Wikibooks:Reading room/Administrative Assistance/Archives/2009/December

IP range issue...
Over the past two nights (my time), Muggles' Guide to Harry Potter has been attacked by petty vandals all originating in a single address range, 89.207.208.1 - 15. The nature of the attacks leads me to believe that this is a middle or high school, and we are being randomly edited by students. Spot checking of the edits done by people in this range reveals no useful edits at all, and several vandalism blocks over the past two or three years. I would like to request that these addresses be blocked from editing, but not account creation; if someone wants to do useful work, they should be able to if they are willing to identify themselves. Chazz (talk) 16:08, 1 December 2009 (UTC)


 * The whole 89.207.208.0/24 network is owned by one YHGfL Foundation in the UK. A /28 block may not be sufficient. -- Adrignola talk contribs 17:38, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
 * That's a school network. They claim the CIDR is /21, but I calculated it as a /24. I'll block the smaller range - let us know if you get bad edits from outside that as well, and we'll expand it to the /21. &mdash; Mike.lifeguard &#124; talk 23:51, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Page advertising
There have been several users that have had to be blocked infinitely by myself and others for creating pages that were a facade for advertising a link to various websites. I'd like to request a checkuser action be performed to determine if an IP range block will be effective in stopping this pattern. The users that I know of acting in this fashion include: -- Adrignola talk contribs 13:08, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
 * User:Raja.ccs (deleted contribs)
 * User:Cashgiftingmentor (deleted contribs)
 * User:Jack4673 (deleted contribs)
 * User:Loveforever199 (deleted contribs)
 * User:Residualincomebusiness (deleted contribs)
 * The similar content of the pages suggests a single source of the edits... I'd say circumstantial evidence supports a CU check to confirm and then allow a block. Unusual? Quite TalkQu 17:19, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
 * There are at least 3 IPs of different ranges, and at least 2 terminals being used. I'll poke around some more in a few hours, but it doesn't look good. -- SB_Johnny  talk 18:26, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Blocked the IPs, found more of these accounts doing the same thing on commons so please keep us informed if you see a similar pattern. -- SB_Johnny  talk 19:27, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

Advertising www.puretravel.com
An anonymous user has been inserting link spam directing readers to a travel web site. (see Vietnam/Introduction_to_Vietnam & Talk:Vietnam/Introduction_to_Vietnam) Can this site be blacklisted? Recent Runes (talk) 12:15, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
 * [[Image:Yes_check.svg|15px| ]] Done -- Adrignola talk contribs 13:07, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

Uploader Right
I guess then we need to do some or all of the following:


 * 1) Agree and create a policy page (uploader is a very basic start I've made)
 * 2) Agree how we will grant the uploader right... Is it like Editor (any Admin can make a judgement call) or after a full consensus debate at WB:RFP?
 * 3) Work out where contributers will request an upload... I'd prefer a page like WB:RFI rather than just a general "put a request in the reading room, but it's up for debate
 * 4) Decide what we are going to do as a policy with all the existing free content. I know some people have been moving it to Commons anyway, but is this a "policy" that we'll target moving it all. We'll inevitably create a whole load of image deletions by moving stuff and / or doing a fair use review as there's loads of stuff with incomplete data..

Do we want a project page somewhere to work on this (maybe the discussion page of Wikibooks talk:Uploader?

'Unusual? Quite' TalkQu 21:59, 25 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Debate has moved to the "policy" talk page (thanks for fixing the link, hopeless on my part!) Unusual? Quite TalkQu 23:25, 25 December 2009 (UTC)