Vandalism reports/Archives/Archive 6

Warning This is an archive. Please post new vandalism alerts on vandalism reports under the respective section. Thank you.

Current cross-wiki vandalismEdit


Create many spam articles in w:zh-yue. --Kowlooner (talk) 07:41, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

Cross-wiki vandalism since April. LlamaAl (talk) 02:57, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

  Done globally blocked again, for longer as the block in April didn't deter the vandal QuiteUnusual (talk) 13:51, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

Cross-wiki spam. --invadinado (TALK - SUL) 09:21, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

  globally blocked --MF-W 12:08, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

Ministério da JustiçaEdit

Personal attack.GRS73 (talk) 23:50, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

  account locked. --MF-W 23:52, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

Flaky564 taking it out on eswikiEdit

Crosswiki vandalism, started on spanisch Wikipedia, then german now vandalising the italian wikipedia. --Sitic (talk) 01:31, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

Account has been locked from editing, thanks QuiteUnusual (talk) 09:08, 3 June 2013 (UTC)


Crosswiki vandalism, changing userpages and in general being a nuisance. Regards Knud Winckelmann (talk) 21:40, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

Stopped shortly before this report, and no activity outside of enwiki and dewiki, so no need for a gblock at this time, thanks. QuiteUnusual (talk) 19:05, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

cross-wiki linkspam: [1] --Se4598 (talk) 07:38, 7 May 2013 (UTC)


User:Lezgistxa is a vandal banned from the Lezgi Wikipedia. He vandalized the article on Lezgi Language on various projects, replacing the alphabet written in Cyrillic by the alphabet he made up in Latin. (Lezgi is written in Cyrillic alphabet). On top of this, he often logs out and edits from IP, accusing other in vandalism or issuing threats.


  • Lak Wikipedia: [2]; then vandalized my talk page (removed by a steward), today from IP: [3]
  • Chechen Wikipedia: [4] and further edit warring in this article;
  • Russian Wikipedia [5]; false accusations: [6]--Ymblanter (talk) 22:06, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

The best from my perspective would be a global lock; however, I do not know whether the activity of the user in the last half a year (only vandalism and threats) qualifies; if not, please make sure that his vandalism in Lak Wikipedia would be stopped (a block and/or a page protection); there are no administrators there, and I am the only regular user. Thank you in advance.--Ymblanter (talk) 22:06, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

Katy Perry vandalEdit

I am very new to this.

The user QuoteTheRavenHair [stalktoy] – [cross-wiki edits] has been cross vandalizing almost all of the Katy Perry articles, especially the Italian one. The user in question has been engaging in non-stop edit wars and even making sockpuppet accounts, (on the Italian wiki) to avoid a block and even using racial slurs. What can be done about this whole thing?

VelvetViolet4444 (talk) 12:08, 22 March 2013 (UTC)VelvetViolet4444

I can see that the user edits the Katy Perry and other female singer articles on multiple wikis. What I can't see is any that look like vandalism on the random sample of projects I looked at. If there is a problem on itwiki, that's for the local community to deal with. If the problem is wider we will need links / diffs to the problematic edits please QuiteUnusual TalkQu 14:23, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Oh yes, of course. Here they are.

Italian wiki: [8]

Turkish wiki: [9]

Spanish wiki: [10]

VelvetViolet4444 (talk) 22:49, 29 March 2013 (UTC)VelvetViolet4444

Quotetheravenhair is an uncivil "professional editwarrior" with a childish attitude for compulsive revert and insults. I set an abusefilter on which works quite fine, feel free to email me (if you are a sysop) to ask me to implement it on other wikis. --Vituzzu (talk) 23:00, 29 March 2013 (UTC) at bxr-wikiEdit

Please see his contributions, all -- vandalism with uncivil descriptions. Saint Johann (ru) 17:25, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

IP-address blocked 3 days for trying to fix the election. -- Tegel (Talk) 17:36, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

Amanbir Singh,

[11][12][13][14][15] --Petrov Victor (talk) 13:27, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

Agreed. He should probably be locked. I just reverted another. πr2 (t • c) 13:31, 10 March 2013 (UTC)
Locked / IP gblocked for 3 days. --MF-W 14:11, 10 March 2013 (UTC)


  • xwiki-contribsxwiki-date (alt)STIP infoWHOISrobtexgblockglistabuselogipchecker is vandalizing the English Wikiquote. Could someone please block this ip-adress. -- Mdd (talk) 23:35, 25 February 2013 (UTC)
    • A global block might be useful, because this IP address has recently also been abused at the Simple English Wikipedia (see luxo: Anyway, I've requested a local block at the English Wikiquote. Thanks for your report, Mdd! Mathonius (talk) 23:39, 25 February 2013 (UTC)
      • The reason I have made this request here is, that there is no admin around right now. Yesterday User Mukburger 3 had a similar edit pattern, and I would like to prevent a similar escalation. Is it possible to block that ip address right now? -- Mdd (talk) 23:55, 25 February 2013 (UTC) IP'sEdit

Makes lots of small edits over lots of wikis. Often removes internal linking (red links) (like this and this). Sometimes adds links to other wikipedias (en, simple, sv) like this, this, this and this). Is using the edit summary. Edits inline referneces by adding internal linking to them, or linking to some other wikipedia. Seems to have started on en.wikipedia, there is probably more IP's to be found by looking through the edit history of articles like en:Effect of climate change on plant biodiversity. -- 09:10, 25 February 2013 (UTC)


-- 13:39, 26 February 2013 (UTC)


-- 09:53, 3 March 2013 (UTC)


-- 10:01, 4 March 2013 (UTC)


‎* xwiki-contribsxwiki-date (alt)STIP infoWHOISrobtexgblockglistabuselogipchecker

See also this exchange on simple:. -- 08:28, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

he-wp-user and IPsEdit

I am Japanese-WP User. I want to report problem users. They(He) are Hebrew-wp User and Israel-IP Users. They are acting in many langueges Wiki-projects (include Ja-WP). They will continue to post articles of poor quality and in violation of the licensein with Machine translation!
I warned and protested to him in talk-page in He-wp, more than once[16]. But he did not listen. A another Ja-wp user submitted a request user-block[17], then he was blocked infinity in Ja-wp[18]. After that he was blocked in No- and Ru-Wp with same reason (In En-wp he was blocked other reason.).
But he is posting articles hidden with IP. Yesterday a article was posted[19], but it will be deleted soon[20].
I can not judge that is their act vandalism or not. But I want to stop the damage for wiki-project more. --Ashtray (talk) 13:53, 15 February 2013 (UTC)


Has made many subtle vandalism edits over a period of months. Every single edit from this IP has been vandalism.http://en.wikipedia .org/wiki/Special:Contributions/ Lithopsian (talk) 19:27, 4 February 2013 (UTC)

I can't see any edits outside the English Wikipedia, so it's not considered as cross-wiki wandalism. And English Wikipedia has local administrators to deal with local issues. Report the issue on w:Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism. -- Tegel (Talk) 19:37, 4 February 2013 (UTC)


Widespread vandalism on species. Hasn't been blocked yet. --Techman224Talk 06:07, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

Some Chinese projects as well. --Makecat 06:10, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
  Done on species by User:Stho002. Techman224Talk 06:16, 26 January 2013 (UTC)


Creates pages on different wikis with junk content.[21][22] (see cross-wiki contribs) --Z 10:05, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

Cross-wiki vandalEdit

Changes the map of Georgia and valdalizes numbers--Ymblanter (talk) 19:19, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

Sexually unsound vandalEdit

Keeps going around wikis and adding sexual content totally unrelated to the article itself. --Hydriz (talk) 15:05, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

  Blocked for 3 months. Thanks for reporting. -- Quentinv57 (talk) 15:38, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

Cross-wiki vandalEdit

Consistently vandalizing articles about Israel, specifically in "scarcely-populated" wikis. -- Prokurator11 (talk) 16:09, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

He's back:

-- Prokurator11 (talk) 07:45, 15 December 2012 (UTC)


Vandal-spam-bot, blocked locally on it.Wiki. Already active in march, now repeating.--DoppioM 15:24, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

Done. Thanks. -- MarcoAurelio (talk) 09:47, 5 September 2012 (UTC)


This account has threatened to attack several wikis (in French here) since he's been blocked on fr.wikt:

  1. He began to place the French insult "con" on fr.wikt main page.
  2. Then he apologized and organized a false vote for him, and put this masquerade link on the main page.
  3. Then he blanked the fr.b main page.
  4. The fr.s one.
  5. The bat-smg.w one.

Thanks for your attention. JackPotte (talk) 21:03, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

Today the account seems to have stopped. That's maybe due to his four blockings. JackPotte (talk) 09:01, 25 August 2012 (UTC)
Leaving a note here that the account was globally locked. -- MarcoAurelio (talk) 17:41, 7 September 2012 (UTC)=== User "Mukburger 3" on Wikiquote ===

Hi. Could someone please ban User "Mukburger 3" on Wikiquote? He is trying to wreck the place. Thanks. ~ Daniel Tomé (talk) 00:23, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

Account locked for cross-wiki vandalism. -- Tegel (Talk) 00:29, 25 February 2013 (UTC)
The IP is still vandalising, isn't it? πr2 (t • c) 00:30, 25 February 2013 (UTC)
Lock Special:CentralAuth/Mukburger 4. πr2 (t • c) 00:30, 25 February 2013 (UTC)
Done. And the IP-address doesn't edit any more. -- Tegel (Talk) 00:34, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

Stop vandalism Lezgi WikiEdit

Lock Lezghin Wikipedia administrator User:Migraghvi since it removes the page for no reason!!! FsF (talk) 12:38, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

FsF is additional account of user Lezgistxa who permanently blocked for vandalism in Lezgi Wikipedia.--Soul Train (talk) 14:56, 26 February 2013 (UTC) xwiki-contribsxwiki-date (alt)STIP infoWHOISrobtexgblockglistabuselogipchecker cross-wiki vandalism --Iste (D) 10:45, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

  Done, anon-only global block for 3 days. Trijnsteltalk 10:53, 6 June 2012 (UTC)


Edgar --Inkowik (talk) 17:39, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

  Done, locked by Jyothis. Trijnsteltalk 20:22, 4 June 2012 (UTC)


User: who is permanently blocked in the English, Assyrian, Navaho, Saterland Frisian, Thai and Welsh Wikipedias and temporarily blocked in various other Wikipedias and in Wikimdia Commons is spamming the same images cross-wiki. User: Global Edits,

The user was the subject of serious acts of vandalism as had been the case in English Wikipedia until the permanent block: English Wikipedia User talk:

Other spammings from this address is happening cross-wiki and relentlessly so. Apart from vandalism I am afraid that this user has the ability to hack because some of the articles this user edited on were briefly disrupted.

Saguamundi (from the German Wikipedia ) 09:52, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

  Done. Shizhao globally blocked the IP address until 16 August 2012. Please note that not all edits are reverted. Trijnsteltalk 16:10, 17 May 2012 (UTC) et alEdit

Apparent long-term pattern of a combo of copyvio, sourcing issues, sockpuppeting, and evasion across several encyclopedias.

Already blocked in NL, JA, for a combination of copyright, sock-puppetry and other violations. I found this while filing a sock report at ENWIKI.

Please see that investigation for details, elaborate diffs provided. As this IP has been adding material onto at least twenty other Wikipedias, a wider view seems appropriate. --Joe Decker (talk) 17:26, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

N.B.; JA block expired in the six days since I posted this. --Joe Decker (talk) 20:28, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

Withdrawn: While much of the original history remains, some of the recent apparent misbehavior may not have been, and it would be inappropriate to continue pressing this with a user when there is not evidence of a consistent current problem of misbehavior. --Joe Decker (talk) 00:59, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

lez-Wikipedia user Lezgistxa 2Edit

Totally disagree with vvv and this is 2nd section. Here the message from my talk page @Lez-WP:

Hi. He translated some media-wiki azerbaijani messages in lezgi language. [23] [24] --Vugar 1981 (обсуждение) 10:24, 4 Нава 2012 (MSK)

He replaced messages in Azerbajan wiki to Lezghian system messages. Lezgistxa allready vandilized 1) Russian Wikipedia, 2) Lezghian Wikipedia, 3) TranslateWiki. If it is not cross-wiki vandalism, I don't know what IS vandalism. And how can we ban a vandal, if prior the project hasn't got own administrators?--Soul Train (talk) 13:13, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

  • The wrong translations in Translatewiki are sure casual. The same happened to me. I opened Russian translation for help and translated it there. It is evident that he used Azerbaijani translation for help. Constructive user should think the same way. But, as I stated in previous report, Soul Train's behavior is not constructive. I think Soul Train should be warned by admins. --Bouron (talk) 19:21, 6 April 2012 (UTC)
    Lol. I see you 3rd time and every time your messages more and more ridiculous.--Soul Train (talk) 16:42, 7 April 2012 (UTC)
  • Changes messages of other users, changes words of templates that allready using as standart (see Administrator's undo: [25] [26]) The only user in Lezghi Wikipedia, with whom others have problems, is Lezgistxa. He even said that he knows Lezghian language not very good, so his mistakes constantly have to clean by other people, first of all - Administrators.--Soul Train (talk) 17:01, 7 April 2012 (UTC)
  • Well, as expected, user Lezgistxa was banned for 3 days in Lezgi Wikipedia. Because of inappropriate use of alternative accounts in Administratorship voting he can be blocked indefinitely. This report can be closed.--Soul Train (talk) 00:29, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

lez-Wikipedia user LezgistxaEdit

It is good that Lezgistxa is native speaker and I thank for its contribution to the project when it was in Incubator. But there are two very hard negative sides. First, his desire to translate Lezghian language to the Latin form can be regarded as nothing but vandalism. All those edits ([27] [28] [29] and so on) were canceled. There's absolutely no reliable sources indicating that Lezgins are using Latin alphabet in the letter. Russian-Lezgin dictionary of Magomed Gadzhiev, main existing dictionary which is basis for all modern dictionaries, uses only the Cyrillic alphabet. Latin alphabet used just from 1928 to 1938 and it does not reflecting current state. Second, this edit violates generally accepted en:standards of сivility / ru:Википедия:Этичное поведение. Translation: "Oppose Lezgin Wikipedia does not need Azerbaijanian administrator and that's all!!!!!!!!". I believe that such behavior deserves block. And if that is not enough, third, I can write about absolutely wild situation related to the category "Tslapashstan" (Категория:Цlaпашстан). Tslapash means in Lezginian "horse manure", stan, as you know, "country". And he edit this category, even want create vandal category in Commons, so... I even can't imagine the chaos in the project if such user become administrator.--Soul Train (обсуждение) 12:06, 29 Ибне 2012 (MSK)

Also note his talk page @Ru-Wikipedia. List of violations is impressive (just scrolling his talk page):

  • "No original research" (ru:ОРИСС, warning 17 November 2011);
  • Warning 4 december 2011;
  • Warning for moving deleting template (4 December 2011);
  • "Edit warring" (warning, 7 December 2011);
  • Blocking (7 December 2011) for Edit warring;
  • Blocking for deleting content of pages (8 December 2011);
  • Warning 12 December;
  • Copyrights warning (16 December);
  • WP:COPY (16 December);
  • Other mystifications;
  • Links to English Wikipedia instead of reliable sources;
  • Warning for "Edit warring" (9 January 2012);
  • Blocking for same reason (9 January 2012);
  • Replic removing from talk pages (warning, 15 January 2012);
  • Warning for fraud (18 January)
  • Warning for phrase such: "Rasim Musabekov is Azerbaijanian, so his page can't be reliable source" (28 December 2011)
  • Warning for deleting content of pages (11 February 2012)
  • Blocking for "Edit warring" (9 March 2012);
  • Blocking for deleting content of pages (10 March 2012);
  • Reblocking because of bypass of blocking (24 March 2012).

Furthermore, I don't check other Wikipedias, but violations may be there too. At least, he intended to create the category @ Commons with vandal name that I've talk in lez-WP.--Soul Train (talk) 09:31, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

  • I see no vandalism evidence by Lezgistxa. If he likes using Latin alphabet then there should be no restriction to do that. Lezgin Wikipedia should be as comfortable for Lezgins as it is possible. But it seems Soul Train's principals are to mess Lezgin users up, not to let Lezgins use non-cyrillic alphabet and not to let LW be developed and expanded because good Lezgin encyclopedia is good for Lezgin people and their language. If person don't want some project works then he can't just close it. But he can go there and do everything to make it uncomfortable, hard to work. That is what some users from Russian Wikipedia possibly do in lezwiki. Lezgistxa spent a lot of time and energy to have this project opened, so he sure is interested in developing lezwiki. BTW, Warnings from ruwiki are not relevant here.--Bouron (talk) 09:37, 1 April 2012 (UTC)
    Your statement just boorish, dear Bouron. I'm working days and nights for the normal functioning of Lezghin Wikipedia - creating templates, coordinating the work for systematization of data in order to Lez-WP continue to growing up by the rules. As for the Cyrillic alphabet, show us evidences that Lezgins use the Latin alphabet in their live. (Largest periodic journal, Encyclopeadias of Gadzhiev, Talibov, Gulmagomedov and so on) By the way, Lezgistxa already apologized for his behavior. So who is right?--Soul Train (talk) 20:38, 1 April 2012 (UTC)
  • Please, do something! He changes articles without community desicion. When we talking about rules of countries names, he just renaiming articles without reliable sources - just as he want. Even other Lesghian users are already tired.--Soul Train (talk) 21:33, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

  Not done. This seems to be a content dispute rather than vandalism. Such disputes shall be resolved by local admins, they are out of scope of GS or steward authority. vvvt 07:32, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

Hi I want to say that Lezgi wiki exposed by other elements of vandalism , they may be Trojan horses. My desire to use indigenous Lezgin words are destroyed , Lezgin alphabet does not meet the Lezgin language as it was imposed during Communist terror against the population of the Caucasus peoples , terrorism , which continues to this day Lezgistxa (talk) 09:46, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

Possible open proxiesEdit

All of these IPs were caught in vandalising pages from my personal and to-do lists as obvious revenge for deleting by me a non-notable page a few days ago. Locally I've blocked some of them which were open proxies with persuasive evidence, however to prevent further cross-wiki issues, here I propose to check them all and block them globally if they are widely accessible, as it is usually done. Based on the fact that they appeared once in a few minutes and are located in different countries, these IPs must be either proxies or zombies, which are subject to blocking. Sorry if it isn't the page for such requests, then I don't mind moving the topic.--Microcell (talk) 16:17, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

  Done. All blocked as open proxy. -- Tegel (Talk) 16:31, 18 March 2012 (UTC)


Edgar --Inkowik (talk) 12:22, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

Done. Jafeluv (talk) 12:51, 17 February 2012 (UTC)


Edgar --Inkowik (talk) 12:21, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

Done. Jafeluv (talk) 12:51, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

User:Pfä! ScAvenger Piffmust!Edit

Edgar --Inkowik (talk) 12:20, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

Done. Jafeluv (talk) 12:51, 17 February 2012 (UTC)


Edgar --Inkowik (talk) 12:20, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

Done. Jafeluv (talk) 12:51, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

User: and User:

Reincarnations of Al12179 below; both keep spamming the same images cross-wiki. global edits 1, global edits 2. --Cú Faoil 08:28, 8 January 2012 (UTC)


Edgar v.W. --Martin1978 (talk) 11:36, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

  Done, globally locked. Trijnsteltalk 12:00, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

Long-term, recurrent vandalismEdit

IRadysyuk (Spammer)Edit

Crosswiki spammer for the commercial website The user page in de:WP has been deleted and the user was blocked indefinite. Global contributions [30] --Gleiberg 09:37, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

  Done, globally locked on 17 May by MBisanz. Trijnsteltalk 17:24, 27 June 2012 (UTC)


account/ip wiki lock/block comment
Namasqe (talk • contribs • block • xwiki-contribs • xwiki-date (alt) • CA • ST • lwcheckuser) en, ko, ja, zh locked
Dpdjwkdwnsgk (talk • contribs • block • xwiki-contribs • xwiki-date (alt) • CA • ST • lwcheckuser) ja, ko, zh locked
Lekapolys (talk • contribs • block • xwiki-contribs • xwiki-date (alt) • CA • ST • lwcheckuser) en, gan, ja, ko locked
Yenook (talk • contribs • block • xwiki-contribs • xwiki-date (alt) • CA • ST • lwcheckuser) en, ja, ko locked
Negovic (talk • contribs • block • xwiki-contribs • xwiki-date (alt) • CA • ST • lwcheckuser) de, en, fr, id, ja, ko, la, simple, zh_yue locked
Hongerranke (talk • contribs • block • xwiki-contribs • xwiki-date (alt) • CA • ST • lwcheckuser) en, eo, ja, ko, simple, zh_yue locked
Listop (talk • contribs • block • xwiki-contribs • xwiki-date (alt) • CA • ST • lwcheckuser) ja, ko locked
Oongpak (talk • contribs • block • xwiki-contribs • xwiki-date (alt) • CA • ST • lwcheckuser) en, ja, ko locked
Armidgain (talk • contribs • block • xwiki-contribs • xwiki-date (alt) • CA • ST • lwcheckuser) commons, en, enwb, enwn, enwq, enws, enwv, enwikt, fr, ja, ko, mw, meta, nl, ko, pl, simple, species, zh, zh_yue locked
Sasmoto (talk • contribs • block • xwiki-contribs • xwiki-date (alt) • CA • ST • lwcheckuser) en, ja, ko locked
Strooke (talk • contribs • block • xwiki-contribs • xwiki-date (alt) • CA • ST • lwcheckuser) ja, ko, zh locked
Rolcacus (talk • contribs • block • xwiki-contribs • xwiki-date (alt) • CA • ST • lwcheckuser) en, ja, ko, zh locked
Rowjddlfeodnjstn (talk • contribs • block • xwiki-contribs • xwiki-date (alt) • CA • ST • lwcheckuser) ja, ko locked
Midooros (talk • contribs • block • xwiki-contribs • xwiki-date (alt) • CA • ST • lwcheckuser) en, fr, ja, ko, simple locked
Laceberto (talk • contribs • block • xwiki-contribs • xwiki-date (alt) • CA • ST • lwcheckuser) commons, en, ja, ko, kowq, kows, oldws, zh locked
ヨムファングク (talk • contribs • block • xwiki-contribs • xwiki-date (alt) • CA • ST • lwcheckuser) en, ja, ko locked
Allinkstrok (talk • contribs • block • xwiki-contribs • xwiki-date (alt) • CA • ST • lwcheckuser) ja, ko locked
Tangsord (talk • contribs • block • xwiki-contribs • xwiki-date (alt) • CA • ST • lwcheckuser) commons, enwn, enwikt, ja, ko, mw, meta, zh_yue locked
Monivero (talk • contribs • block • xwiki-contribs • xwiki-date (alt) • CA • ST • lwcheckuser) commons, de, en, enwb, enwn, enwq, enws, enwv, enwikt, gan, id, ja, ko, mw, meta, pt, simple, species, zh_yue, zh locked
Ducleir (talk • contribs • block • xwiki-contribs • xwiki-date (alt) • CA • ST • lwcheckuser) en, ja, simple, zh locked
豊田善生 (talk • contribs • block • xwiki-contribs • xwiki-date (alt) • CA • ST • lwcheckuser) en, ja, ko, simple, zh_yue, zh locked
Eibsfsgkog (talk • contribs • block • xwiki-contribs • xwiki-date (alt) • CA • ST • lwcheckuser) en, ja locked
Exatras (talk • contribs • block • xwiki-contribs • xwiki-date (alt) • CA • ST • lwcheckuser) en, ja, ko, simple, zh locked
Legnakar (talk • contribs • block • xwiki-contribs • xwiki-date (alt) • CA • ST • lwcheckuser) en, ja, ko, zh locked
Paragonia (talk • contribs • block • xwiki-contribs • xwiki-date (alt) • CA • ST • lwcheckuser) ja non-sul enwiki account is unrelated
SerbantIII (talk • contribs • block • xwiki-contribs • xwiki-date (alt) • CA • ST • lwcheckuser) en, ja, ko, zh locked
Lourik (talk • contribs • block • xwiki-contribs • xwiki-date (alt) • CA • ST • lwcheckuser) en, ja, ko locked
Dixameno (talk • contribs • block • xwiki-contribs • xwiki-date (alt) • CA • ST • lwcheckuser) en, ja, ko, zh locked
Riaskan (talk • contribs • block • xwiki-contribs • xwiki-date (alt) • CA • ST • lwcheckuser) ja locked
Csityzen (talk • contribs • block • xwiki-contribs • xwiki-date (alt) • CA • ST • lwcheckuser) commons, en, enwb, enwn, enwq, enws, enwv, enwikt, es, fr, incubator, ja, ko, mw, meta, pt, species, zh locked
Flowerday (talk • contribs • block • xwiki-contribs • xwiki-date (alt) • CA • ST • lwcheckuser) ja locked
Saidvoice (talk • contribs • block • xwiki-contribs • xwiki-date (alt) • CA • ST • lwcheckuser) commons, en, ja, ko, zh locked
Louranshow (talk • contribs • block • xwiki-contribs • xwiki-date (alt) • CA • ST • lwcheckuser) ja, ko, zh locked
Labobart (talk • contribs • block • xwiki-contribs • xwiki-date (alt) • CA • ST • lwcheckuser) en, ja, ko locked
Kezzoki (talk • contribs • block • xwiki-contribs • xwiki-date (alt) • CA • ST • lwcheckuser) de, ja, zh locked
Difarty (talk • contribs • block • xwiki-contribs • xwiki-date (alt) • CA • ST • lwcheckuser) commons, en, enwb, enwn, enwq, enws, enwv, enwikt, incubator, ja. ko, mw, meta, species, zh locked
Nivor (talk • contribs • block • xwiki-contribs • xwiki-date (alt) • CA • ST • lwcheckuser) en, gan, ja, ko locked
Ermoohyun (talk • contribs • block • xwiki-contribs • xwiki-date (alt) • CA • ST • lwcheckuser) ja, ko locked
Diff2dr (talk • contribs • block • xwiki-contribs • xwiki-date (alt) • CA • ST • lwcheckuser) ja locked
Tersmibit (talk • contribs • block • xwiki-contribs • xwiki-date (alt) • CA • ST • lwcheckuser) ja locked
Allehu (talk • contribs • block • xwiki-contribs • xwiki-date (alt) • CA • ST • lwcheckuser) ja, ko locked
Takenskept (talk • contribs • block • xwiki-contribs • xwiki-date (alt) • CA • ST • lwcheckuser) en, fr, ja, ko, meta, zh locked

English compulsive vandalism crosswiki Sarah 1940Edit

Reported by: MoiraMoira (talk) 09:15, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Long-term cross wiki spamming against Azerbaijan and Turkey articles by blocked User: who has the ability to hackEdit

User: who is permanently blocked in the English, Assyrian, Navaho, Saterland Frisian, Thai and Welsh Wikipedias and temporarily blocked in various other Wikipedias and in Wikimdia Commons is spamming the same images cross-wiki in the Turkey and Azerbaijan country articles again under these IP addresses:

The user was the subject of serious acts of vandalism as had been the case in English Wikipedia until the permanent block: English Wikipedia User talk:

Other spammings from these addresses is happening cross-wiki and relentlessly so. Apart from vandalism I am afraid that this user has the ability to hack because some of the articles this user edited on were briefly disrupted. The IP address of the user is subject to change but stem from the same region and the pattern is the same. Due to the constantly changing IP addresses, is it possible to semi-protect the Turkey and Azerbaijan articles from IP vandalism, since many Wikipedia encyclopedias in other languages are small and ill prepared to deal with this ongoing vandalism?

Saguamundi 16:21, 16 July 2012 (UTC)


OlympicFan creates sockpuppets to spam user pages in different wikis about a sports-related forum. Please report accounts below, and move them to the collapsed box once they have been globally locked. Jafeluv 23:21, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

List of accounts
Named accounts (all locked)
Non-SUL accounts
Known IPs

Long-term cross wiki vandalism against Portuguese historyEdit

I - Since January 2007 we have a Wikipedia's user theory being spread im many Wikis: there was a reign of Queen Beatrice of Portugal from 22 Octobre 1383 to April (after, August) 1385. The user was, in 2007, called Andreas Herzog [stalktoy] – [cross-wiki edits] [31] and we can read his theory here.

His theory in 2007: «Se as Cortes de Coimbra não lhe reconheceram a legitimidade, não podiam certamente apagar os factos históricos que estavam para trás - e um facto indesmentível é que D. Beatriz tomou atitudes próprias de um rei de Portugal. Por muito que Fernão Lopes - a nossa principal memória para este conturbado período histórico - nos queira fazer pensar o contrário, quando lemos as páginas da Primeira Parte da Crónica d'el-Rei D. João I da Boa Memória, 1.ª parte essa que foca o chamado período do «Interregno», do Mestre de Avis como Regedor e Defensor do Reino (e então, pergunto-lhe, onde está a verdade? Porquê chamar crónica do Rei D. João I se os factos que descreve se referem a um período em que ele era apenas Mestre de Avis, e somente o último capítulo diz respeito à sua aclamção como rei em Coimbra? Não seria mais verdadeiro chamar-lhe antes Crónica da Regência do Mestre de Avis ou ainda, mais exactamente, Crónica do [desafortunado] Reinado de D. Beatriz ou coisa que o valha? Porquê, até, a designação que usamos, entre nós, historiadores, de interregno, período entre reinados, se afinal havia uma rainha? Parece que afinal a história deste período é tudo menos descomprometida... Usamos o artifício do interregno para dizer que ninguém governa de jure... Como vê, a História é tudo menos uma ciência pacífica, exacta e objectiva - e quando uma crónica é espelho de uma encomenda do poder político que governa a Nação, então temos todos os motivos e mais alguns para desconfiar da sua inteira verdade...). Pernicioso é, se ao Estado couber a escrita da História... E o tempo da história "oficial", espero que já lá vá, pelo menos, há trinta e três anos...»

This user isn't a common Wikipedia author, because he was a sysop of Wikipedia po in 2006. I intervened, since 2010, and this was corrected, at least, in Portuguese, Spanish, French and English Wikipedias, but in many others this theory remained. It as no historiographical foundation, except a hoax from the time of King Miguel I in Portugal. As they needed, in that time, a precedent to dethrone Queen Mary II, they invented that the portuguese Cortes of Coimbra, on April 1385, have dethroned "Queen" Beatrice. It's known that this Cortes declared the Portuguese Throne empty since the dead of her father, King Ferdinand I, and the user Andreas Herzog, if he is, as I think, also the user Trasamundo [stalktoy] – [cross-wiki edits] [32] (because both defend the same very special theory and user Trasamundo reveals a great knowledge of Wikipedia), know all this because it was writen by me, on a discussion with Trasamundo, here

I wrote, then (current rectification on italic): «The contemporary little number of authors defending Beatriz or Juan I were kings, or those that defended this in the past, don't give dates of their "reign" because they consider the two (or one or another) were allways the real kings (of a nominal point of view). The only guys "dating" the reign of Beatriz (but calling Juan I an usurper) were the impostors, in the time of King Miguel I, that invented the "destitution" of Beatriz by the Cortes in 1385 to justify, with a forged "precedent", the drowing of queen Maria II, this one a true destitution. So, regarding 1383-1385, this is not history, it's a joke.»

By hasard, I didn't know, at the time, that there is a historiographical current of spanish and portuguese authors considering Beatrice titular Queen of Portugal between 22 Octobre and the middle of December 1383, but, till today, this theory remains minoritary among the portuguese professors of History. But one thing is, even on this theory, a nominal reign between 22 Octobre - middle December 1383, and of this theory we can inform our readers, and another thing, that is junk, is Trasamundo's criation of an Beatrice and Juan I of Castile reign from 22 Octobre 1383 to August 1385.

Well, as I arrived, in 2011, to a minimum consensum with Trasamundo on the texts of Wikipedia es, I didn't bother any more with this question. But now Trasamundo is returning to charge, recuperating is junk theory with no historiographical support: the reign of Beatrice from 1383 to 1385, and eliminating all opposed information. As he also don't like King Juan I of Castile's testament, he not only eliminates any reference to the fact that, on this testament, the owning of the Kingdom of Portugal is declared on doubt between Beatrice and the futur King Henry III of Castile, as he invents an interpretation: «la mención al papel arbitral del Papa es para ratificar que efectivamente los derechos de sucesión de Portugal pertenecerían a Enrique III tras fallecer Beatriz.» The massacre of the ancient text and the new text with this junk theory and the falsification of the sense of Juan I de Castile's testament was in this date. The most part of the new text is good, and some parts are even very good, but this is furtive vandalism, to bring junk and eliminate previous legitimate material on an article. I suspect that, if we don't do nothing, very soon we will have more spreading of "Beatrice and Juan I of Castile reign between the years of 1383 and 1385".

What we need to do, about this particular question:

I) Clean up all the pages about the Portuguese Kings, and about Beatrice and Juan I of Castile, on many Wikis, of this junk theory of the "reign of both between 1383-1385".

II) And, as there is a historiographical dispute even about a reign from 22 Octobre to middle December 1383, and this is a minoritary current, to impeach any changes on those articles declaring that they were kings of Portugal for 60 days. The question of Juan I of Castile's testament is only, for the moment, on Wikipedia es, and I don't need Metawiki intervention (I will resolve it).

As I have yet many thing to say and two more (or three) cases to expose, in the end of all, I will refer what I think we must do with user Trasamundo or with user Trasamundo/Herzog. For now, I only ask to be confirm if they are the same person. Jorge alo 09:10, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

II - The case of Miguel, Crown Prince of Portugal. It was a hoax, but with tertiary and even secondary sources. So, it was a good hoax, and we profit it, on Portuguese and English Wikipedias, to make articles about this hoax or repeated equivocation (the english article isn't yet finished). Meanwhile, Peadar [stalktoy] – [cross-wiki edits] [33], creator of the article on Wikipedia po, was blocked two times. On Wikipedia en, on a conversation with me [34], Borgatya [stalktoy] – [cross-wiki edits] [35] assumed a relationship with user Peadar:

«Please accept the existence of this article which does not hurt your personality and for you is also better to agree instead of querrel here and in portugese wiki.21:49, 4 December 2011 (UTC)Borgatya (talk)»

Possibly, they are two sock-puppets of someone else (and I would like to know who), that began to spread the hoax by wiki-scam. Well, could be a equivocation in good faith of some author of Wikipedia, but there's a clear note of vandalism that remained: after the issue has been clarified, Peadar/Borgatya or Peadar and Borgatya left the hungarian article, with all it's false content, as it was, til this moment (11h 22m, 09/01/2012, on my portuguese clock). This is not a good faith behavior and he (or they) vandalized hungarian Wikipedia.

In this case,I ask:

I) To notify hungarian wikipedia (I don't no hungarian) that they have this false article. II) The two sock-puppets don't need to be blocked because they are inactive, but it's necessary to see from who they are sock-puppets, begining for Herzog/Trasamundo (or both, if they aren't the same). And also to see if these sock puppets return to service. Jorge alo 11:42, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

III - The case of the Royal coat of arms of the portuguese kingdom. This isn't the complete coat of the last Bragança's Kings. There are some elements and others are missing. As you can see by the conversation between me and Cristiano Tomás/Lumastan, he is accepting the criticism, but, in the end, he says he will not correct the coat of arms (he says with me, but I never said to him that I wanted that both we corrected it; my intervention was to the coat of arms shall be corrected, and by him).

I think this is also a case of furtive vandalism. The user know that the coat isn't complete and, so, isn't the description, made by Anselmo Braancamp Freire and other authors, of the coat of arms of the last Bragança's Kings, but don't give a damn about. As it was made by him, is very well as it is. I suspect Lumastan [stalktoy] – [cross-wiki edits] is user Trasamundo, not only because of this idea that he knows all and all that he do is well done, but also because user Trasamundo is, since six days (from 3 to 9 January), inactiv on Wikipedia es.

In this case there was a development, the user Cristiano Tomás/Lumastan asked pardon and said he will correct the coat of arms [36], but I keep the request I-, to confirm if user Lumastan is user Trasamundo, because not only of this incident but also because of point IV of this report.

Second development, user Cristiano Tomás say he is not Trasamundo nor Andreas Herzog [37], but I continue with my request I of this point III.

I ask, in this case:

I- To confirm if user Lumastan is user Trasamundo. II- To eliminate his coats of arms, on Commons, for the last Bragança's Kings of Portugal, this one, because the tittle is wrong, and this one. The first, on the french text, it's a proof that he knows very well what the arms reel were, because they miss only a little dragon with wings and a helmet under the crown to be complete. And, by my conversation with him, we see that he was trying to fool me about the helmet (open and not closed) and about the dispositon of the ermine (not to above, but as it is on the image of the french text).

IV - Well, where can be now user Herzog/Trasamundo (or both) in this moment? As we saw for his contributions on Wikipedia es, he was working on the Portuguese Kings, and if I'm right, and he is user Lumastan, he is "working" on the same matter and taking the time and the patient of a lot of people, as usual, but now on Wikipedia en. You can see his good work here.

As people on this discussion is complaining of distorsion of numbers, false arguments, and, as I think it's usual on him, of the use of sock-puppets,

I ask, in this case:

I- To put a filter against sock-puppets on this [38] discussion page, and since the beginning of the discussion, to see if the sock puppets were there, particularly on the discussion of the move.

II- to investigate, on all the Wikimedia network, the relationship between this seven: Andreas Herzog [stalktoy] – [cross-wiki edits], Trasamundo [stalktoy] – [cross-wiki edits],Lumastan [stalktoy] – [cross-wiki edits], Lecen [stalktoy] – [cross-wiki edits] [39], Alarbus [stalktoy] – [cross-wiki edits] [40], Peadar [stalktoy] – [cross-wiki edits] and Borgatya [stalktoy] – [cross-wiki edits].

V - Already out of the issue of the Portuguese History, I have also to say that this guy and some others are promoting, since long time ago, all the pretenders that they can find to Kings, and everywhere. They are Kings creators! This is particularly harmful to Wikipedia because, with false Kings on our lists, we are, at least, subject of criticism of the respectivs school communities.

In this case I ask:

I- To notify all Wikipedias that they possibly have cases of false Kings on their lists.

Ii- To investigate and list all the Wikipedians envolved on the fabrication of Kings, also the relationship between them and the possible relationship of this guys with any vulgar genealogy Internet sites.

VI - Finally, I think this guy needs a exemplar punition. His behavior is of someone wich is mad, thinking that is the best, a kind of little God in the earth. It's true that he is very clever, but, unfortunately, he is "from the dark side of the force".

In this case, I ask:

I- As this guy is not a common guy, and is an ancient sysop, to be guarded by a Steward. And, as user Cristiano Tomás say he is not user Trasamundo neither user Andreas Herzog, that he also be guarded by a Steward till we are sure that what he says is true. And about user Trasamundo, if he also says he isn't user Andreas Herzog, I ask the same thing.

II - I guard my proposition of punition, about the principal suspect, till the end of this matter. To all the others envolved on the fabrication of kings and reigns, orders of succession, etc, on any Wikipedia, I asked they will be warned to not repeat this behavior, and, if they persist, I don't ask they will be banned, but I ask an hard and exemplar punition, at least, a block till they will demand excuses to the community.

Final note: As this is a complex case about, I think, an ancient sysop, I thought the better was to put it here, on this Meta page. If I'm wrong, please tell me where I must present this report. My best salutations, Jorge alo 13:25, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

Hi, Jorge. You are looking for an experienced sysop. I am not sure if I meet with criteria, but you are free to ask a second opinion. Mentioned accounts focus their edits on large projects. I believe you should ask for help on each large project; nothing about large projects can be decided here. If we are dealing with long-term vandalism, the accounts should be blocked, but none of them are and they won't be blocked on these projects by anyone except local sysops. This page might be used to report vandalism on large projects but only blatant ones.
The most part of what you are asking have to be done by local sysop (i.e. put filter, block users, clean up pages). You asked some other actions that, in my opinion, needs better explanation, like clarify the abuse made by some accounts (it is not disallowed to have multiple accounts unless they were used to do any harm and, if they did it, you need to ask a local checkuser to perform the check) and clarify why they should "be guarded" (I suppose you are requesting them to be locked). If possible, please try to write a simple text; easy to be understood by those that are not following this problem.” Teles (T @ L C S) 21:11, 12 January 2012 (UTC)
Yes, I want a second, and even, if possible, a third opinion. And more, to me, is strange your answer to my report, and also your behavior here, on Wikipedia po. I do not trust you. Salutations, Jorge alo 21:20, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
No problem. You are free to tell me what is strange on my talk page and I can explain or review my behavior. Regards.” Teles (T @ L C S) 00:17, 16 January 2012 (UTC)
I am a someone that loves History, not a computer expert, and I have already spent more then 6 hours writing this warning to you, Stewards of Meta. What I'm telling you is that these guys are a organized group and have a great knowledge of how Wikipedia works. It's possible that they have inflitrations not only on local administrations but also on Meta administration. Study, please, what happened here and its developments. What I ask is that this matter will be followed by one or more Stewards of all trust, and I even ask that myself will be watched, because, on the next two or three months, I'm going to try to correct some of the mess they have criated. I don't demand they should be locked for the moment, what I demand is that all this matter, and people involved, will be followed and watched by Stewards of full confidence. And I also demand that a general warning should be sent to all Wikipedias alerting to the possibility of some of their lists of Kings have been vandalized, as, in many cases, the portuguese lists of kings are. If Meta, in such a case, can't do nothing, very well, this kind of organized gangs will have a easy life on keeping vandalazing. To a organized attack we only can respond with organized action, and, as Teles certainly is not a fool, for me, is strange that he can't see that. Ask me to do the job, local by local Wikipedia, facing a organized group? This is a wonderful form of evade the problem. So, I also ask Teles will be put out of this matter. Salutations. Jorge alo 14:34, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
Development: On Wikipedia spanish I am blocqued for 30 days and strange things, that I have stated before, since 2010, on Wikipedia portuguese, now are happening there. This discussion page was altered yesterday or today, but now as the date of 31.dec.2011 as the last modification:
Discusión:Beatriz de Portugal (reina)
   «Pocos meses después murió su padre y fue proclamada reina de Portugal bajo la regencia de su madre»...(discusión) 17:52 20 ene 2010 (UTC)
   Iniciar sesión / crear cuenta
   Sección nueva
   Ver historial
   Portal de la comunidad
   Cambios recientes
   Páginas nuevas
   Página aleatoria
   Notificar un error


   Crear un libro
   Descargar como PDF
   Versión para imprimir


   Esta página fue modificada por última vez el 31 dic 2011, a las 17:28.
   El texto está disponible bajo la Licencia Creative Commons Atribución Compartir Igual 3.0...
As can be confirmed on the page's historial:

Icon tools.svg Herramientas: Detalles de contribuciones • Búsqueda en el historial Estadísticas: Estadísticas • Número de visitas • Número de personas que vigilan esta página Leyenda: (act) = diferencia con la versión actual, (ant) = diferencia con la versión anterior, m = edición menor

   (act | ant) 17:28 31 dic 2011‎ Trasamundo (discusión | contribuciones)‎ m (561 bytes) (Discusión:Beatriz de Portugal (1372-1410)...
   (act | ant) 17:54 20 ene 2010‎ (discusión)‎ (561 bytes) (deshacer)
   (act | ant) 17:52 20 ene 2010‎ (discusión)‎ (558 bytes) (Página creada con « :«Pocos meses después murió su padre y fue...
This page contained my warning to the spanish sysops and editors of the article that I was going to do this report, and now that warning as disappeared. It contained also some critics to the article that taked the editor to make some modifications. Jorge alo 07:42, 12 February 2012 (UTC)
Development: though I was blocked and although they know that I stated that this article contained false propositions, is currently taking place in Wikipedia in Spanish a process of appointment of the said article to good. Examples of false propositions: Juan I of Castile took the arms of Portugal. He didn't took the arms of Portugal, he mixed these arms with the arms of Castile. Title: «Queen of Portugal». She never used it, and she always used «Queen of Castile and León and Portugal», a never existing entity, as her husband never used the title of king of Portugal. On the succession border, it's said she and her husband succeed her father, as a «disputed queen». But the reference on the border speak of pretenders. Olivera Serrano is a " historiographic warrior source", as himself says, but, at least, he never affirmed that the «mention to the pope on Juan I's testament was only to...»,etc. These are only three examples, and there are a lot more of false propositions that I'm not referring. The biggest problem subsist: declaring her as having succeed her father, when even the used source caracterize her husband as a pretender to the portuguese crown! This reiterated attempt of saying that she was a portuguese queen, as I said at the beginning, it's taking place since 2007! And, as I said, there's only a minoritary current defending that she was titular queen, but only from 22 octubre to middle december 1383 (and it's only that: a minority of spanish and portuguese historians). Jorge alo (talk) 11:32, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
It,s also enough to read Anexo:Monarcas de Castilla to see that the "theory of making pretenders appear as «rival kings» or «kings disputed»" is taking care of Wikipedia en español. What are the historiographic currents that defend such theory? More, even in cases where such theory could be admited as, for example, the fight between Pedro I and Enrique II of Castile, is this theory in majority among spanish historians? I think this a very serious case of imposing as the rule a minoritary point of view, more understandable on Genealogists then properly on Historians. I propose and ask, please, the intervention of a international commission of Wikipedia historians on such a serious matter. Jorge alo (talk) 22:12, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
Well, finito: exvollo vai till this matter shall be resolved by Wikipedia. I suspended my contribution, here, on all the project, expecting other points of view on spanish Wikipedia about what I said there. It´s impossible to work further without other contributions of specialists on History: I hope they will appear, and I hope the best to all the Wikipedia project. By my part, I think that I have done what I could. Abraço, Jorge alo (talk) 13:32, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

Blue Cold Ice CreamsEdit

There seems to be an ongoing vandalism concerning the topic "Blue Cold Ice Creams", which includes the following edits:

-- 01:41, 15 January 2012 (UTC)


This user is accused of operating as a public-relations-agency for the company "Farina" in all Wikimedia-Projects!

On the basis of the user-edits of the "Farina-Archiv"-Accounts (more: see [41], [42], [43], [44], [45], [46], [47], [48]) the extreme PR-activity of this user on articles concerning the company "Farina" (or its nemesis "4711"/"Muehlens") can be easily seen. And even in the user-name, or on the user-page, the user publicly discloses that he has a connection to the company "Farina"! At the German administrator-inquiry-page there were the request of a global block of this User, so I hope I'm at the right adress here.

personal note:
I think this user is really a big deal. I watched this User in the german Wikipedia for some time and had to realize with horror that this is a very extreme case of media-manipulation and PR-activities

It will be very difficult to rewrite the whole articles again neutrally. In view of the long period in which the user remained undetected it will certainly be a Herculean-task to rewrite all these articles neutrally... That can't be done alone and I also do not want to do it alone. I'm looking forward to hearing from you soon! If there are some questions so please ask on my talk. Greetings --111Alleskönner (talk) 16:43, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

interesting links (German):

If there are some questions so pls ask on my talk. -jkb- 23:46, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

111Alleskönner, do not delete edits of other users, you could be blocked. -jkb- 09:49, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

sorry -- 14:47, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

Ty RezacEdit

This use has been recommended to stick the usual practice of editing a certain file, but this user has instead acted in the most vile way as seen in his last post at his talk page: —The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk) 23:46, 25 May 2012‎

[49], [50], [51] and [52] --Vogone (talk) 09:51, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Italian copyvio and picturepusher vandal Archita78Edit

  • Reported by: MoiraMoira (talk) 17:57, 23 August 2012 (UTC)
  • Accounts locked by: Matanya

Will most likely surface again.