Steward requests/Global/2014-02

Requests for global (un)block

Global block for spam range

Status:    Done

Cross-wiki spamming of the same kind. Compromised hosts.--Jasper Deng (talk) 07:19, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

Global block (crosswiki harassment)

Status:    Not done

--Ferbr1 (talk) 19:59, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

  Not done dynamic IP @ Spanish telco, no value in blocking  — billinghurst sDrewth 08:15, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

I have been blocked for 5 years

Status:    Done

I need your review about your action on me. I have nothing to do some good things right now. Please give me the unblocking action for my account on all wikis, because you give me a global block. I access the Internet by using Let Her Go. I don't use something like an open proxy. Thank you and respects.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Helder Monter (talk)

I have modified the block on the IP range, so you should be able to edit while logged in.  — billinghurst sDrewth 02:25, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

Global block for

Status:    Done
  Done though it looks like a dynamic IP, and an interesting combination of ranges,, and We should watch and manage and maybe see if we can isolate in one of those ranges, or if we are looking across all of them. As EvW is at a new ISP, some could look to contact their abuse address (Cablecom GmbH) and see if we can get traction there.  — billinghurst sDrewth 22:39, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

Global range-block for LTA

Status:    Done

Nothing (<--perhaps) constructive for a long time. Has been 'spamming' pages cross-wiki with rather unconstructive messages related to blocking etc. Warned many times on several wikis, blocked globally and locally several times and still active in this foolish behavior. A user said that this is en:Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Ezekiel53746. (I haven't gone thru that page.) --Glaisher [talk] 17:33, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

Done. --MF-W 22:19, 6 February 2014 (UTC)
From what I have seen the edits are pesky rather than true vandalism or abuse, and personally I would have preferred to see management done at local levels, and I haven't seen much evidence of local blocks.  — billinghurst sDrewth 22:26, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

Global block for

Status:    Not done

look like open proxy. --Byfserag (talk) 03:22, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

Proxies? yes; open? not evident. Seem to be a means through the GFW. This can be handled locally at zhWP if it a problem.  — billinghurst sDrewth 11:16, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Global block for

Status:    Done

open proxy [1] + high spam level /St1995 12:38, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

  Done  — billinghurst sDrewth 11:18, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Global block

Status:    Done

cross-wiki spambot (long-term): maybe an open proxy. Now blocked in ruwiki (28 days) and in enwiki (log) regards /St1995 13:38, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

Done for 6 months. --MF-W 14:17, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

Global block for spam IP address

Status:    Done

Spambot-only IPs /St1995 17:22, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

  Done for the short term, they look like dynamic addresses.  — billinghurst sDrewth 21:16, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

Global block/unblock for

Status:    Not done

I don't even know what I am doing or which bit to edit so apologies if this is in the wrong place! My IP address is blocked (for a *year*!!?) and I have no idea why. I only came to sign up for an account as I don't even have one, and this is the message I got:

Your IP address has been blocked on all wikis.
The block was made by Billinghurst ( The reason given is Cross-wiki spam: spambot: webhost servihosting.
Start of block: 08:18, 10 December 2013
Expiry of block: 08:18, 10 December 2014
Your current IP address is 19:16, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

The IP range in which your IP address is located has been spamming us, we got fed up, and we blocked it. It is a soft block, so that just requires you to edit the wikis from a user account, rather than from an IP address. Go to m:Special:CreateAccount  — billinghurst sDrewth 21:13, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

Global unblock for 2a01:4f8:150:7ffe:1::4

Status:    Not done

I never had any proxy software running on this computer. Ever. And I am not doing so now. I'd also like to know how Trijnstel ever got the idea that I had an open proxy running here.

root@tjps:/home/thilo# nmap -sT -6 2a01:4f8:150:7ffe:1::4 -p 1-65535

Starting Nmap 6.00 ( ) at 2014-01-16 16:14 UTC Nmap scan report for (2a01:4f8:150:7ffe:1::4) Host is up (0.036s latency). Not shown: 64517 filtered ports, 1017 closed ports PORT STATE SERVICE 22/tcp open ssh

Nmap done: 1 IP address (1 host up) scanned in 129.15 seconds

--ThiloSchulz (talk) 16:25, 16 January 2014 (UTC)
Come on, this can't be so difficult, now can it? --ThiloSchulz (talk) 13:20, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

My IP adress was blocked by user User:Vituzzul

Start of block: 22:08, 4. dec. 2013

End of block: 22:08, 4. dec. 2017

de-userpage: [2]

I'm using VPN internet filterd in iran please unblock me

This IP is part of a range block that is problematic. You should seek an IP exemption from the wiki at which you edit.  — billinghurst sDrewth 07:54, 19 January 2014 (UTC)
We cannot exclude one IP from a range, and the range is problematic. You have been directed to alternate solutions.  — billinghurst sDrewth 15:06, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
  Closed as stale, no further contact has been received.  — billinghurst sDrewth 13:23, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

Global Unblock for

Status:    Not done

Can you please global unblock this IP, that I can make a "Schiedsgerichtsanfrage". She is offline finished and now I´d start the discussion. The CheckUser on the German Wikipedia was a big mistake, when you can say: The account have a majority of the account. Ok, but what isn´t okay, that he shout very loud. This IP belongs to this user. Please global unblock at least (I don´t know the ground: Long term abuse doesn´t say very much) and then I make a "Schiedsgerichtsanfrage". Thank you and good night. --Holzliebhaber meta (talk) 18:48, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

@Reaper: You were told quite a few times how to contact the de:ArbCom. As no one plays with you any longer in the German Wikipedia you are free to leave. If it is a good idea to look for mates to play at meta I really cant say. As told multiple times: Go, find yourself an other hobby.
@Stewards: Please see a certainly incomplete collection of his valuable contributions and accounts and
exted the IP block indef., please. --Pentachlorphenol (talk) 19:26, 15 February 2014 (UTC)
ReaperAlarm is abel to contakt the de:ArbCom, it is not necesarry to unblock him, he is blocked after this CU. The IP is not dynamic, so he is only able to use mobile IPs for his "work" in the moment. --Itti (talk) 19:33, 15 February 2014 (UTC)
If you wish to make an arbitration request to deWP, it may be advisable to utilise their email address. Re the block you should notify DerHexer on his user talk page to this unblock request. I doubt that anyone else has sufficient background to be able to respond appropriately.  — billinghurst sDrewth 04:34, 16 February 2014 (UTC)
@de:User:Itti and de:User:Pentachlorphenol If you would any time unblock my account de:user:Rlik kl, then I´d don´t make with any other account. However it isn´t possible, the best way is, you unblock my first account de:user:Holzliebhaber 2569. What have I to do, that you can unblock the first or the second account. I made a good job with de:user:Rlik kl, Pentachlorphenol you had many luck with the User:Filzstifton the de:Wikipedia:Checkuser/Anfragen/ReaperAlarm bzw. Ultimato7. User:Odeesi was on my side, but de:User:Filzstift didn´t hear, what she say and then he made this. This wasn´t right, read from the CheckUser Intro:

Eine Abfrage ist dann angebracht, wenn das positive Checkuser-Ergebnis Kontensperrungen rechtfertigen würde, die ohne positives Checkuser-Ergebnis als nicht gerechtfertigt angesehen werden würden.

My account de:User:Rlik kl didn´t made prohibited things, I made 16 new articles, no articles wasn´t delete and 116 edits.

@ steward How you can see, the user from, who discussion, are very controversial users. Dear --Holzliebhaber meta (talk) 12:26, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

  Not done I have spoken to the blocking steward, and had a little look at the situation and will not remove the block. You can talk to deWP ArbCom at the expiry of the block.  — billinghurst sDrewth 13:20, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

Global unblock for

Status:    block expired

This is shared IP used by Swiss governmental agencies. Despite of some vandalism there is no reason for a global block. See w:deBenutzer:, [3] and [Ticket#2008081310012381]. Cheers, 16:29, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

Long term abuse means that we have been abused for a long time, while some may agree with your position, others would disagree with your assessment that it doesn't require a block. There are always consequences for actions. If you are the perpetrating party, I hope that this is a poignant reminder of the consequences, that further breaches will be longer, and that we seriously wish to stop abuse. If you are an innocent party affected by this block, then there are processes to manage this, and you can either continue that conversation here, or email stewards if you wish to have that conversation in a confidential manner  — billinghurst sDrewth 21:26, 13 February 2014 (UTC) (@Mathonius:)
Addendum. If after six years there is still abuse occurring from within these Swiss agencies, it doesn't encourage me that there is a good or serious resolution process within the Swiss agencies.(incorrect, just not effective). To note that stewards don't have access to the ticket mentioned, though I have asked that it be made available to us.  — billinghurst sDrewth 21:34, 13 February 2014 (UTC)
Addendum (2) I have been pointed to w:nl:Overleg gebruiker:FFA P-16/blockmsg that relates to this matter, and I was informed that the abuse from the IP was crosswiki, not solely contained within deWP.  — billinghurst sDrewth 23:42, 13 February 2014 (UTC)
Access to that ticket has been gained, and I can see that it has an off and on again history (and noting that my German is horrid) and information surrounding the IP. I have downgraded the block to a soft block, though we may again have to upgrade if it is again abused.  — billinghurst sDrewth 06:04, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

What is the difference "block" vs. "soft block"? It does not seem to change anything. To me it seems that little potential vandalism has occurred in 2014. The main issue are probably these reverts: [4][5][6][7]. As not being an expert in Swiss Air Force, I cannot judge this criticism[8], but I does not seem to be vandalism. Cheers, 11:40, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

(Hard)block is accounts and IPs, soft block is IPs only. I am not an expert at nlWP, nor deWP, but I do rely on their expertise to inform me of problematic edits. The blocking steward speaks Dutch fluently, so I will bow to their knowledge of the situation. You still haven't said what role you are taking in this discussion, that would help put us on a level playing field.  — billinghurst sDrewth 12:18, 14 February 2014 (UTC)
I do not exactly understand your question. I am simply affected by this block due to the fact that I - and many other people working for Swiss government - cannot edit any page in Wikipedia. There is no reason to patronize local Wikipedias. de.wikipedia for instance can easily take care of its own. Is there no possibility to exclude some Wikipedias from the global block? Cheers, 15:03, 14 February 2014 (UTC)
Since the global block is changed to a soft-block all accounts are excluded from the global block. You just need to create the account from another IP-address and log in using that. If you don't create an account and log in you are still blocked. -- Tegel (Talk) 16:09, 14 February 2014 (UTC)
Creating and working with an account is not an option for me for certain reasons. Cheers, 09:12, 17 February 2014 (UTC)

  Closed  — billinghurst sDrewth 09:54, 17 February 2014 (UTC)

Global block/unblock for

Status:    not blocked

(request made on talk page) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk)

There is not a global block on this IP address. Check the local wiki where you are trying to edit for whatever blocks they have. Look at your wiki's Special:Block page.  — billinghurst sDrewth 21:32, 17 February 2014 (UTC)

Global block for

Status:    Done

Cross wiki nonsense, --Savhñ 08:46, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

  Done  — billinghurst sDrewth 10:37, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

Global block for User:

Status:    Done

Spambot, see also [9] /St1995 14:43, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

Global block for spambot range

Status:    Not done

very high spam activity with this range of IP addresses (long time). See [10]. Please block. /St1995 14:49, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

We don't usually block without examples of a local effect. Please provide some example IP addresses from local problems to reopen this request, and we will explore further.  — billinghurst sDrewth 03:33, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

213 113 16 93

Status:    Done

Hi, I have been blocked by VITUZZU. I do not know why. The block indicates a one year period from March 2013 to March 2014. This is not true. I have been active since March 2113. I suspect an error. 213 113 16 93 Bengt Nyman (talk) 12:19, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

It was spamming us at the time that it was blocked. As it is now a while ago, I have removed the block.  — billinghurst sDrewth 13:56, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

Global unblock for VPN IP

Status:    Done

Moved from Steward solicitações/Global by LlamaAl (talk) 17:55, 23 February 2014 (UTC)


why I was bloked?!

I use and always used the Steganos Online Shield and no-one blocked my access.

Why now?!

Could you unlock the access please?!

Thank you.

Aamrs (talk) 13:32, 23 February 2014 (UTC) (talk) 16:32, 21 February 2014 (UTC) - Alfredo Silva

Please tell us the blocked IP; or send a mail to stewards if you don't want to reveal it publicly. --MF-W 20:36, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
I discovered the IP address and have modified the IP block so that the user can edit.  — billinghurst sDrewth 13:39, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

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

Global lock/unlock for Rigelmeister

Status:    Not done

I didn't know using VPN was forbidden in Wikipedia. I will deactivate it while in Wiki. Please remove my ban.

Your account has never been locked so no further actions are required.--Vituzzu (talk) 00:20, 1 February 2014 (UTC)
VPNs are not forbidden, what you encountered was a hardblock on an IP range that has been problematic for spam (IP blocks aare different from account locks). I have modified that block so it is now a soft block, which now allows users logged in, to be able to edit from there. Alternatively, I see that you do have an IP outside of the VPN, and that is suitable for use as well, and seems without restrictions.  — billinghurst sDrewth 02:12, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

Global lock for NoahZLNwcpeai

Status:    Done

Spambots. TeleComNasSprVen (talk) 09:59, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

Spambots, done.  — billinghurst sDrewth 13:18, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

Global lock for Kathryn589

Status:    Done

Mostly spam. TeleComNasSprVen (talk) 07:25, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

And the rest? --MF-W 16:00, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
I mean to say that they are all spam, based on my observations of AbuseFilter entries such as here here and here but as I cannot view the contents of the AbuseFilter directly without the proper permissions it would not hurt to do a double check (like above). TeleComNasSprVen (talk) 20:19, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

And three more found:

Thanks for your considerations, TeleComNasSprVen (talk) 22:23, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
  Done those that are clearly spambot, which is not all of them, leaving those to those communities  — billinghurst sDrewth 08:26, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
OK thanks for re-checking them! TeleComNasSprVen (talk) 12:02, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

Global lock for Holzliebhaber meta

Status:    Not done

This is a sockpuppet of long-run troll ReaperAlarm. A few hours ago, he pleaded Steward and deWP admin DerHexer for un-blocking and un-locking for the purpose of an arbitration committee request. I can't imagine any reason why this should be done. He already had an arbitration committee request (de:Wikipedia:Schiedsgericht/Anfragen/Missbrauch von Administratorenrechten und missbräuchliche unbegrenzte Sperrung), but the arbitration committee refused to arbitrate this request because there wasn't made a mistake at the admin's decision to block him indefinetely.
I also want to point to de:Wikipedia:Checkuser/Anfragen/ReaperAlarm bzw. Ultimato7. This checkuser request unveiled a massive amount of accounts belonging to ReaperAlarm, among them Holzliebhaber 2569. Subsequent to this CU, his static IP was blocked indefinetely at deWP and also several times globally. Obviously he uses his cell phone IP-number now.
Please lock Holzliebhaber meta indefinetely. There's absolutely no way that he can ever do good, encyclopaedic work with an account connected to this history. He just wants to keep admins (and now stewards, too (cf. User talk: on their toes. Thanks --Schniggendiller (talk) 00:40, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

  Not done My reasoning is that deWP can manage the account on a local level, and would seem to be doing so. There are many wikis outside of deWP where this user may be able to contribute. The main account for the user is not globally locked, and that would tend to indicate that I should not block a subsidiary accounts, and especially due to socks not being against global policy. Also deWP checkusers have regular, direct and easy means to contact stewards and have not done so on this case.  — billinghurst sDrewth 08:37, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

Global lock for vandal-only

Status:    Done

Blocked as vandal-only on both kowiki and enwiki. --Rschen7754 10:23, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

  Done, thanks QuiteUnusual (talk) 11:22, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

Global lock for ElbertGvugvast

Status:    Done

Spambots. TeleComNasSprVen (talk) 12:02, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

Some are spambots (4) and   Done, some others may be, and some are definitely not. That is not to say that they are not abusing the services, it means that we will leave them to be managed locally, and that is often sufficient and suitable. Spambots are done as they can go xwiki quickly, and usually evidence of other issues.  — billinghurst sDrewth 02:37, 6 February 2014 (UTC)
Alright, thanks for the review and explanation. TeleComNasSprVen (talk) 00:41, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

Global lock for F.M.Azeem

Status:    Done

More obvious batch of spam I suppose. TeleComNasSprVen (talk) 00:41, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

  Done; clearly all spam only accounts. Thanks. QuiteUnusual (talk) 10:30, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

Global lock for Martinsavannahtyu

Status:    Done

Two spambots and one vandal (from the full report). TeleComNasSprVen (talk) 00:19, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

thx  — billinghurst sDrewth 11:29, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Global lock for KitvMrly

Status:    Done

Cross-wiki spambot. Savhñ 13:09, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Global lock for Jude Enemy

Status:    Done

Cross-wiki LTA, previous socks locked. [11] --Rschen7754 05:25, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

Global lock for EstelaJZIL

Status:    Done

Spambot, see abuselog entry. TeleComNasSprVen (talk) 04:06, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

  Done, thanks. QuiteUnusual (talk) 09:36, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

Global lock for Sutha123

Status:    Done

Crosswiki spambot. JurgenNL (talk) 09:02, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

  Done by Mentifisto, QuiteUnusual (talk) 09:37, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

Global lock for Bjfaayorkfzylvt

Status:    Done

Spambot. Érico Wouters msg 21:20, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

  Done.—Teles «Talk to me ˱C L @ S˲» 21:28, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

Global lock for Vlad 22222

Status:    Done

Long term abuse. TeleComNasSprVen (talk) 03:50, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

  Done — billinghurst sDrewth 07:01, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

Global lock for 影武者(Kagemusha)'s sockpuppets 20140216

Status:    Done

Cross-wiki LTA, see en:Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Nipponese Dog Calvero/Archive. --Lanwi1(Talk) 08:13, 16 February 2014 (UTC), addition--Lanwi1(Talk) 09:24, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

  Done  — billinghurst sDrewth 09:47, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

Global lock for 影武者(Kagemusha)'s sockpuppets 20140216-2

Status:    Done

Cross-wiki LTA.--Lanwi1(Talk) 12:55, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

  Done  — billinghurst sDrewth 13:30, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

Global lock for 影武者(Kagemusha)'s sockpuppets 20140216-3

Status:    Done

Cross-wiki LTA.--Lanwi1(Talk) 15:24, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

  Done Ruslik (talk) 15:47, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

Global lock for Thompsonking162

Status:    Done

Cross-wiki spambot.--Jasper Deng (talk) 06:35, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

Global lock for 影武者(Kagemusha)/Nipponese Dog Calvero's sockpuppets 20140219

Status:    Done

Cross-wiki LTA.--Lanwi1(Talk) 19:22, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

Done. --MF-W 22:11, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

Global lock for 대우건설's sock

Status:    Done

kowiki LTA. —레비Revi 10:41, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

  Done  — billinghurst sDrewth 11:01, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

Global lock for Sridharbsbu

Status:    Done

Confirmed sock of Sridhar1000. INeverCry 22:26, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

Done. --MF-W 22:29, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

Global unlock for Johnericlee

Status:    Not done

I am sorry for abusing the Wikimedia Foundation. Please give me a second chance. I have changed passwords of all my accounts to random combinations to forget the passwords. I will add content that has sources. At least can i have a topic ban om Phineas and Ferb. Sorry. I gave read all policies. I will put things in my own words. In fact, only unlock one account.-- 21:49, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

@Trijnstel:  — billinghurst sDrewth 06:18, 9 February 2014 (UTC)
Didn't get a ping on this one... (no idea why) Will look at it. Trijnsteltalk 20:53, 12 February 2014 (UTC)
Pings does not work in ns0. bugzilla:55491 --Glaisher [talk] 16:41, 13 February 2014 (UTC)
  Not done you're blocked on three major projects (the English, German and Dutch Wikipedia) due to adding copyvio, incorrect data and abuse of sockpuppets (see this file on the Dutch Wikipedia). I suggest that you contact en:Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Ban Appeals Subcommittee. Maybe they can help you. Trijnsteltalk 16:51, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
The implicit statement is that if you manage to get enWP or deWP to remove your block and give you better guidance, then we will remove the lock. If you contact those wikis and progress your discussions, please ask those wikis to contact us.  — billinghurst sDrewth 08:52, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

Global lock for JeroldChristmas

Status:    Done

Another batch of spam. --TeleComNasSprVen (talk) 14:07, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

  Done, thanks - QuiteUnusual (talk) 17:24, 26 February 2014 (UTC).

Global block for Rhapsodius

Status:    Done

Cross-wiki harassment and defamation on,,,, I would also appreciate some semiprotection (one or two weeks) on my talk page on Meta. --Hégésippe | ±Θ± 19:21, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

Already locked by Elfix. John F. Lewis (talk) 19:22, 28 February 2014 (UTC)