Misplaced Pages

:Requests for investigation: Difference between revisions - Misplaced Pages

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 00:38, 8 December 2006 editDurova (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers60,685 edits →Watchlist requests: 31 hour block, needs full report← Previous edit Latest revision as of 15:19, 22 August 2023 edit undoGraham87 (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Event coordinators, Extended confirmed users, Page movers, Importers291,408 editsm much more common like this 
(718 intermediate revisions by more than 100 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Short description|Historical Wikimedia project page}}
{{process header
{{historical|WP:RFI|WP:VIP}}
| title = Requests for investigation
| section =
| previous = ←]
| next = ] (])→
| shortcut = WP:RFI
| notes = This page allows users to request administrator investigation of '''certain''' types of abuse only. Do not use this page until you read the ]. For obvious vandalism, see ]. '''Alerts that do not belong on this page may be removed without action or notice.'''


:''This page has been '''shut down''' after ].''


:Please use ] as an alternate venue for cases of simple vandalism that require an immediate block and ] for cases that require further investigation.
{{editabuselinks}}

}}
==Old instructions for this page==
==Instructions==
<small>
Choose one of three sections to make a report: ], ], or ]. Follow the recommended format for each section including the heading markup. Place the request at the top of the ''New requests'' subsection or the top of the watchlist. Provide page diffs from edit histories if appropriate and links to specific problem pages. Choose one of three sections to make a report: ], ], or ]. Follow the recommended format for each section including the heading markup. Place the request at the top of the ''New requests'' subsection or the top of the watchlist. Provide page diffs from edit histories if appropriate and links to specific problem pages.
</small>


==Watchlist== ==History==
* Report in this section:
# Articles being hit with a very high level of vandalism or that are repeatedly vandalised with an extended time before reverts.
# Registered users or IPs that have carried out clear vandalism but have currently stopped.

* Do not report here:
# Articles featured on the front page, or very high profile articles - these will already be watched
# Vandals needing to be blocked - see ] instead.
# Users needing investigation - see one of the sections below.

*Use the following format:
: <code><nowiki>* {{article|article name}} - brief explanation // ~~~~</nowiki></code> '''or '''
: <code><nowiki>* {{vandal|username}} - brief explanation // ~~~~</nowiki></code> '''or '''
: <code><nowiki>* {{IPvandal|Ip_Address}} - brief explanation //~~~~</nowiki></code>

*Reports will be removed from the list and watched by users in .

===Watchlist requests===
<!-- Report new alerts below this line -->
* {{article|Unitarian Christianity}} - page undergoes radical revisions on a regular basis, appears some fights about the veracity of the article are being done by re-writes; all sides look to be pretty biased. // ] 21:52, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
*Please add {{article|Unitarianism}} to this request- same nonsense happening over there. ] 21:54, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
:31 hour block issued on one editor. Recommend the other involved editors watch the suspected sockpuppet for block evasion. This is not simple vandalism and deserves a full request. Please submit a more complete statement with page diffs in the registered user section lower on this noticeboard. <font face="Verdana">]<sup>'']]''</sup></font> 00:38, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

* {{article|World Wrestling Entertainment}} - Several different IP's and user's have been for no reason blanking the page, or writing offensive and abusive language. They also type in incorrect information. On the history page, a great deal of reverts can be seen. This page is blanked four to five times a day. ] 21:54, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
* {{article|Inco}} - Several IP's in the same range have been adding innacurate information to this page about human rights abuses without citing references. It appears to be a person related to an indeginous group in New Caledonia that are currently protesting against the construction of an Inco plant. It is ok to mention this event in the page, but the article is being very biased towards their cause. ] 5 December, 2006 (UTC)
* {{article|Marc Lepine}} - Several IP's in the same range have been vandalizing this page daily for at least a week, using misleading edit summaries. The edits are all bascially identical and claim that an "international holiday" is celebrated for this murderer as "the first counterattack in the feminist war against men." It's a)not true and b)all the edits to the article are so controversial, its hard to see this as an edit war -- . New user ] has been gamely watching the page and my involvement is as the result of a "help me" request. // ] 12:41, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
::Update. After the last revert I reported it to ] and the article is now sprotected. Thanks. ] 21:53, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
*{{article|Ford Ranger}} - Various members of "Ranger-Forums" have been adding a link to that site, after it has been made clear it is not an acceptable link. --] 20:45, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
**I have semi-protected this article. —]→]&nbsp;&bull; 05:02, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

*{{article|Towers of London}} - I'm aware that posting here may be escalating the issue too far - I'm not sure where else this should go. ] is consitently reverting changes that remove POV & unencyclopaedic statements - I have asked for passing comment, but none has been made. // - ]<sup><span style="color:#FF0000">(]/])</span></sup> 14:43, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
**I have protected the article due to edit warring and to force the matter onto the talk page. —]→]&nbsp;&bull; 05:44, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

*] - many vandal edits in last 10 days, multiple users or socks, mostly nonsense about the character Minkus. See also ] and ]. ] | ] | ] 00:00, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
:Semi-protected. Follow up with a full report and page diffs if necessary. <font face="Verdana">]<sup>'']]''</sup></font> 00:20, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
::Vandalism continues on ] and ] Also a joke article ]. See also single-edit user {{user|Rockin42}}, and this edit by {{user|Blues111}}. I suspect either sock puppetry or a small group of fans working together, or both. Thanks! ] | ]|] 05:25, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
:::And tonight, more of the same on ]. {{IPvandal|69.129.201.181}} blocked for this. See also {{IPvandal|12.226.49.155}}, who has been busy today, and vandalized the same user page as {{user|Chese27}}, but hasn't done anything ''Boy Meets World''-related on that IP. I don't want to compare this pattern of vandalism with a game of Whack-a-mole...no, wait. Yes, I do, except for the part about hitting something with a hammer. BTW, is this the right place to report this? If not, please redirect me. Thanks! ] | ] | ] 04:18, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
::::Right page, wrong section. Move it down into regular requests and provide full evidence. If you suspect sockpuppetry that would go to ]. One of the joys of administratorship is that we sometimes get to play whack-a-mole with the block button. I'll dig in this garden for moles. :) <font face="Verdana">]<sup>'']]''</sup></font> 03:46, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
:::::Hmm. I don't want to spoil your "fun", but I think I'd better try the Sock puppet page. The sections below seem to be set up for one user name or IP per request - and the weird thing about this Minkus malarkey is that it comes from two or three user names and at least two IPs. Looking at each one in isolation probably won't give the full picture. So it's off to sock-pulling land for me, I guess. Even if they turn out to be five different people (which seems unlikely), it's all the same puppet show. Regards and thanks! ] | ] | ] 04:54, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
::::::I am no fun. I have semi-protected ] and deleted the Munkis junk article. The sockpuppets are old and IPs change frequently, so blocking is sometimes not appropriate there. If the IPs listed are not the same addresses used in the accounts, you can file a ] so that the person behind the user accounts can be blocked. In general, though, I don't think this is that serious a problem, and it is adequately prevented by semi-protection. —]→]&nbsp;&bull; 05:30, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
:::::::Thank you very much! I found the sock puppet page a little, um, daunting, and wasn't sure what to do next. Perhaps this Minkus madness is over with, at least for now. Hope, so, anyway. The only vandalism I saw today on a ]-related page didn't seem to have anything to do with these others. In any case it seems to come in intermittent waves of concentrated vandal activity. I'll keep the checkuser avenue in mind for the next wave, if any. (Enough with the metaphors already, Karen!) ] | ] | ] 05:59, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
*{{article|Queanbeyan Whites}}
There has been a large number of edits being done by anonymous IP's on December 6th 2006, often adding gibberish or lines that are clearly vandalism. I've reverted all of those changes to a earlier version, but this article will have to be watched in the short term to protect it from unnecessary edits and vandalism. ] 06:55, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

==IP addresses==
{| style="background-color:#F9F9F9; border:1px solid #A00; padding:5px;"
| ]
| '''Do not report obvious vandalism here;''' see ]. Only report IP addresses that are engaged in complicated, deceptive vandalism that will require more than a few moments for an administrator to analyse. Please read the ]''' before reporting.
|}


Please use this format at the top of this section:

<code><nowiki>===={{IPvandal|IP Address}}====</nowiki></code>

<code><nowiki>Brief Description. ~~~~</nowiki></code>
<!-- DO NOT REPORT SIMPLE VANDALISM HERE, SEE WP:AIV INSTEAD -->
<!-- Report new alerts below this line (to the top of the list)-->
===New requests===
===={{IPvandal|209.226.121.19}}====
The persistent vandal to ] is back for the third time - multiple IPs (all 209.226.121.xxx as documented below). Two previous requests for investigation are below; the vandal left immediately after each request was posted (so no action was taken), and then returned later. Vandal is obviously watching ], and is clearly determined to disrupt ] - even posting the comment "Finally! Destroy this stupid article!" after agreeing with content dispute comment by a registered user (perhaps the same IP?) (see history below).

Please note that ] is a very highly politicized disease - some of the ] page history was deleted by administrators a few months ago due to potentially libelous content against a prominent researcher in the field. Though this article is well-documented and was selected for ] (A-Class rating), some users have expressed anger that two sides of the Lyme "controversy" are both represented on the page, insisting "there is no controversy" and that only one side should be represented. Suspicious behavior from this vandal suggests political motives, eg. vandal started out by making arguably legitimate edits with POV consistent with the "no controversy" position, and then as documentation was added to article supporting another position, he started with the penis references, etc. In addition, after the content dispute discussion on ] went against his view and in favor of including both sides of the controversy, he (without explanation) removed the POV tag he'd previously wanted (perhaps because it directed reader to ]), and when the POV tag was restored, he vandalized the very first line of ] -- both suggesting an effort to keep readers away from the discussion on ] as soon as it was no longer going in his favor.

Because vandal stops immediately when request for investigation is posted, he has never been banned. The suggestion to request page protection doesn't make sense, as it is all coming from 209.226.121.xxx and is clearly a lone determined vandal who is watching this request for investigation page, and apparently not vandalizing other pages. See history below (previous requests are unaltered except addition of internal links) ] 02:29, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

:''From 30 June 2006 request'':
:] (talk • contribs • WHOIS • RDNS • block user • block log) -- Multiple IPs (all 209.226.121.xxx - listed below). This user is back to vandalizing ] and ]. Has a history of persistent vandalism to Lyme_disease despite numerous warnings (some deleted), related to extreme POV. Vandalism from user temporarily stopped after request for investigation was submitted 21 May 2006 - see below (no action was taken since things had calmed down), but started again as of 25 June 2006 (talk page) and 26 June 2006 (article).

:''From 21 May 2006 request'':
:Prior to vandalism, first edit from IP was generally legitimate though some was reverted as POV; IP had comments on talk page about chronic Lyme patients being lazy, not really ill, etc. Since then IPs have gone on a streak of vandalism - a combination of foul language/images ("penis" references, "sluts", etc) mixed with statements offensive to Lyme patients (laziness etc), and page/section blanking. Recently something more complex is happening - after a registered user added POV tag and related comments on the talk page, ] initially expressed elation - "Finally! Destroy this stupid article!" But after another registered user strongly defended the article on the talk page, ] attempted to delete the POV tag on the article and replace it with a merge tag, with no explanation. Now for the first time, blatant vandalism to the talk page ("slut") was added by ], to the first line of the talk page. (After this was reverted, the IP vandalized the talk page of the user who reverted.)
::IPs: ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ]
:Not necessarily vandalism, but related extreme POV: ], ], ], ] // --] 15:36, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
:Also note - On 24 April 2006, ] uploaded the same image (Masturbation1a.jpg) to Lyme_disease that ] uploaded to the sandbox today, 21 May 2006. --] 16:34, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

===Under investigation===

===={{IPvandal|72.91.169.22}}, {{IPvandal|71.251.88.110}}, {{IPvandal|71.251.88.110}}====

] has been using a program of attempting to intimidate any alternative contributor to his religious group's topic page ] by slapping vandalism tag on me and others in order to block my IP address - using alternative sockpuppet addresses that leaves his main user loking clean. The latest using the IP; ], , here . I removed it. Sockpuppetry and personal attack, or just a cynical and dishonest ploy to block other users to gain control over a topic for his group, he has since faked a user page to look like a third contributor he has also intimidated with threatening warnings.


'''The user page for ] is faked up to look like; ], complete with bad Indian-English spelling'''

This is an important detail as we will see later. It says;


" ''User:72.91.169.22 ''

''How am I vandalising? I was deelteing anti-Hindu propangda trying to create a wedge between BKs and Hindus co-religionists. No racism will be tolerated!'' "


If you look at the user contribution for ], here , you will see the same anti-hindu proganda stuff used on the ], here

''Revision as of 16:38, 21 November 2006 ] m (deleted anti-Hindu propaganda user trying to create drift between BK brothers and Hindu co-religionists)''


'''However, looking at the archive of maleabroad, Luis ] slapped a vandalism tag on ] from the same IP address in Tampa; 72.91.169.22 ''' (72.91.169.22 ), where Luis or Avyakt7 as he likes to call himself says;

" ''Brahma Kumaris World Spiritual University

Please stop. If you continue to vandalize pages, you will be blocked from editing Misplaced Pages. 72.91.169.22 03:05, 22 November 2006 (UTC) AVYAKT7'' "

Luis is of course a teacher and recruiter for the BKWSU Raja Yoga center in Tampa. See documentation of his talks, here , etc.


* At 02:42 am 30 November 2006 as ] he made his usual revision/accusation ''(rv: vandalism - User 195.82.106.244 changed article without previous discussion as stated in Talk page without obeying policies in talk page - vandalism - version from user Appledell)'' .
* At 02:49, 30 November 2006 he made a Administrator intervention against vandalism, here . ''*ipvandal ] Reported user this morning. Keeps reverting page without discussion and blanks all warnings from talk page''.
* At 02:54, 30 November 2006 .
* At 02.57 am on 30 November 2006 he then used this sockpupet IP address on my talk page .


If we look at the user contribution for ] we see that he has used it soley to attack me ... and once for ].

If we look at his own user page for ... we see that despite making all the edits to ] he has not once used it to make an IP vandalism report and only once a personal attack report.

If we look at the other IP address is uses ] also Tampa Verizon and used for making vandalism attacks on Maleabroad

If we look at user contributions for Tampa Verizon ]; here, , we see they are again solely focused on the ], ] and myself.

If we look at user contributions for ] = is also Tampa Verizon; here, , we see they are again solely focused on the ] and myself.


From 25/26 October 2006 when he first engaged in editing as ] , he has been a one track record Vandalism, Vandalism, Vandalism, Vandalism and whole load of admin tricks to block others ... no wonder he has been to busy to actually engage in the atempted discussion, mediation or arbitration . Except on others pages where he seeks advice and attempt to discredit me and similarly hitting other first contributors, e.g. .

I have no doubt that this is not exhaustive but it is exhausting ... I hope that we can resolve matters.

I would like to point out that the same team are also at work on Google Answers having critical or even independent pieces about the ] removed, e.g. which is now http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview?id=206345, Yahoo and elsewhere. Yes, Misplaced Pages Foundation will be targetted next if they has not already done so. Scratch me and I will bleed citations.

*One final incident, just wanted to add for the sake of completeness a Request for checkuser that Luis did under the ] user where he refers to himself in the third party, "''He also reported user ] ... Personal attack on Riveros11 ...''" etc. . It is worth noting JUST for the amount of effort he puts into this.

**Uh-oh ... And ]

] 02:33, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

] 07:59, 2 December 2006 (UTC)


====={{IPvandal|195.82.106.244}}, , {{IPvandal|brahmakumaris.info}}, {{IPvandal|bkwatch}}=====
When you are checking the above, please check also the poster of the request above and other suspect SPs. See ArbCom case on ]: ] ] <small>]</small> 18:49, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

===={{IPvandal|195.70.17.226}}====
This site ] and this site ] refer to the same company. Both sites are pretty clearly advertisements I believe, and until recently they have been edited by a user . After my edits and my appeals to this user to please talk on the discussion pages or to state their point of view, instead of attacking my user page , it looks like all new edits are being done by an ip addres: 195.70.17.226 This user has a history of putting random ACM Forex links into other articles.
These are some examples:

I believe this ip is the same as the user Acmforex and I believe this IP is not being a very productive wiki user

let me know what I can do about this?

Thanks

--DrewWiki 12:33, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

:I have blocked the IP for 1 month. I am not sure what the situation is with ]. —]→]&nbsp;&bull; 04:58, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

===={{IPvandal|151.204.243.217}}====
Repeated content removal directed to one site without adequate description or reasoning at ]. A sock puppet of {{IPvandal|141.149.186.183}} who has done similar actions. ] <small>(]) (])</small> 18:11, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

:Post page diffs. <font face="Verdana">]<sup>'']]''</sup></font> 18:27, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

:: , , , ] <small>(]) (])</small> 21:07, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

:::I'm not convinced that this is a sockpuppet. Please ] and invite this editor to explain his or her reasoning for the deletion on the article talk page. Looks like the response to this has been unusually aggressive. Perhaps this is really someone new who could become a productive editor. Follow up if problems continue. <font face="Verdana">]<sup>'']]''</sup></font> 00:33, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

:::: I was judging this based on the WHOIS for both: and . Is there a way to do a WHOIS on regular users for the record? Thanks for the reply, I'll just keep it status quo on the page and see what else happens. ] <small>(]) (])</small> 01:35, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

:::::Okay, that seems reasonable. Still, nothing beyond a level 2 warning on either IP. I'd like to see some good faith outreach. Ask this person to participate at the article talk page. <font face="Verdana">]<sup>'']]''</sup></font> 02:41, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

:::::: I was under the assumption that they were both sockpuppets, so each warning was a cumulation off of both IPs. Upon the next removal, I'll ask that it be taken to the Discussion page as there is a system for link additions/removals (installed by me due to the high degree of link removals/additions for this article). ] <small>(]) (])</small> 04:45, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

:::::::I understand that similar matters have been longstanding problems at this page. Nonetheless, the right thing to do is to welcome each newcomer who might become productive and encourage them to contribute in accordance with site policies before issuing warnings. Some types of activity don't require that welcome - but this isn't someone who's posting obscenities to a page. They might have a genuine disagreement about that link's suitability and not understand consensus editing. Talk first and come back if they don't cooperate. <font face="Verdana">]<sup>'']]''</sup></font> 20:09, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

:: Regarding , the same user with the same DNS range is continuing to remove links. I posted a lengthy note on his talk page (didn't get around to it the first time but left a note in the edit summary at ]. This is getting old. This is verifiable with a simple IP query and WHOIS on the domains.
:: "Regarding edits to ]. Your edits are similar to that of and . The DNS for all three IPs are from the same DNS range: , and . Please cease the removal of information and use the appropriate channels; more specifically, see the Discussion page for criteria on link additions/removals. See ] and ] for more information." ] <small>(]) (])</small> 00:47, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

:::I have semi-protected ]. —]→]&nbsp;&bull; 04:47, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

:::: Thank you. Hopefully this will resolve the link issues until it settles down. Unsure why this cropped up though... ] <small>(]) (])</small> 04:55, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

===={{Vandal|Keltik31}}====
Has been warned and blocked in the past for personal attacks; impersonates an admin , and trolls various talk pages (too many to list, see contribs) with racist/anti-Semitic comments. <font color="silver">-</font><font color="silver">-</font> '''] <sup>]</sup><sup><font color="silver">|</font></sup><sup>]</sup>''' <font color="silver">-</font><font color="silver">-</font> 03:11, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
:I clicked randomly on a dozen contribs and did not find anything egregious. Content disputes are not vandalism. —]→]&nbsp;&bull; 04:16, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
:Note that there is a user-conduct RfC pending with regard to this user. See ]. ] 22:44, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

===={{Vandal|Wateva100}}====
Further Vandalism of the article ]. This user added unnecessary Information in to the article, this was thankfully deleted by the user: 'centrx' (thank you to to him!) for a Screenshot of this vandalism:
http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Tyne_and_Wear_Fire_and_Rescue_Service&diff=88488950&oldid=88449288
The Vandalism by this user is written on the right hand side of the Page, In red. Thanks
] 16:28, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
:Only 2 edits total from this account and no prior warnings. Leave a level 2 template on the editor's talk page and follow up if problems resume. <font face="Verdana">]<sup>'']]''</sup></font> 15:09, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

===={{vandal|MeltedSugaar}}====
'''Possibly a sockpuppet of ]'''

Has vandalized my User page and Talk page with insults in Spanish and English and what seem to be threats.

In the Talk page he added the following message :

::''==TE CHINGAMOS CON MUCHISIMO GUSTO==''

::''Tienes enemigos bien asentados, y te ven desde lo alto. Te hemos chingado pendejo!''

That reads: "We fuck you with great pleasure. You have well estabilished foes and they watch you from the high. We have fucked you ''pendejo''!" (not sure what "pendejo" means as it is a Latin American insult, not used where I live. ''Chingar'' is also a Latin American verb, though in this case I know it's meaning).

:::"Pendejo" means dickhead. ] 09:00, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

In my user page he added:

::''You have enemies in high places. Remember Machismo.''

] article was affected by editorial dispute between Marsiliano and myself that ended with repeated insults in Caribbean Spanish against me and, later in vandalism of my user page, what got him blocked. That's why I think MeltedSugaar is likely to be a sockpuppet of Marsiliano, as it is the same M.O.

In that case admins involved were Durova and Centrx, I mention because they may remeber the details and make the connections. ] 03:36, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

:I've indef blocked this account as an impersonation account and because it was only used to attack and harass another editor. Leaving here in case Durova or Centrx want to review and see if this has ties to the prior case. ] <sup>]</sup> 03:50, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
::Thanks, Shell. --] 05:10, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

I think this is just a big excuse for sugaar to get more attention, <dele> and I think block-angry. He's fabricating attacks so he can then go and say he was the victim of an evil wiki conspiracy, when in reality he only has own hardheadedness to blame for getting blocked, he should have listened to Shell who's been more than infinitely patient with him, and quite gracious I might say, considering the snide remarks Sugaar has directed at her, no easy task I can imagine. Sugaar is <dele>, my suggestion is that he should be left alone <dele>, he's harmless–except possibly to himself. {{unsigned|Marciliano}}

::I don't know if that was Marsiliano, only that looked like him (you?). On the rest: I don't understand half of it. --] 05:10, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
:::Banned the new sock. Report any others that slip out of the drawer. <font face="Verdana">]<sup>'']]''</sup></font> 16:05, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
::::Thanks, Durova. I must say I feel sort of pity for this guy, he wrote some apparently good articles before becoming troublesome, he could have been a good editor would not have been for his total disrespect of everything. I wonder if a temporary block of months would not have better solution when the first case happened (in the hope that he would meditate and retake his work from a better perspective). Maybe I'm just too bevenevolent, who knows? --] 19:34, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
:::::Actually I thought I was earning my softie reputation when I didn't indef block him for forging my signature. The long and obscene post that followed sealed the deal but by then another admin had beaten me to it. I'm not offended so much as amused: as a war veteran who's done everything from handling live rattlesnakes to surviving being struck by lightning, I'm probably more macho than this fellow by every definition except the Y chromosome. <font face="Verdana">]<sup>'']]''</sup></font> 15:21, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
::::::LOL --] 18:20, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

I am not sure if I have to initiate a new request or not, by the moment I am posting in this one as it seems related:
*] attempted to do something in my user page but reverted it him/herself . Yet this same user did attack ] talk page with contents that seem to attack me . Wooble was not involved in the ] case but he has been involved in the more than nasty content dispute in ], what makes me think if all these attacks are indeed linked to Marsiliano or to some other people.
*In the same line, ] has vandalized my talk page with a "call" to "sabotage" Misplaced Pages articles allegedly related to ] in the name of the "White Mantis", a simmilar term to the "White Manta" used by ZugaarZucks in the vandalism of Wobble's talk page.
I am pretty sure that Marsiliano had a single static IP (and probably that's the same one of Marciliano) but all these others that seem to plagiarize Marsiliano's style (as well as ]) are starting to look like related to the dispute of ] rather than to Marsiliano.
I must say that I was aware of the "return of Marciliano" from some days ago and he has not attacked me as such but "only" seems to have gone around the ban by creating a new user identity. I strongly suspect now that all these three "users" (sockpuppets?) are rather related to the White people article dispute than to Marsiliano.
I think this alternative possibility should be investigated too. They could well be one or several "stormfronters" venting their anger and trying to "scare" me and other users involved in that dispute from an anti-racist POV. --] 18:20, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

I have just realized that ] has also vandalized Wooble's talk page with the same "request" as he did in mine. Aditionally he has made nonsense vandalism in the White people article's talk page and even Shell Kinney's talk page. No need to post diffs because it's all in user contributions short list. --] 18:53, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
:Other admins banned all three socks before I can get to them. I hope the rest get eaten in the dryer. Report any that land on the laundry room floor. <font face="Verdana">]<sup>'']]''</sup></font> 03:48, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

::They are coming in hordes. Someone with access to variable IPs?
::] , plagiarizing the style of ] warnings - reverted by Shell Kinney.
::] and ] with the same message related to the "request" of Llano del Ramsilio. Reverted by Shell Kinney again.
::Guess I will have to arm myself with tons of patience. --] 12:23, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

:::There's also a checkuser open to see if we can block the IPs behind this spree. This is getting downright silly. ] <sup>]</sup> 12:33, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
::::Thanks. There are more, possibly all are the same single user (but maybe has access to variable IPs, can't say).
::::*] (already blocked)
::::*] (already blocked)
::::*]
::::Regards, --] 19:14, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
:::::All of those accounts have been blocked. <font face="Verdana">]<sup>'']]''</sup></font> 17:02, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Not sure if I should open a new case. The following three users have recently vandalized my user page in different manners. All them are new users:
* ] . He also posted unmeriting comments with obvious offensive intent and open apology of certain far-right ideologies in the RFC on me . I'd check his other too.
* ] .
* ] (this one seems to go in the same line of DerStormtroper).
Thanks to the people that has reverted. --] 03:14, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Aditionaly it's surely worth mentioning another new user: ] who has vandalized a section of the ] on an action parallel to that of TheBeggar'swatchmaker (claiming that the Basque lauburu is an "offensive svastiki") (this was me: ] 8forgot to sign]]

*Have another one in the same extreme-right line: ] . This one seems a genuine Spaniard. Translation of his user name is "The Boot of ]". Translation of the attack is:
<blockquote>
''Shut up if you don't want to recieve an ass-breaking kick, you Basque Moor. Long life to Franco! Long life to the King! Long life to ]! Long life to Spain, always catholic and Imperialist! --] 05:35, 30 November 2006 (UTC)''
</blockquote>
It seems they keep coming. Yet there must be a finite number of them, so I don't despair. --] 06:30, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

What was the result of the Checkuser request? —]→]&nbsp;&bull; 04:43, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

===={{vandal|ChildOfA303}}====
Also:
*]
*]
*]
Multiple linkspam on many articles relating to British geography by likely sockpuppets, involving the inappropriate insertion of links to a mirror of Google Maps located at www.blackcomb.co.uk (which appears to be a commercial website). All appear to be single-purpose accounts.
E.g.:
*
*
*
*
] 23:36, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
:See also ] ] 11:05, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
::Maybe should be brought to ]. —]→]&nbsp;&bull; 21:47, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

I blocked all of them except ]. They are disruptive sockpuppets. —]→]&nbsp;&bull; 04:04, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

===={{vandal|Posmodern2000}}====
User has been reinserting linkspam and information that was previously deleted and discussed at length on the talk page for ], all editors except ] agree the information is speculation and unverifiable (Posmodern2000, not surprisingly, claims what he wants to add are all "facts" that have been mysteriously suppressed by authorities and that he's being censored). After all the discussion and attempts at resolution, this is devolving into mere vandalism. ] 01:38, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
:Post diffs, please. <font face="Verdana">]<sup>'']]''</sup></font> 03:30, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
::No subsequent activity on this account. <font face="Verdana">]<sup>'']]''</sup></font> 16:44, 26 November 2006 (UTC)



===={{IPvandal|195.82.106.244}}====
user 195.82.106.244 has used a "forest fire" using his suspected sockpuppet account brahmakumaris.info (under investigation )
Repeated allegations and blanking his talk page to avoid prosecution:
Disparaging comments about editors :He has threatened me to contact my employers about using Misplaced Pages. He has published my personal information as well.
Direct insults to persons.
Finally, user 195.82.106.244 was recently blocked (within a week) and still he has modified article and blanked his talk page: and
Please attend this unfortunate matter asap. Thank you. ] 14:31, 21 November 2006 (UTC) Avyakt7
:We need page diffs, not links. <font face="Verdana">]<sup>'']]''</sup></font> 14:45, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
:: Here you are. Thanks! <br>Differentials:<br>
(note that both users in question do not delete each others work but rather complement it)
(User Brahmakumaris.info took away the sprotect tag placed by admin. In this way user 195.82.106.244 could post)
(brhmakumais.info moved pages to a new page, however here: Note November 15th changes and here user 195.82.106.244 activity on the same day.)
link to versions:
] 20:55, 21 November 2006 (UTC) AVYAKT7

Here are more differentials submitted by another user to me:<br>
Disparaging and provocative POV presented as fact in discussion (trolling)...<br>

Bogus personal attack report and deletion of comment...<br>
He also reported riveros11 on a personal attack intervention board with a very attacking diatribe...
Someone answered.
244 obviously didn't like the comment so he deleted it!
<br>

Personal attack on Riveros11...<br>
Bad faith edit comments....

Personal information and false allegation of sockpuppet...<br>

Intimidation...<br>
<br>
Taunting...<br>
<br>

Removing NPOV...<br>

Removing page protection (probably to be able to post again as 244, evidence of sock puppet)...<br>

Changing others' discussion and offensive edit comment....<br>

Shifting of burden of proof onto those questioning the article...<br>

Forest fire...<br>

Thank you, ] 13:56, 22 November 2006 (UTC) avyakt7
:That's a lot of evidence over quite a few months. Thank you for searching and summarizing all of those diffs. Some of these actions aren't necessarily objectionable. For instance, Misplaced Pages doesn't take a stand against editors blanking warnings from their own talk pages. Nor is it necessarily wrong to remove an NPOV tag, particularly when it's a single action rather than a revert war. The bulk of the history looks like a heartfelt content dispute. While ''cult'' is a hot button word, this editor doesn't use it frivolously but rather supports it with links and detailed discussion - although the allegation itself is necessarily provocative, it seems to have been raised in a suitably dignified manner. So what we're left with is the sockpuppet allegation and some background history. This looks like it presents an editor who was involved in a long term content dispute and then began using socks to ] the article. ] is the best place to handle that (and I'm glad it's already been reported there) because between that page possibly ] your bases should be covered without needing to come here. A few of the other posts cross the line enough that I'd issue a warning or a short block if these were new events, but those actions took place months ago. <font face="Verdana">]<sup>'']]''</sup></font> 04:27, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

Dear Durova, and how about this one just a day ago? http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Brahma_Kumaris_World_Spiritual_University&diff=cur&oldid=90603114
Please note that his links offered as support to his statements does not meet wikipedia standards for an article. Those are note reliable sources. This user however, wishes to use those sources even though admins already have told him that those are not valid. I just wish someone would take action specially after offering such a lenghty proof (user .244 does not even get a warning!!)rather than sending me to post in other places. Best ] 16:09, 28 November 2006 (UTC) avyakt7

:I semi-protected ]. —]→]&nbsp;&bull; 03:59, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

::'''Listen guys, this is a bit of a joke because ] '''is''' ] and ] whom both refer to himself in this and other complaints as if ] is a third party. Please see detailed documentation above. ] has been using ] and other IPs to build up a bogus case against me and others in order to block me out from editing the article. '''

::The background to this case is that Luis ] is a teacher and recruiter for this millenarianist group the ] and they have an IT team working on this article to ensure that nothing that contradicts its PR can exist there. Not even links for ex-victims as per The Family, Moonies and Scientology. Ditto, that no materials can be references from their "scriptures" or publications as per other religions. What this is all about is blocking any questions being raise. Ditto, The Family, Moonies and Scientology etc all have critical or opposition sections and links which he has removed from this one.

::The history goes back to when he was suspended from a public discussion forum for making personal attacks on others which he has continued to lay blame on me for. I was the victim of those attacks. See,

:::With references to consistent claim that I accepted to use the sources he provided and have requested discussion of reliable sources, policy is clear;

::'''Self-published and dubious sources in articles about the author(s)'''
::'''* it is relevant to their notability;'''
::'''* it is not contentious;'''
::'''* it is not unduly self-serving;'''
::'''* it does not involve claims about third parties, or about events not directly related to the subject;'''
::'''* there is no reasonable doubt as to who wrote it.'''

:: I put in for RfC, mediation and arbitration and the guy refused to participate whilst all the time using these alternative IPs to try block me out. I am glad I found all this to understand what is going on. ] 12:43, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

==Registered users==

'''Read the ]''' before reporting. Do not report content or user disputes here, unless you can provide links demonstrating a strong attempt at ] Please use this format at the top of this section:
<code><nowiki>===={{vandal|User_name}}====</nowiki></code>

<code><nowiki>Brief Description. ~~~~</nowiki></code>

Usernames are case sensitive.

===New requests===
<!-- Report new alerts below this line (at the top of the list)!-->

===={{Vandal|freescotlandparty}}====
Hi there, been trying to dissuade freescotlandparty from repeatedly removing justifiable and referenced material from the Free Scotland Party page. He makes no attempt to justify this in return but simply keeps reverting. I have posted notes on the edit history log but I'm not competent enough to use the presribed templates. I did leave a message on the obvious vandal section but it looks as though it might not have been acted upon (possibly because the warning procedure wan't followed correctly). The users name is identical to the page name so I can only assume that he's deliberately censoring material he doesn't like. Can someone please help warn the user correctly or take further action. Thanks.

==== Users {{user|Alex Stanek 999}}, {{user|Bachey}}, and {{user|Akbarc}}====
I'm suspecting that all these users are the same person based on the style of contributions and vandalism. Some of the user(s) contributions have been positive, and I think that this user/these users might have some potential to contribute positively --] 14:48, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

==== {{Vandal|BooyakaDell}} ====
I hope I have the right place. The user is misusing the notability tags on articles that I have established to him as notable. The main sources of the trouble are the articles on ], ], and ]. He has also added the tags needlessly to other wrestling promotion pages that I have removed on the ground of acting on bad faith. I have told the user this, and yet he persists claiming superior knowledge of the rules of notability - forgetting that notability within the profession (pro wrestling in which I am actually involved) is relevant. And then ignoring that same point. This matter is urgent - and I note this user is suspected of being a sockpuppet on his user page. ] 02:15, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
::Dude, I have done *NOTHING* wrong. You're trying to say I'm a sockpuppet when I'm not and yet you're accusing me of acting in bad faith. My acts were entirely in good faith and I am trying to compromise with you. I've basically given up trying to convince you because obviously you're not going to be convinced.] 02:38, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
:::There has been no attempt to compromise by you. You have stuck hard and fast to a single rule when flexibility and common sense is called for. And when I applied that flexibility and common sense you refused to listen and repeated your actions. That's vandal behaviour. ] 21:42, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

::::There has been no attempt to compromise by you. - False
You have stuck hard and fast to a single rule when flexibility and common sense is called for. - False

And when I applied that flexibility and common sense you refused to listen and repeated your actions. - False

Stop making up false accusations and take responsibility for your own actions. Your standards for notability don't match up with Misplaced Pages's official standards for notability. You are wrong about your argument that ] is notable because it innovated the Taboo Tuesday concept. See http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Pro_Wrestling_Unplugged. Even though PWI innovated concepts such as the Tables & Scaffold match, it was deemed not notable. The concerns which I bring up for ] are virtually identical to the concerns that were brought up for Pro Wrestling Unplugged, which was eventually deleted. Either put in some sources to the ] article, offer an argument other than a. "your tags are in bad faith" or b. "this subject is notable because it innovated a very minor concept" or be prepared to accept that "importance" and "notability" tags will be put on the article as their placement is entirely 110% warranted and justified, and your removal of such tags constitute nothing short of vandalism.
] 21:51, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
::Before this gets classified as a "He Said/He Said" kind of issue, there is reason to believe that ] is a ] account to get around ]'s community ban, there is a page at ] requesting action. ] 22:56, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
:::Well said, Fozzie. I'll ignore Booyaka's above contribution because all one has to do is look at his contributions list to see that I'm right. ] 06:47, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Please see my comments on my talk page (am Adopter of BooyakaDell - ]) - ]. For record I don't think that dealing with the Sockpuppet czase is the way to go - as a Checkuser has proved not workable - see ]. Cheers ] 17:40, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

==== {{Vandal|E.Shubee}} ====
This user has been reported here but I'm not sure if this may be a better place to do it. This user has been nothing but a nuisance since coming onboard.
The ] continues to personally attack other editors because he does not agree with them. The warnings have been low key and subtle in hopes to assist him become a better contributor. I really feel this user needs to be heavily scrutinized. He is not contributing but is in fact creating issues on Misplaced Pages violating ]. His adoptive editor recently un-adpoted him (]), because nothing was changing. He has been blocked twice for various things. I feel that he needs some stronger guidance in order to help him become a positive contributor to Misplaced Pages. Several editors have mentioned that it is highly likely, though not conclusively proven by checkuser, to be the users last account, {{User|Perspicacious}}. If you follow the trail, you will note that this user has ''not'' been a positive contributor. He has consistently attacked editors and he's turned his personal talk page into something to talk about editors he doesn't agree with. He has consistently misquoted and misrepresented what other editors have said (see and for examples)
Polite suggestions and invitations to learn the policies, ask questions, warnings, etc., have all failed. Instead user tries to turn around policies to fit his agenda and attack disagreeing editors. If you take a look at his user page and talk page you will see this.

:To point out some other discussions about E.Shubee see:
*]
*.
*]
*
*
*
*
*] see '''re: Criticism of the Seventh-day Adventist Church''' and '''Question''' sections
*]

Thanks for your attention to this as we are all tired of the the issues being caused by him. --] (]) 17:32, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

:Just to update, there have been more complains see ] and ]. I'm not sure what else to do besides bringing this to your attention. --] (]) 23:54, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
::1 month block issued. <font face="Verdana">]<sup>'']]''</sup></font> 00:08, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

==== {{Vandal|Breannarox}} ====

For evidence of what I discuss below, please direct your attention to essentially all of this user's edits on the page in question, specifically the diffs I provide below. The user's talk page will demonstrate multiple warnings. This user continually, relentlessly makes disruptive edits to ]. User continues to insert biased, patently unverifiable, unencyclopedic information despite being told exactly what is wrong with what he / she is doing multiple times by myself and ]. Specifically, he / she (I'm just going to go with she from now on) seems to be enamored with the character named Breanna, hence the username. She inserts glorious, flowing, totally unsourced and unverifiable prose into Breanna's section of the article whenever I turn my back, ignores my warnings against doing so, and blanks the paragraph or otherwise vandalizes the section devoted to Breanna's "rival" on the program, Tessa Keller. Beyond a content dispute, now a constant edit war, and her blind eye to all warnings makes it vandalism.
Examples:

Her edits regarding Breanna; this diff shows two of her edits, both made after about six warnings: .

Her edits to Tessa Keller section: .

--] 01:30, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

===={{Vandal|Itake}}====
Itake has previously been fighting with other users, which a quick look at his talk page will tell. He has been gone for a while, or so I thought - he is back, and is conducting edit wars here and there. A few examples: , , and . I don't really know what to do to stop him. ] (] ° ]) 11:10, 2 December 2006 (UTC)


===={{Vandal|Preform}}====
Strong suspicions that this user is banned user {{Vandal|MagicKirin}} who also used the now banned account {{Vandal|Tannim}}. Same group of articles - ] - ], ] - picking up where the previous account was banned. Same arguments. Same litany of poor edits reverted immediately by numerous editors. Same pattern of being oblivious to the fact that his use of a new sockpuppet is transparent.--] 01:14, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
:We don't do sockpuppet investigations here. Request a checkuser if this appears to be a sock of a banned account. <font face="Verdana">]<sup>'']]''</sup></font> 01:37, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

==== {{Vandal|Jobjörn}} ====

Jobjörn is constantly involved in removing NPOV edits on articles such as and . Even though proper sources are provided as per ] the man still reverts them. When one attempts to make said articles NPOV, Jobjörn goes on to do his own POV edits on other articles such as as "retaliation". ] 12:02, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

===Under investigation===


===={{vandal|Creepy Crawler}}====
This user has repeatedly vandalized pages with blanking, , creation of bizarre fake userpages, ], ], and creation of numerous redundant categories: , , , , and . He had repeated warnings, almost all of which he has blanked, been warned not to blank warnings, and then blanked that too, as a check of his user talk can show. He seems bent on continuing this disruptive behavior, because although every warning blanking is summarized as a variation of 'I said I'm sorry!', he continues in the exact same patterns. ] 22:09, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
:72 hour block. One of the talk page comments accused this editor of being a sockpuppet of two banned accounts. Head over to checkuser and post a request there; if it comes back positive we'd have grounds for a siteban. <font face="Verdana">]<sup>'']]''</sup></font> 22:42, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
::Request submitted as suggested. Will report outcome when it appears. ] 04:40, 28 November 2006 (UTC)



===={{vandal|Skinny_McGee}}====
'''Suspected Sockpuppetry, Deceptive Editing and Vandalism'''
*A strong suspicion of sockpuppetry, deceptive editing, and complex abuse on the ] article.
*Possibly 6 other sockpuppets.
*Self-promotion: IPs of past abuse/ possible IP sockpuppets ALL point to Chardon, OH (home city of this group).
*Removal of other editor's Rfc by SkinnyMcGee. (ie: no help/comment was ever given by outside editors).
*Non-policed 3RRs and false report of sockpuppet by biased editor.
*Detailed description ''']''' of this issue with '''diffs''' and '''comments''' for all abuse.
* This really needs investigated. I believe the wrong party has been banned due to nepotism. And certainly the article is now protected and is wrong on several counts according to citations that were also removed by SkinnyMcGee. ] 06:35, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
:] accuses me of a false report of sockpuppet, this accusation is false and unwarranted. You can find my checkuser request here: , and my report here: . Also, when I asked this user to reveal his/her previous username in the user's talkpage, the user refused to do so, I'm beginning to suspect that this user is another one of ]'s sockpuppets. ] 13:37, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
:Sockpuppetry investigations normally go to ]. That's their specialty. Have you tried formal mediation? <font face="Verdana">]<sup>'']]''</sup></font> 04:00, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

:I believe this goes beyond obvious sockpuppetry. I also suspect multiple sockpuppets/meatpuppets, so I thought it best to post here. Also, I moved comments by ] above to my talk page to keep this section brief, but he removed that link from here when reverting this page, so I am putting it back. Please see ] for my discussion with ], not to be confused with the issue. I simply feel that ] has show bias during the edit war on ]. ] 07:12, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
::The conflict of interest allegations have been made before and seem to apply to both sides. If this really proves unresolvable then ] may be your final stop. This board doesn't do suspected sockpuppet investigations, which is the only new allegation in the present thread. Strongly recommend ]. <font face="Verdana">]<sup>'']]''</sup></font> 17:09, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Thank you. I made a request for SSP and will wait for that result. Depending on what it bears I will then ask for further help or look for one of the non-affiliated editors who were not involved in the edit war to help in verifying the statements and edit as needed. If the SSP is positive, I have a feeling much of the submitted info will need edited or cited. I just find it odd that only one side of the arguement had any citations to show as evidence, and that person was banned. ] 04:51, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
:The account that got banned was a confirmed sockpuppet. As an outside observer, it appears that both sides of the edit war are people who know each other and used to do business together. They might not have positively identified each other out of a group of people who had an interest in this band, but the conflict appears to extend well beyond Misplaced Pages. Earlier I suggested a separate biography for Joseph Vargo and a Wikilink within the article as a compromise solution. Apparently something like that was tried unsuccessfully before I became aware of the problem. I'm still not sure why that couldn't work if it were tried again. I'll level with you: the people who are editing this article probably have enough knowledge to raise this to ] or ] quality if they would cooperate. The changes that immediately followed my last set of suggestions were steps in that direction. If you ''don't'' work things out you'll probably wind up in arbitration, in which case anything could happen: one realistic possibility is that both sides get topic banned and no other Wikipedians know or care enough to raise the article to its full potential. Try formal mediation if you haven't already - and remember there are bigger things in life than one Misplaced Pages article. <font face="Verdana">]<sup>'']]''</sup></font> 20:37, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
::Unprotected the article with a warning to the participants: I will open an arbitration request if this unprotection fails. <font face="Verdana">]<sup>'']]''</sup></font> 00:30, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

===={{vandal|Steve44}}====
This user is either a really bad editor or a really good vandal. Often changes information to incorrect info, probably on purpose, along with intentionally bad grammar. Whether or not he is intentionally distructive his edits are still harmful.--] 19:11, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
:72 hour block for vandalism. <font face="Verdana">]<sup>'']]''</sup></font> 15:30, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
:User is really bad at editing and makes ridiculous spelling errors and changes dates and numbers without citing any sources. —]→]&nbsp;&bull; 03:27, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

===={{vandal|William Mauco}}====

This user has a persistent behaviour of blanking relevant information in ] - related articles and introducing fake information. He self-declared is the author of 80% or Transnistria - related articles in Misplaced Pages , I didn't check but this is probabily true. However, after I start looking on those articles I realized that his edits look more like propaganda for this unrecognized country and not as NPOV information as should be in Misplaced Pages. This is why I start being involved in Transnistria - related articles in Misplaced Pages, which sometimes went to edit warring with Mauco. 6 times he broke the 3RR but was never blocked (I made a report about this on Administrators Noticeboard
In 23 November both me and ] were blocked for edit warring. First thing Mauco did after block finished was to revert me, without any explanation, in 6 different articles:
# . In article ], I gave 12 (twelve) refferences to support my view that between the familly of transnistrian president Smirnov and company Sheriff there are strong links. Between refferences - BBC, Washington Times, San Francisco Chronicles, which can not be considered biases, contrary with Mauco's links, which are from Russian or Transnistrian sources (the entire political game in Transnistria being the desire of Russia to anex this region). Mauco claim that between the company Sheriff and Smirnov there are big clashes.
# (see talk page: we had a dispute, a mediator was brought to solve it, there are 4 wikipedians who want to include a paragraph, only Mauco opposed; after a compromise proposal was proposed by mediator which remained unanswered by Mauco, paragraph was included but Mauco reverted without explanations)
#
# (revert with the misleading comment that information belong to an other article - Raşcov, while info he took out was not about Raşcov)
# and
#.

Beside reverting me he didn't make any other edit today (until now) .

In the same time, this user is ] wikistalking me, he recognized that he is "monitoring" my contributions but claim this is not wikistalking (what else is it?) and previously try to convince other users (without success) what a bad person I am, pretending untrue facts about me. For example, he told to an other user (Johnathanpops) that I accused him as being a sockpuppet and part of a KGB conspiracy (while I never had any dispute with this user and never accused Johnathanpops of sockpuppetry or of being KGB agent) and is pretending that I use to edit anonimously and made threats.

I mention also that I try to solve problems with this user through talk pages and I also tried formal mediation ,

I consider latest reverts of my work by Mauco, done imediatelly after we both were blocked for edit warring, and without any discussion in talk pages of involved articles, as vandalism.--] 02:21, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
:Sorry to disappoint, but this is really a content dispute outside the scope of this noticeboard. The most recent posts to mediation happened only four days before this request so - as far as I know - the mediation might still be ongoing. I hope that resolves the issues because if it doesn't you might have to try arbitration. <font face="Verdana">]<sup>'']]''</sup></font> 17:51, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
::Is possible that a non-Russian admin will look at this report? Mediation is not about the articles in which vandalis occured.--] 11:41, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
:::LOL, I'm not even Russian by descent. ] <font face="Verdana">]<sup>'']]''</sup></font> 14:03, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
::::I apologies Durova if I mistakenly believed you are Russian, I saw you took a name of a Russian female soldier. However, your denial is not clear - you told you are not Russian by descent, that mean you can be Russian by other criteria, for example, citizenship.--] 01:02, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

User was blocked for 48 hours for edit warring. —]→]&nbsp;&bull; 02:56, 1 December 2006 (UTC)



==See also==
* ]
* ]
* ] contains information about vandalism, antivandalism methods and tools, and links to other relevant pages.
*]

]


The first page used for tracking vandalism was a user subpage, ], some time before 4 November 2001. The vandalism in progress page was established as VANDALISM IN PROGRESS - the title was upper-case to make it easily distinguishable on ]). Around the same time, the Misplaced Pages Militia (since renamed to the ]) was formed to coordinate responses to press releases about Misplaced Pages. The "VANDALISM IN PROGRESS" page was moved to the Misplaced Pages namespace in August 2002 and was renamed to the current title in 2006. Its archives since 2003 may be found in ] and the talk archives since august 2002 can be found in the history of ] and in text form as subpages of ]. Old subpages can also be found through ]. the ] page also grew out of "vandalism in progress". A section on the "vandalism in progress" page for persistent vandalism was added in ], later ], and then re-created as ] in September 2004; in December 2004 it was ] to ], titled ].
]
]
<!--] -->
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]

Latest revision as of 15:19, 22 August 2023

Historical Wikimedia project page
This page is currently inactive and is retained for historical reference.
Either the page is no longer relevant or consensus on its purpose has become unclear. To revive discussion, seek broader input via a forum such as the village pump. 		Shortcuts
This page has been shut down after this debate.
Please use Misplaced Pages:Administrator intervention against vandalism as an alternate venue for cases of simple vandalism that require an immediate block and Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents for cases that require further investigation.

Old instructions for this page

Choose one of three sections to make a report: Watchlist, IP addresses, or Registered users. Follow the recommended format for each section including the heading markup. Place the request at the top of the New requests subsection or the top of the watchlist. Provide page diffs from edit histories if appropriate and links to specific problem pages.

History

The first page used for tracking vandalism was a user subpage, ManningBartlett/Naughty people, some time before 4 November 2001. The vandalism in progress page was established as VANDALISM IN PROGRESS on 1 December 2001 - the title was upper-case to make it easily distinguishable on recent changes). Around the same time, the Misplaced Pages Militia (since renamed to the Volunteer Fire Department) was formed to coordinate responses to press releases about Misplaced Pages. The "VANDALISM IN PROGRESS" page was moved to the Misplaced Pages namespace in August 2002 and was renamed to the current title in 2006. Its archives since 2003 may be found in Misplaced Pages:Requests for investigation/Archives and the talk archives since august 2002 can be found in the history of Misplaced Pages talk:Requests for investigation/Archive 4 and in text form as subpages of Misplaced Pages talk:Requests for investigation. Old subpages can also be found through special:Prefixindex/Wikipedia:Vandalism in progress. the long-term abuse page also grew out of "vandalism in progress". A section on the "vandalism in progress" page for persistent vandalism was added in February 2004, later abandoned, and then re-created as "Ongoing alerts" in September 2004; in December 2004 it was split off to its own page, titled Misplaced Pages:Vandalism in progress/Long term alerts.

Category: