Wikipedia talk:Long-term abuse/Archive 2

message: lots of random (it seems) pages (see pendulum for instance) sorry , don't know how to add an internal link 
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Pendulum&diff=prev&oldid=87776620
:Of all people! That IP happens to be registered to West Point! I have noted it on the talk page for future follow up. 68.39.174.238 21:46, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  129.29.227.4 

message: Petty vandalism on a large number of pages.
:Blocked long ago as a sockpuppet of a known troll. 68.39.174.238 18:49, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  JackandJune 

message: These vandals keep on comming back wikipedia.  If they keep on vandalsing wikipedia could they also vandalise this page and it's subpages too? I think this page and it's subpages should semi-protected.--Scott3 02:39, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Semiprotection isn't (supposed to be) preventative. 68.39.174.238 10:58, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Shouldn't this page be semi-protected 

message: Many IPs I've seen vandalise with a specific pattern of replacing entire pages (Talk and User/User talk namespaces too) with thousands of copies of the phrase '.F.U.C.K...S.H.I.T...C.U.N.T...P.O.O...A.S.S...B.I.T.C.H.!.!.!.!...'. They also fill the edit summary with the same, making me think it's a vandal bot just filling all text fields with the phrase. Where should this be listed? —Vanderdecken∴ ∫ξφ 12:37, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Do they use accounts, or IP addresses? If they use accounts, do they follow a common naming pattern? If IPs, are they all from a similar range? The same country? Or do they use open proxies? Do they show particular prediliction with certain pages or people? Depending on the answers, you can probably cast that information into a understandable and usefull section here. 68.39.174.238 17:23, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: They're part of the multitude of aol vandals that hit random pages.  Wether or not they are the same user or multiple ones is unknown. Kevin_b_er 00:29, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd say add it under "Unique entities" if you want to... 68.39.174.238 09:37, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  What should I do? 

message: Are they supposed to be added to the top or bottom of their respective sections? There is no indication on the page of which is correct, and many people seem to be confused as to which is correct, as many of the entries are not in any chronological order.--The Count of Monte Cristo Parley 21:49, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I have placed a note requesting that they be added at the bottom for now.--The Count of Monte Cristo Parley 09:12, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Good enough. Hopefully people (myself included) will notice! 68.39.174.238 16:42, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  About adding new entries to this page 

message: Could it be possible for Stephan Colbert to have a subpage?  He might not be vandalsing it again but there going to people trying make the edits he made on the show and he is a well known vandal.--Scott3 01:03, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You can try and create one, but since the actuall identity is known, BLP, libel and other policies will come into play. 68.39.174.238 09:38, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Stephen Colbert]] 

message: I am thinking of adding Outoftuneviolin to this page. (their socks repeatedly vandalize Violin and Evolution by blanking pages and replacing them with "outoftuneviolin was here" or "evolutionism sucks") Comments? -- FrostytheSnowman ('sup?) 23:00, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Good entry! 68.39.174.238 14:15, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

text: Agreed I just found one of his sock puppets User:Outoftunebassguitar.  I was comming here to do that.--Scott3 03:04, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[User:Outoftuneviolin|Outoftuneviolin]] 

message: Note: I moved HurricaneCraze32's comments, below, from the main project page because it did not seem like the appropriate spot to post them, as per "Don't add an entry here requesting some account be blocked."  I know nothing about the conflict in question, but User:SPUI does not seem to be blocked at the moment, so it didn't seem as though the project page was the right spot.  HurricaneCraze32 says he has been shuttled around various pages looking for a place to air his grievances, so even if this isn't the appropriate spot for his comments, someone here can direct him in the right direction.  Thanks.  - Tapir Terrific 00:14, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes I looked his page he looks like a good entry.  But:
*Has he been banned permanently
*Can you give evidence of this happening
**Like the users leaving wiped would be good since you couldn't find it with his contributions--Scott3 02:34, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

text: I've seen flashes in the distance over this user, I'd suggest looking at some of the various user organizations around here related to dispute resolution. If you want to, you can take out an WP:RFC, however that can be extremely trying on the nerves of all involved. If you're content to wait it out, most true problem users will end up getting themselves thrown out given the time. 68.39.174.238 06:17, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  User Problem 

message: When I used to vandalize, I used to check the list of blocked users very often to see what the admins thought of my trolling usernames, I noticed some guy using the words "Fuck Japan" in (presumably) his username over and over. I also published my story and will be posting my list of sockpuppets I remember creating on my username, and then leave for a while. 4.20.1889 21:43, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: He's been banned: User:Fuck japan--Scott3 22:01, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  FuckJapan 

message: A few months ago when I decided to join the anti-vandal unit.  I reverted an edit by an I.P address.  He never made any more edits or anything until now.  He sent me some Spam.  The reason why I'm comming here is that I'm just wondering if this could a LTA vandal(with a dyamic I.P.) who goes sends the editor that reverted his edits spam or some kind of personal  attack which seems to be commmon with LTA abuse.--Scott3 21:56, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Personally, it looks more like someone trying to justify their PoV with some incivility and possibly semi-reputable source. 68.39.174.238 23:23, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Wait that the worng link here's the right one: --Scott3 00:02, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Still, that doesn't look like SPAM to me (There's no site linked or mentioned); it's just some partizan screed about the policies of a U.S. Federal politician. Anyway I've never seen a vandal who SPAMs people who revert him, but plenty of them (EG. User:Primetime, who hit up on me not that long ago) will attack reverters. 68.39.174.238 01:48, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Who is this? 

message: A number of IPs are vandalizing pages, seemingly throughout Wikipedia, by replacing the entire article text with variations on the following phrases: '.C.U.N.T.....F.U.C.K...S.H.I.T......A.S.S...P.O.O...' etc. This type of thing also is placed in the edit comments field, or the comments which show up when you click on "History". Is this possibly a bot or other automated program, or a prolific user with too much time on his hands? What's going on with this? It seems to be all over the place, or variations of it. Rm104 08:42, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vulgar Vandal 

message: Does Outoftuneviolin need his own subpage now? He has over 89 suspected/confirmed sockpuppets of himself. (See :category:Wikipedia sockpuppets of Outoftuneviolin and :Category:Suspected Wikipedia sockpuppets of Outoftuneviolin) -- FrostytheSnowman ('sup?) 14:39, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You know I was considering putting Outoftueviolin and the blashphemy guy into the same userpage.  They are very similar but it's not confirmed that there both the same person so it might be a good idea to put them in the same subpage.--Scott3 00:45, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

text: Yes.--Scott3 02:11, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

text: Waitwaitwait... you created the page and then put it up for deletion?! 68.39.174.238 17:06, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

text: If that pages does get deleted, you can expect someone else who runs across them to re-add the info to this page. 68.39.174.238 01:38, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Does Outoftuneviolin need a subpage? 

message: Please review User:Durova/Complex vandalism at Joan of Arc. After a Wikibreak of several months I returned to discover that a persistent vandal had returned (suspected activity spans nearly two years). Unsure whether this (or some version thereof) is appropriate for a Long term abuse entry. Please advise. Durova 04:40, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This LTA entry has been removed twice by the Rm104 (talk • contribs • [ page moves] • block user • [ block log]) and IdlP (talk • contribs • [ page moves] • block user • [ block log]). --   Netsnipe  (Talk)  09:27, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This editor's notice to my talk page was also deleted by QFMC. Durova 13:21, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requesting a review 

message: I don't think this the right place to do this but after seeing this disscussion I think it would be good idea to temproally restore the vandal subpages untill we can create a new policy on creating vandal subpages and debating WP:DENY---Scott3 Talk Contributions  Count: 950+  03:32, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  WP:LTA subpages 

message: I added the vandal subpage deletion debate to RfC---Scott3 Talk Contributions  Count: 950+  22:47, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Style issues]] 

message: He's not gonna bother Wikipedia anymore. Trust me ;).--Richard 16:51, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  RuneScape vandal 

message: To be honest, i really have to get to bed, but I need to report this vandal. i don't have time to read over the page tonight, since i need to sleep, but can someone else take care of this for me?
IP is 212.219.248.236 (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&target=212.219.248.236)
Thanks all
SLATE 05:46, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ahh heck! ANOTHER school IP! I'll try and add it soon, or you can after you get some sleep ;D. 68.39.174.238 04:44, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  persistent vandal 

message: I know his subpage has been deleted but I don't see his entry on WP:LTA.  I don't know why he's not on there so I'm going to put him back in.---Scott3 Talk Contributions  Count: 950+  22:49, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I re-added the entry, but it was later trimmed down severely, and finally (I think I was the responsible party) it was removed again. 68.39.174.238 00:18, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Where is outoftunedviolin entry? 

message: Every one of his edits is vandalism(I've checked all of them), and he hasn't vandalized enough in a short period of time to get himself blocked, but has gotten a final warning twice.  Should I put him on the Long Term Abuse list?--Vercalos 03:24, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That dude is an extremely minor vandal, as they go. Generally speaking, a "long term" vandal has used both IPs and user accounts, the latter of which are blocked instinctively and indefinately. Also, IP addresses are rarely added to the list solo unless they belong to some sort of "shared user" facility (Schools, libraries, public buildings) and so can't be blocked for long terms. 68.39.174.238 02:18, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Does this user qualify? 

message: ...let's not edit war... 68.39.174.238 21:17, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Please... 

message: If you check User:192.87.54.3's editing history, you see nothing BUT vandalism. It's been going on for a lot of months and I've reversed their vandalism on XTC a month ago. If you go to their talk page you'll see a lot of warnings, even some from the beginning of 2006. I suggest a perm ban. 89.98.95.206 13:01, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Unless it's an open proxy (And it doesn't seem to be), generally IPs aren't blocked indefinitely. I suggest you go to WP:ABREP and see if they can deal with this dude. 68.39.174.238 09:06, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  192.87.54.3 

message: Why are some of the Don't's in the Explanation section in bold while others are in italics?  Are the bold don't's things we especially should not do?  Anyone mind if I make them all bold so they match?  Sorry for nitpicking. delldot | talk 20:14, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You are correct in that they're supposed to be different levels of emphasis. You can standardize them if you wish. 68.39.174.238 16:54, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Kind of trivial but...

message: As part of the 2010 revamping, I've cleaned out the reports listed here and moved any useful ones to the new centralized archive. All discussions should be made on the main project talk page. As a side note, all but one of the reports in this archive were legitimate... Reports of single incidents of vandalism were found in the archive and have not been moved to the new archive. There was also a legitimate user listed in there, but I've removed his entry. However, if anyone is interested, the old archive is still available through the page history. Netalarmtalk 05:44, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Centralized archiving