![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | ← | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 |
Most of the vandals listed here I see are referred to as 'he'. If they are confirmed to be males that's fine but if we don't know, its better to use gender-neutral pronouns like 'they'. WdS | Talk 08:08, 31 July 2016 (UTC)
But if someone feels this is really important they are welcome to expend the effort to change entries where the gender of the subject is not known to the gender-neutral singular they.Apparently not, as I was just reverted when I tried to change an entry to be gender neutral. I think its very poor form to treat Wikipedia editors as automatically male-unless-proven-otherwise. WanderingWanda ( talk) 09:11, 23 September 2019 (UTC)
Might an LTA page be warranted? They've used a staggering 293 accounts and IPs to sock incessantly for 3 years, filling up 160 SPI reports. They've also gone cross-wiki, requiring stewards to lock some accounts. We would need to be very careful to avoid WP:BEANS, but I think an LTA page might help. I wanted to hear some other opinions on this. Thanks, GAB gab 20:04, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Support: Isn't there somewhere better to suggest this where more people will look? MM (WhatIDo WHATIDO?) (Now THIS... I did.) 19:12, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
When a new long-term abuse report is created, its status is set to pending by default. Who is it that reviews/approves new pending reports? I created Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/Fangusu a little over a month ago (thought it was longer, oops) but it has not been reviewed yet. I don't see reviewing in the instructions anywhere so I'm not sure who I should contact, if it was at the point where I should be contacting anyone. Ivanvector ( Talk/ Edits) 18:20, 4 November 2016 (UTC)
Picture: You are a new Wikipedia user, decide to try doing some silly vandalism for the heck of it and are blocked promptly. The next day, you do it again, and again after that, because each time, it becomes more fun. Pages are protected, your socks are tagged and such but that only makes it more exciting. This scenario sound familiar? That's how the common vandal becomes a LTA. It feels to me like this is happening more regularly; instead of attracting helpful new contributors, we keep getting these LTA cases. An extreme more recent example would be Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/The Suix. It has to do with the way things work here; this is like a game to them. Other than the standard WP:DENY stuff, does anyone have any new ideas for how to make disrupting Wikipedia and evading blocks boring, and how to make reformation more desirable? Of course there will always be some trolls who will troll no matter what, but surely there has to be something we can do, some changes to the system that will discourage this kind of behavior more. Sro23 ( talk) 03:08, 27 December 2016 (UTC)
Please see RfC: LTA Knowledgebase at the Village Pump. Sam Walton ( talk) 16:34, 5 February 2017 (UTC)
Under most investigation pages here, there is a descriptor for "Severity". however, I cannot find any policy delineating what distinguishes "High", "Medium", "Low", and "Severe". I feel some guidelines about this would be an asset to the utility of the project/descriptor. DLMacLeod ( talk) 03:51, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
I've got one that is basically my own pet project. They only go after one article and are really, really obvious. This has been going on for over two years now. It doesn't feel like trolling, I think they really just don't get that the article on the area where they live is not a place for them to spam their own name and make ridiculous claims about being a CEO or whatever. So, not a huge deal, the only thing is that it appears I am the only one who is aware of them. Last year i took a long break and they went hog-wild spamming this article and generally making a mess out of it. So the issue is that if I'm not around, nobody seems to notice, and they don't realize this "new" user is not new at all, having had about a dozen previous incarnations.
Maybe this post wil be enough to get more eyes on it? The article in question is Phalia, a district in Punjab, Pakistan. Socks are pretty obvious. More details available upon request. This discussion I just started at Commons can tell you basically what you need to know. Beeblebrox ( talk) 18:53, 13 May 2017 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/List has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please capitalize that Taiki0409 note because LG-Gunther still creating LTA cases with caps 66.87.69.4 ( talk) 05:35, 23 June 2017 (UTC)
" Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/Detailed instructions", currently linked in one of the banners at the top of the talk page, seems to be abandoned or not well updated. It links to the inactive WP:Abuse response. What to do with the instructions? -- George Ho ( talk) 16:32, 30 July 2017 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/List has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please fix summary for Taiki0409 209.249.5.130 ( talk) 05:18, 11 August 2017 (UTC)
August 31, 2017: Hello. My phone was IP banned from editing any articles and the explanation was a bunch of unproperly formatted code about the Dog and rapper vandal and need help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.204.244.241 ( talk • contribs) 17:01, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
Banned in October 2013; still active in 2017 (see WP:Sockpuppet investigations/Jeremy112233). The only link I know of to use e.g. for G5 nominations is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive254#Community ban proposal for paid editing firm wikiexperts.us. We also need a place to hang this linkage. Just as a matter of convenience I'd like to create a LTA case, if nobody objects. ☆ Bri ( talk) 17:06, 1 November 2017 (UTC)
At Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/Massachusetts vandal, a fairly recent case page has been nominated for deletion. Feel free to add your thoughts on the matter. Binksternet ( talk) 05:01, 5 December 2017 (UTC)
To editor Enterprisey: I don't understand your reversion. The instruction text now appears in a tall awkward column under the roman numeral I. I had move the text to the cell to the right to fix that problem. How is was my edit causing a visual problem? Chris Troutman ( talk) 16:23, 27 December 2017 (UTC)
I have an idea: why not put LTAs on a multilingual wiki (maybe at lta.wikimedia.org)? We could start by importing the en, de, nl, ja, and zh LTA cases. This would allow more coordination between each wiki's checkusers. Lojbanist remove cattle from stage 18:40, 1 April 2018 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/List has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please can you remove Joelhazelton and a few others, the case has been archived, but i moved it to the archive. i am not autocomfirmed, so i cannot move it myself. Sincerely, Cæsey Shine! 07:05, 11 April 2018 (UTC)
Okay, thank you. Cæsey Shine! 19:56, 11 April 2018 (UTC)
I'm going to unarchive WP:LTA/SGK per [3]. Linguist un Eins uno (Linguist111) 16:54, 22 June 2018 (UTC)
I've encountered a specific SPI case multiple times this month. From SPI filings they appear to be quite active, but cases only date back to April and I was wondering what the time threshold was for a case to be considered LTA. It seems likely that they meet the last two criteria for an LTA filing. Also, I encountered an established LTA case with its own page that is not on the LTA front page and would like to know what additional criteria, if any, need to be satisfied for the case to be on the front page. Aspening ( talk) 14:25, 29 June 2018 (UTC)
Are LTAs prohibited from creation if the sockpuppeteer/vandal in question seeks attention and endorses a LTA page for themselves? I'm pretty sure that LTA pages for attention-seekers are supposed to be forbidden in accordance with WP:DENY, but I'm not 100% definitive. Campuscarrot ( talk) 05:06, 20 July 2018 (UTC)
Now, I just demand editors to put it User:Daciproteasa09 in LTA list. 95.91.212.63 ( talk) 13:38, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
I want the English Wikipedia to adopt the LTA namespace like the Japanese Wikipedia. For example: WP:LTA/BMX will become LTA:BMX. – User 45 65 41 16:57, 25 December 2018 (UTC)
What's the best procedure for deleting an LTA subpage itself created as an attack? Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/Cinadon36 czar 23:16, 5 February 2019 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/List has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Change 'anti-soy bean propeganda' to 'anti-soy bean propaganda' ActualYellowJournalism ( talk) 05:32, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
What happened to the Willie on wheels special long term abuse report? I remember seeing it SpidersMilk, Drink Spider Milk, it tastes good. ( talk) 21:03, 3 March 2019 (UTC)
It's a very useful resource for preventing vandalism. ᴀɴᴏɴʏᴍᴜᴤᴤ ᴜᴤᴇʀ (ᴛᴀʟᴋ) 23:26, 4 March 2019 (UTC)
I added the above vandal to the table and documented their activity, but I am not documenting LTA activity every day. Any further guidance/help will be appreciated. Thanks.-- Ymblanter ( talk) 15:15, 7 March 2019 (UTC)
Take a look at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/Nevada IPs and comment if you want. Binksternet ( talk) 14:56, 30 April 2019 (UTC)
Hello all,
I’m writing to let you know about a new project, IP Editing: Privacy Enhancement and Abuse Mitigation, that the Wikimedia Foundation is starting.
Because people in general are increasingly technically advanced and privacy conscious, our users are now more aware of the collection and use of their personal information, and how its misuse may lead to harassment or abuse. The Foundation is starting a project to re-evaluate and enhance protections for user privacy through technical improvement to the projects. As part of this work, we will also be looking at our existing anti-vandalism and anti-abuse tools and making sure our wikis have access to the same (or better) tools to protect themselves.
The project page is on Meta. This project is currently in very early phases of discussions and we don’t have a concrete plan for it yet. We’d like your input. And please share with other people who you think would be interested. SPoore (WMF), Strategist, Community health initiative ( talk) 18:16, 1 August 2019 (UTC)
See Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/The abominable Wiki troll. Johnuniq ( talk) 03:36, 23 August 2019 (UTC)
Created, but little confused by style of this page and also whether i need to enter more information.
IP has a history of abuse, came off a ban and has since continued. Slywriter ( talk) 02:36, 4 October 2019 (UTC)
I deleted the information. I am not experienced enough to know whether I should have performed UNDO instead.
Please identify the editor or create a filter that blocks him/her from reposting this type of information. There was no footnote identifying the source.
I identified the date of the posting from the history. See the lines below copied from the history.
curprev 05:38, 2 October 2019 65.246.252.82 talk 25,482 bytes +4 undo curprev 05:38, 2 October 2019 65.246.252.82 talk 25,478 bytes +115 undo
Unclefeet ( talk) 17:04, 9 February 2020 (UTC)
@ Oshwah, @ Widr: Sockpuppeteer has returned from inactivity; see User:Kamala_Harris_Genghis_Khan. Passenger pigeon ( talk) 20:04, 13 March 2020 (UTC)
Hello everyone! I am well aware that I'm not the first person to bring this up, but between then and now there has been an increase in pending LTA reports. From what I understand after a pleasant chat in the IRC, the filing of an LTA report can sometimes be counterproductive and give a persistent troll or vandal the recognition and attention that they desire, and so for that reason lots of them should not exist. This may have led to a common practice of neglecting newly filed LTA reports for a long time due to a perceived low urgency, which is understandable. However, as I had mentioned earlier in the IRC, the frustration over the slow evaluation of pending reports has led even certain admins to change the status to active immediately upon creating a report themselves. Though I do not have the authority to do this, the LTA report that I have been contributing to is one of a notorious cross-wiki POV vandal that is well-recognized and had been known by many admins on the English Wikipedia long before I came into the picture. Wouldn't you agree that the evaluation and updating of these reports should be prioritized over those that seem counterproductive by a more active vetting process? Months after my initial filing of WorldCreaterFighter, none of the info that I know many of these admins and checkusers have and can contribute has been added, and the status remains on pending approval when all parties involved are well-aware that they are highly active. I would appreciate any response and welcome a conversation. Thanks! Coderenius ( ☎) 00:32, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
Over at the English Wikivoyage we have a long-term problem with the "fuerdai" vandal (aka "BMX On WheeIs"). We are using a combination of blocks, page protection, and edit filters to stop the vandalism, but with less-than-satisfactory results. The edit filters stop some of the vandalism, but a significant amount still gets through. Can anyone help with other ways to stop this disruption? — Granger ( talk · contribs) 00:15, 23 June 2020 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place to address the redirect
Wikipedia:LTA/TTI. The discussion will occur at
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 July 22#Wikipedia:LTA/TTI until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.
🌸 1.Ayana 🌸 (
talk)
10:43, 22 July 2020 (UTC)
Hello! Please refer to my above post from May – once again, any response would be appreciated. It does seem unfair that most posts receive replies but mine did not despite outlining the issue adequately :)
At the very least, I would like to formally and with all gratitude request for any willing admin to update the information on WorldCreaterFighter and set their status to active in the infobox, and for other high-priority abusers still on pending as well if possible, even though it seems much has been done to remedy the issue with WCF across Wikimedia since my previous post (props for that). After all, checkusers have for the longest had access to and remain fully aware of which IPs WCF socks operate under, so it shouldn't be too much of a hassle to simply transfer some general info on their whereabouts to the infobox. Thank you! Coderenius ( ☎) 19:09, 5 September 2020 (UTC)
Could someone tell me if I'm crazy for thinking these all might be related? If I'm not, we might have a LTA going back to 2009, and over 100 confirmed and suspected socks. ☆ Bri ( talk) 21:34, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
Quite a few entries here have very specific personal information, that if likely put anywhere else on WP would lead to it being oversighted very quickly.
I won't be linking the exact reports for obvious privacy reasons, but here are some privacy concerns I have noticed:
I would immediately email the oversight team if this was on any other page, however, with a page like LTA, I want to see consensus first, so I don't make any mistakes. wizzito | say hello! 06:25, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
I've cleaned up the list significantly by removing archived/pending pages, then went through the pending pages backlog & set the status to active for a bunch of the ones that were.. active. I didn't fully finish the pending backlog because they're either more tricky cases in which activity is not easily determined or are tricky for other reasons. I also archived some as there were many that haven't been active since 2012 or before. Out of the cases I set from pending -> active I selected the most egregious ones to either add/readd to the main list.
Besides what I did, there's still more work to do. I think we need to:
1. Decide on a general set of guidelines for LTA (this is probably best suited for administrators, but apparently previous attempts to get this place noticed on AN failed) — the reason there was this much work to do in the first place is because nobody knows what to do, as evidenced by discussions on this very talk page. I had to analyze past diffs for about an hour before even making a single edit just to see what the established, unspoken rules were regarding marking as active, archived, etc.
2. Encourage more people to help out. Currently there's only 4 people listed under the helpers page for LTA, three of which don't even do LTA work — practically a single person, who is me that I just added today. The people in the past who reviewed the pending cases are either completely inactive or inactive when it comes to LTA.
3. Finish up the pending backlog.
Does anybody feel like helping out with this? Although many people call LTA pointless and say it gives vandals unneeded attention, it's a useful system for SPI & helps significantly with more easily identifying socks/repeat vandals. I plan on tackling it myself soon, but have some other stuff to get to first. Thanks. 0qd ( talk) 21:32, 4 July 2021 (UTC)
I'm thinking of creating a new entry for a certain birth date vandal. I was wondering if it would be a good idea to also mention the vandal in the talk pages of their target articles? The pages don't have many (if any) watchers, and some of them are quite poorly sourced so it's difficult for patrollers to notice when the vandal changes the birth date, and also tedious to keep checking the sources to see if the added DOB is incorrect. On the talk page the sourced birth date could be mentioned with a link to the LTA page. Or is that a bad idea? The vandal doesn't communicate, so hopefully they wouldn't notice the information on the talk page or react to it. kyykaarme ( talk) 05:32, 5 August 2021 (UTC)
I have removed the form for creating a new subpage from the main page to encourage DENY. Most of the sections weren't being filled out anyway. The header now links to the filing instructions. Enterprisey ( talk!) 08:29, 20 October 2021 (UTC)
The person reportedly behind the Runtshit-vandal died earlier this year, perhaps we should remove his name from the list? User:RolandR, what do you think? Huldra ( talk) 22:51, 7 May 2017 (UTC)
I've created the IRC channel #wikipedia-en-lta connect for discussion, coordination, etc. regarding LTA cases or users. In the channel a bot is being configured to automatically send relevant messages. Anyone who is currently active on the English Wikipedia, with no recent blocks, is welcome to join if they either have a wikipedia IRC cloak or are eligible for one. Cloaked users are automatically invited, I can manually invite users who qualify but are not cloaked.
There's currently no formal or clear process for requesting invitations, please let me know if you have any suggestions.
PHANTOMTECH [
TALK
07:20, 15 July 2022 (UTC)
See Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/Debearing egu 77, where User:PhantomTech and I are discussing improvements in the management of WP:LTA. SmokeyJoe ( talk) 08:31, 20 July 2022 (UTC)
PhantomTech[
talk
23:13, 28 July 2022 (UTC)
PhantomTech[
talk
00:19, 29 July 2022 (UTC)
There's a discussion happening at Wikipedia talk:Edit warring#Reverting actions performed by banned users in violation of a ban, and sockpuppets or meatpuppets of banned or blocked users., and input from people experienced in anti-LTA work would be appreciated. Firefangledfeathers ( talk / contribs) 14:53, 4 August 2022 (UTC)
Wikipedia's list of "long-term abusers" reads like a roster of pathetic supervillains -- 2600:1700:D0A0:21B0:9593:9F2A:DF7D:5B03 ( talk) 04:32, 23 July 2022 (UTC)
At special:permalink/1125251255#Blanking_inactive_LTA_pages some editors set a practice to start blanking documentation of long term abuse which is over 5 years old.
I am not sure what to make of this. I suppose it does not hurt. I am not aware of a real problem which it addresses. I am not aware of routine blanking elsewhere on Wikipedia. I am just posting here to put a record of the practice on the talk page of this, the concerned practice. Bluerasberry (talk) 23:21, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
I'd like to help create an entry for Mcclian, a persistent WP:SPA vandal of wrestling-related articles since 2009. A brief history can be seen at his SPI archive, which summarises it well. After his block in 2015, he has almost exclusively used Canada-based IPs numbering well into the hundreds, and remains active as of last week. He usually returns under a new IP every month, but it would be a fairly easy task for me to collate most IPs used by him since at least 2017.
My rationale for opening up an LTA case would be to establish a one-stop repository for all his IPs so that users unfamiliar with his vandalism can learn to spot it across the fairly wide range of articles he's touched, in the same manner as this (vandal unrelated). I've managed to acquire lengthy PPs for two such articles – WWF Full Metal: The Album and WWF The Music, Volume 2 – but he still springs up plenty elsewhere and I alone cannot keep track.
Denial should no longer be relevant because he'll continue regardless, and an LTA would be beneficial for the above reason. Mac Dreamstate ( talk) 16:05, 18 February 2023 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/List has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
The following eight discussions have been archived and should be removed from Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/List:
I already posted them in Wikipedia:Long-term_abuse/Archive.
Additionally, I posted at Wikipedia_talk:Long-term_abuse/Scibaby that someone should blank his page. Someone added an archive tag, but did not blank. I still recommend blanking. 2620:8D:8000:10D5:C4A0:B6FC:B66B:A381 ( talk) 15:45, 17 May 2023 (UTC)
FYI, I found the eight by copying and pasting all the names from Wikipedia:Long-term_abuse/List and /info/en/?search=Category:Inactive_project_pages?from=Lo, then comparing the two lists in Excel. 2620:8D:8000:10D5:C4A0:B6FC:B66B:A381 ( talk) 15:48, 17 May 2023 (UTC)
One thing leads to another. I saw a bunch of LTA pages that should have been archived and requested that to be done [4].
Looking at the discussion, I saw that one admin recommended that the page be marked historical due to a relative lack of recent edits over the past 7-8 years [5].
I think Wikipedia has gotten better at preventing long-term abuse, so the number of LTAs has declined in the past few years. Many vandals also celebrate the recognition they get from these kinds of pages. The Long-term abuse page should be marked as historical. What do you think? 2620:8D:8000:10A6:71B7:9282:F1A9:BA79 ( talk) 20:54, 20 May 2023 (UTC)
I started to notice that Zhmailik and Zhoban are in the wrong order. In the LTA unsorted case list, Zhoban is before Zhmailik. However, in alphabetical order, Zhmailik is before Zhoban. I suggest the unsorted case list to be in alphabetical order.
218.212.76.59 ( talk) 02:46, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
Hey, I noticed AudiGuy-1204 LTA and found an error. It reads AudiGuy-1024 instead of AudiGuy-1204. 119.75.204.218 ( talk) 04:28, 13 July 2023 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | ← | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 |
Most of the vandals listed here I see are referred to as 'he'. If they are confirmed to be males that's fine but if we don't know, its better to use gender-neutral pronouns like 'they'. WdS | Talk 08:08, 31 July 2016 (UTC)
But if someone feels this is really important they are welcome to expend the effort to change entries where the gender of the subject is not known to the gender-neutral singular they.Apparently not, as I was just reverted when I tried to change an entry to be gender neutral. I think its very poor form to treat Wikipedia editors as automatically male-unless-proven-otherwise. WanderingWanda ( talk) 09:11, 23 September 2019 (UTC)
Might an LTA page be warranted? They've used a staggering 293 accounts and IPs to sock incessantly for 3 years, filling up 160 SPI reports. They've also gone cross-wiki, requiring stewards to lock some accounts. We would need to be very careful to avoid WP:BEANS, but I think an LTA page might help. I wanted to hear some other opinions on this. Thanks, GAB gab 20:04, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Support: Isn't there somewhere better to suggest this where more people will look? MM (WhatIDo WHATIDO?) (Now THIS... I did.) 19:12, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
When a new long-term abuse report is created, its status is set to pending by default. Who is it that reviews/approves new pending reports? I created Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/Fangusu a little over a month ago (thought it was longer, oops) but it has not been reviewed yet. I don't see reviewing in the instructions anywhere so I'm not sure who I should contact, if it was at the point where I should be contacting anyone. Ivanvector ( Talk/ Edits) 18:20, 4 November 2016 (UTC)
Picture: You are a new Wikipedia user, decide to try doing some silly vandalism for the heck of it and are blocked promptly. The next day, you do it again, and again after that, because each time, it becomes more fun. Pages are protected, your socks are tagged and such but that only makes it more exciting. This scenario sound familiar? That's how the common vandal becomes a LTA. It feels to me like this is happening more regularly; instead of attracting helpful new contributors, we keep getting these LTA cases. An extreme more recent example would be Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/The Suix. It has to do with the way things work here; this is like a game to them. Other than the standard WP:DENY stuff, does anyone have any new ideas for how to make disrupting Wikipedia and evading blocks boring, and how to make reformation more desirable? Of course there will always be some trolls who will troll no matter what, but surely there has to be something we can do, some changes to the system that will discourage this kind of behavior more. Sro23 ( talk) 03:08, 27 December 2016 (UTC)
Please see RfC: LTA Knowledgebase at the Village Pump. Sam Walton ( talk) 16:34, 5 February 2017 (UTC)
Under most investigation pages here, there is a descriptor for "Severity". however, I cannot find any policy delineating what distinguishes "High", "Medium", "Low", and "Severe". I feel some guidelines about this would be an asset to the utility of the project/descriptor. DLMacLeod ( talk) 03:51, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
I've got one that is basically my own pet project. They only go after one article and are really, really obvious. This has been going on for over two years now. It doesn't feel like trolling, I think they really just don't get that the article on the area where they live is not a place for them to spam their own name and make ridiculous claims about being a CEO or whatever. So, not a huge deal, the only thing is that it appears I am the only one who is aware of them. Last year i took a long break and they went hog-wild spamming this article and generally making a mess out of it. So the issue is that if I'm not around, nobody seems to notice, and they don't realize this "new" user is not new at all, having had about a dozen previous incarnations.
Maybe this post wil be enough to get more eyes on it? The article in question is Phalia, a district in Punjab, Pakistan. Socks are pretty obvious. More details available upon request. This discussion I just started at Commons can tell you basically what you need to know. Beeblebrox ( talk) 18:53, 13 May 2017 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/List has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please capitalize that Taiki0409 note because LG-Gunther still creating LTA cases with caps 66.87.69.4 ( talk) 05:35, 23 June 2017 (UTC)
" Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/Detailed instructions", currently linked in one of the banners at the top of the talk page, seems to be abandoned or not well updated. It links to the inactive WP:Abuse response. What to do with the instructions? -- George Ho ( talk) 16:32, 30 July 2017 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/List has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please fix summary for Taiki0409 209.249.5.130 ( talk) 05:18, 11 August 2017 (UTC)
August 31, 2017: Hello. My phone was IP banned from editing any articles and the explanation was a bunch of unproperly formatted code about the Dog and rapper vandal and need help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.204.244.241 ( talk • contribs) 17:01, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
Banned in October 2013; still active in 2017 (see WP:Sockpuppet investigations/Jeremy112233). The only link I know of to use e.g. for G5 nominations is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive254#Community ban proposal for paid editing firm wikiexperts.us. We also need a place to hang this linkage. Just as a matter of convenience I'd like to create a LTA case, if nobody objects. ☆ Bri ( talk) 17:06, 1 November 2017 (UTC)
At Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/Massachusetts vandal, a fairly recent case page has been nominated for deletion. Feel free to add your thoughts on the matter. Binksternet ( talk) 05:01, 5 December 2017 (UTC)
To editor Enterprisey: I don't understand your reversion. The instruction text now appears in a tall awkward column under the roman numeral I. I had move the text to the cell to the right to fix that problem. How is was my edit causing a visual problem? Chris Troutman ( talk) 16:23, 27 December 2017 (UTC)
I have an idea: why not put LTAs on a multilingual wiki (maybe at lta.wikimedia.org)? We could start by importing the en, de, nl, ja, and zh LTA cases. This would allow more coordination between each wiki's checkusers. Lojbanist remove cattle from stage 18:40, 1 April 2018 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/List has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please can you remove Joelhazelton and a few others, the case has been archived, but i moved it to the archive. i am not autocomfirmed, so i cannot move it myself. Sincerely, Cæsey Shine! 07:05, 11 April 2018 (UTC)
Okay, thank you. Cæsey Shine! 19:56, 11 April 2018 (UTC)
I'm going to unarchive WP:LTA/SGK per [3]. Linguist un Eins uno (Linguist111) 16:54, 22 June 2018 (UTC)
I've encountered a specific SPI case multiple times this month. From SPI filings they appear to be quite active, but cases only date back to April and I was wondering what the time threshold was for a case to be considered LTA. It seems likely that they meet the last two criteria for an LTA filing. Also, I encountered an established LTA case with its own page that is not on the LTA front page and would like to know what additional criteria, if any, need to be satisfied for the case to be on the front page. Aspening ( talk) 14:25, 29 June 2018 (UTC)
Are LTAs prohibited from creation if the sockpuppeteer/vandal in question seeks attention and endorses a LTA page for themselves? I'm pretty sure that LTA pages for attention-seekers are supposed to be forbidden in accordance with WP:DENY, but I'm not 100% definitive. Campuscarrot ( talk) 05:06, 20 July 2018 (UTC)
Now, I just demand editors to put it User:Daciproteasa09 in LTA list. 95.91.212.63 ( talk) 13:38, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
I want the English Wikipedia to adopt the LTA namespace like the Japanese Wikipedia. For example: WP:LTA/BMX will become LTA:BMX. – User 45 65 41 16:57, 25 December 2018 (UTC)
What's the best procedure for deleting an LTA subpage itself created as an attack? Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/Cinadon36 czar 23:16, 5 February 2019 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/List has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Change 'anti-soy bean propeganda' to 'anti-soy bean propaganda' ActualYellowJournalism ( talk) 05:32, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
What happened to the Willie on wheels special long term abuse report? I remember seeing it SpidersMilk, Drink Spider Milk, it tastes good. ( talk) 21:03, 3 March 2019 (UTC)
It's a very useful resource for preventing vandalism. ᴀɴᴏɴʏᴍᴜᴤᴤ ᴜᴤᴇʀ (ᴛᴀʟᴋ) 23:26, 4 March 2019 (UTC)
I added the above vandal to the table and documented their activity, but I am not documenting LTA activity every day. Any further guidance/help will be appreciated. Thanks.-- Ymblanter ( talk) 15:15, 7 March 2019 (UTC)
Take a look at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/Nevada IPs and comment if you want. Binksternet ( talk) 14:56, 30 April 2019 (UTC)
Hello all,
I’m writing to let you know about a new project, IP Editing: Privacy Enhancement and Abuse Mitigation, that the Wikimedia Foundation is starting.
Because people in general are increasingly technically advanced and privacy conscious, our users are now more aware of the collection and use of their personal information, and how its misuse may lead to harassment or abuse. The Foundation is starting a project to re-evaluate and enhance protections for user privacy through technical improvement to the projects. As part of this work, we will also be looking at our existing anti-vandalism and anti-abuse tools and making sure our wikis have access to the same (or better) tools to protect themselves.
The project page is on Meta. This project is currently in very early phases of discussions and we don’t have a concrete plan for it yet. We’d like your input. And please share with other people who you think would be interested. SPoore (WMF), Strategist, Community health initiative ( talk) 18:16, 1 August 2019 (UTC)
See Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/The abominable Wiki troll. Johnuniq ( talk) 03:36, 23 August 2019 (UTC)
Created, but little confused by style of this page and also whether i need to enter more information.
IP has a history of abuse, came off a ban and has since continued. Slywriter ( talk) 02:36, 4 October 2019 (UTC)
I deleted the information. I am not experienced enough to know whether I should have performed UNDO instead.
Please identify the editor or create a filter that blocks him/her from reposting this type of information. There was no footnote identifying the source.
I identified the date of the posting from the history. See the lines below copied from the history.
curprev 05:38, 2 October 2019 65.246.252.82 talk 25,482 bytes +4 undo curprev 05:38, 2 October 2019 65.246.252.82 talk 25,478 bytes +115 undo
Unclefeet ( talk) 17:04, 9 February 2020 (UTC)
@ Oshwah, @ Widr: Sockpuppeteer has returned from inactivity; see User:Kamala_Harris_Genghis_Khan. Passenger pigeon ( talk) 20:04, 13 March 2020 (UTC)
Hello everyone! I am well aware that I'm not the first person to bring this up, but between then and now there has been an increase in pending LTA reports. From what I understand after a pleasant chat in the IRC, the filing of an LTA report can sometimes be counterproductive and give a persistent troll or vandal the recognition and attention that they desire, and so for that reason lots of them should not exist. This may have led to a common practice of neglecting newly filed LTA reports for a long time due to a perceived low urgency, which is understandable. However, as I had mentioned earlier in the IRC, the frustration over the slow evaluation of pending reports has led even certain admins to change the status to active immediately upon creating a report themselves. Though I do not have the authority to do this, the LTA report that I have been contributing to is one of a notorious cross-wiki POV vandal that is well-recognized and had been known by many admins on the English Wikipedia long before I came into the picture. Wouldn't you agree that the evaluation and updating of these reports should be prioritized over those that seem counterproductive by a more active vetting process? Months after my initial filing of WorldCreaterFighter, none of the info that I know many of these admins and checkusers have and can contribute has been added, and the status remains on pending approval when all parties involved are well-aware that they are highly active. I would appreciate any response and welcome a conversation. Thanks! Coderenius ( ☎) 00:32, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
Over at the English Wikivoyage we have a long-term problem with the "fuerdai" vandal (aka "BMX On WheeIs"). We are using a combination of blocks, page protection, and edit filters to stop the vandalism, but with less-than-satisfactory results. The edit filters stop some of the vandalism, but a significant amount still gets through. Can anyone help with other ways to stop this disruption? — Granger ( talk · contribs) 00:15, 23 June 2020 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place to address the redirect
Wikipedia:LTA/TTI. The discussion will occur at
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 July 22#Wikipedia:LTA/TTI until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.
🌸 1.Ayana 🌸 (
talk)
10:43, 22 July 2020 (UTC)
Hello! Please refer to my above post from May – once again, any response would be appreciated. It does seem unfair that most posts receive replies but mine did not despite outlining the issue adequately :)
At the very least, I would like to formally and with all gratitude request for any willing admin to update the information on WorldCreaterFighter and set their status to active in the infobox, and for other high-priority abusers still on pending as well if possible, even though it seems much has been done to remedy the issue with WCF across Wikimedia since my previous post (props for that). After all, checkusers have for the longest had access to and remain fully aware of which IPs WCF socks operate under, so it shouldn't be too much of a hassle to simply transfer some general info on their whereabouts to the infobox. Thank you! Coderenius ( ☎) 19:09, 5 September 2020 (UTC)
Could someone tell me if I'm crazy for thinking these all might be related? If I'm not, we might have a LTA going back to 2009, and over 100 confirmed and suspected socks. ☆ Bri ( talk) 21:34, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
Quite a few entries here have very specific personal information, that if likely put anywhere else on WP would lead to it being oversighted very quickly.
I won't be linking the exact reports for obvious privacy reasons, but here are some privacy concerns I have noticed:
I would immediately email the oversight team if this was on any other page, however, with a page like LTA, I want to see consensus first, so I don't make any mistakes. wizzito | say hello! 06:25, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
I've cleaned up the list significantly by removing archived/pending pages, then went through the pending pages backlog & set the status to active for a bunch of the ones that were.. active. I didn't fully finish the pending backlog because they're either more tricky cases in which activity is not easily determined or are tricky for other reasons. I also archived some as there were many that haven't been active since 2012 or before. Out of the cases I set from pending -> active I selected the most egregious ones to either add/readd to the main list.
Besides what I did, there's still more work to do. I think we need to:
1. Decide on a general set of guidelines for LTA (this is probably best suited for administrators, but apparently previous attempts to get this place noticed on AN failed) — the reason there was this much work to do in the first place is because nobody knows what to do, as evidenced by discussions on this very talk page. I had to analyze past diffs for about an hour before even making a single edit just to see what the established, unspoken rules were regarding marking as active, archived, etc.
2. Encourage more people to help out. Currently there's only 4 people listed under the helpers page for LTA, three of which don't even do LTA work — practically a single person, who is me that I just added today. The people in the past who reviewed the pending cases are either completely inactive or inactive when it comes to LTA.
3. Finish up the pending backlog.
Does anybody feel like helping out with this? Although many people call LTA pointless and say it gives vandals unneeded attention, it's a useful system for SPI & helps significantly with more easily identifying socks/repeat vandals. I plan on tackling it myself soon, but have some other stuff to get to first. Thanks. 0qd ( talk) 21:32, 4 July 2021 (UTC)
I'm thinking of creating a new entry for a certain birth date vandal. I was wondering if it would be a good idea to also mention the vandal in the talk pages of their target articles? The pages don't have many (if any) watchers, and some of them are quite poorly sourced so it's difficult for patrollers to notice when the vandal changes the birth date, and also tedious to keep checking the sources to see if the added DOB is incorrect. On the talk page the sourced birth date could be mentioned with a link to the LTA page. Or is that a bad idea? The vandal doesn't communicate, so hopefully they wouldn't notice the information on the talk page or react to it. kyykaarme ( talk) 05:32, 5 August 2021 (UTC)
I have removed the form for creating a new subpage from the main page to encourage DENY. Most of the sections weren't being filled out anyway. The header now links to the filing instructions. Enterprisey ( talk!) 08:29, 20 October 2021 (UTC)
The person reportedly behind the Runtshit-vandal died earlier this year, perhaps we should remove his name from the list? User:RolandR, what do you think? Huldra ( talk) 22:51, 7 May 2017 (UTC)
I've created the IRC channel #wikipedia-en-lta connect for discussion, coordination, etc. regarding LTA cases or users. In the channel a bot is being configured to automatically send relevant messages. Anyone who is currently active on the English Wikipedia, with no recent blocks, is welcome to join if they either have a wikipedia IRC cloak or are eligible for one. Cloaked users are automatically invited, I can manually invite users who qualify but are not cloaked.
There's currently no formal or clear process for requesting invitations, please let me know if you have any suggestions.
PHANTOMTECH [
TALK
07:20, 15 July 2022 (UTC)
See Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/Debearing egu 77, where User:PhantomTech and I are discussing improvements in the management of WP:LTA. SmokeyJoe ( talk) 08:31, 20 July 2022 (UTC)
PhantomTech[
talk
23:13, 28 July 2022 (UTC)
PhantomTech[
talk
00:19, 29 July 2022 (UTC)
There's a discussion happening at Wikipedia talk:Edit warring#Reverting actions performed by banned users in violation of a ban, and sockpuppets or meatpuppets of banned or blocked users., and input from people experienced in anti-LTA work would be appreciated. Firefangledfeathers ( talk / contribs) 14:53, 4 August 2022 (UTC)
Wikipedia's list of "long-term abusers" reads like a roster of pathetic supervillains -- 2600:1700:D0A0:21B0:9593:9F2A:DF7D:5B03 ( talk) 04:32, 23 July 2022 (UTC)
At special:permalink/1125251255#Blanking_inactive_LTA_pages some editors set a practice to start blanking documentation of long term abuse which is over 5 years old.
I am not sure what to make of this. I suppose it does not hurt. I am not aware of a real problem which it addresses. I am not aware of routine blanking elsewhere on Wikipedia. I am just posting here to put a record of the practice on the talk page of this, the concerned practice. Bluerasberry (talk) 23:21, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
I'd like to help create an entry for Mcclian, a persistent WP:SPA vandal of wrestling-related articles since 2009. A brief history can be seen at his SPI archive, which summarises it well. After his block in 2015, he has almost exclusively used Canada-based IPs numbering well into the hundreds, and remains active as of last week. He usually returns under a new IP every month, but it would be a fairly easy task for me to collate most IPs used by him since at least 2017.
My rationale for opening up an LTA case would be to establish a one-stop repository for all his IPs so that users unfamiliar with his vandalism can learn to spot it across the fairly wide range of articles he's touched, in the same manner as this (vandal unrelated). I've managed to acquire lengthy PPs for two such articles – WWF Full Metal: The Album and WWF The Music, Volume 2 – but he still springs up plenty elsewhere and I alone cannot keep track.
Denial should no longer be relevant because he'll continue regardless, and an LTA would be beneficial for the above reason. Mac Dreamstate ( talk) 16:05, 18 February 2023 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/List has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
The following eight discussions have been archived and should be removed from Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/List:
I already posted them in Wikipedia:Long-term_abuse/Archive.
Additionally, I posted at Wikipedia_talk:Long-term_abuse/Scibaby that someone should blank his page. Someone added an archive tag, but did not blank. I still recommend blanking. 2620:8D:8000:10D5:C4A0:B6FC:B66B:A381 ( talk) 15:45, 17 May 2023 (UTC)
FYI, I found the eight by copying and pasting all the names from Wikipedia:Long-term_abuse/List and /info/en/?search=Category:Inactive_project_pages?from=Lo, then comparing the two lists in Excel. 2620:8D:8000:10D5:C4A0:B6FC:B66B:A381 ( talk) 15:48, 17 May 2023 (UTC)
One thing leads to another. I saw a bunch of LTA pages that should have been archived and requested that to be done [4].
Looking at the discussion, I saw that one admin recommended that the page be marked historical due to a relative lack of recent edits over the past 7-8 years [5].
I think Wikipedia has gotten better at preventing long-term abuse, so the number of LTAs has declined in the past few years. Many vandals also celebrate the recognition they get from these kinds of pages. The Long-term abuse page should be marked as historical. What do you think? 2620:8D:8000:10A6:71B7:9282:F1A9:BA79 ( talk) 20:54, 20 May 2023 (UTC)
I started to notice that Zhmailik and Zhoban are in the wrong order. In the LTA unsorted case list, Zhoban is before Zhmailik. However, in alphabetical order, Zhmailik is before Zhoban. I suggest the unsorted case list to be in alphabetical order.
218.212.76.59 ( talk) 02:46, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
Hey, I noticed AudiGuy-1204 LTA and found an error. It reads AudiGuy-1024 instead of AudiGuy-1204. 119.75.204.218 ( talk) 04:28, 13 July 2023 (UTC)