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 editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 04:27, 1 December 2006 editCentrx (talk | contribs)37,287 edits →{{vandal|John Spikowski}}: Content dispute. File a new report if necessary← Previous edit Revision as of 04:31, 1 December 2006 edit undoCentrx (talk | contribs)37,287 edits →{{vandal|Creepy Crawler}}: Move to under investigationNext edit →
Line 359: Line 359:
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) 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) :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|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)




Revision as of 04:31, 1 December 2006

←Index of request pages Requests for investigation Archives (current)→
Shortcut This page allows users to request administrator investigation of certain types of abuse only. Do not use this page until you read the policies, guidelines, and procedures. For obvious vandalism, see Administrator intervention against vandalism. Alerts that do not belong on this page may be removed without action or notice.


Noticeboards
Misplaced Pages's centralized discussion, request, and help venues. For a listing of ongoing discussions and current requests, see the dashboard. For a related set of forums which do not function as noticeboards see formal review processes.
General
Articles and content
Page handling
User conduct
Other
Category:Misplaced Pages noticeboards

    Instructions

    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.

    Watchlist

    • Report in this section:
    1. Articles being hit with a very high level of vandalism or that are repeatedly vandalised with an extended time before reverts.
    2. Registered users or IPs that have carried out clear vandalism but have currently stopped.
    • Do not report here:
    1. Articles featured on the front page, or very high profile articles - these will already be watched
    2. Vandals needing to be blocked - see WP:AIV instead.
    3. Users needing investigation - see one of the sections below.
    • Use the following format:
    * {{article|article name}} - brief explanation // ~~~~ or
    * {{vandal|username}} - brief explanation // ~~~~ or
    * {{IPvandal|Ip_Address}} - brief explanation //~~~~

    Watchlist requests

    • Zoe (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log): The removal of a message from my user talk page contradicts WP:VAN but appears to have deeper roots. I am an advocate for user:cplot. He has asked for my help and is currently blocked by MONGO. My observations show that he is beeing discriminated against, bullied and even perhaps secretavilly obsconded. Normally I would place a warning on the users page but seeing the entire situation I am not taking this vandalism litely and neither should the investigator that takes this case. There are allegations of corruptness within the administrator on the september 11, 2001 article. Seeing as this appears complicated I bring it forward here.(Note: See discussion of his block on User:MONGO talk page and the notice board)(sorry if this isn't the right place) --CyclePat 03:42, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
    • Cplot appears to be a sockpuppet troll who has been leaving anon messages at the village pump and other places with the sole intent of disrupting Misplaced Pages. Zoe removed a comment from the banned user per policy. --Tbeatty 03:58, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
    • Thank you to Tbeaty and Zoe. They have explained to me, with references and in a clear polite maner, that it is perferctly reasonable to remove material published by sockpuppet that is specifically avoiding a block. --CyclePat 18:47, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
    Usually takes a bit more to merit semi-protection. Post again if problems increase. Durova 03:40, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
    Semi-protected. Durova 03:40, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
    Low level vandalism doesn't merit page protection. Durova 00:22, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
    Semi-protected. Durova 00:22, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
    This ought to be a full request for investigation rather than a watchlist request. I've banned the attack account for libel and semi-protected both the article and the talk page. Durova 20:06, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
    Semi-protected. Follow up with a full report and page diffs if necessary. Durova 00:20, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
    Vandalism continues on Boy Meets World and Lee Norris Also a joke article Hangin' With Mr. Minkus. See also single-edit user Rockin42 (talk · contribs), and this edit by Blues111 (talk · contribs). I suspect either sock puppetry or a small group of fans working together, or both. Thanks! Karen | Talk|contribs 05:25, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
    And tonight, more of the same on Lee Norris. 69.129.201.181 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) blocked for this. See also 12.226.49.155 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log), who has been busy today, and vandalized the same user page as Chese27 (talk · contribs), 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! Karen | Talk | contribs 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 Misplaced Pages:Suspected sockpuppets. 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. :) Durova 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! Karen | Talk | contribs 04:54, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
    Semi-protected. Durova 23:40, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
    Rarely vandalized. Follow up if problems increase. Durova 04:07, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
    Semi-protected. Durova 12:52, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
    Semi-protected. Durova 02:34, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
    Semi-protected. Durova 04:04, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

    206.186.111.13* (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) - repeated vandalism from this IP block Jimkloss 21:12, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

    Semi-protected. Durova 04:05, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

    Towers of London (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) - I'm aware that posting here may be escalating the issue too far - I'm not sure where else this should go. Deathrocker is consitently reverting changes that remove POV & unencyclopaedic statements - I have asked for passing comment, but none has been made. // - Tiswas 14:43, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

    IP addresses

    Do not report obvious vandalism here; see Misplaced Pages:Administrator intervention against vandalism. 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 policies, guidelines, and procedures before reporting.


    Please use this format at the top of this section:

    ===={{IPvandal|IP Address}}====

    Brief Description. ~~~~

    New requests

    195.70.17.226 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)

    This site ACM Forex and this site Advanced Currency Markets refer to the same company. Both sites are pretty clearly advertisements I believe, and until recently they have been edited by a user User:Acmforex. 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 Drewwiki, it looks like all new edits are being done by an ip addres: 195.70.17.226 195.70.17.226 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)

    204.13.204.162 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)

    Repeated deletion of sourced information and insertion of disparaging conjecture at Italian American. Repeated edits of this and other pages indicate this is a sock puppet of Callmarcus and 69.141.3.45. This user has an extensive history of being blocked for vandalism including several "last warnings." This template must be substituted.

    — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ana Nim (talk • contribs)
    Capisce. yandman 19:05, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

    151.204.243.217 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)

    Repeated content removal directed to one site without adequate description or reasoning at urban exploration. A sock puppet of 141.149.186.183 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) who has done similar actions. Seicer (talk) (contribs) 18:11, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

    Post page diffs. Durova 18:27, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
    13:50, 26 November 2006, 23:04, 25 November 2006, 22:02, 20 November 2006, 21:05, 18 November 2006 Seicer (talk) (contribs) 21:07, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
    I'm not convinced that this is a sockpuppet. Please WP:AGF 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. Durova 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. Seicer (talk) (contribs) 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. Durova 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). Seicer (talk) (contribs) 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. Durova 20:09, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
    Regarding 151.204.242.114, 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 Urban exploration. This is getting old. This is verifiable with a simple IP query and WHOIS on the domains.
    "Regarding edits to urban exploration. Your edits are similar to that of 151.204.243.217 and 141.149.186.183. 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 WP:EL and WP:VANDAL for more information." Seicer (talk) (contribs) 00:47, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

    66.174.93.105 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)

    This user has violated the three-revert rule by reverting edits to the article on Fantasia Barrino, including a copyrighted, invalid image. 200.167.230.39 19:34, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

    Although violating the 3RR rule, the IP did so in response to sockpuppetry by the user above and Knightrider1984, both indeffed now. Just a heads up - Martinp23 19:57, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
    Confirm sockpuppetry accusation with evidence from a Checkuser (if the allegation meets their guidelines) or move to Misplaced Pages:Suspected sockpuppets. Page diffs all around if this remains here. Durova 04:12, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
    Checkuser was carried out before blocks by Dmcdevit on IRC. As such, the socks were blocked, and the sockpuppeteer left unblocked - for confirmation, just take a look at the contribs of the two blocked users mentioned (200.167.230.39 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) and Knightrider1984 (talk · contribs)). Martinp23 15:01, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
    We need page diffs. Durova 20:11, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

    Under investigation

    Keltik31 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

    Has been warned and blocked in the past for personal attacks; impersonates an admin here, and trolls various talk pages (too many to list, see contribs) with racist/anti-Semitic comments. -- weirdoactor -- 03:11, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

    I clicked randomly on a dozen contribs and did not find anything egregious. Content disputes are not vandalism. —Centrx→talk • 04:16, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

    Wateva100 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

    Further Vandalism of the article Tyne and Wear Fire and Rescue Service. 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 Tellyaddict 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. Durova 15:09, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

    MeltedSugaar (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

    Possibly a sockpuppet of Marsiliano

    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 diff:

    ==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. yandman 09:00, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

    In my user page he added:

    You have enemies in high places. Remember Machismo. diff

    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. Sugaar 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. Shell 03:50, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
    Thanks, Shell. --Sugaar 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. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marciliano (talk • contribs)

    I don't know if that was Marsiliano, only that looked like him (you?). On the rest: I don't understand half of it. --Sugaar 05:10, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
    Banned the new sock. Report any others that slip out of the drawer. Durova 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? --Sugaar 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. Durova 15:21, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
    LOL --Sugaar 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:

    • User:ZugaarZucks attempted to do something in my user page but reverted it him/herself diff. Yet this same user did attack User:Wobble talk page with contents that seem to attack me diff. Wooble was not involved in the Machismo case but he has been involved in the more than nasty content dispute in White people, what makes me think if all these attacks are indeed linked to Marsiliano or to some other people.
    • In the same line, User:Llano del Ramsilio has vandalized my talk page with a "call" to "sabotage" Misplaced Pages articles diff allegedly related to White people 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 User:Getxo) are starting to look like related to the dispute of White people 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. --Sugaar 18:20, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

    I have just realized that User:Llano del Ramsilio 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. --Sugaar 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. Durova 03:48, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
    They are coming in hordes. Someone with access to variable IPs?
    User:ManagerMania diff, plagiarizing the style of Thulean warnings - reverted by Shell Kinney.
    User:Panfilio diff and User:BlanchesseOblige diff 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. --Sugaar 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. Shell 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).
    Regards, --Sugaar 19:14, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
    All of those accounts have been blocked. Durova 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:

    Thanks to the people that has reverted. --Sugaar 03:14, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

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

    • Have another one in the same extreme-right line: User: LaBotadeFranco diff. This one seems a genuine Spaniard. Translation of his user name is "The Boot of Franco". Translation of the attack is:

    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 Fraga! Long life to Spain, always catholic and Imperialist! --LaBotadeFranco 05:35, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

    It seems they keep coming. Yet there must be a finite number of them, so I don't despair. --Sugaar 06:30, 30 November 2006 (UTC)


    ChildOfA303 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

    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.:

    DWaterson 23:36, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

    See also Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Spam#blackcomb.co.uk Femto 11:05, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
    Maybe should be brought to WP:RFCU. —Centrx→talk • 21:47, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

    I blocked all of them except User:Newmoontube. They are disruptive sockpuppets. —Centrx→talk • 04:04, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

    Posmodern2000 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

    User has been reinserting linkspam and information that was previously deleted and discussed at length on the talk page for Emiliano Zapata, all editors except User:Posmodern2000 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. Tubezone 01:38, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

    Post diffs, please. Durova 03:30, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
    No subsequent activity on this account. Durova 16:44, 26 November 2006 (UTC)


    195.82.106.244 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)

    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. 72.91.4.91 14:31, 21 November 2006 (UTC) Avyakt7

    We need page diffs, not links. Durova 14:45, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
    Here you are. Thanks!
    Differentials:

    (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: 72.91.169.22 20:55, 21 November 2006 (UTC) AVYAKT7

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

    Bogus personal attack report and deletion of comment...
    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!

    Personal attack on Riveros11...
    Bad faith edit comments....

    Personal information and false allegation of sockpuppet...

    Intimidation...

    Taunting...

    Removing NPOV...

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

    Changing others' discussion and offensive edit comment....

    Shifting of burden of proof onto those questioning the article...

    Forest fire...

    Thank you, 72.91.169.22 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 WP:OWN the article. Misplaced Pages:Suspected sockpuppets is the best place to handle that (and I'm glad it's already been reported there) because between that page possibly WP:DR 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. Durova 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 72.91.169.22 16:09, 28 November 2006 (UTC) avyakt7

    I semi-protected Brahma Kumaris World Spiritual University. —Centrx→talk • 03:59, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

    Registered users

    Read the policies, guidelines, and procedures before reporting. Do not report content or user disputes here, unless you can provide links demonstrating a strong attempt at dispute resolution. Please use this format at the top of this section:

    ===={{vandal|User_name}}====

    Brief Description. ~~~~

    Usernames are case sensitive.

    New requests

    Greenfields (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

    User's only contributions have been vandalize by repeatedly blanking all or part of the articles and talk pages on two Arizona politicians. --BenBurch 01:52, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

    Preform (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

    Strong suspicions that this user is banned user MagicKirin (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) who also used the now banned account Tannim (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). Same group of articles - Hugo Chavez - Cindy Sheehan, Hezbollah - 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.--Zleitzen 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. Durova 01:37, 28 November 2006 (UTC)


    Under investigation

    Sonia Jordan (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

    This user's contributions consist solely of adding a link to a website to purchase golf (and Scotland) books. (And then re-adding after the link has been editted out.) This has been going on for about two weeks. Is there a "don't advertise" template for their user talk page - or something? Thanks. J. Van Meter 14:24, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

    yes, this is spam use {{subst:spam}}~~~~ on their talk page, in the edit summary just write please don't advertise.
    see also WP:SPAM, this is a list of other test templates Misplaced Pages:Template_messages/User_talk_namespace#Warnings ▪◦▪≡Ѕirex98≡ 16:09, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
    I see edits on two days only 17 November and 27 November. The editor was not warned until 27 November after the most recent edit. I agree this is spam. Post again if the problem resumes. Durova 20:20, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

    Skinny_McGee (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

    Suspected Sockpuppetry, Deceptive Editing and Vandalism

    • A strong suspicion of sockpuppetry, deceptive editing, and complex abuse on the Midnight_Syndicate 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 HERE 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. Peacekpr 06:35, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
    Peacekpr 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 User:GuardianZ's sockpuppets. Dionyseus 13:37, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
    Sockpuppetry investigations normally go to Misplaced Pages:Suspected sock puppets. That's their specialty. Have you tried formal mediation? Durova 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 Dionyseus 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 User_talk:Peacekpr for my discussion with Dionyseus, not to be confused with the issue. I simply feel that Dionyseus has show bias during the edit war on Midnight_Syndicate. Peacekpr 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 Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration 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 WP:DR. Durova 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. Peacekpr 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 good article or featured article 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. Durova 20:37, 27 November 2006 (UTC)


    Steve44 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

    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.--CyberGhostface 19:11, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

    72 hour block for vandalism. Durova 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. —Centrx→talk • 03:27, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

    William Mauco (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

    This user has a persistent behaviour of blanking relevant information in Transnistria - 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 User:William Mauco were blocked for edit warring. First thing Mauco did after block finished was to revert me, without any explanation, in 6 different articles:

    1. revert on Sheriff. In article Sheriff (company), 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.
    2. Politics of Transnistria (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)
    3. List of unrecognized countries
    4. War of Transnistria (revert with the misleading comment that information belong to an other article - Raşcov, while info he took out was not about Raşcov)
    5. Gîsca and
    6. Mikhail Burla.

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

    In the same time, this user is WP:STALK 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, here 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 here 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.--MariusM 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. Durova 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.--MariusM 11:41, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
    LOL, I'm not even Russian by descent. User:Durova/Travels Durova 14:03, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

    User was blocked for 48 hours for edit warring. —Centrx→talk • 02:56, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

    White people, etc.

    LSLM (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

    First of all this user seems to be: 72.144.247.96

    Second of all I reported him because of personal attacks here:

    And finally, he seems to be doing the same thing with Euskata and Sugaar. Namely, deleting cited material and restoring stuff with no citation. He's doing this without any explanation besides "reverting vandalism". He ignores discussion in talk pages here:

    He calls Misplaced Pages:Verifiability and Misplaced Pages:No original research "Rv vandalism by Dark Tichondrias' nordicist attempts to define white."

    His edit difs:

    Also, he may be associated with: 65.11.58.154

    And they use similar excuses: Nordic-Anglo-Saxon bias

    Of course we werent explained of where Nordicist or Anglo-Saxon is.

    Thulean 15:53, 10 November 2006 (UTC)


    NOTE: This user might also be: 72.153.229.218 dif: history:

    And 72.153.229.218 has been warned for Vandalism twice: 1 by me, 1 by an admin:

    Thulean 16:00, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

    • I forgot to add my edit history .

    LSLM deleted all this simply by saying nothing. Thulean 16:49, 10 November 2006 (UTC) Recusing myself. Durova 05:50, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

    • LSLM, aka Veritas and Severitas, is doing the right thing. There's no vandalism in his actions, just active NPOV protection, at the expense of his own energies and despite WikiLawyering harassing tactics by Thulean. --Sugaar 14:32, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

    Recusing myself. Durova 03:16, 12 November 2006 (UTC)


    • This user seems to be 65.11.70.82 .

    And there are loads of 60 something users here which jumped to edit wars . So first all this user might have violated 3RR and any decision should consider his puppets. Thulean 20:43, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

    This absolutely ridiculous. As I just pointed out in the discusion of the affected page: there's a "wikipedia alert" at stormfront.org exactly the same day that massive anon. and suspect puppet vandalism happened .
    If anything is clear is that LSLM doesn't sympathize with Stormfront in any way.
    But anyhow, he's also a serious user with a good historial (as far as I know). He has credibility too. --Sugaar 23:27, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
    Sugaar (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

    This user thinks quoting Oxford English Dictionary as POV pushing. In my edits, I had removed uncited meterial and added cited ones, with bunch of edit explanations and comments in discussion pages. He reverted my edits 4 times now (2 times each article) and did this without any discussion or explanation besides "rv vandalism", not to mention he named his huge edits as minor. I reverted his first set of edits with long explanations but he reverted back.

    dif 1: dif 2:

    My warnings to him: , Thulean 23:18, 9 November 2006 (UTC)


    Oh it seems he had deleted my warnings. Here are diffs: Thulean 23:21, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

    I deleted your mock warnings becuase it's part of your harassing strategy. I have not a single time gone to your page and pressed you in any way: I kept all the discussion in the discussion page. You came to my "home" repeatedly, pushing me into saying what I think of you (only to use it as "evidence" of suppossed "name-calling"), posted bogus warnings, continuous "legalist" threats that are nothing but threats of the lowest kind. Whatever you have to say to me, say it in the investigation. Do not spam my user page.
    Furthermore: you have been asked by an administrator not to do it. But you insist.

    --Sugaar 00:44, 10 November 2006 (UTC)


    Yes that's one of my main denounces on your complex vandalism behaviour: you have been using Misplaced Pages's defense mechanism to POV-push your viewpoints against consensus by creating multiple "legal" complains against the veteran and serious users that, like myself, were trying to stop your unilateralism and keep a reasonable NPOV consensus.
    While we are here you are editing the page at will, imposing yur individual POV against multiple protests.
    I'll keep reverting as much as possible your unilateral ideological edits unless my computer breaks or I am ordered not to do so. If you knew what consensus-making could mean, we would not be in this pathetic situation. (For instance, we could have created a subsection on Whiteness acording to white nationalism, a linked enry on white nationalism or whatever other solution).
    But you just want to impose your will. --Sugaar 18:26, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

    Recusing myself. Durova 05:51, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

    User was blocked for 6 hours for personal attacks and harassment. Don't pay attention to his recusal nonsense, he says that about every administrator who rightfully gets on his case. —Centrx→talk • 21:34, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
    Recusal simply means I've stepped aside and welcome other admins to step forward. Recusal has no bearing on the merits of the case. Durova 23:04, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
    I must protest. I have not asked anyone to recuse him/herself except Shell Kinney, who has single-handedly managed all the White people conflict with what I believe is very bad criteria. Durova recused herself long before I even thought of recusing anyone. In fact I thought that Shell Kinney should take example from Durova, who I would like to be in the case probably.
    Don't get things wrong. On think is that I find that Shell is one-sided and another thing is that I think that every administrator is, what is not the case.
    You, Centrx, have played no role so far and don't seem to have much of an idea of what was going on around this conflict. You should ask and study the issue before giving such opinions. --Sugaar 08:29, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

    CSArebel (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

    This newly registered user has vandalized the article Johnny Rebel (singer) by adding this to the article:

    a href="http://www.gods-kingdom.org/SecondComing/money

    He also added an internal link to the article for "present" and another for "money," and why, I don't understand.

    I have reverted the article; please check the history, however, as he seems to have removed the a href="http://www.gods-kingdom.org/SecondComing/money that he left earlier.

    (Because I am unsure what CSArebel did to the site, or why, please also make sure I have not mistakenly confused CSArebel's actions as vandalism when they might not be vandalism. I see that an anonymous vandal struck right before CSArebel altered the site, and CSArebel seems to have removed that other vandal's vandalism before making his own inexplication changes to the article. This is confusing!)

    Sincerely,

    --Skb8721 00:00, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

    Those external links pull up 404 errors when I check them. I'd call that mild vandalism or possibly an experiment: level 1 or 2 template for that. What concerns me more are the song titles this editor added. If those are the actual titles of the tracks then they belong in the article with no additional caution. If they're exaggerations then a level 4 warning template is warranted. Given the artist in question they might plausibly be true - in which case per WP:NOT the edit is relevant and should stand. Durova 06:43, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
    I checked the song titles, and they are valid, offensive though they are. --Skb8721 17:52, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
    By the way, I see that CSArebel also made some inexplicable edits to the article Race of Jesus, adding internal links to unimportant words in the article, seemingly at random . . . which another Wikipedian reverted as vandalism. So, should I warn CSArebel, or is this something an administrator should do? I am unsure, so please advise.--Skb8721 17:59, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
    No activity since 12 November so probably not a great source of worry. A level 1 or 2 warning is appropriate. Post again if problems resume. Durova 03:44, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
    Activity resumed. Queried the editor re: removal of Andrew Johnson from Southern Democrats. Posted the query as a conditional block warning. Durova 05:48, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
    User blocked indefinitely for disruption. —Centrx→talk • 02:38, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

    See also

    Category: