Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism

"WP:RVAN" redirects here. For information on how to respond to vandalism, see Wikipedia:Vandalism § How to respond to vandalism.

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!

1. The edits of the user must be obvious vandalism or obvious spam.
2. Except for egregious cases, the user must have been given enough warning(s).
3. The warning(s) must have been given recently and there must be reasonable grounds to believe the user(s) will further disrupt the site in the immediate future.
4. If you decide that a report should be filed place the following template at the bottom of the User-reported section:
   • * {{Vandal|Example user or IP}} Your concise reason (e.g. vandalised past 4th warning). ~~~~
5. Requests for further sanctions against a blocked user (e.g., talk page, e-mail blocks) should be made at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.
6. Reports of sockpuppetry should be made at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations unless the connection between the accounts is obvious and disruption is recent and ongoing.

This noticeboard can grow and become backlogged. Stale reports are automatically cleared by MDanielsBot after 4–8 hours with no action.

You can subscribe to a web feed of this page in either RSS or Atom format.

This page was last updated at 22:07 on 27 December 2024 (UTC). if it is out of date.

Reports

User-reported

• Pistolplay4 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) – User abuse of block evasion by River Stumpf. 123.136.111.181 (talk) 06:35, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

  I cannot tell that this is vandalism, so you may need to take this to SPI if no one else can either. Prodego ^talk 06:48, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

This noticeboard is for obvious vandals and spammers only. Consider taking this report to Sockpuppet investigations. Indeed, or you could directly contact an admin who is familiar with the case — MusikAnimal ^talk 15:41, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

• 212.97.83.228 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) – On Sega All-Stars (series): vandalism after final warning. Deliberately adding false information to articles. The1337gamer (talk) 13:05, 21 December 2015 (UTC)
• 59.92.74.217 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) – On List of Christmas dishes: vandalism after final warning. Keeps on deleting randomly. Poepkop (talk) 13:20, 21 December 2015 (UTC)
• 192.171.223.232 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) Des Moines public school IP - Long term vandalism, with no constructive edits. Request school block for a term or two. Richard Harvey (talk) 15:08, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

Insufficient recent activity to warrant a block. Katie^talk 15:33, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

• 207.35.67.26 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) – On WICY ([1]): vandalism after final warning. I guess the same as IP 74.57.17.58. see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/74.57.17.58 , both IP-addresses has ahistoryof editing Rockland_Centre. As IP 207.35.67.26 removing my warning on talk page for 74.57.17.58, and making seven edits on my talk page, trying to make it look like remarks from 2 persons. Troll? Dan Koehl (talk) 15:28, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

Not vandalism. Editor Dan Koehl was abusing his rollback feature while I was removing an edit on the WICY that was promotional POV content and not compatible with Wikipedia's Wikipedia:Five pillars. The edit was clearly advertising the radio station (which is against Wikipedia's policies) and Dan Koehl was repeatedly abusing his rollback feature to reinstate the POV content instead of writing a manual edit summary and engaging an a civil discussion. Dan Koehl must have thought that just because he is a registered editor that makes him better than an unregistered editor. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.35.67.26 (talk) 15:57, 21 December 2015 (UTC)