Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Current issues and requests archive 25
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Peter Pan
I'm really confused. I found an article called Peter Pan with some comments about being gay and Michael Jackson etc etc. I changed it to be more correct and a bot arrived and changed it back to the silly version. And gave me a warning for vandalism!! Help please? Victuallers (talk) 17:12, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
- I think it was a mistake by the bot. Don't worry. Barras (talk) 17:17, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
- I'm looking into the exact rule that was triggered, but certainly the >50 edits has something to do with it. Sorry for the problem, could you possibly file a False-Positive Report? Thanks, Goblin 19:39, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
Done --Barras (talk) 19:44, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
- I'm looking into the exact rule that was triggered, but certainly the >50 edits has something to do with it. Sorry for the problem, could you possibly file a False-Positive Report? Thanks, Goblin 19:39, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
More Disney Vandal/Bambifan101
I'd unintentionally posted to an archived discussion regarding this little menace, so I thought I'd do it right. :) He was just booted off of English yet again and I have to tell you, I am sick to death of this individual. English has a long-term vandal of nearly five years nicknamed "MascotGuy." His idiosyncracies point toward autism. He's generally benign, but a pain nonetheless. Bambifan101, on the other hand, may be in serious need of professional help if he's for real. I remember when I was 14 and you can bet your bottom dollar that I wouldn't have been writing about the Teletubbies on a wiki site if either had been around at the time. Nor would I keep coming back to a place I wasn't wanted. I take hints well. This screwball does not. Most of his anon edits resolve back to Bell South in Atlanta. What are the steps to be taken for a formal complaint to the IP for TOS violations and abuse? --PMDrive1061 (talk) 20:14, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
- We can add User:Idontlikeu to the list. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 04:50, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
- Hello there - I am not a doctor, so I am not qualified to diagnose health issues of a patient I have never seen, based on their behaviour on a community website. Also, I have no idea about the terms of service of BellSouth (or any other ISP). I can therefore neither tell you whether this user violates these terms of service, nor how to complain to the ISP; I am fairly sure though that the terms of service specify how to complain to the ISP. As the admin team we are committed to protecting this Wikipedia, we are not interested in the health issues certain users might have. Please also note that there are well-established scientific journals that publish articles about the Teletubbies, so writing about them is nothing to be ashamed of:
- Sex-Roles Stereotypes in TV Programs Aimed at the Preschools Audience KA Powell et al. Women and Language, Vol 25, Issue 2; Fall 2002.
- Bound together: Signs and Features in Multimedia Content Representation E. Hartley - COSIGN 2004
- Those are just two scientific articles on the teletubbies, I am sure there are many more. In short, I currently do not see how the admin team can help you (beyond what we already do). --Eptalon (talk) 09:33, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
- Hello there - I am not a doctor, so I am not qualified to diagnose health issues of a patient I have never seen, based on their behaviour on a community website. Also, I have no idea about the terms of service of BellSouth (or any other ISP). I can therefore neither tell you whether this user violates these terms of service, nor how to complain to the ISP; I am fairly sure though that the terms of service specify how to complain to the ISP. As the admin team we are committed to protecting this Wikipedia, we are not interested in the health issues certain users might have. Please also note that there are well-established scientific journals that publish articles about the Teletubbies, so writing about them is nothing to be ashamed of:
I'm not a doctor either, but I don't believe it takes one to see that we're dealing with a really bizarre individual. If he is in fact a fourteen-year-old boy, his interests/obsessions/tantrums point to a mental age less than half that in my opinion. He just happens to be good with computers or he has someone who knows how to shift proxies enabling him. The other likely scenario is that we're dealing with a fully aware adolescent troll who's getting his yuks whenever he logs on and pretends to be this person. I'm an administrator at English and I have to deal with him all the time. I may have frightened him off to some degree and he's coming here instead. Sadly, you may be right about doing all you can. If his proxies keep shifting and he's obsessed with editing these sites, there really isn't much either of us can do beyond playing "Whack-A-Bambi." In the meantime, I'm working on building my edit count here so that I can apply for adminship and help out. Good luck and I'll keep on patrolling for him over here. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 17:07, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
- Adminship is not based on edit count, nor any other set factors. Everyone has their own reasons to type the words "support" or "oppose". —MC8 (b · t) 22:28, Monday May 18 2009 (UTC) (I Protest!)
My name is the master of all of the 6's

Per WP:BOLD I have indef-blocked this account: 0 edits to articles, disrupting RFA with frivolous requests, making contentious changes to templates, a clear and obvious sockpuppet/reincarnation, here to cause trouble. He's now posting his password. I thought it best to nip this in the bud before it got beyond silly. Majorly talk 21:17, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
- +1, I was just going to do the same. --M7 (talk) 21:18, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
- Endorse, good call. PeterSymonds (talk) 21:19, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
- Endorse Block Good call, Majorly. I could tell this user was not here to help contribute to an encyclopedia. Meetare Shappy Cunkelfratz! 21:20, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
- Agreed. Also, I've deleted out the diffs with his password (the initial posting, the revert, and the undo/re-revert). EVula // talk // ☯ // 21:20, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
- User:MNITMOAOT6 has also been blocked, per the same reasons. --M7 (talk) 21:22, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
- I agree with the block. I was thinking about the same. Barras (talk) 21:25, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
- Agree with block, but how did EVula delete the diffs? Griffinofwales (talk) 21:48, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
- Using the delete button, I reckon. Majorly talk 21:49, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
- I thought only oversighters could do that, and when I checked 30 minutes ago, there weren't any oversighters on this project. Griffinofwales (talk) 21:52, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
- No, selective deletion can be preformed by any admin. –Juliancolton | Talk 21:53, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
- Depends what you mean by selective deletion. Revision delete can only be used by oversighters (who have a (show/hide)) by logs and diffs. What EVula did was delete the page, and then use tick boxes on the undelete form to selectively restore the page without the offending revisions. The diffs are still available to sysops using undelete too. Best, PeterSymonds (talk) 21:56, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks for explaining. Griffinofwales (talk) 02:45, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
- Depends what you mean by selective deletion. Revision delete can only be used by oversighters (who have a (show/hide)) by logs and diffs. What EVula did was delete the page, and then use tick boxes on the undelete form to selectively restore the page without the offending revisions. The diffs are still available to sysops using undelete too. Best, PeterSymonds (talk) 21:56, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
- No, selective deletion can be preformed by any admin. –Juliancolton | Talk 21:53, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
- There is no use to oversight a password to a blocked account <EG> --M7 (talk) 21:54, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
- Yes, but there's no use to leaving the password there in the history, either. I erred on the side of caution, which is the appropriate response in situations such as this. EVula // talk // ☯ // 22:08, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
- I truly appreciated you fast selective deletion. I was just saying that IMHO there's no need for a steward to oversight that data. --M7 (talk) 22:10, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
- Er, I totally knew that. I was just, uh... testing you. Yeah, that's it, testing you. And you totally passed! Congratulations. *cough* EVula // talk // ☯ // 22:16, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
- Endorse. –Juliancolton | Talk 21:53, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
- Endorse. — neuro(talk) 02:06, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
- I agree. Block endorsed. — RyanCross (talk) 02:25, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
- Endorse, purely just a disruptive troll.-- Tdxiang 01:18, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
- (NA)endorse. —MC8 (b · t) 07:33, Friday May 22 2009 (UTC) (I ♥ Kennedy)
Pakistan topics
I've recently blocked (for two weeks) two IPs used by the Pakistan POV editor for POV pushes. I don't know what is happening regarding the anon editing debate but I'd like to go around and six month or indef semi-pp all the Pakistan articles I can locate in the mean time. Any objections? fr33kman talk 02:00, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
- Two IPs could probably mean they're both the same people working from a proxy. I suggest banning the proxy. --<font=Comic Sans MS>S3CR3T (tell me a secret.) 02:13, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
- No, not proxies. Both IPs are in the same /24 range (range block might help) and are UK O2 addresses (probably a 3G mobile Internet user). We've had a long history of this individual causing issues and POV pushing in India/Pakistan topics; he is very well known to the admins here. fr33kman talk 02:26, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
- 82.132.136.157 (talk · contribs) seems to be part of the Pakistan Clan. --<font=Comic Sans MS>S3CR3T (tell me a secret.) 01:56, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
- Yes, very much so. We tend to believe it is a single person doing these edits; therefore it's a block on sight issue. Even though, many edits do make it into the encyclopedia; and some edits are probably useful. The main issue seWP has with this editor is the constant POV pushing that takes place. They seem to be a Briton of Pakistan heritage who has a point to push against India, mostly regarding Kashmir topics. A long term solution is continually being discussed. For future reference, I'd advise you not to welcome anonymous editors of Pakistan/India/Kashmir topics unless 100% sure that it is appropriate. Don't worry about the recent welcome you made, however; it takes a while to see this person's pattern. Hope this helps! :-) fr33kman talk 02:19, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
- 82.132.136.157 (talk · contribs) seems to be part of the Pakistan Clan. --<font=Comic Sans MS>S3CR3T (tell me a secret.) 01:56, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
- No, not proxies. Both IPs are in the same /24 range (range block might help) and are UK O2 addresses (probably a 3G mobile Internet user). We've had a long history of this individual causing issues and POV pushing in India/Pakistan topics; he is very well known to the admins here. fr33kman talk 02:26, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
(unindent) OK, I was a bit confused at this block at first. I thought the users edits were quite useful, but some of them were copy-pastes from enWP (which I understand is against the rules too). Anyway, thanks for the help! :D --<font=Comic Sans MS>S3CR3T (tell me a secret.) 02:23, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
- You're welcome. It takes us all a bit of time to see patterns sometimes. I know I was a tad hesitant with this user myself until I got to grips with exactly what was going on. He can be quite subtle at times. Now, I make it my business to actively seek him out and stop his actions (as do many others here). It's nice to know you really care about the project, and it's editors! :-) fr33kman talk 02:36, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
- Oh, just as a note: Most of the topics surrounding Pakistan, India and Bangladesh, including the conflicts these countries went through are heavily edited by the user. As far as I can tell this user has been one of a very select few (read 2-3) to edit such topics in perhaps the last six months. I write this just as a note: not all the contributions of this user are bad, it is just likely there will be a (usually pro-Pakistan) POV in their edits. --Eptalon (talk) 10:23, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
- Could we semi-protect every article that has either "Pakistan-* relations" or "* - Pakistan relations"? It would certainly stop a lot of his edits? — This signed comment was added by Kennedy (talk • changes). (I ♥ MC8) 10:25, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
- Too much work to be done, and this also prevents other anons from making (useful) edits. Blocking would be slightly easier. Chenzw Talk 10:30, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
- Except that doesn't seem to be working so well. Perhaps we could start salting them as we delete them? I doubt any IP has edited them in good faith yet, and don't see it happening any time soon. — This signed comment was added by Kennedy (talk • changes). (I ♥ MC8) 10:37, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
- Could the abuse filter be able to deal with this? Chenzw Talk 10:40, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
- (ec) @Chenzw: The IPs keep changing. @All: I'd like to try and "encourage" him/her to become a named editor so that his actions are easier to track; hence why I'd like to pp the articles. I know it's a lot of work, but I'm willing to do it. It's very hard for people to keep track of what's going on with these topics and this editor because they do make some very good edits; just lots of POV pushy edits also. I've tried to engage in a dialog, but frankly I don't think they care to talk with us. It's sad really because they could really help us out by editing an area practically no one else edits. Right now, though, more POV edits get through than get caught. fr33kman talk 10:42, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
- Except that doesn't seem to be working so well. Perhaps we could start salting them as we delete them? I doubt any IP has edited them in good faith yet, and don't see it happening any time soon. — This signed comment was added by Kennedy (talk • changes). (I ♥ MC8) 10:37, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
- Too much work to be done, and this also prevents other anons from making (useful) edits. Blocking would be slightly easier. Chenzw Talk 10:30, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
- Could we semi-protect every article that has either "Pakistan-* relations" or "* - Pakistan relations"? It would certainly stop a lot of his edits? — This signed comment was added by Kennedy (talk • changes). (I ♥ MC8) 10:25, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
- Oh, just as a note: Most of the topics surrounding Pakistan, India and Bangladesh, including the conflicts these countries went through are heavily edited by the user. As far as I can tell this user has been one of a very select few (read 2-3) to edit such topics in perhaps the last six months. I write this just as a note: not all the contributions of this user are bad, it is just likely there will be a (usually pro-Pakistan) POV in their edits. --Eptalon (talk) 10:23, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
Flag
I'd like to request that my flag be restored. I've had enough of a break to get back to work here. Synergy 00:16, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
- I definitely think that he should get it back. We've messed him as an admin. :-) Meetare Shappy Cunkelfratz! 00:20, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
- 200% endorse! (maybe more!) fr33kman talk 00:24, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
- Yay! Majorly talk 01:30, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
- I've no problems if you become an admin again. Barras (talk) 07:11, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
- Welcome back. — This signed comment was added by Kennedy (talk • changes). (I ♥ MC8) 07:55, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
- I've no problems if you become an admin again. Barras (talk) 07:11, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
- Yay! Majorly talk 01:30, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
- 200% endorse! (maybe more!) fr33kman talk 00:24, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
Done — This signed comment was added by Kennedy (talk • changes). (I ♥ MC8) 07:57, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
Can I get an admin to swing by Wikipedia:Copyright problems and deal with (delete) the article I posted there? Thanks. --Philosopher Let us reason together. 00:55, 27 May 2009 (UTC)