Vandalism reports/Archives/2016-06


Arman553 [stalktoy] – [cross-wiki edits] this is bitafarhadi plz global block, thanks --Florence (talk) 15:15, 6 June 2016 (UTC)[]


There was an instance of vandalism on the Konkani Wikipedia: - I've deleted the topic, but the text in the subject, which can be still be seen, even by non-logged in users, is quite offensive. Hence, please suppress the Topic because there is no one with suppress rights in gomwiki. The Discoverer (talk) 10:14, 8 June 2016 (UTC)[]

I've handled the topic, but went to hide the deletion log entry containing the offensive info, and it does not hide, even if the deletion log shows that I've changed the visibility of a log... —MarcoAurelio 11:16, 8 June 2016 (UTC)[]
I have reported this at phab:T137288. —MarcoAurelio 11:30, 8 June 2016 (UTC)[]
Thanks MarcoAurelio. One more thing about this incident is that I wanted to check if the same user had done similar edits on other projects. But it seems that Global User Contributions does not show edits to Flow topics, so I couldn't find out. Is there any way to check for global edits to Flow pages (to investigate cross-wiki vandalism, for example)? The Discoverer (talk) 07:26, 10 June 2016 (UTC)[]
For accounts, you could use Special:CentralAuth to see wikis where they have edits. GUC should probably be updated to include Flow eventually. Ajraddatz (talk) 07:30, 10 June 2016 (UTC)[]
In this case, it was an IP address, not a logged-in user. Perhaps we should request for GUC and EditCounter to take into account Flow topics too. With Flow becoming the standard on gomwiki, mw and parts of other wikis like cawiki, wfmlabs tools should be ready for them.
And also consider checking whether the IP address in question in this case, made Flow edits elsewhere. The Discoverer (talk) 12:08, 11 June 2016 (UTC)[]

‎2602:30A:2C48:EB10:8CBA:C520:6F13:EECB at dzwiki

One of many IPs of a longtime cross-wiki vandal is back creating "year" stubs to push dzwiki up to 200 articles). In this case, the stubs cover a random assortment of years, including 2000, 2004, 2033, 2040, 2042, 2043, and 2044. Some of these (the first two) already exist on the wiki as articles using Hindu-Arabic numerals, and these should probably should be moved to the corresponding titles using Dzongkha numerals. Because of this fact, this case is perhaps a little trickier than the typical "year stub" spamming. I'm hoping that the new stubs can be deleted with maximum prejudice (as they have the hallmarks of a longtime vandal), but perhaps others would have a different opinion? - dcljr (talk) 02:27, 18 June 2016 (UTC)[]

Done. Thanks. - dcljr (talk) 10:15, 18 June 2016 (UTC)[]

User:Hypocritepedia using

  Done. -- Tegel (Talk) 00:46, 23 June 2016 (UTC)[] xwiki-contribsxwiki-date (alt)STIP infoWHOISrobtexgblockglistabuselogipchecker is also spamming now. Mrschimpf (talk) 01:04, 23 June 2016 (UTC)[]
It's already rangeblocked. :) Matiia (talk) 01:06, 23 June 2016 (UTC)[]
Thank you; I was just about ready to turn off all my notifications. Thanks for your quick work. Mrschimpf (talk) 01:59, 23 June 2016 (UTC)[]
This section was archived on a request by: —MarcoAurelio 21:56, 27 June 2016 (UTC)[]

Multiple IPs primarily in sdwiki and cywiki

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

Cross-wiki edits by sockpuppets of Messina

Status:    Done

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

Accounts are globally locked by other stewards now. Thanks. —MarcoAurelio 21:55, 27 June 2016 (UTC)[]
This section was archived on a request by: —MarcoAurelio 21:55, 27 June 2016 (UTC)[]

User:Peadar (User:Borgatya at enwiki)

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

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


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

I see the latter action (page deletion) has already begun (on at least crh: and gv:). How 'bout the former (global block)? - dcljr (talk) 08:18, 26 June 2016 (UTC)[]
  mass deleted and locally blocked--Infinite0694 (Talk) 08:31, 26 June 2016 (UTC)[]
This user is not going to stop. He needs to be globally blocked. - dcljr (talk) 19:18, 27 June 2016 (UTC)[]
Gave the IP a 6 months global block. —MarcoAurelio 21:49, 27 June 2016 (UTC)[]
This section was archived on a request by: —MarcoAurelio 11:47, 2 July 2016 (UTC)[]