Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
m 1 user left. rm 202.45.119.48 (blocked 3 months by Materialscientist (AO ACB)).
→‎User-reported: not vandalism.
Line 38: Line 38:
:{{AIV|n}} I'm not sure I'd count that last edit to the user page as vandalism. [[User:Daniel Case|Daniel Case]] ([[User talk:Daniel Case|talk]]) 02:51, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
:{{AIV|n}} I'm not sure I'd count that last edit to the user page as vandalism. [[User:Daniel Case|Daniel Case]] ([[User talk:Daniel Case|talk]]) 02:51, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
::This is the edit I was reporting [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=ICarly_%28season_4%29&action=historysubmit&diff=442421226&oldid=442369745]. The user page edit came later. [[User:Geraldo Perez|Geraldo Perez]] ([[User talk:Geraldo Perez|talk]]) 03:04, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
::This is the edit I was reporting [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=ICarly_%28season_4%29&action=historysubmit&diff=442421226&oldid=442369745]. The user page edit came later. [[User:Geraldo Perez|Geraldo Perez]] ([[User talk:Geraldo Perez|talk]]) 03:04, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
:::{{AIV|nv}} These all appear to be good-faith edits to me; I'm not saying they are perfect, or that they shouldn't be reverted, but I cannot see where this users editing is vandalism, and not simply good faith but poorly guided editing. This comes off more as a noob being [[WP:BITE|bitten]] than someone trying to intentionally mess up articles just to mess them up. [[User:Jayron32|<font style="color:#000099">Jayron</font>]]'''''[[User talk:Jayron32|<font style="color:#009900">32</font>]]''''' 03:17, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

Revision as of 03:17, 1 August 2011

    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 22:56 on 20 May 2024 (UTC). Purge the cache of this page if it is out of date.




    Alerts

    Bot-reported

    User-reported

    Note: I'm not sure I'd count that last edit to the user page as vandalism. Daniel Case (talk) 02:51, 1 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    This is the edit I was reporting [1]. The user page edit came later. Geraldo Perez (talk) 03:04, 1 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    Edits are not vandalism. Please ensure recent edits constitute vandalism before re-reporting. These all appear to be good-faith edits to me; I'm not saying they are perfect, or that they shouldn't be reverted, but I cannot see where this users editing is vandalism, and not simply good faith but poorly guided editing. This comes off more as a noob being bitten than someone trying to intentionally mess up articles just to mess them up. Jayron32 03:17, 1 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]