Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism
Appearance
Report active, obvious, and persistent vandals and spammers here. |
---|
Before reporting, read the spam and vandalism pages, as well as the AIV guide. To submit, edit this page and follow the instructions at the top of the "User-reported" section. For other issues, file a request for administrator attention. Important!
|
This page was last updated at 22:17 on 1 September 2024 (UTC).
if it is out of date.
This page has an administrative backlog that requires the attention of willing administrators. Please replace this notice with {{no admin backlog}} when the backlog is cleared. |
Alerts
User-reported
- Nissae Isen's Man (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) - Repeatedly adding unsourced or poorly sourced information, some of it intentionally inaccurate: [1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6], [7], [8]. Says he will continue doing so despite policy and many warnings: [9] Cresix (talk) 03:34, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
Question: Would it be possible to get a diff of the edit in which the user in question actually states any of these edits are intentionally inaccurate? This seems like tendentious editing, but not so much like vandalism. - Vianello (Talk) 03:54, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
- He will not acknoweldge that they are intentionally inaccurate. But look at this edit about a very famous living person (Taylor Swift) albeit not in an article, but nonetheless false claim about a living person: [10]]. That's not the only intentional inaccuracy, but it's the easiest one to refute. Even if the intentional inaccuracies are overlooked, look at the pattern of reverting despite warning after warning after warning, and then saying he intends to continue doing so. How long does this have to go on before it becomes blockable? He has been given multiple final warnings. Cresix (talk) 04:03, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
- 74.192.212.231 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) - On Taylor Martinez (diff); vandalism after final warning. keeps on adding obvious false information. CutOffTies (talk) 04:02, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
Edits are not vandalism. Please ensure recent edits constitute vandalism before re-reporting. Does not look so obvious to me, in fact the user even tried to add references at one point [11]. I protected the page for 3 days for edit warring/content dispute. -- Ϫ 04:49, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
- Sb.ratakonda (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) - vandalism after final warning. speedy removal after final warning. WuhWuzDat 04:39, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
No vandalism since final warning. Re-report if this user resumes vandalising. Their final removal of the template was actually simultaneous with the final warning, and they have not removed it since. They have now placed the "hang on" template on their article and so a block will not be needed. They finally get it --Diannaa (Talk) 05:00, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
- 97.102.153.253 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) - Excessive vandalism.Sentinel R (talk) 04:50, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
Warned user. - gave a final warning. Also - user has not edited in 1 hour. 7 05:29, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
- Yellowseahorse (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) - On Aren B; vandalism after final warning. Editor continues to removed CSDs from article after final warning. ttonyb (talk) 06:16, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
- AlexiusHoratius (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) - account is being used only for promotional purposes Ak169808 (talk) 06:35, 22 November 2010 (UTC)