see #Requests for global (un)lock and (un)hiding if your request involves an account.
Global blocks don't affect Meta-Wiki, so if your IP address is blocked, you can still appeal here. IP addresses that cause disruption on Meta should be reported at Meta:Requests for help from a sysop or bureaucrat instead of here so that they can be blocked locally.
Please describe the kind of cross wiki abusive activity you see from the IP. Saying an IP is a long term abuser is not helpful, but saying "IP vandalizes at ban.wikipedia, no.wikipedia and vi.wikipedia" is. This is especially important for range blocks. If you do not provide enough details, your request might be declined.
Instructions for making a request

Before requesting, make sure that:

  1. You know the IP address(es) you wish to have globally blocked or unblocked.
  2. For blocks, the global blocking criteria are met.
  3. For unblocks, your request addresses the original reason for blocking the IP, if any.

To make a request for the address(es) to be blocked or unblocked

Copy the template below to the bottom of this section and explain why the address(es) should be blocked/unblocked.
=== Global block/unblock for [[Special:Contributions/Some IP address|Some IP address]] ===
{{Status}} <!-- Do not remove this template -->
* {{Luxotool|IP address}}
Description, evidence, diffs, etc. --~~~~
When requesting that your IP be unblocked, note that stewards need to know your IP address to even consider a request.
To find your IP, please visit https://www.whatismyip.com/
You are not required to disclose your IP in public - you may make requests privately to any steward on IRC or by email at: stewards@wikimedia.org

Global unblock for 185.89.36.0/22

Status:    On hold

This was blocked in 2021 as an OP, but in the meantime the range is used by the German internet provider InternetNord ([1]). One of their customers complained to the German VRTS. I have already made an exempt for the range block on dewiki, but I would also request a total unlock globally. Thanks, XenonX3 (talk) 12:18, 23 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Martin Urbanec: --Alaa :)..! 14:03, 25 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Global block for 2A0B:F4C1:2:0:0:0:0:247

Status:    In progress

Tor exit node. --CptViraj (talk) 09:58, 11 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I think this should be handled by TorBlock itself. —MarcoAurelio (talk) 18:17, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Global block for 2A02:898:218:0:0:0:0:1

Status:    In progress

Tor exit node. --CptViraj (talk) 10:01, 11 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Global block for 2001:BC8:1200:D:208:A2FF:FE0C:8F72

Status:    In progress

Tor exit node. --CptViraj (talk) 10:09, 11 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Since we have TorBlock as an extension, I thought we just grab the TorProject data (ie. ExoneraTor claims it has been Tor Exit Node for more than 48 hours prior to this report) to dynamically block exit node? If it did not block, it sounds more like a possible bug report. — regards, Revi 20:14, 14 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
It wasn't blocked at the time of my request, don't know about now. Is range block helpful as it has been done in my previous Tor IP block requests? -- CptViraj (talk) 09:03, 20 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I think I remember there being some issue with IPv6, though I can't find anything on Phabricator. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 11:09, 20 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed, there's been a few IPv6 Tor exits which have not been blocked by TorBlock and required manual blocks. MarioGom (talk) 17:22, 21 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
|revi, I thought that at as well, but JavaHurricane corrected me, linking me to a relevant recent thread that explained the TorBlock extension has issues with IPv6 addresses. Dmehus (talk) 03:33, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Global unblock for 2001:470::/32

Status:    In progress

The block reason incorrectly identifies this range as an open proxy. It's neither proxy nor open. I learned that some admins believe the Hurricane Electric's service makes it “like” an open proxy, but note that none of the reasons usually given as the rationale for the no open proxies policy apply to it. There is no anonymity nor particularly high potential of abuse. There is no reason why blocking individual /64 or /48 networks wouldn't be effective in case of abuse.--MwGamera (talk) 22:35, 29 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Oppose You say that there is no particularly high potential of abuse, but that doesn't match our logs. It's full of spambots. AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 03:16, 31 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The Internet is full of spambots and it would be surprising for a range this huge to carry only benign traffic. I don't have any visibility into Wikimedia logs so can't comment on the actual numbers. Is there any reason why they couldn't be blocked individually like in all the other ranges? In any case, the block reason given doesn't match reality (it's not even weasel worded like the one on EN wiki) and I considered it prudent to try to fix the situation before requesting an exemption from a block that from my POV goes against the guidelines.--MwGamera (talk) 18:02, 4 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Support This block hurts me and other people. HE 6to4 tunnel is necessary for my work, ISPs in my area do not give native IPv6. --Kawtaj (talk) 07:07, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Support This block hurts me, and I expect other people. My ISP doesn’t give good IPv6 access, and HE tunnelserver.org tunnels are my only good option. Lionel Elie Mamane (talk) 01:43, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
This is an open proxy/web host/colocation provided, used by one or more VPN services, if I'm not mistaken. If users with cross-wiki constructive contributions are affected, you can request a global IP block exemption. I can definitely attest to the Hurricane Electric LLC IP ranges being used for abuse and spambots on Miraheze as well. Dmehus (talk) 02:08, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
It is not an open proxy nor a web host. Every user has a separate, identifiable, and individually bannable prefix routed to them (although possibly more than one). There might be, and there likely are, some open proxies, web hosts, VPNs, etc, as well as spambots and other sources of abusive traffic in it, but that doesn't explain why should the whole range be blocked instead of just the networks with those. Or why should it be claimed to be an open proxy if the actual reason for blocking is some actual (ongoing?) cross-network abuse.--MwGamera (talk) 21:02, 27 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I can only second this request. This range hasn't been blocked until some point in 2020. At least unblock people from editing when logged in. But in general don't impose a general block because most users will be legitimate, like every normal network. Just block /64 or /48 after abuse has been noticed. --Treysis (talk) 09:18, 1 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Global block for proxy ranges

Status:    In progress

Proxies used in cross-wiki abuse: [2], [3], [4], [5]. ----*Fehufangą ♮ ✉ Talk page ♮ 05:14, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Global block for LTA Xayahrainie43

Status:    In progress

Long term abuse: Xayahrainie43 / zh:LTA:x43. Most of edits were reverted.--SCP-2000 02:41, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Global unblock for 147.161.237.87

Status:    In progress

When trying to edit a page, I received the block error "The IP address or range 147.161.237.87 has been globally blocked (disabled) by Jon Kolbert for the following reason(s): Open proxy/Webhost. This block will expire on 15:19, 31 October 2024."

This assessment is incorrect; the IP listed is part of a larger range operated by ZScaler (AS62044, 147.161.236.0/23 as well as many others). The IP range is used for Internet egress for corporate customers, who use ZScaler products for MFA-secured access to internal networks. My employer mandates use of ZScaler and it cannot be disabled on the machine. ZScaler do not operate any open public proxies, nor do they offer "privacy" VPN products, it's purely business use for SMEs & corporates. --Chris W. (talk | WP profile) 13:12, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Global block for Special:Contributions/1.43.0.0/16 and Special:Contributions/1.42.0.0/16

Status:    In progress

crosswiki abuse, long term abuse [6][7] --Johannnes89 (talk) 13:06, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Global block for 120.188.0.0/17, 114.4.0.0/16 and 114.10.0.0/19

Status:    In progress

Persistent long-term abuse, cross-wiki abuse, block evasion and IP hopping. AdhiNG (talk) 20:11, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Global block for 38.7.0.0/16

Status:    In progress

Crosswiki spam. Open proxies. See also c:COM:ANB#Spammer using multiple accounts. -- Jeff G. ツ (please ping or talk to me) 16:45, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Jeff G. Why do you think that the entire range is open proxy? I am not comfortable making a large range-block like this otherwise.--BRP ever 00:51, 13 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@BRPever: In addition to c:Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/Blocks and protections/Archive 32#Spammer using multiple accounts, please see all of the proxy blocks at https://meta.toolforge.org/stalktoy/38.7.0.0/16 in no less than 10 /24s and consider adding \bmensa(?:marketing|tech)\.com\.au\b to the global spam blacklist. -- Jeff G. ツ (please ping or talk to me) 10:45, 14 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Global block for 46.177.0.0/16

Status:    In progress

Xwiki disruption; see stalktoy. Blocked on cawikiquote, elwikinews, enwiki, and elwikitionary. IP from this range is currently disrupting enwiki. --Firestar464 (talk) 10:59, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Global block for 49.228.0.0/18

Status:    In progress

Spammy range, see [8]. ----Minorax«¦talk¦» 15:23, 30 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ping @Teles, considering you acted on #Global block for 49.228.17.157. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 09:42, 5 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Global block/unblock for 37.128.219.241

Status:    In progress

The IP is static. The user adds the Danish cast of several TV series to non-Danish pages.[9][10][11] The user is already blocked up to 2028 at en.wiki[12], so I would highly recommend a long-term block because I just reverted this person on multiple wikis that seem to lack recent patrollers. --Tbhotch (talk) 20:35, 30 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Global block for 80.246.28.0/24

Crosswiki abuse and VPN/Open Proxy. --Codc (talk) 23:56, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Global block for 103.153.2.0/24

Status:    In progress

Open proxy. --reNVoy (user talk) 14:10, 3 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Renvoy What makes you say this entire range is an open proxy? AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 01:54, 5 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
QBA-bot blocked handful of IPs from that range. Generally there is weird activity that involves LTA Marsuki s.kom + several IPs from that range were indicated as Tor Connection. reNVoy (user talk) 11:28, 5 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Global block for 180.243.0.0/20

Status:    In progress

Cross-wiki abuse. The vast majority of recent edits are vandalism. --NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 15:33, 13 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Global block for 2401:4900:560B:D7F1:384A:74A6:1954:4E58

Status:    In progress

Long-term abuse. Cross-wiki abuse. w:en:Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Wefffrrr/Archive#26_July_2021 Please block the suitable range. As they are active on mrwiki, wikidata, enwiki, hiwiki, commonswiki. From similar geo-locations and IP ranges. thanks. --QueerEcofeminist [they/them/their] 02:42, 15 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Global block for 195.35.231.192/26

Status:    In progress

LTA resumes activities after 3 month global block expired. See file here. --- Hoyanova (talk) 06:51, 15 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Global block for 2402:800:621F:C661:1DEC:31DF:32C:27EC/48

Status:    In progress

Long-term abuse. Cross-wiki abuse. Sister cities vandal. --NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 12:19, 16 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Global block for 178.33.0.0/16

Status:    In progress

Webhost, including spambot abuse. See https://meta.toolforge.org/stalktoy/178.33.0.0/16. --~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 01:00, 19 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Global block for LTA

Status:    In progress
Long-term abuse. --Mtarch11 (talk) 11:46, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Global block for 203.78.230.253

Status:    In progress

Cross-wiki abuse. Spam / spambot. --春春眠眠Syunsyunminmin 🗨️Talk 06:29, 24 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Global block for 106.102.0.140/24

Status:    In progress

Cross-wiki abuse. See also Stalktoy. --SCP-2000 09:37, 27 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Global block for 8.21.110.0/24

Status:    In progress

Cloudflare / Firefox VPN. --reNVoy (user talk) 10:52, 29 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Global lock IP rangeblock requested (85.140.14.80/16)

Status:    In progress

Per my talk, a trusted user from en.wp has requested the following:

Hi. Since the "Steward requests/Global" is semi-protected, I was wondering whether it's possible for you to ask for the 85.140.14.80/16 IP range to be globally blocked? They have already been blocked on various projects, including: ru.wp, fr.wp, es.wp, wikidata, nl.wp, de.wp, etc. Many thanks.

Please review for the suitability of blocking these IPs. Thanks. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 17:19, 29 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Moved to appropriate section. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 17:40, 29 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Global block for 140.213.149.182

Status:    Done

Lock evasion by LTA Marsuki. --NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 21:26, 30 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done BRP ever 23:05, 3 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Global block for 181.135.52.245

Status:    Done

Long-term abuse. Wikinger. --~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 01:00, 3 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done BRP ever 23:00, 3 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Global block for 186.120.69.18

Status:    Done

Long-term abuse. Cross-wiki abuse. Abusive username. Spam / spambot. GRP sock. --Ilovemydoodle (talk) 02:28, 3 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please consider selecting the actual applicable reasons rather than all checkmarks shown in TwinkleGlobal. An IP address is clearly not an abusive username. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 08:31, 3 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Done Please make your request properly if you want them processed. I am doing this one since there seem to be an urgent need, but please be more careful with requests moving ahead. Thank you.--BRP ever 22:44, 3 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Global block for 70.81.193.238

Status:    Done

Cross-wiki abuse. --NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 04:00, 3 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done BRP ever 22:44, 3 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Global block for 115.31.84.212

Status:    In progress

Cross-wiki abuse. --NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 00:20, 4 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Requests for global (un)lock and (un)hiding

Note that global blocking currently only applies to IPs, due to a technical limitation. If you wish to request a named account for global [un]locking, please request a global [un]lock here instead. Be sure to follow the instructions below:
  • Your request might be rejected if it doesn't include the necessary information.
  • Warning! This page is publicly viewable. If the account name is grossly insulting or contains personal information please contact a steward privately in #wikimedia-stewardsconnect or email your request to the stewards VRT queue at stewards-oversight@wikimedia.org (direct wiki interface) but do not post it here. Thanks.
  • Warning! This is not the place to ask for locks based on your opinion that someone is disruptive. Global locks are used exclusively against vandalism and spam, not because of content disputes, not because you think that someone deserves to be globally blocked. In such cases, you should ask for local blocks at appropriate places.
  • If you are globally locked, you should appeal your lock to stewards-appeals@wikimedia.org.

Please describe abusive activity of an account before reporting them here. Since stewards are often not active at projects the reported accounts are, things that seem obvious to you may not be equally obvious to the reviewing steward.

Instructions for making a request

Before requesting that a global account be (un)locked, please be sure that:

  1. You have evidence of cross-wiki disruption from the account(s).
  2. You can show that it is not feasible to use local-only blocks or other measures like page protection to combat the disruption.
  3. You have considered making the request in #wikimedia-stewardsconnect, especially for account names which will be hidden, or for urgent requests.
To make a request for an account to be locked or unlocked
Copy one of the codes below to the bottom of this section and explain why the account(s) should be locked/unlocked.
=== Global lock/unlock for Foo ===
{{status}} <!-- do not remove this template -->
* {{LockHide|username}}
* {{LockHide|username|hidename=1}} <!-- if you do not want the name to be visible on this page -->
*...
Reasons, etc. --~~~~

For many accounts: 

=== Global lock for spambots/vandals ===
{{status}} <!-- do not remove this template -->
{{MultiLock|username|username2|username3}}
{{MultiLock|username|username2|username3|hidename=1}} <!-- if you do not want the names to be visible on this page -->
*...
Reasons, etc, --~~~~

Global unlock for Eaglestorm

Status:    In progress

There were incivility problems on both enwiki and enwikiquote, but these weren't cross-wiki vandalism, spam or sockpuppetry issues and therefore I don't think they are eligible for a global lock. --Ferien (talk) 15:29, 2 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Also pinging Tegel as the one who made the lock --Ferien (talk) 15:30, 2 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Only edits are on two wikis. I don't see how this couldn't have been handled locally if needed. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 15:40, 1 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Is there a consensus that you want to have the user back at en.wikiquote? If there is then I would consider a re-evaluation of the global lock. -- Tegel (Talk) 21:39, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Tegel, the user was only blocked on Wikiquote for two weeks and that block has now expired, so I would say yes. --Ferien (talk) 05:47, 8 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
+1. IMO it's the global lock that effectively just extended the enwq block to be indefinite (and nothing else) without consensus. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 14:27, 8 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Global lock for どうせ

Status:    In progress

Cross-wiki long-term abuse: w:ja:LTA:SLIME. Vandalism-only account. Continuing vandalism on jawiki. --郊外生活Kogaiseikatsu (talk,contribs) 08:39, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

My CU results at login-wiki don't particularly indicate this to be SLIME. How sure are we this is SLIME? -- Amanda (she/her) 14:12, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@AmandaNP: That is because this account did vandal edits at Tokyo-related articles on jawiki. I guess the editing trend matches what SLIME usually do, and a jawiki sysop added this account into SLIME sock list; w:ja:Special:Diff/89427416. But considering your CU report, this account may be copycat of SLIME by other LTA, or this account has been logged in by taking measure to CU such as using different IP or ISP. Even if this account is not SLIME, but this account has done vandal edits on jawikivoyage such as creating vandalism-only page that ridicules a jawiki sysop voy:ja:Special:Redirect/logid/13654, so this account can be thought to cross-wiki abuse account. --郊外生活Kogaiseikatsu (talk,contribs) 20:23, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Global lock for FaridK12

Status:    In progress

Copyright violations at multiple wikis, see also en:Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#FaridK12_and_copyright. They have already been blocked at enwiki, and 16 of their articles at azwiki have also been deleted. At Commons, 2 uploads have already been deleted. --LaundryPizza03 (talk) 01:32, 22 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Comment Additionally, all remaining contributions at azwiki should be inspected for copyright violations, and revdel'd or deleted as appropriate. All copyvios at enwiki have been removed, and all files uploaded at Commons have been deleted or are nominated for deletion. LaundryPizza03 (talk) 02:32, 22 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Azwiki has 10 active admins, so I am not comfortable acting there. @Turkmen: for a look.--BRP ever 23:24, 2 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Global lock for T308397

Status:    Done

Long-term abuse. user:Cyberpunk2077JohnnySilverhand per edits on Chinese Wikipedia. --PAVLOV 19:20, 25 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@PAVLOV which specific edits are you referring to? Can you please provide the diff? Sorry if I am missing something very obvious. Thanks--BRP ever 23:44, 2 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Done, socks locked as well. Thanks...BRP ever 22:41, 3 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Global lock

Status:    Not done

Abusive username. --NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 12:39, 19 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh: can you email me the translation of this name? Sorry but google translate isn't helping me much in this case.--BRP ever 11:53, 3 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@BRPever: The third word is a slang term that means male's sexual organ. NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 19:22, 3 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh Combined with the first two words, is it meant to be a personal attack? Lock/hide is equivalent to oversight, so it can only be used for personal attack or similar level of abuse.--BRP ever 22:26, 3 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@BRPever: The first two are generic words commonly used in names. This username is not meant to be a personal attack; however, the third word is by itself such a strong word that, in my opinion, should never appear on any list. NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 22:31, 3 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Not done local block on wikis where it is deemed offensive should suffice. Might be a good idea to leave a note after the block and ask them to rename themselves.--BRP ever 22:36, 3 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Global lock for User:Quintinense's puppets

Status:    In progress

Puppets confirmed. Edmond Dantès d'un message? 05:45, 22 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed where? — regards, Revi 17:24, 26 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Pinging @Conde Edmond Dantès. :) --BRP ever 23:55, 2 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Global lock for 渡名喜文仁

Status:    In progress

Cross-wiki long-term abuse: w:WP:LTA/NDC. appeared on jawiki and wikidata. The username contains 文仁 (w:Fumihito, Crown Prince of Japan); the name of Japanese imperial family member. In wikidata, this account added sitelink to Vietnamese Wikipedia article. --郊外生活Kogaiseikatsu (talk,contribs) 16:53, 26 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Global lock for Thánh Chửi Wiki (Trieu Thuan Son's sockpuppet) and Trieu Thuan Son's sockpuppet(s)

Status:    Not done
User list
Lock all:

offensive/abusive username + viwiki raider KhanhCN Defender1st Minh (talk) 03:32, 29 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@KhanhCN Defender1st Minh What does these name mean? Please email me if it is something serious that can't be discussed publicly. Considering the name have not be revdeled in viwiki and the block reasons are different, I am having a hard time determining why a lock is necessary here.--BRP ever 11:46, 3 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@BRPever Very necessary! Both are Trieu Thuan Son's sockpuppets and created for raid + personal attack! ([13], [14] and [15]) KhanhCN Defender1st Minh (talk) 04:59, 4 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note that Trieu Thuan Son (talk • contribs • block • xwiki-contribs • xwiki-date (alt) • CA • ST • lwcheckuser) is not locked either, and you have not pointed out any cross-wiki abuse. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 07:53, 4 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@1234qwer1234qwer4 Trieu Thuan Son has only been blocked on viwiki for 3 months so I don't report him here! KhanhCN Defender1st Minh (talk) 08:34, 4 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
And there are a lot of evidence to prove that he is trying to get around/bypass the ban KhanhCN Defender1st Minh (talk) 08:49, 4 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Not done This should be dealt with locally.--BRP ever 09:23, 4 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Global lock for Haydichet

Status:    Not done

Pending... ([16]) offensive/abusive username - KhanhCN Defender1st Minh (talk) 16:36, 2 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@KhanhCN Defender1st Minh How is this username offensive/abusive? Sorry if I am missing something obvious.--BRP ever 11:00, 3 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
BRPever Haydichet means die in Vietnamese KhanhCN Defender1st Minh (talk) 04:19, 4 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Not done not offensive to the point where we need to lock them.--BRP ever 09:22, 4 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Global lock for DotServer

Status:    Not done

Cross-wiki abuse. Sockpuppetry. Copyright violations. Please see en:Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/TheManishPanwar. ---- Jeff G. ツ (please ping or talk to me) 12:12, 3 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Not done. No significant cross-wiki abuse, only blocked one one project, only one account indef'd. --AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 22:27, 3 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Global lock for Eiskrahablo sock(s)

Status:    Done

Sockpuppet(s) found in enwiki sockpuppet investigation, see w:en:Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Eiskrahablo. Girth Summit (blether) 12:23, 3 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Robot clerk note: Done by AntiCompositeNumber. MajavahBot (talk) 23:45, 3 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Global lock for MariaJaydHicky sock(s)

Status:    In progress

Sockpuppet(s) found in enwiki sockpuppet investigation, see w:en:Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/MariaJaydHicky. Girth Summit (blether) 12:39, 3 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Global lock for AmeenKhan8803

Status:    Done

Long-term abuse. Thamesinfotech. --GeneralNotability (talk) 13:10, 3 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done Ruslik (talk) 20:55, 3 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Global lock for Agustin Sepulveda Venegas 2004 Fan sock(s)

Status:    Done

Sockpuppet(s) found in enwiki sockpuppet investigation, see w:en:Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Agustin Sepulveda Venegas 2004 Fan. Girth Summit (blether) 13:19, 3 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Robot clerk note: Done by AntiCompositeNumber. MajavahBot (talk) 23:45, 3 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Global lock for 影武者(Nipponese Dog Calvero)

Status:    Done

Cross-wiki LTA, also please check sleepers.  It looks like a duck to me--Lanwi1(talk) 14:49, 3 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done Ruslik (talk) 20:52, 3 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Global lock for sockpuppet

Status:    In progress

Sockpuppet Trusovafan (talk) 14:01, 3 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Whose? Ruslik (talk) 20:49, 3 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
user:આર્યગુજરાત and many others. Trusovafan (talk) 04:51, 4 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Global lock for ImanueI NS Uen

Status:    Done

Long-term abuse. Cross-wiki abuse. Marsuki. --··· 🌸 Rachmat04 · ☕ 15:29, 3 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done BRP ever 23:06, 3 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Global lock for Crack Oficial 10

Status:    Done

Long-term abuse. --Rubbish computer (Ping me or leave a message on my talk page) 22:01, 3 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Rubbish computer Who? AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 22:24, 3 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hi AntiCompositeNumber, it's the same person as this account . https://meta.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:CentralAuth/Oscareduardo10_20_30_40_50_60_70 Rubbish computer (Ping me or leave a message on my talk page) 22:34, 3 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Robot clerk note: Done by AntiCompositeNumber. MajavahBot (talk) 23:25, 3 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Global lock for ToBeFree2022

Status:    Done

Impersonation. --NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 22:02, 3 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Global lock for IHateSockpuppets

Status:    Done

Long-term abuse. ---Alabama- (talk) 22:23, 3 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Robot clerk note: Done by AntiCompositeNumber. MajavahBot (talk) 23:05, 3 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Global lock for Sangramchowdhury001

Status:    In progress

Crosswiki spam. ---- Jeff G. ツ (please ping or talk to me) 23:07, 3 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Global lock for ErnestoMontague

Status:    In progress

Spam / spambot. Heating system spam. --~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 23:38, 3 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Global lock for LTA

Status:    In progress

Long-term abuse. Abusive username. Avoided. --~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 23:41, 3 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Global lock for JudahM2305 sock(s)

Status:    Done

Sockpuppet(s) found in enwiki sockpuppet investigation, see w:en:Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/JudahM2305. CU-confirmed on enwiki. Mz7 (talk) 01:56, 4 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Robot clerk note: Done by Operator873. MajavahBot (talk) 02:45, 4 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Global lock for Evlekis sock(s)

Status:    Done

Sockpuppet(s) found in enwiki sockpuppet investigation, see w:en:Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Evlekis. GeneralNotability (talk) 02:23, 4 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Robot clerk note: Done by Tks4Fish. MajavahBot (talk) 02:45, 4 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Global lock for ISECHIKA sock(s)

Status:    Done

Sockpuppet(s) found in enwiki sockpuppet investigation, see w:en:Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/ISECHIKA. Confirmed to LTA socks of ISECHIKA. See ja-wiki for more information. My apologies in advance, as many of these accounts appear to already be locked. It was such a huge list, that I didn't have the time to go through each one and check their global lock status... I re-submitted this request and removed the previous requests that I filed; I added additional sock puppet accounts that I've found. This list (as of the time of this filing) is up-to-date. :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 06:00, 4 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Oshwah I can only recommend w:User:GeneralNotability/mark-locked.js in this situation... ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 08:10, 4 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
1234qwer1234qwer4 - Thanks for the recommendation! I'll give it a look! :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 08:13, 4 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
1234qwer1234qwer4 - Another big "thanks" to you! I've added this script to my global.js page, and I love it! Definitely a great script to have on my toolbelt. :-) Later today, I'll go back and re-submit this request and with only the accounts that aren't currently locked listed (if a Steward hasn't gone through it already). Cheers - ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 08:26, 4 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The url generated for is too long, I will divide the request into two and process it.--BRP ever 09:25, 4 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, BRPever! :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 09:28, 4 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Done locked 'em all --BRP ever 09:38, 4 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Global lock for Punetaxicabs12

Status:    In progress

Spam / spambot. --Mtarch11 (talk) 07:14, 4 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Global lock for spambots

Status:    In progress

Spambots. --Mtarch11 (talk) 07:31, 4 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Global lock for House of Yahweh

Status:    In progress

Long-term abuse: HoY. --Mtarch11 (talk) 09:47, 4 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

See also

Cooperation requests for: comments (local) (global) · translation

Retrieved from "https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Steward_requests/Global&oldid=23483150"