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 19:52, 8 July 2006 editScottie theNerd (talk | contribs)2,475 edits →Under investigation← Previous edit Revision as of 20:48, 8 July 2006 edit undoPorky Pig (talk | contribs)99 editsm →New requestsNext edit →
Line 67: Line 67:
===New requests=== ===New requests===
<!-- Report new alerts below this line (at the top of the list) --> <!-- Report new alerts below this line (at the top of the list) -->
*{{vandal|Liftarn}} This editor keeps spamming the ] with stuff that either should not be posted or should be posted at the specified article. This editor wants the +cat shut down but cannot muster the votes. Please stop this editor. Thank you ] 20:48, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

* Complex case, several user names (sockpuppets) over several hoax articles (which have now been speedied). See ]. -- ] 09:49, 3 July 2006 (UTC) * Complex case, several user names (sockpuppets) over several hoax articles (which have now been speedied). See ]. -- ] 09:49, 3 July 2006 (UTC)


Revision as of 20:48, 8 July 2006

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


    Shortcut
    • ]

    This page is intended 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.

    To update this page, purge the cache. For alerts that have already been addressed, see the archives.

    Watchlist

    • Report in this section:
    1. Articles being hit with a very high level of vandalism or 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

    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.

    Requests

    Please use this format at the top of this section:

    *{{IPvandal|IP Address}} -- Brief Description // ~~~~

    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 and please note that spaces in usernames need to be replaced by underscores (as shown in the example above).

    New requests

    • Bull-Doser (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) User first registered as User:Take Me Higher, and became very notorious for his poor pictures of cars, where they were either covered in snow, or taken from the back in bad condition or in bright sun. We would try to be nice and talk to him about his pictures and try to work the thing out, but he would just ignore us and upload more bad pics. We filed a RfC that he completely ignored, and he continued to ignore our advice/warnings. He uses his talk page for a blog, so we know he sees them, but perfers not to respond to them. After getting numerous warnings from us for our bad pics, he registered the account User:Bull-Doser hoping that we wouldn't know that it is him, so he wouldn't be bogged by us warning us about his pics. This failed however, as he continued to upload the same bad pics, and we easilly saw through it. This is when our patience with him ran out, as he continued to ignore our warnings. Every picture except for a few salvageable ones were removed from articles. Me, and two other members of Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Automobiles agreed that at this point, we will step back and let the admins handle him, so here you go. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Karrmann (talk • contribs)
    Comment: User:Bull-Doser is also overlinking dates and places, and reverting when we change his overlinking. He had the same behavior when he was User:Take Me Higher. He also reverts information on certain automotive infoboxes, thus making the articles region-centric instead of international. --Pc13 11:49, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
    Well Bull-Doser self-identifies as being Take Me Higher (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) so I don't think that's a problem, especially as only one account is being used. I realise it is frustrating to have to sort through the photos looking for the better ones, but as far as I know there is no actual policy against making less-than-perfect contributions if they don't fall under the definition of vandalism (these don't). Possibly disruption if there is edit warring involved- is that the case? I.e. does he ever dispute you removing his images from articles? Also please remember to stay civil in your messages. Petros471 12:52, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
    A couple of times he disputed it, and sometimes he puts the images abck after we remove them. Karrmann 14:15, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

    Further info; Lostsociety AKA Mookie Chookie 1) Lostsociety claims they “called Miguel Y Costas” and found out that Abadie papers were discontinued. He says this because he works for Bambu, who has all of their papers made by Miguel Y Costas. However in the USA, Abadie is a trademark of Republic Tobacco (a competitor of Miguel Y Costas), and it is certainly not discontinued. This was only posted so that he could justify removing Abadie from the rolling paper list to make Bambu the top slot. 2) Lostsociety has posted 14 images of Bambu papers and products. Each time he makes incorrect claims such as “image from Bambu website”. However the images are not found on the Bambu website and are very clearly promotional images 3) Lostsociety continually reverts and posts promotional language such as “Bambu papers are the best in the world” type comments (Bambu are the #1 selling rolling paper in the Carribean, Bambu are the #1 selling paper, Bambu is the last independent company, Bambu rules, etc..). He continually adds these comments to various rolling paper pages (Bambu, Rolling Papers, Miguel Y Costas, Juicy Jays and others, and undoes anyone’s changes that removes or alters this promotional language 4) Lostsociety posts slanderous and defamatory text on brands that compete with Bambu. 5) Lostsociety posts under 3 names, all with the same IP address and all have the same tactic of promoting Bambu papers above all others 6) When cornered, Lostsociety tries to deflect blame by saying that people who revert or alter his promotional language & image posts work for Bambu competitors (yes, it’s all one big conspiracy against Bambu, this is classic caught-blame-others psychology).

    • User:CmdrClow has repeatedly removed warnings that I have placed on his Talk page, even after I have warned him for removing them. He has edited my comments on article discussion pages, and left unsigned comments. When I advised him, politely, to always remember to sign his comments he proceeded to remove what I said from the article's discussion page. He believes that if he labels my warnings "personal attacks" then he can remove them. I have warned him repeatedly, and I would like someone to investigate this situation and take the most appropriate action. If you could respond to my talk page with the outcome of your investigation and final decision I would appreciate it. Thank you. Bignole 04:53, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
    • CoolKatt_number_99999 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) has, on various Wiki articles, contributed what could be considered unsubstaniated information on articles related to television stations. In this article, for example, he/she added unverified information about what the call letters of television stations mean; the information was later verified and proven to be factually incorrect. In the instance of KMYL-LP, there is no way the call letters could mean what he/she lists them as, because My Network TV didn't exist when the station was founded. In other cases, he/she speculates that the letter W in call letters means "We're" (see WSTM) - when, in may cases, that's not correct. I don't think this user is doing it in bad faith, but at the same time, it is a persistent problem. I'm hesitant to bring this up with the user because he/she is involved in several edit disputes / personal conflicts with other users. Amnewsboy 13:52, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
    The user in question also has six kajillion user subpages related to a fictional history of TV stations, which may or may not be related to the current situation. I mention it here for informational purposes only, as an uninvolved observer. -Hit bull, win steak 16:19, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
    Follow-up User has - again - re-added his interpretation of the AETN letters, even though they are factually incorrect. (I can provide documentation if needed.) Amnewsboy 04:17, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
    I don't like being called a vandal. The callsigns on AETN have to mean something, even if there is no source. And the KMYL calls were adopted after its parent station, KASY-TV, was announced as a MNT affliate. CoolKatt number 99999 04:42, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
    I apologize if the latter was an error on my part. However, AETN insists the call letters -- officially -- mean nothing. I'm simply asking that you verify any call letter changes you make with the station in question before making them. Amnewsboy 05:13, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
    Another idea: Use {{fact}}. CoolKatt number 99999 05:48, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

    Under investigation

    F 22 10:25, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

    I have no evidence? Shall we disregard all the edits made to my Talk page that I have arbitarily removed because they were obvious vandalism? I didn't accuse you of being a sock puppet; I was merely stating the reason for your block as cited through the Wiki template. I don't care if you're the same person, but I am concerned that you are being a major inconvenience to other editors. If you want others to leave you alone, it would behove you to leave us alone and let us make proper, constructive edits without some random guy playing with our hard work. Let the admins decide what to make of this situation, and stay away from my Talk page. --Scottie theNerd 23:02, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
    • WIN (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) - For months this user has been posting long diatribes to the Talk page Indo-Aryan migration, treating the page as if it is a discussion forum to decide the truth of the theory. He constantly claims the theory is wrong with links to amateur websites to back him up, terrible English, and an unwillingness to listen to anyone. When told that the Talk page is to be used for creating consensus on scholarly opinion sourced from reputable places outside Misplaced Pages, and not a place to settle controversial theories, he has just ignored these warnings. I've starting reverted his additions outright as vandalism, with support from other users, but I just can't keep up with this guy. Please, look at his edit history for this Talk page, he's never made a productive edit, just endless rants. Make it stop. CRCulver 09:53, 24 June 2006 (UTC)
    • 578 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) -- User, with whom I have a dispute over a number of pages (a RfM is filed), has posted a bad faith Blatant Vandal warning on my talk page , and is otherwise harassing. The user was inactibe for over a year, until a dispute with other users over some AfD's started. His third edit after his return was the addition of an article I had AfD'ed on my user page (not my talk page), in the list of my main contributions. He has been uncivil in his comments to other users , and , including accusing them of sockpuppetry . The only edits (since his return) not involving talk pages or user pages are a vandalizing of Game tester (and labeling his change as rvv!) , and one change of which I can't judge the validity . Fram 12:40, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
    Addition: user now says rather unicivil that RfI or RfM won't make a difference, as he will then change his IP... Fram 19:58, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
    Warned. Petros471 21:01, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

    See also

    Category: