Jump to content

Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Predator106 (talk | contribs) at 22:20, 15 September 2008 (User-reported). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.


    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 10:07 on 14 October 2024 (UTC). Purge the cache of this page if it is out of date.



    Alerts

    User-reported

    • My own opinion: don't block yet. Not really vandalism; some of the edits seem helpful, some seem harmless, some seem a little poorly thought thru, and some harmful. Big problem is lack of communication. Will leave a message on their talk page. Leaving this here for now in case another admin disagrees; and I can definitely see why this is annoying to other editors. --barneca (talk) 21:44, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • Derpadave69 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) Clearly intentional vandalism. Replacing keywords with terms, while not demeaning in their normal sense, when placed into said context makes them so. I know this person personally, he is 16, and sees Wikipedia merely as a place to spread more vandalism, and abuse the given freedoms. He will not stop, I know it won't help to warn him, so hopefully you will heed my warning(before he further harms articles). Please keep this anonymous as this is a friend of mine, so I do not want him to know who I am, but I hold Wikipedia's validity in a higher regard.Predator106 (talk) 22:20, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]