Misplaced Pages

Per my comments on user talk pages, I strongly suggest mediation: both users seem to be good faithed editors who have content dispute, compounded by LUCPOL's poor command of English.-- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk}  20:49, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

L46kok (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Vandal keeps removing speedy tag on Sokwhan Huh article, and is also using User:MNuser to try and remove the tag also. Possible sockpuppet accounts. Chrisch 02:15, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

SnakePlane789 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

I have no idea what's going on with the redirect pages DickLick Single and The_Not-So-Great_Krapli but someone smarter than me should probably try to work it out. Random Passer-by 00:49, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Dr. Dan (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

After months of interaction with this user, I am afraid I have lost hope that he can contribute positivly to our project. While he occasionaly does useful copyediting, a very significant portion of that user's edits (see statistics appendix below) seem to unconstructive remarks on various talk pages. Of course a fondness of discussions is nothing serious (Misplaced Pages is not a soapbox, but we have more important things to deal with) - however his remarks are almost always off topic to the issue discussed and are further highly sarcastic, usually ad hominem, bordering on personal attacks and way too often leading to flaming, wasting times of other editors and stressing them out. The user has been warned to change his attitude many times - examples from his talk page: 29 January 2006, 26 June 2006, 29 June 2006, 4 July 2006, and particulary see 30 July 2006, 11 December 2006, 12 December 2006 and 12 January 2007. Unfortunatly I see no change in his behaviour - other then he is getting increasingly bold with hostile, provocative comments (this is the newest one which prompted me to file this report). Recently some editors have tried to contain the flame wars that habitually edit after his remarks by removing or achiving his posts before they get too many replies (once, twice , thrice, not that it seems to have any effect on him. His constant snipping remarks contributed, among other things, to months long withdrawal from our project of one of the most active contributors - User:Halibutt, the the 168 most active editor (see also his accusation of that user being 'a very warped, and lying propagandist at his absolute worst'). Or just see this gem, where he reffers to Halibutt's contributions as 'flaming and anti-Lithuanian propaganda' and 'a weird, hateful history of editing'. As obviously warnings are ineffective, I'd like to ask the community to consider other actions before this user manages to offend and chase of other editors from our project.-- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk}  18:44, 18 January 2007 (UTC) PS. In a recent post, Dr. Dan calls me a 'self proclaimed wellspring of knowledge regarding Poland on English Misplaced Pages'. Here he accusses me of 'falsehood'...-- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk}  18:19, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

• If it helps at all, i'd like to say that i highly support investigative actions.-- Hrödberäht 05:33, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

• • I would like to address these remarks and ask for 48 hours or less, to do so. As a very active member of various organizations opposing the Iraq War, and recent attempts to escalate it, I am unable to give these serious, but untrue, characterizations the time needed to address them appropriately. I'm also on call this weekend, and as a physician, I take that very seriously. So between work and my contributions of time to the anti-War effort, I need a little time to respond to these remarks before any decisions are taken. Thanks Dr. Dan 18:52, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

So granted: 24 hour block. Your analysis appears to be topical and substantive, but the persistent sniping violates WP:CIVIL. When the block expires please continue the content discussions without personalizing the disputes. Respectfully, Durova 21:19, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

User contributions analysis

Of last 500 edits (that's since mid-September'06) using these scripts:

• article space: 37%; Misplaced Pages space: 3%
  • Significant article edits (copyedits/small rewrites/content/reference additions): 2.6% (13)
• talk (article, user, etc.) space: 60%

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

Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Sean Evans The article has been posted again Sean Evans Headphonos 03:15, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

I left him a note about that.-- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk}  20:53, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

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

A user previously warned by up to Test4 (User talk:VinceB/Blabla1) and blocked for edit warring and sock puppetry has now changed a citation from an academic journal (replacing "nationalist" by a weaker description, not mentioned at all in the cited article). This kind of vandalism is especially threatening to WP:CITE. After this vandalism was reverted, an IP with only three edits in its history (all of them reverts to VinceB's versions of articles) did absolutely the same. A very similar situation has happened in the past (VinceB and his sock puppets trying to remove academic references describing a political party as nationalist and finally blocked for it). Tankred 17:20, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

• 91.120.107.93 (talk · tag · contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · proxy check · block user · block log · cross-wiki contribs · CheckUser (log))
• 195.56.14.142 (talk · tag · contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · proxy check · block user · block log · cross-wiki contribs · CheckUser (log))
• VinceB (talk · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)

These IPs were not me as logged out. Go ahead, and CHECK! This is absolutely outrageous, and disgusting. OK, I understand, that I went a bit too far, as Tankred, sorry. Yeah, pretty similar to mines, I checked them. Since the same internet provider and city, I understand the accusaton, but I'm absolutely sure, that 91.120.etc was NOT me. In the other, I'm not really sure, but I do not remember it. So go ahead with the checkuser. And before accusations, I didn't changed my mind, that these were not me. I'm just simply not sure in one of them, since it reverted Juro only. :-) --Vince 19:18, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

I simply reverted an indef blocked user, User:Koooon's edit to user CoolKoon's previous one. If you check history , you realize, that it may be a sockpuppet in an editwar, against User:CoolKoon (this why Koooon was blocked). So giving me as the one, who added fake is a LIE. My only mistake was, that I didn't checked, if a possible then indef blocked sockpuppet's edit was a fake or not.--Vince 19:29, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Today, I am this, as an IP . I edited this page here also, to prove it. --Vince 19:38, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

As the Strážay, Tomáš. 2005. Nationalist Populism and Foreign Policy: Focus on Slovak-Hungarian Relations. Slovak Foreign Policy Affairs I/2005 ref is not online I cannot verify what is the original wording, hence I cannot vefiry 'vandalism' accusation. Vince has been blocked in the past several times for violations of WP:NPA, warned many times and has been found guilty and blocked for using socks, thus I would suggest filing WP:RFCU and if Vince is again found gulity of suckpuppeting, a long block is in order. The circumstansial evidence (user has been using socks in similiar manner in the past) would indicate he is guilty, but unless another reviewer argues for a block based on this, I am tempted to WP:AGF and not block Vince based on just the evidence above.-- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk}  21:05, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

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

Tankred as usual, above, does note care about the WHYs, just the WHATs, and of course he understands them in the most hostile way, as it can be understanded. In Slovakization article, I simply reverted an indef blocked user, User:Koooon's edit to user CoolKoon's previous one. If you check history , you realize, that it may be a sockpuppet in an editwar, against User:CoolKoon (this why Koooon was blocked). So this is a LIE.

Tankred should be warned to WP:CIV, WP:FAITH, and asked to reduce hostility in his comments against me. He's doing a campaign against me. I never was blocked due to vandalism, only edit warring, and not logging in. Since that time, I learned the lession, but this guy is simply disturbing me, as you can see, not being thretened to fake some incidents to reach his goal to block me indef. Tankred is the one, who forces me to remain unlogged, today, as .--Vince 19:18, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

I also want the personal abuse placed on his userpage against me removed, and warned to WP:NPA. --Vince 20:05, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

I guess this is just a retaliation for my Request of investigation of VinceB's edits. VinceB, I think it would be perfectly sufficient to write your comment once, as you already did on this page. However, I am serious about the investigation request because I have no time to deal with your dynamic IP again. Changing cited text to something else is against the very pillar of Misplaced Pages that is WP:CITE. It should be dealt with. Tankred 22:21, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Yes, of course. I never disputed it. My problem is wth your style, and behave against me. Please don't act like if you still don't know what my real problem is with you. Again, yes, should be dealt with, if I make a mistake, I should be warned, but not in your style - warning templates, "reverting vandalism by VinceB", continuous accusations and denunciations on every possible forum, showing single mistakes as continuous purposed behave etc. this list would be too long. You are agressive, hostile, and highly uncivil, and seemingly you have some personal vindictiveness or whatever childish thing against me. And you simply can not stop. Just look at yr userpage. I put similar thing to my userpage, with difflink, and wanted to put more links to them, when I was angry, but I didn't do it, moreover I removed it when you asked for it. See the difference? You do the same calmly, so you can avoid being blocked for edit warring. It is impossible to talk normally with you - for me at least. You are full with fixa ideas, and you project them all into me. You think that I'm a kind of far right scum, or whatever, wich weaks up, and falls asleep with the Turul, and wants revision and Justice to Hungary and whatever. And this is a fuckin' big lie, and has nothing to do with the real me. Same stands to PANONIAN. Juro's rhetorics and believes partially sticked on you also. I'm researching the question, wich is an awesomly huge difference. this is also mentioned on my userpage, almost from the first time, since I started to use this account instead of being an IP and doing such (mainly routine) activities, like this or this. My only reason, why I use an account is that IPs are not counted as a human in English Misplaced Pages. If they are reverted, noone would check the revert's right. "Sorry, no time for this, buddy". Well, at least it is clearly proved, that it's the same with usernames also, so there's not as a big difference as I thought. I can rename and create articles. Wow. This is the only + what I get, when logged in. And tracking users, whom revert everthing what they can from my contribs, not even caring it's content, or rightness.

And yes, I can't stand dilettantism, or pushing obvious lies, and/or fakes no matter with how many sources - their writer counts only, and they are checkable by everybody -, and I'm pretty short tempered wich leads to hurt some ppl, whom I did not wanted to. --Vince 00:34, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

As far as I can tell, the above rant has no claims to investigate (no diffs to policies Tankred or PANONIAN have broken). As such it seems to be a violation of WP:NPA itself and I concur with Tankred that its seems like a 'revenge' for him repoting Vince's violations above. I'd ask Vince to remove (strike out) this request and apologize for it; otherwise I think we may have a case of personal attack (false accusations and such) to deal with.-- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk}  21:07, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

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

The following IP users have followed the same pattern of behaviour and are presumably the same person, especially as most have made edits within minutes of Pestrick:

• 86.151.1.5 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
• 86.129.164.66 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
• 195.153.138.151 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
• 86.140.97.119 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
• 86.144.199.101 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)

This user has been adding references to "Pat Anderson from Bexhill-on-Sea" into various articles, mainly referring to affairs with female celebrities (primarily Nicola Roberts). This user has also twice created the article Pat Anderson, which was speedily deleted both times. I left a polite warning on the user's talk page (link), who then left the message "tosser" on my talk page (diff). Gasheadsteve 21:48, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

tosser doesn't seem like a serious violation of WP:NPA to me, but sockuppets should be analyzed at WP:RFCU where I suggset you take this case. If proven guilty, blocks and bans can be applied.-- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk}  21:09, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

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

Sam Wereb (talk · contribs) has been following me around wikipedia editing anything I have written and undermining all my edits, he has become a serial pest. He has made bold personal attacks in the past followed up recently by snide comments in an attempt to provoke some outburst that will never come. Sam Wereb (talk · contribs) is frequently sarcastic about other editor's good faith editing; for example, referring to "Mikey's little article" when I put a well-referenced article (Ernest Emerson) up for Good Article review , prior to this he unsuccessfully tried to delete a large well referenced portion calling it "spam,spammity spam" because it contained a single link to the subject's website and his belief that mere mention of any company is advertising, even when the article is about the company in question. When JzG (talk · contribs), SandyGeorgia (talk · contribs) and Jeffpw (talk · contribs) pointed out to him that my edits to Ernest Emerson were not spam and were very well-referenced, he condescendingly replied with, " All very cozy -- and irrelevant". He has been warned in the past by Durova (talk · contribs) (his libelous accusations against me are archived on the WP:PAIN )around 11/18/2006-11/20/2006, %28aeropagitica%29 (talk · contribs) , and Jeffpw (talk · contribs) , and myself yet he simply blanks his talk page, removing indications of past behavior without archiving. I've offered links to wiki: civil, and have tried working with this caustic individual to no avail. One of his latest tactics is to call wikilinks to other wikipedia articles I have worked on as spam and advertising. He has personally posted objections to the length of the Knife entry, yet the only change he has made was to lead people away from an article I have written that is linked from there Walker linerlock.

There's plenty of other constructive work he could do on wikipedia if he's got too much time on his hands. He's turned this into a vendetta for whatever reason. Please investigate this stalker-like behavior. I just want it to stop so I can continue to be a positive contributor and not have to check on every last article I've written or contributed to just because of Wereb's histrionic outbursts and blatant vandalism.

A simple comparison of his history against mine will confirm this.

Thank you. --Mike Searson 10:09, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

SNIyer12 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

I honestly don’t know if this is the right place to put this, however, Misplaced Pages:Requests for administrator attention says this page is the place to report “serial pests”, and SNIyer12 definitely qualifies as that, while I’m not sure if s/he is an “obvious vandal”. When I was a far more active editor, I was frustrated by this user so much that I started an RfC which unfortunately failed to garner much comment either way—including from the user, even though s/he was informed on his/her talkpage. Based on recent additions to the RfC which I noticed in my Watchlist, and on this recent comment on the aforementioned user-talk page (which, as usual, the editor has failed to respond to), I felt it was time to seriously seek admin help in dealing with this problem. --WikidSmaht (talk) 18:03, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

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

A review of Wellreadone's user contributions indicates a history of subtle vandalization of articles. He removes tags such as "unreferenced" from articles without comment and replaces information with bogus information not verified by sources (eg he overwrote the previous biography replacing "Marcello I'm Bored" with "I'm So Bored" and included a large section of writing and directing credits many of which are not included in the person's IMDB listing). He has also deleted his own user talk page to remove negative comments and vandalism warnings by editors (these comments are visible by reviewing the history page). Had the user on my watch list from a couple of months ago as well due to similar behavior that is cropping up again now in January. Requesting an investigation on the user's contribution history to determine if admin intervention is needed. Dugwiki 21:15, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

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

This editor has edits all contents relating to Periyar and Vaikom Satyagraha.He also edits all contents relating to Brahmin and deletes contents like in Justice Party (India) or adds hate comments like in Periyar University all uncited .He is will not allow an alternate view with anything relating to Brahmanism even if well cited He also uses Ramananrv123 and ip address and deletes content which he does not like .He added blog as citation in Periyar.Tametiger 19:10, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

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

This editor ignors the copywrite information. Image:USS Barbour County (LST-1195).JPG is and has been clearly labled it came from the Defense Visual Information Center, which is a US Government Agency. If you goto the DVIC site, and search for the USS Barbour County, it gives you a series of photos one of which is the uploaded photo. It is clearly labled correctly, and it is varifable, yet this editor continues put not sourced. --71Demon 01:03, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Carnildo is considered one of the experts in image copyrights. Have you talked to him? I'd expect he could explain the issue on your talkpage without the need for RFI.-- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk}  21:14, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

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

Because of copyvio. He ignores all attempts to contact him or do anything against the copyvio in Kim Mehmenti-article. Now he also uses his user talk for the copyvio. Also works as IP and not only here but also in the other wikis. In the German wiki known as Benutzer:Semimk, in the Albanian one he uses the same as here. In the German wiki we wrote an article to stop him and now we only have to remove the pictures now and then. As far as I've seen the Bulgarian wiki has done the same. I'm not sure if the Macedonian one knows about the problem, but the French has deleted the article, and the Albanian one has decided to ignore the copyvio. -- CecilK 13:31, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Copyvios should be reported on WP:CP. Sockpuppet accusations at WP:RFCU.-- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk}  21:13, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

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

I request that the above user be investigated for violating the policy on vandalism, especially filing reports rather than using dispute resolution to get the facts discussed rather than trying to delete the facts, user used vandalism criteria and complained and got IP user 75.15.203.99 banned, while the facts that were posted were not only true but taken from other articles on wikipedia. I think the facts should be checked from a neutral point of view

trueblood 01:48, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Multiple users found that edits by an anonymous user operating under IP 75.15.203.99 constituted vandalism. I documented these and requested the block, which was reviewed and granted by administrator (aeropagitica). The same anonymous user appears to have then switched to IP 75.15.204.215 and continued vandalizing articles. Other editors have since reverted these edits. Given the record of vandalism and uncivil behaviour by User:Trueblood786, I wonder if User:Trueblood786 may have been the anonymous editor in question and sought to avoid accountability by editing under the IPs mentioned above.

Other editors who have acted on the vandalism in question include User:Eagle 101 and User:The Haunted Angel (both recipients of multiple barnstars including The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar) and User:Eliyahu S. -- Aylahs 02:58, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

I looked though Aylahs's contributions and I didn't see any indications of vandalism. I also don't see any reason why requesting that an admin help with a situation is a problem. Please you can provide diffs. Otherwise, any kind of investigation is quite difficult. ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 00:49, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

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

This user has continually removed negative content from their talk page. I have warned the user, and waded through the history of edits (going back about a month) to return what content I can. However, the user has reverted my edits and removed the warning about this I gave the user. 88.107.102.255 00:41, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Not this time he hasnt. I thought users were allowed to delete content from their user pages, SqueakBox 00:52, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

The only things I have deleted from MY own talkpage that were left by you or your sockpuppets in what I perceived as bad faith or are issues have been sorted out - plus I will delete any edits made from unregistered sockpuppets--Vintagekits 00:55, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

No, you have removed warning messages from other users from your talk page such that other users cannot see you have already been warned about certain things - such as personal attacks. This means users continue to give you just warnings, unaware that you should fully understand what you are doing is wrong, given the pervious warnings. Thus, you can continue to get away with what you are doing - principally being uncivil. Logoistic 23:28, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

NB My sockpuppets are legitimate. Logoistic 23:32, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

You only admitted they were sockpuppets AFTER I left the sockpuppet tag on your page. I removed your edits on my talk page as I considered them to be left in bad faith. I consider that your (and your various sockpuppets) treatment of me is coming close to harrassment and I am trying to stay away from you and not get drawn into edit wars or arguements with you but you are making it very difficult.--Vintagekits 00:11, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

We have discussed this elsewhere, and it is not relevent here. The matter at hand is removal of negative content. Logoistic 01:46, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

I have explained the deletions, no further comment from me--Vintagekits 03:57, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

The user is now removing a tag that highlights he has confirmed illegitimate sockpuppets. Logoistic 21:36, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

I have NO "illegitimate sockpuppets" - if someonelse wants to raise the subject with me then I will be happy to discuss with them - but not you as Iconsider that you act in bad faith towards me--Vintagekits 21:41, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Requests_for_checkuser/Case/Vintagekits Logoistic 22:14, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

yes, that is not an "illegitimate sockpuppet"--Vintagekits 22:19, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

it is, it's now been banned by an admin. End of story. I just want the admin to look at the removal of negative content. Logoistic 00:02, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Professor69 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Obvious vandalism to and FranksValli 07:43, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Has been warned and hasn't contribute since, I think we can archive this RFI.-- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk}  20:47, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

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

This user is a persistant abuser of wrestling related articles and is a constant nuisance. He was reported for vandalism but the reporter was told it was a content dispute. As is visible from both his talk page, and the WP:PW talk page he has been asked many times to stop and read the WP:PW guidelines, then told, then warned. Yet he continues to ignore everything and persist with his disruptive edits; any help would be useful. DavyJonesLocker 00:46, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

I support any punishment offered as a result of this, The Damaja's disruptive edits and lack of communication have become tiresome and, to put it crudely, a persistant pain in the arse. SteveLamacq43 02:05, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

someguy0830 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), tjstrf (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), gunslinger47 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

this person has gone crazy. i don't know how many more accounts he has created so far. check out his contribs, he is doing nothing, but to revert and revert. and he is reverting the same thing that gunslinger47 and tjstrf were reverting. this guy has obsessive compulsive disorder, someone should look into those three accounts, you will find that those three accounts have similar partners, updating similar articles, and most importantly, reverting like a crazy man. he does not care what that article is, all he cares is to revert after revert. that is serious vandalism. he has been reverting the same articles for last few days.

check out Government of China, he used the name gunslinger47 to vandalize. then he used the user name someguy0830 again to vandalize the same article again. he has gone crazy! someone should suspend all those three accounts. it is the same person who is doing the same reverting.

he has reverted this single page for the FOURTH time already.

Note: this request was filed by an IP sock of User:SummerThunder, who has been vandalizing my user talk page and other pages for days now. Please block him, and any other IP who readds it. --tjstrf talk 11:10, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

• Someguy0830 has always been a responsible editor. Something is rotten in Denmark. -- Elaich 02:15, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

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

There is currently a Vote about some +categories and as the vote is occurring Fresheneesz moved the articles to the main category. Would you please advise him to revert all of his changes. Thank you Headphonos 00:46, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

That's usually something editors take care of themselves. If there's a deeper problem at work please post details with diffs. Durova 03:40, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

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

This user appears to be engaging in autobiography (which I've tagged for speedy deletion) and spamming to promote his record company and possibly also anonymous sockpuppeteering as IP 217.235.190.206 to add more advertising spam for the same record company. Random Passer-by 20:50, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

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

You better take a look at these user boxes User:Otherone/Userboxes

Yes, some of them are objectionable. I suggest you leave a polite note to that effect on the editor's talk page. Durova 18:58, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

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

This user has avoided formal mediation, is ignoring informal mediation requests and RfC consensus, and is not accepting Third party viewpoints. He reverts any constructive edits, in spite of consensus from outside admins and long-time editors, to retain a 'attack' section called Controversy in the IIPM article, which is on a large educational institution, and possibly is covered under the 'living persons' category, as the Misplaced Pages article affects the lives of its students directly. Iipmstudent9 07:23, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Please provide specific links and diffs. Durova 18:59, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Inra20 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

This user has been vandalizing articles on many former beauty queen contestants. This is a newly sockpuppet account and the user has used names User:RESIA20, User:Urali20, and IP Address 70.126.2.82 to continued to make unconstructive edits. In the article for Denise Quinones and Shanna Moakler she has not listen to several editors' request for citations. I have pleaded many times and yet no success. She has been blocked once on Friday for the 3RR rule. Unfortunately, me trying to stop her vandalism also was blocked for reverting the article in itsstage prior to it being vandalized. --XLR8TION 05:47, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

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

This is a very different request, this user has created over 50 "bio stubs" - looks like he's going through some Armenian "who's who" list and creating 1 or 2 line stubs, non-referenced, non-sourced. I did put a kind "heads up" on his user page, and am tagging all of these as {db-xxx}. Perchance an admin could watch/explain the WP:BIO and other categories before this becomes a nasty situation. Not 100% sure if this is vandalism, leave that call to the experts.SkierRMH 21:13, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

7777 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

This user has repeatedly removed maintenence templates from a page s/he created (Guatemalan Fir), which is in desperate need of cleanup and sources. I have left requests for him/her to stop, and later warnings to stop, on this user's talk page many times. The user has not acknowledged them, nor stopped removing the templates. I don't think that the editor is intentionally being a vandal, but after multiple warnings I don't know what else to do. --Icarus 19:24, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

• While this user has not logged in to edit the page in quite some time, a string of anonymous IP addresses have continued to remove the maintenence templates. It is very obviously the same user, as other edits to the article follow the same patterns as well. I continue to do what cleanup I can, and I don't know what more can be done by me or anyone, but I thought that as my earlier request was still on this page, I should leave this update lest it appear that the problem has been resolved just because the user is working anonymously now. --Icarus 22:47, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

flybd5 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

• I have edited and made proper grammatical, punctuation, and typo corrections on the aryicle for Pedro Rossello many times. This user who apparently is a person who goes against many of my personal political beliefs (as discussed on discussions boards) has been reverting my changes and feels that he personally owns this article. If you take a look at the history of my changes, my edits have made the article sound much more professional and informative. I have even listed citations and he deletes them. I have reported him to numerous admins to no ado. Please tell him to stop reverting my changes. Many other Wikipedians agree with me that he has crossed the line. I will revert my changes. pleas take a look at my edits and you will clearly see that this is not vandalism. --XLR8TION 17:13, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Comment: Article is now locked and I'm watching the situation. ---J.S 18:17, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

We're back to the same story again. Go look at the latest round of edits on Pedro Rossello. This user is claiming that I am the vandal, when in fact the latest diffs show that XLR8TION is making wholesale changes with obvious grammatical errors and removing information that is shown as factual with cites and refs. XL8RTION continues the exact same pattern of behavior on the article that caused the issues in the past week and a block of the article. I'm tired of dealing with this issue, if you won't do something about it at the level of the user I will simply abandon any effort to keep the article accurate and in good condition. XLR8TION can't even spell correctly! See above! Flybd5 04:19, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

I've left a block warning. Follow up if this editor deletes sourced material again. Durova 03:27, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Soccerguy1039 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Looking at this user's block log, he was previously blocked by Friday on the 9th of Dec. 2006 for problem editing. I initially contacted Friday, but have not received a response. Soccerguy1039 is continuing his disruptive edits, refusing to sign comments, then removing the {{unsigned2}} templates that other users place next to his comments . Several users have asked him to stop, yet he continues. I believe he is also operating a sockpuppet by the name Emokid200618 (talk · contribs). Their contribs are identical, including the removal of unsigned templates on Talk:Final Fantasy XIII . Soccerguy1039 and Emokid200618 have also made identical edits on Template:Kingdom Hearts series (Soccer = ; Emokid = ). Emokid has also vandalized George W. Bush, though it was a minor nuisance. ( ) Apologies if this is the incorrect place to report this, but it doesn't seem to fit WP:AN, it isn't obvious vandalism (WP:AIV) and isn't only about sockpuppets. AuburnPilot 20:27, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

Comment: Soccerguy1039 has been blocked for 48 hours by Friday. I will take the other issues to WP:SSP. AuburnPilot 00:22, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

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

Category:Anti-Semitic people Vote

There was a recent Vote to change the +cat name from Category:Anti-Semitic people to Category:Antisemitic people and it was decided to keep the hyphen. Hashomer has moved the category anyway and without any further vote. In addition, the editor has changed the link at the articles in the category. Would you please move the category back and have the editor revert back all the changes made to each article linking to the new category Category:Antisemitic people. Thank you 69.156.78.94 12:12, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

My apologies, I'm a new user and this was an honest mistake. I noticed that the parent category used the spelling Antisemitic for instance "Category:Antisemitism" and that the article on the subject was Antisemitism. I thought retaining the hyphen in the Anti-Semitic people category name was just an oversight and it would just be a housekeeping change to move it over since most encyclopedias try to be consistent in their spelling. I was unaware of the vote in November otherwise I would have left well enough alone. I will revert the move now. Hashomer 19:36, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

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

Is it possible to consider giving a warning to this user for this clearly heinous post.  ? Thanks 03:32, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Definitely worth a warning. You can issue that yourself. Durova 19:02, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

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

I suggest a warning to User:Chesdovi as he is messing around with the Holiest sites in Islam article by adding numerous non-islamic sites and irrelevant content. (He was a major contributor to this article in the early stages and I'm sure he knows very well about what he's doing) . See the following edits :

There are more of such kind of edits. thestick 12:33, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

He's already gotten a final warning and continued adding nonsense. 48 hour block issued. Durova 08:52, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

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

I would suggest a warning be given to User:Cheekychops as he has repeatedly edited living person biographies to add comments stating that various male actors are actually "gay and are dating casting director Lee Dennison". When these entries are removed by other editors he repeatedly replaces them. He cites fake sources and even when confronted continues to insist that the citation is genuine, or alternatively suggest a different citation, resulting in more work for other contributers to disprove him yet again. Examples of this vandalism include

1. Many edits to Colin Farrell
2. Vin Diesel
3. Ron Livingston
4. Mark Anstee
5. Rob James-Collier

In light of the potentially defamatory nature of these comments, and the sheer number of them, perhaps it would be wise to block this user?

The "Lee Dennison" mentioned in all these quotes seems to have also existed for a short time as User:LeeDennison who created a vanity article about himself which was subsequently deleted. I think this is the same user as User:Cheekychops.

The user has also added many other entries referring to "Lee Dennison" to various articles.

It's surprising that this has gone on for so long without any user block. I've left a warning. Post again if the problem resumes. Durova 03:43, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

• I'm on OTRS, and we got a (very very polite) complaint about this. I too am surprised it went on for as long as it did, but at least it let me use an amusing edit summary when blocking ("user is obsessed with casting director Lee Dennison"). DS 15:34, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Love is all we need (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

I would suggest a warning be issued to User:Love is all we need as the user is using multiple user accounts, claiming to follow wikipedia policies. The user uses his/her accounts in different discussions so that the reader gets the impression that it is several users commenting an article. MoRsE 20:38, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Please go to WP:SSP and follow the suspected sockpuppet report directions there. We do other types of investigations at this board. Durova 03:44, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

Well, the instructions led me to believe so, but well. MoRsE 05:53, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

Maybe that should be worded more clearly: what's obvious to an involved editor may not be obvious from a distance. Durova 03:27, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Bluechevylover (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) and Lord Tortiville II (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Please see this nonsense edit of Back to the Future by Bluechevylover (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) from 12/11, followed by the same edit by Lord Tortiville II (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) on 12/14. First user name got a Test4, and I gave the second a blatantvandal warning last night. Checking the second name's contribs brought me to the spurious articles Fisherman's Choice and Bailey's Creek Fisherman's Challenge. I tagged them as hoaxes, and 68.39.174.238‎ tagged them for speedy, which apparently went through today. Lord Tortiville II has already recreated the Bailey article. Neither account has many edits. The first one made some to automotive articles, which I didn't look at; the other has basically only touched Back to the Future and the two nonsense articles. I'm thinking there are probably older accounts I don't know about. I'm not sure what is to be done, except to mention the situation here. Thanks! Karen | Talk | contribs 20:06, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

The warnings are appropriate. One account has only a single edit and the other hasn't been active since 11 December. This may wither from benign neglect. In case it doesn't, post again with new diffs and I'll follow up on your warnings with a block. Durova 04:05, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

Actually there were more edits on the newer name, but they appear to have been rolled back or something. (There were two edits each to create the now-deleted articles, if I recall correctly, and one more today to recreate one of them.) The recreated article has been salted, and the other one has not made a return appearance. I'll let you know if anything else happens. Thanks! Karen | Talk | contribs 04:44, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

User:Media anthro and User:Squeakbox

I've had a user come to the mulatto board making constant changes. When I left him a personal note on his user talk, he responded to me on his own talk page. The only way I knew he did that was I went back to explain another edit I did. I told him that if he needed to leave me a message he needed to leave it for me on MY page, not his. He finally figured it out and posted a message on my page saying something about he would block me because he was an edittor. He's a new user and in no way was I vandalising, he was. I told him I would report him for both vandalism and harassment because there was nothing to show he was an editor. Then some guy named User:Squeakbox contacted me saying that administrators would block me if I reported User:Media anthro saying he wasn't an editor because he really was. Does this sound fishy to you?

Please provide page diffs and sign your request. Durova 04:07, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

Imgi12 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Candyonashell has consistently vandalized the Satish Mohan page. This has continued after I requested that he/she stop on his/her talk page. This is the only page that the user has "edited." Vandalisms ahve included potentially libelous unverifiable information, and loaded terminology. --Cjs56 03:47, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

This user is vandalizing pages related to homosexuality, including the homosexuality article itself and the Family Pride article, injecting POV comments and pejorative insults, user is degrading article quality by weasel wording and referencing extremist groups, referring to them as "conservative".

--Izanbardprince 01:59, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

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

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 Alex Stanek 999 (talk · contribs), Bachey (talk · contribs), and Akbarc (talk · contribs)

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 --WillMcC 14:48, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Report to WP:SSP per their requirements. We do other types of investigations here. They handle suspected sockpuppets. Durova 04:03, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

E.Shubee (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

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 user 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 disrupting wikipedia to make your point. His adoptive editor recently un-adpoted him (Dispute page), 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, Perspicacious (talk · contribs). 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:

• The_Hybrid/Dispute
• .
• User_talk:The_Hybrid
• MyNameIsNotBob
• Ansell
• Notice Board
• Durova
• Fermion see re: Criticism of the Seventh-day Adventist Church and Question sections
• User_talk:PaulTaylor7

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

Just to update, there have been more complains see here and here. I'm not sure what else to do besides bringing this to your attention. --Maniwar (talk) 23:54, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

1 month block issued. Durova 00:08, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

To add my input, this user has shown absolutely no sign of relenting. Even while blocked, he continues to make accusations and attacks against not only the editors who registered repeated complaints, but also the editor who tried to adopt him, and now the administrator who imposed the block. Every attempt to deal reasonably with this individual has resulted in utter failure, as he tends to compulsively blame and demean others who disagree with him, often resorting to misrepresenting them on numerous Misplaced Pages pages in attempts to prove his position. Hours and days have been wasted in dealing with his individual's numerous disruptive contributions, and his presence has become a significant drain on both the human and electronic resources of this community. Thank you for your time. Zahakiel 05:49, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

The thread at his talk page has grown rather long. As I stated in the block notice, Misplaced Pages:Disruptive editing is recommended reading and this editor is risking a community siteban. Durova 04:58, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

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

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 Laguna Beach: The Real Orange County. 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 User:Dina. 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: .

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

Genuine vandalism here, but no activity in nearly a week. I would have blocked if I had read this sooner. Report again if problems resume. Durova 04:02, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

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

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: Antifascistisk aktion, Swedish Anarcho-syndicalist Youth Federation, Anti-Fascist Action and Superpower Classic. I don't really know what to do to stop him. Jobjörn (Talk ° contribs) 11:10, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Only one edit since 9 December. Post again with page diffs if problems resume. Durova 04:09, 16 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)

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

Jobjörn is constantly involved in removing NPOV edits on articles such as Swedish Anarcho-syndicalist Youth Federation and Invisible Party. Even though proper sources are provided as per WP:REF 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 Christian Democracy as "retaliation". Itake 12:02, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

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

Nadia Kittel works on themes around the Dresden article and the former GDR. He therefore uploaded a couple of images that break copyrights. He reverts deletion of this images from articles . Further he is destroying articles with a dump of data . He is neither justifying his changes nor naming his sources nor minding that he overwrites referenced data. He breakes communication down by just deleting all messages on his talk page . His changes are all without comment or justification. Geo-Loge 17:07, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Avoidant vandalism Geo-Loge 17:20, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

I have left a note for Nadia and for Geo-Loge. Xiong Chiamiov :: contact :: 03:43, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

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

This person has been constantly editing The Sword and removing any reference to metal, even after it has been cited. He refuses to engage in any discussion, whether on his talk page or on The Sword talk page. He has also gone to numerous other pages, such as List of doom metal bands and 2006 in metal and removes any mention of The Sword. He also operates under the IP 66.90.137.157. 100% of his edits are to The Sword, Age of Winters (an album page) or deleting mention of The Sword on another page. Both talk pages (user's and IP's) have been warned. Olliegrind 03:45, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Under investigation

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)

User is still editing in a broken fashion. It's hard to tell if his additions are in good-faith, but they are questionable and without sources unverifiable, and they are full of spelling and grammatical errors, etc. I have advised him about this on his talk page. Even if this user is acting in good faith, he may be doing more harm than good. —Centrx→talk • 13:24, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

New Year's Resolution

Can someone check if the comments on the talk page are vandalism or a "same to you with tomatoes" exchange (and remove). Jackiespeel 17:57, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

See also

• /Archives
• Misplaced Pages:Long term abuse
• Misplaced Pages:Vandalism contains information about vandalism, antivandalism methods and tools, and links to other relevant pages.
• Meta:Finding network abuse contacts