I have archived my various vandalism-related talk page discussions, particularly requests to deal with vandals, on this page. Vandalism User:81.202.222.30This user is continuing to vandalise as we speak despite warning. He needs final warning then a block if he persists. Thanks.-- File Éireann 21:32, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
Could you help? Prodego talk 13:54, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
Just created. Perhaps you might wish to block.-- File Éireann 21:35, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
User:Evinem is running amok among wikipedia articles. I think he needs a final warning and a block.-- File Éireann 22:42, 9 December 2005 (UTC) I'll take a peek here... Evinem ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
Now User:Poppppppp is on the loose.-- File Éireann 00:25, 10 December 2005 (UTC) ![]() !מזל טוב from Izehar What would we do without you to block all the vandals? Before you, we'd have to wait for ages before they were blocked; forcing non-admins such as myself to follow them around reverting them until someone would block them. Izehar ( talk) 20:52, 12 December 2005 (UTC) Here, take an award: I created a page for common assault and seem to have run into a false category problem. Obviously, common assault should not be a category in its own right. David91 03:25, 19 December 2005 (UTC) I saw you become an admin, and I saw your name on my watch list so I picked you for help :). Can you give me some advice on what to do? On 2005 Sydney Race Riots, User:Flying fox is editing, reverting, etc and summarizing that he's reverting my edits. I have no clue as to why, as they aren't my edits. The only edits I've made are moving references to the reference section and tagging the appropriate content with a link to the reference. I haven't added any original content to the article. I don't know what's up with this guy. -- Elliskev 02:41, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
Would you mind launching an investigation of this chaps highly unusual edits. I've already had a bit of a debate with him and I've nominated another of his articles for deletion today. Basically, most of his articles have to go. Hes put a huge amount of work into them. Unfortunately, they don't appear to belong in this encyclopaedia.-- File Éireann 22:33, 13 December 2005 (UTC) Remember to check out User:Aoclery-- File Éireann 15:42, 14 December 2005 (UTC) Aoclery ( talk • contribs • page moves • block • block log) Seems like a particular IP likes you. :P He's out of here, but you must be doing a good job... Tito xd( ?!? - did you read this?) 01:35, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
There is an unregistered user who is constantly vandalizing the Evansville, Indiana page to include a vanity link to his website. The user in question is Evansvilleboneyard and the website in question is Evansville Boneyard. Despite consistent removal by a number of contirbutors, he/she continues to add it back to the Evansville page with such things as "widely read", etc. There is absolutely no evidence to suggest it is encyclopedia worthy and the user should be warned and/or banned. We could really use your help in removing these pointless links and keeping this guy from adding them back.-- YHoshua 03:31, 16 December 2005 (UTC) You beat me to User talk:67.119.122.102, the guy adding LegalMatch spam. If I'd seen your note first I might have held off, but in fact I had already reverted his history. No great loss IMHO. If you disagree I'm happy to go back and undo, though AndyJones 22:44, 16 December 2005 (UTC) My IP address is 205.188.117.13. username:Mike Nobody. The IP address has been blocked by BD2412.
I want to continue working on my Userpage. I was in the process of adding pics to my page and relevant articles (Star Trek References in Futurama, Saavik, etc.) Could you please unblock me, I haven't vandalised anything, just an AOL user who got blocked too.-- Mike Nobody 21:26, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
Please see my reply as to why 31 hours should stay :) -- Cel e stianpower háblame 10:04, 19 December 2005 (UTC) 20:45, 19 December 2005 BD2412 blocked "User:213.244.194.183" with an expiry time of indefinite (Follows m.o. of repeat vandal BangBang.) I'm pretty sure you know it, but blocking IPs indefinitely should not be done unless they're open proxies. Just wanted to know what's going on. Tito xd( ?!? - help us) 03:55, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
You're about to be yelled at again, so be prepared. I've just unblocked user:202.180.83.6, which you seem to have blocked for two days despite the message on the user talk page saying that since this IP is used by a large number of editors, incuding at least one admin (me) it should only be blocked for 15 minutes at a time, and that you should give me warning first! Grrrrr! Grutness... wha? 05:32, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
That's happened to me more than once myself, especially with those high-speed persistent vandal types. (Unfortunately that IP range has a bunch of legitimate users, else I'd range-block it!) Antandrus (talk) 23:12, 20 December 2005 (UTC) Dakota Fanning protectedI have protected Dakota Fanning for the time being, and will maintain it in that status for a few hours. Cheers! BD2412 T 21:08, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
Why was I blocked previously? I went to come on here the other day & it gave me a message that I had been blocked? I would have emailed you but those who I share my computer with do not want to be spammed. I even tried my friend's account to try to message you on here, but his account would not work either. So why were both me & my friend blocked after doing nothing wrong? I checked the block list of when it said I'd been blocked & my name was not on there. I do not want people getting the wrong idea & thinking I'm a vandal. Thanks Spawn Man 00:08, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
You said you wanted to unprotect The PLAGUE. I have a feeling you didn't know how to unprotect a deletedpage since it was still protected when I saw it. :) You just delete the page. Darn newbie admin! :) -- Woohookitty (cat scratches) 01:06, 4 January 2006 (UTC) Greetings. I just wanted to inform you, as an admin, about a new user, HQCentral that may be worth keeping an eye on. First of all, he posted an attack on my talk page for tagging an article for cleanup and, furthermore, here is an early version of his user page. I posted a polite welcome on his talk page regarding some of our rules on civility, but I think that a note from an admin might have a little more teeth with him. Anyways, just wanted to give you a heads up, and keep up the excellent work! Youngamerican 19:28, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
Already there. Thanks for the heads-up, though (by the way, take a look at the latest revision to the page if you haven't already ;-)). Linuxbeak (drop me a line) 02:40, 13 January 2006 (UTC) I changed this vandal's talk page from full protection to semi-protected. For anon talk pages, a semi-protect is sufficient to prevent them from blanking it, while allowing other users to post warnings. I hope you don't mind! Owen× ☎ 16:59, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
A revert war on Louisiana Baptist University is totally out of control. Everyone has started using anon IP's so I'm not sure who is really involved. I think the page should be protected to force this to the talk page. Could you take a look at the page history, thanks. David D. (Talk) 06:41, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
Hey BDA, being kind of inexperienced, I was hoping you could look at what I did with the user Sanoker- I described it at the bottom of WP:AN/I. CanadianCaesar The Republic Restored 05:02, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
I admit it looks exactly like vandalic nonsense, and there was no way to tell ahead of time that I wanted it. 68.39.174.238 03:23, 25 February 2006 (UTC) 216.70.13.130 ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) linkspam Prodego talk 22:22, 8 March 2006 (UTC) I appreciate that you looked into my block. I realize that when I email an admin they may not be able to get to my request for awhile. Thank you. No Guru 05:52, 12 March 2006 (UTC) As a big vandal fighter, I am seeing what I can do to get checkuser access to help me tackle sockpuppets and help out with the backlog. Any help/advice would be appreciated. Gator (talk) 14:26, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
Indef block Nikto parcheesy ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) Prodego talk 00:11, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
Yes. Good eye. CheckUser confirms, of course. Jayjg (talk) 22:04, 17 April 2006 (UTC) Would you please consider a block on this user: [1] for repeated vandalism to Bill Clinton today? Kukin i 14:00, 28 April 2006 (UTC) Hi BD, I think this user, 206.176.100.20 is a vandal. If you can help please do so. -- Eastlaw 04:52, 3 May 2006 (UTC) More IP blocks over a month. This time Natalinasmpf. See User_talk:Natalinasmpf#User:169.244.143.115, I would appreciate your assistance again. Thanks for you help, Prodego talk 17:10, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
Another, this one is tricky. This user seems to have been unilaterally sysoped by Danny and has only 168 edits. User:AlisonW. See her block log. Prodego talk 18:52, 20 June 2006 (UTC) You don't seem to be aware of it but
Ted Wilkes has been banned from editing Wikipedia. He was banned in mid March for 1 year by the Arbitration Committee.
FearÉIREANN
BD, when you get a chance, can you permablock this account? Thanks.-- Kchase 01:58, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
Hey, stranger, maybe you can solve a mystery. I just made an edit to revert a "test" by an anon at IP 146.129.250.105 in the above referenced article. On the article page, I can see that the offending characters are no longer there, and my watchlist shows that I made the edit. However, when I pull up the history on the article -- the edit doesn't show up at all. It shows the last edit as having been made by IP 146.129.250.105, as though I never made the edit. Any idea what would cause that discrepancy? Yours, Famspear 20:56, 21 September 2006 (UTC) OK, I got out of Wikipedia, closed my browser, reopened it, cleared my cache in the browser (Microsoft Internet Explorer), then got back into Wikipedia, and the problem seems to be gone. Weird. Famspear 21:04, 21 September 2006 (UTC) This user has been vandalizing Mertens v. Hewitt Associates. He has already been warned once. Should I do anything more? -- Eastlaw 23:51, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
WP:AN/I is where the discussion is located. -- Tractor kings fan 07:00, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
HeHe, I'm well aware of the notorious "III/3/One" vandal. I remember standardizing the LTA page on him before it was deleted. 68.39.174.238 05:34, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
*cough *cough* *sighs* — Moe ε 22:49, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
A one second block can be used to make a note in someone's block log. While agree that it isn't used very often, I've sure seen it used more than a 15 minute or 1 hour block, both of which are fairly useless in term of vandalism and unlikely to be constructive if used for other purposes. John Reaves 18:29, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
User Gettingitdone has Vandalized the AFD for Citizen of the Several States by removing my comments tonight. I have since replaced them on the AFD and warned him on hi talk page, but I thought it was important that you be aware of this since you opened the AFD in question. If you know of any other instances of vandalism in regards to this AFD please let me know so I can involve an administrator. -- Torchwood Who? ( talk) 06:07, 7 March 2008 (UTC) False accusations don't belong anywhere on Wikipedia. -- Zsero ( talk) 17:22, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
Hi. I've noticed a few edits to this page from an anonymous editor who claims to be Sol Wachtler ( here, here, and here). Most of the edits appear to try to portray him in a better light. It seems like a clear conflict of interest to be editing your own wikipedia article but is there a policy against it?-- Cdogsimmons ( talk) 20:22, 17 December 2008 (UTC) I don't think messages that still apply, such as IP information and block notices, shoud be removed from IP talk pages, such as User talk:203.36.44.12. -- Geniac ( talk) 23:13, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
One heck of a fast click while reverting vandalism - my bad - Fastily (talk) 03:56, 25 March 2009 (UTC) You didn't talk about this with me, you didn't clear the unblock requests and you didn't clear the autoblock. Not helpful. Gwen Gale ( talk) 23:24, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
Except in cases of unambiguous error, administrators should avoid unblocking users without first attempting to contact the blocking administrator and discuss the matter with them. If the blocking administrator is not available, or if the administrators cannot come to an agreement, then a discussion at the administrators' noticeboard is recommended. The user made a string of taunting personal attacks amid many warnings and you straightforwardly broke policy by not contacting me. The next time you disagree with an admin action, don't wheel war (An administrator undoes another administrator's actions without consultation). Instead, please read up on how these things are done by consensus and follow it. Gwen Gale ( talk) 00:16, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
I'm itching to indef this guy, but I don't want to step on your toes. This user is about as clear a vandalism-only, malicious account as you're likely to see. He even moved a page to "on wheels" (which I thought the abuse filter wouldn't allow).-- Fuhghettaboutit ( talk) 03:15, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
|
I have archived my various vandalism-related talk page discussions, particularly requests to deal with vandals, on this page. Vandalism User:81.202.222.30This user is continuing to vandalise as we speak despite warning. He needs final warning then a block if he persists. Thanks.-- File Éireann 21:32, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
Could you help? Prodego talk 13:54, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
Just created. Perhaps you might wish to block.-- File Éireann 21:35, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
User:Evinem is running amok among wikipedia articles. I think he needs a final warning and a block.-- File Éireann 22:42, 9 December 2005 (UTC) I'll take a peek here... Evinem ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
Now User:Poppppppp is on the loose.-- File Éireann 00:25, 10 December 2005 (UTC) ![]() !מזל טוב from Izehar What would we do without you to block all the vandals? Before you, we'd have to wait for ages before they were blocked; forcing non-admins such as myself to follow them around reverting them until someone would block them. Izehar ( talk) 20:52, 12 December 2005 (UTC) Here, take an award: I created a page for common assault and seem to have run into a false category problem. Obviously, common assault should not be a category in its own right. David91 03:25, 19 December 2005 (UTC) I saw you become an admin, and I saw your name on my watch list so I picked you for help :). Can you give me some advice on what to do? On 2005 Sydney Race Riots, User:Flying fox is editing, reverting, etc and summarizing that he's reverting my edits. I have no clue as to why, as they aren't my edits. The only edits I've made are moving references to the reference section and tagging the appropriate content with a link to the reference. I haven't added any original content to the article. I don't know what's up with this guy. -- Elliskev 02:41, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
Would you mind launching an investigation of this chaps highly unusual edits. I've already had a bit of a debate with him and I've nominated another of his articles for deletion today. Basically, most of his articles have to go. Hes put a huge amount of work into them. Unfortunately, they don't appear to belong in this encyclopaedia.-- File Éireann 22:33, 13 December 2005 (UTC) Remember to check out User:Aoclery-- File Éireann 15:42, 14 December 2005 (UTC) Aoclery ( talk • contribs • page moves • block • block log) Seems like a particular IP likes you. :P He's out of here, but you must be doing a good job... Tito xd( ?!? - did you read this?) 01:35, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
There is an unregistered user who is constantly vandalizing the Evansville, Indiana page to include a vanity link to his website. The user in question is Evansvilleboneyard and the website in question is Evansville Boneyard. Despite consistent removal by a number of contirbutors, he/she continues to add it back to the Evansville page with such things as "widely read", etc. There is absolutely no evidence to suggest it is encyclopedia worthy and the user should be warned and/or banned. We could really use your help in removing these pointless links and keeping this guy from adding them back.-- YHoshua 03:31, 16 December 2005 (UTC) You beat me to User talk:67.119.122.102, the guy adding LegalMatch spam. If I'd seen your note first I might have held off, but in fact I had already reverted his history. No great loss IMHO. If you disagree I'm happy to go back and undo, though AndyJones 22:44, 16 December 2005 (UTC) My IP address is 205.188.117.13. username:Mike Nobody. The IP address has been blocked by BD2412.
I want to continue working on my Userpage. I was in the process of adding pics to my page and relevant articles (Star Trek References in Futurama, Saavik, etc.) Could you please unblock me, I haven't vandalised anything, just an AOL user who got blocked too.-- Mike Nobody 21:26, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
Please see my reply as to why 31 hours should stay :) -- Cel e stianpower háblame 10:04, 19 December 2005 (UTC) 20:45, 19 December 2005 BD2412 blocked "User:213.244.194.183" with an expiry time of indefinite (Follows m.o. of repeat vandal BangBang.) I'm pretty sure you know it, but blocking IPs indefinitely should not be done unless they're open proxies. Just wanted to know what's going on. Tito xd( ?!? - help us) 03:55, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
You're about to be yelled at again, so be prepared. I've just unblocked user:202.180.83.6, which you seem to have blocked for two days despite the message on the user talk page saying that since this IP is used by a large number of editors, incuding at least one admin (me) it should only be blocked for 15 minutes at a time, and that you should give me warning first! Grrrrr! Grutness... wha? 05:32, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
That's happened to me more than once myself, especially with those high-speed persistent vandal types. (Unfortunately that IP range has a bunch of legitimate users, else I'd range-block it!) Antandrus (talk) 23:12, 20 December 2005 (UTC) Dakota Fanning protectedI have protected Dakota Fanning for the time being, and will maintain it in that status for a few hours. Cheers! BD2412 T 21:08, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
Why was I blocked previously? I went to come on here the other day & it gave me a message that I had been blocked? I would have emailed you but those who I share my computer with do not want to be spammed. I even tried my friend's account to try to message you on here, but his account would not work either. So why were both me & my friend blocked after doing nothing wrong? I checked the block list of when it said I'd been blocked & my name was not on there. I do not want people getting the wrong idea & thinking I'm a vandal. Thanks Spawn Man 00:08, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
You said you wanted to unprotect The PLAGUE. I have a feeling you didn't know how to unprotect a deletedpage since it was still protected when I saw it. :) You just delete the page. Darn newbie admin! :) -- Woohookitty (cat scratches) 01:06, 4 January 2006 (UTC) Greetings. I just wanted to inform you, as an admin, about a new user, HQCentral that may be worth keeping an eye on. First of all, he posted an attack on my talk page for tagging an article for cleanup and, furthermore, here is an early version of his user page. I posted a polite welcome on his talk page regarding some of our rules on civility, but I think that a note from an admin might have a little more teeth with him. Anyways, just wanted to give you a heads up, and keep up the excellent work! Youngamerican 19:28, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
Already there. Thanks for the heads-up, though (by the way, take a look at the latest revision to the page if you haven't already ;-)). Linuxbeak (drop me a line) 02:40, 13 January 2006 (UTC) I changed this vandal's talk page from full protection to semi-protected. For anon talk pages, a semi-protect is sufficient to prevent them from blanking it, while allowing other users to post warnings. I hope you don't mind! Owen× ☎ 16:59, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
A revert war on Louisiana Baptist University is totally out of control. Everyone has started using anon IP's so I'm not sure who is really involved. I think the page should be protected to force this to the talk page. Could you take a look at the page history, thanks. David D. (Talk) 06:41, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
Hey BDA, being kind of inexperienced, I was hoping you could look at what I did with the user Sanoker- I described it at the bottom of WP:AN/I. CanadianCaesar The Republic Restored 05:02, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
I admit it looks exactly like vandalic nonsense, and there was no way to tell ahead of time that I wanted it. 68.39.174.238 03:23, 25 February 2006 (UTC) 216.70.13.130 ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) linkspam Prodego talk 22:22, 8 March 2006 (UTC) I appreciate that you looked into my block. I realize that when I email an admin they may not be able to get to my request for awhile. Thank you. No Guru 05:52, 12 March 2006 (UTC) As a big vandal fighter, I am seeing what I can do to get checkuser access to help me tackle sockpuppets and help out with the backlog. Any help/advice would be appreciated. Gator (talk) 14:26, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
Indef block Nikto parcheesy ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) Prodego talk 00:11, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
Yes. Good eye. CheckUser confirms, of course. Jayjg (talk) 22:04, 17 April 2006 (UTC) Would you please consider a block on this user: [1] for repeated vandalism to Bill Clinton today? Kukin i 14:00, 28 April 2006 (UTC) Hi BD, I think this user, 206.176.100.20 is a vandal. If you can help please do so. -- Eastlaw 04:52, 3 May 2006 (UTC) More IP blocks over a month. This time Natalinasmpf. See User_talk:Natalinasmpf#User:169.244.143.115, I would appreciate your assistance again. Thanks for you help, Prodego talk 17:10, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
Another, this one is tricky. This user seems to have been unilaterally sysoped by Danny and has only 168 edits. User:AlisonW. See her block log. Prodego talk 18:52, 20 June 2006 (UTC) You don't seem to be aware of it but
Ted Wilkes has been banned from editing Wikipedia. He was banned in mid March for 1 year by the Arbitration Committee.
FearÉIREANN
BD, when you get a chance, can you permablock this account? Thanks.-- Kchase 01:58, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
Hey, stranger, maybe you can solve a mystery. I just made an edit to revert a "test" by an anon at IP 146.129.250.105 in the above referenced article. On the article page, I can see that the offending characters are no longer there, and my watchlist shows that I made the edit. However, when I pull up the history on the article -- the edit doesn't show up at all. It shows the last edit as having been made by IP 146.129.250.105, as though I never made the edit. Any idea what would cause that discrepancy? Yours, Famspear 20:56, 21 September 2006 (UTC) OK, I got out of Wikipedia, closed my browser, reopened it, cleared my cache in the browser (Microsoft Internet Explorer), then got back into Wikipedia, and the problem seems to be gone. Weird. Famspear 21:04, 21 September 2006 (UTC) This user has been vandalizing Mertens v. Hewitt Associates. He has already been warned once. Should I do anything more? -- Eastlaw 23:51, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
WP:AN/I is where the discussion is located. -- Tractor kings fan 07:00, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
HeHe, I'm well aware of the notorious "III/3/One" vandal. I remember standardizing the LTA page on him before it was deleted. 68.39.174.238 05:34, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
*cough *cough* *sighs* — Moe ε 22:49, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
A one second block can be used to make a note in someone's block log. While agree that it isn't used very often, I've sure seen it used more than a 15 minute or 1 hour block, both of which are fairly useless in term of vandalism and unlikely to be constructive if used for other purposes. John Reaves 18:29, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
User Gettingitdone has Vandalized the AFD for Citizen of the Several States by removing my comments tonight. I have since replaced them on the AFD and warned him on hi talk page, but I thought it was important that you be aware of this since you opened the AFD in question. If you know of any other instances of vandalism in regards to this AFD please let me know so I can involve an administrator. -- Torchwood Who? ( talk) 06:07, 7 March 2008 (UTC) False accusations don't belong anywhere on Wikipedia. -- Zsero ( talk) 17:22, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
Hi. I've noticed a few edits to this page from an anonymous editor who claims to be Sol Wachtler ( here, here, and here). Most of the edits appear to try to portray him in a better light. It seems like a clear conflict of interest to be editing your own wikipedia article but is there a policy against it?-- Cdogsimmons ( talk) 20:22, 17 December 2008 (UTC) I don't think messages that still apply, such as IP information and block notices, shoud be removed from IP talk pages, such as User talk:203.36.44.12. -- Geniac ( talk) 23:13, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
One heck of a fast click while reverting vandalism - my bad - Fastily (talk) 03:56, 25 March 2009 (UTC) You didn't talk about this with me, you didn't clear the unblock requests and you didn't clear the autoblock. Not helpful. Gwen Gale ( talk) 23:24, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
Except in cases of unambiguous error, administrators should avoid unblocking users without first attempting to contact the blocking administrator and discuss the matter with them. If the blocking administrator is not available, or if the administrators cannot come to an agreement, then a discussion at the administrators' noticeboard is recommended. The user made a string of taunting personal attacks amid many warnings and you straightforwardly broke policy by not contacting me. The next time you disagree with an admin action, don't wheel war (An administrator undoes another administrator's actions without consultation). Instead, please read up on how these things are done by consensus and follow it. Gwen Gale ( talk) 00:16, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
I'm itching to indef this guy, but I don't want to step on your toes. This user is about as clear a vandalism-only, malicious account as you're likely to see. He even moved a page to "on wheels" (which I thought the abuse filter wouldn't allow).-- Fuhghettaboutit ( talk) 03:15, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
|