Wiktionary:Vandalism in progress

Definition from Wiktionary, the free dictionary
Jump to: navigation, search

This page is intended to get administrator attention quickly when dealing with current instances of vandalism. List new alerts at the top of the list in the following manner:

* {{vandal|username or IP}} Brief reason why, preferably a link to a vandalized page. ~~~~

Don’t include the User: prefix in the template!

Please do not add cases older than two to three hours. Denied requests will have an explanation added here, and be kept for one to seven days before being removed. Thank you for helping us keep an organized Wiktionary!

Admins: Please remove performed blocks.

New alerts[edit]

  • 2607:FB90:170C:E62D:0:27:FE72:5B01 (talkcontribswhoisdeleted contribsnukeedit filter logblockblock logactive blocksglobal blocks) - screwing with currency entries —suzukaze (tc) 00:09, 29 December 2015 (UTC)
    Blocked and reverted. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 00:14, 29 December 2015 (UTC)
    This is our animal noises vandal on their T-Mobile account (same as Renard's report, above), trying to find a subject area that no one is patrolling. I expanded your single block to a range block and extended it to a month, and did the same with the IP of theirs that you blocked on Friday. In general, blocking a single IP v.6 is a waste of time if they know what they're doing, since most accounts are allocated a minimum of a 63-bit address range. This person has 64 bits of address range on their fixed IP account, and used that extra bit to evade my first range block, so it's a good idea to not leave any holes. Of course, we can't just block T-Mobile for all of Illinois, so we'll have to content ourselves with slowing them down and doing what we can to suck all the fun out of their game. Chuck Entz (talk) 06:24, 29 December 2015 (UTC)
    I didn't realise this was a recurring vandal. I think most blockees, even IPv6 blockees, don't actively try to evade their blocks, but this is clearly a different sort of vandal. Incidentally, very few distinct anons actually edit Wiktionary; we could probably give out longer and wider blocks to IPs in general with negligible collateral damage. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 06:32, 29 December 2015 (UTC)
    I have yet to see almost any non-vandal edits from IPv6 addresses. Not sure why that is. Equinox 08:51, 29 December 2015 (UTC)
    They're still relatively rare, so the bad ones stand out in one's memory I see innocuous ones all the time. As for collateral damage: if you set the block to apply to logged-in users, you will affect people who never edit anonymously. But we do get useful anonymous edits, especially translations. Chuck Entz (talk) 15:12, 29 December 2015 (UTC)
    You can block the /65 for this address to try and get his whole user-block. - TheDaveRoss 15:24, 29 December 2015 (UTC)
    2607:FB90:26E:CF9C:0:4:8981:F501 (talkcontribswhoisdeleted contribsnukeedit filter logblockblock logactive blocksglobal blocks) has returned —suzukaze (tc) 01:50, 30 December 2015 (UTC)
    And has been again blocked and reverted. I'm sure it takes less time to do that than it takes for them make the edits in the first place. Annoying, but trivial. Chuck Entz (talk) 03:16, 30 December 2015 (UTC)
  • One day wasn't enough for 76.167.232.59 (talkcontribswhoisdeleted contribsnukeedit filter logblockblock logactive blocksglobal blocks)suzukaze (tc) 05:19, 2 January 2016 (UTC)
    • 2606:6000:CA80:1600:3059:D216:9370:F9B3 (talkcontribswhoisdeleted contribsnukeedit filter logblockblock logactive blocksglobal blocks) may be the same person —suzukaze (tc) 07:08, 15 January 2016 (UTC)
      • I had already blocked them before I saw this. And yes, it's the same person. I suspect they're at least partly trying to make a political statement- substituting alternative romanizations such as w:Tongyong Pinyin for communist Hanyu Pinyin. At any rate, I have yet to see one of their edits that didn't have to be reverted, so I guess we'll have to start blocking them on sight. Chuck Entz (talk) 08:05, 15 January 2016 (UTC)