Wikibooks:Vandalism in progress/Archive3

Tom the grate ( talk | email | contribs )
Seems he had a blast of edits a few days ago, now he seems to be back again tonight. I've reverted what he's done, but more may be coming. I think Derbeth might be blocking him now since he has been previously warned. -Matt 02:36, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
 * I gave him last chance, now he is blocked for two weeks. --Derbeth talk 07:47, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
 * He continued his nonsense editing and so now he is blocked for one month. -within focus 21:15, 13 August 2006 (UTC)]
 * I think that's a little rediculous. This account was probably created only for the purposes of vandalism, and he clearly has a propensity to repeat his vandalous behavior. Nextime, his block should last forever. --Whiteknight (talk) (projects) 00:16, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

== Dawn_Marie_Schaussen ( talk | email | contribs ) and others ==

Several counts of vanadalism. Dawn actually stopped first, but similar edits/vandalisms from other "puppets" (i think puppets anyway) have forced me to ban. Seems like a puppet account anyway. Keep a lookout for edits about "Hitler's briefs" --Dragontamer 16:06, 9 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Oh wow, I didn't know about the "autoblock" thing :-/ Anyway, thats what the string of my blocks are about. --Dragontamer 16:09, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Willy on wheels ( talk | email | contribs )
This user appears to be a sockpuppet of the notorious Wikipedia vandal Willy on Wheels! I just reverted a couple of his pagemoves. They were WOW type(Cookbook to Cookbook on Wheels). Josen 16:48, 19 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Blocked forever. Thanks for the heads-up. --Whiteknight (talk) (projects) 19:28, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
 * You're welcome. Josen

砲火 万物の霊長 ( talk | email | contribs )
Pagemove vandal, moving pages to foreign characters. --Wur-dene 19:26, 27 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Blocked, thanks. --Whiteknight (talk) (projects) 22:41, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Molcow ( talk | email | contribs )
This user replaced my user page with a &#123;{sockpuppet}} template. I've looked over his contribution history, and while i dont see anything that is blatant vandalism, i do see alot of edits that are meaningless or incorrect. He labled himself as a sockpuppet of User:Owl, and labled a series of other users (including at least one that i don't think exists) as sockpuppets as well. I haven't blocked this one yet, but I have left him a warning. I would like somebody else to look over his contributions, and see if i missed something. --Whiteknight (talk) (projects) 22:44, 27 July 2006 (UTC)


 * I blocked him for two weeks on grounds of repeat vandalism of user pages. --Whiteknight (talk) (projects) 12:00, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

B R I E F S ( talk | email | contribs )
Created attack page on User:Kernigh. --Wur-dene 11:27, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

I Got U Over ( talk | email | contribs )
Adding 'do briefs stink?' to articles. --Wur-dene 19:52, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Blocked forever, seems like an ordinary vandal account. --Derbeth talk 20:08, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Tab room ( talk | email | contribs )
Pagemove vandal adding "UP MY BUTT" to module names. SB_Johnny | talk 12:07, 10 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Blocked forever. Thanks for the heads-up. --Whiteknight (talk) (projects) 18:17, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Vandalism Wave
This morning, there has been a large wave of vandalism, including WoW style vandalism, sockpuppetry, etc. If any active admins could help clean this up, it would be appreciated. I'll post a list of offending usernames when the wave is over. check the RC and look for things like "Software Piracy!" and "PENIS PENIS", etc. --Whiteknight (talk) (projects) 13:19, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

== Sleehw no Retsehcnam ( talk | email | contribs ) == Suspected WoW sockpuppet/sleeper sockpuppet. See his userpage. --82.42.145.227 10:27, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
 * A stupid joke. --Derbeth talk 10:43, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

Wonderwang ( talk | email | contribs )
User:Wonderwang vandalized the main page, several other pages, and did some page move vandalism. All his damage has been fixed, and the vandal blocked forever, but others should be vigilant. Gentgeen 06:49, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

N!663R ( talk | email | contribs )
Several instances of vandalism and creation of new nonsense/potentially racist pages. I marked the new pages for deletion. Doctormatt 06:42, 7 October 2006 (UTC)
 * I am cleaning after him now. --Derbeth talk 07:24, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

Queen Of Spades ( talk | email | contribs )
Fifteen acts of vandalism in the span of 24 minutes. All of which were cleaned up by User:Draicone. No permanent damage that I can see. --Swift 07:02, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Blocked. --Derbeth talk 07:36, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

216.7.254.254 ( talk | email | contribs )
Alot of Vandalism of Wikibooks. Keytotime 20:31, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Blocked. -within focus 23:31, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

Aram Pitts ( talk | email | contribs )
Currently placing unpleasant graphic and vadalising pages. Final warning issued - thanks -- Herby talk thyme 10:59, 25 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Blocked by steward Suisui. --Kempm 11:04, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Good news and thanks for the help -- Herby talk thyme 11:06, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

161.132.77.15 ( talk | email | contribs )
Blanking stuff at present - had 1 warning + bv and still continuing - block would be nice! -- Herby talk thyme 14:47, 27 October 2006 (UTC)


 * I have blocked him for 1 day, because the vandalisms weren't too bad, and the vandal will probably get bored with this and go elsewhere. Thanks for the heads-up. --Whiteknight (talk) (projects) 14:51, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

81.99.90.78 ( talk | email | contribs )
Block might well be in order here - 3 warnings to bv -- Herby talk thyme 14:37, 1 November 2006 (UTC)


 * I've looked at his contributions, and while they are low-quality, i dont think they quite qualify as vandalism. --Whiteknight (talk) (projects) 15:21, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

69.25.116.2 ( talk | email | contribs )
Slightly odd but seems like vandalism to various Adventist pages. There was some a couple of days ago and I check with one of the registered editors dealing with those pages and he considered it vandalism. Doubt anyone is around but ... -- Herby talk thyme 09:48, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
 * stopped for now. When anyone does look at it it may be worth a block.  It is the second set of similar editing in under a week.  Thanks -- Herby  talk thyme 10:37, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Spoke too soon - there was more. Think this may need attention to prevent further instances -- Herby  talk thyme 11:14, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Blocked one week.-- SB_Johnny | talk 11:54, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

85.101.230.240 ( talk | email | contribs )
Placed LARGE spam collection! Worth a block? -- Herby talk thyme 11:51, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Yes. He has been blocked by User:Whiteknight for a day (at the moment) for linkspamming.  Thanks for bringing this one up.  --Rob Horning 17:11, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

195.93.21.72 ( talk | email | contribs )
Repeated vandalism of Truman and the Cold War over a number of days. Had two warnings. Block may be appropriate. Thanks (and are we still using here or is it moved yet?) -- Herby talk thyme 17:41, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Hum - given admin activity since I posted this I guess this is the wrong place. However some posting of the change would have been useful as I seem to have been the only RC patroller in the last 24 hours -- Herby  talk thyme 20:06, 5 November 2006 (UTC)


 * I think its still the right place for now. I would do it myself, but being new at it I hestitate to ban anyone yet until I've had a chance to discussion with someone more experienced at it then I on when and how long is appropriate. Maybe another admin will notice this soon. I haven't really notice any admin activity so far today besides my own. --darklama 21:22, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

This is still the correct place to report vandalism, we just don't have enough active admins to monitor this page or any page, for that matter) at all times of the day. Sometimes, things like this don't get discovered until well after the fact. That's part of my rationale for trying to recruit more admins. --Whiteknight (talk) (projects) 22:30, 5 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Interesting discussion. However could someone look at a block please.  This is a repeat vandal if you look at the contributions.  My view (FWIW) a week's block should catch their next attempt which hopfully will put them off. Thanks -- Herby  talk thyme 10:55, 6 November 2006 (UTC)


 * This is an AOL IP address and is being used by lots of people. Such addresses shouldn't be blocked for longer than 2 hours. --Derbeth talk 11:04, 6 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Ok you're the admin - I just looked at the vandalism history -- Herby talk thyme 11:07, 6 November 2006 (UTC)


 * We should maybe thing about marking the AOL IPs as such... as well as the difference between the dynamics and proxies. -- SB_Johnny | talk 11:22, 6 November 2006 (UTC)


 * I think there is no need to do so as Wikipedia does it much better. I always check an IP both in a WHOIS service and in Wikipedia, where you can often find interesting things, like that the IP belongs to a school or is an open proxy. --Derbeth talk 11:24, 6 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Yeah, but it would be a lot easier for local vandal watchers if that info was here, rather than having to go to wikipedia every time. Maybe someone could go through and copy those IPuserpage messages? -- SB_Johnny | talk 11:28, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

168.8.116.25 ( talk | email | contribs )
Just been vandalising and I'm not around as much for a while. Had bv. In case anyone else is there -- Herby talk thyme 14:58, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Persistent so and so if anyone is around a block would be good -- Herby talk thyme 14:59, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Got bored maybe, stopped for now -- Herby talk thyme 15:04, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Blocked for the day. -- SB_Johnny | talk 16:23, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

85.99.51.105 ( talk | email | contribs )
This user added 413 external links to the Help:About‎ page. Linking to an adult website. (Mateo1983 22:35, 8 November 2006 (UTC))


 * Blocked for 1 day. Thank you for the heads-up. --Whiteknight (talk) (projects) 22:40, 8 November 2006 (UTC)


 * From what I can tell this page seems to have a bit of a vandalism history. Perhaps it should be simi-protected so only registered users can edit it? --darklama 22:53, 8 November 2006 (UTC)


 * That's actually not a bad idea. let me go protect it now, and we can hope nobody gets upset about it. --Whiteknight (talk) (projects) 22:58, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

62.232.224.14 ( talk | email | contribs )
Worth watching (or blocking if so inclined!). Been quite playful so far -- Herby talk thyme 11:54, 13 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Blocked for the day. -- SB_Johnny | talk 11:58, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

207.63.185.36 ( talk | email | contribs )
Currently vandalising page - Cheers - anon Herby!--161.73.46.151 16:42, 14 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Blocked for the day, since he revandalised after reverts.-- SB_Johnny | talk 16:51, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks - back on line tomorrow! -H --161.73.46.151 17:39, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

168.9.35.14 ( talk | email | contribs )
I guess the editing of this one today could do with a look - really childish but has been warned -- Herby talk thyme 16:55, 17 November 2006 (UTC)


 * He or she seems to be obsessed with that one particular area.--Mateo1983 16:59, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
 * For some reason these pages seem to attract attention - other IPs have played here too - thanks for your reverts too Mateo1983 -- Herby talk thyme 17:06, 17 November 2006 (UTC)


 * I had to go back through a few revisions to get it back to normal.--Mateo1983 17:10, 17 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Blocked for 1 day. thanks for the help, both of you. --Whiteknight (talk) (projects) 17:18, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Grand Am ( talk | email | contribs )
Many Racial Vandalism and Moving of Pages reverted most of it. Keytotime 00:23, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Pontiac Grand Am ( talk | email | contribs )
Many Racial Vandalism and Moving of Pages reverted most of it. Keytotime 00:23, 20 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Blocked both, and the IP address that they both came from. Thanks for pointing this out. I'll try and clean up whatever you missed. --Whiteknight (talk) (projects) 01:01, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Cisco17 ( talk | email | contribs )
I would like to request a prompt and indefinite block on this user for this edit - -- Herby  talk thyme 11:14, 20 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Done. -- SB_Johnny | talk 11:39, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

65.95.235.49 ( talk | email | contribs )
Worth a block? 2nd lot of vandalism today - warned by Swift earlier -- Herby talk thyme 14:08, 22 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Well, this isn't really a prolific vandal and I'm not overly enthusiastic about blocking IPs as they may be shared. The A Wikimedia Administrator's Handbook/Block doesn't help really. --Swift 14:24, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
 * No problem and as much a heads up as anything else. I did put something on the talk page of the handbook about clarifying the checking of IPs (nothing happened) -  has some info.  Mind you another reason no one should give me the "tools"  -- Herby  talk thyme 14:30, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

OK at it again and bugging me - short block if anyone is around -- Herby talk thyme 17:51, 22 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Blocked for a day. For Swift: you may want to read Administrators and Dealing with vandalism. It has some information on blocking IP addresses. --dark [[Image:Yin yang.svg|12px]] lama 18:27, 22 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Cheers, Darklama. --Swift 18:42, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

81.177.14.26 ( talk | email | contribs )
Playing silly ****. Nice warning & bv so far - probably heads up rather than anything else -- Herby talk thyme 17:10, 22 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Blocked for the day. --Swift 18:41, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Bujar ( talk | email | contribs )
Two new pages linking to a blog site created today so far. Had a "test" warning earlier this year. Worth reviewing -- Herby talk thyme 13:03, 23 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Permablocked. Obviously up to no good. -- SB_Johnny | talk 14:05, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

85.96.255.160 ( talk | email | contribs )
If it isn't a shared one a block would be good - this just did a nice big spam dump on us -- Herby talk thyme 18:14, 25 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Blocked for 1 week... for now. IP addresses are a sticky situation. Anyone know if this is an open proxy or something? (and also, where I can get the info whether or not it is an Open Proxy would be nice.) --Dragontamer 18:42, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Best I can do is User:Derbeth. Thanks tho -- Herby  talk thyme 19:06, 25 November 2006 (UTC)


 * It looks like it is a dynamic IP address, so 1 week looks fine. --Dragontamer 02:57, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

195.189.209.67 ( talk | email | contribs )
Another spam dump just after the other (no one else on RC???). Same page to Help:Editing so semi protect? Equally this is the third spam dump from this IP this month -- Herby talk thyme 10:32, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Interestingly the same history on WP, 4 spam dumps this month! -- Herby talk thyme 10:38, 26 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Blocked 1 week -- SB_Johnny | talk 13:30, 26 November 2006 (UTC)


 * I went ahead and semi-protected Help:Editing from being edited and fully protected from being moved, since its linked to within "edit this page". --dark [[Image:Yin yang.svg|12px]] lama 13:52, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks all -- Herby talk thyme 15:24, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Tom the grate ( talk | email | contribs )
He came back after I blocked him for several weeks. As an FYI, his block is now infinite and people should watch for anything he tries to do under another alias. As many of us have seen, he has an affinity for cats. -within focus 19:27, 26 November 2006 (UTC)


 * This same general username has been used for a number of previous vandalism attacks. Anything resembling this username should probably be blocked forever on sight. --Whiteknight (talk) (projects) 01:00, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

I've also blocked his user page and user talk page from being recreated. --Whiteknight (talk) (projects) 01:03, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

66.240.221.36 ( talk | email | contribs )
This unregistered user has vandalised (?) several pages this evening. His additions are a little weird - just numbers. I've warned this unregistered user on their userpage.


 * Looks like newbie tests, or harmless nonsense. I will block him for about an hour or two, just to send the message home. --Whiteknight (talk) (projects) 00:00, 27 November 2006 (UTC)


 * OK. Looking at his block log it seems you've banned him before too.  Xania 00:56, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

195.212.29.83 ( talk | email | contribs )
Some small vandalism on Special_Relativity:_Principle_of_Relativity Keytotime 20:49, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Blocked 1 week. -- SB_Johnny | talk 21:16, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

80.41.73.208 ( talk | email | contribs )
Blanked the page GCSE Science/Rates of reaction courseworkKeytotime 21:00, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Blocked 1 week. -- SB_Johnny | talk 21:16, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

66.244.223.234 ( talk | email | contribs )
Vandalising pages now - had bv warning -- Herby talk thyme 18:33, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Keeping going if anyone is around -- Herby talk thyme 18:35, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Blocked for 1 day. I will make it longer if we need, because the block log shows some history of vandalism from this IP address. --Whiteknight (talk) (projects) 18:37, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Hung Lo ( talk | email | contribs )
MAJOR ALERT - anyone around a fair amount of damage needing repair. Heavy duty block on user (anything short of indef and I resign). Image to deleted and a large number of pages to deal with - won't get them all done immediately -- Herby talk thyme 08:04, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
 * gone quiet for a mo - couldn't get any assistance - not sure all damage is dealt with -- Herby talk thyme 08:32, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
 * WHEN the cavalry arrive - suggest checkuser as this image was used before in the same way -- Herby talk thyme 08:39, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

I see that Derbeth took care of it and blocked this user indefinitely, since he /she didn't mention it here, I thought I'd go ahead and do so. --dark lama  13:37, 29 November 2006 (UTC)


 * As I see he was back again can the checkuser facility be used on this as this is now the third lot of vandalism by this method. Equally RC folk should be keeping an eye for similar names -- Herby  talk thyme 09:13, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Several IP vandals now active
"nice site", blanking, etc. I'm trying to keep on top of it, but if another admin is around, please give a hand. I'm giving 1-week blocks. -- SB_Johnny | talk 15:44, 30 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Notice: I discussed this with the wikipedia admins, and the IPs being used for this purpose should be assumed to be open proxies (check first!). Wikipedia admins would like to be kept up to date with what we find. -- SB_Johnny | talk 20:08, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

66.165.172.163 ( talk | email | contribs )
Heads up as much as anything - one of the IPs placing "cool design", "great website etc". User page mentioned in staff lounge only at present -- Herby talk thyme 19:26, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Spate of IP vandals now
Replacing pages with "xxx" and helpfully putting it in the summary. Blocks now please -- Herby talk thyme 18:37, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
 * I think the recent blocks on open IPs seems to have an effect - long time since I reverted much - thanks -- Herby talk thyme 15:24, 2 December 2006 (UTC)


 * There's easily a couple hundred more... should we leave those to you, Herby? -- SB_Johnny | talk 15:35, 2 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Do you mean so that I have something to revert still or (one day) get a chance to play with the toys (currently storing speedies ) -- Herby talk thyme 15:38, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Nice site one
Back on Immortalgeek user page -- Herby talk thyme 14:18, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

213.42.21.77 ( talk | email | contribs )
"excellent site" vandal. I did a two hour block (scared to do more yet!). If it should be more feel free and I'll learn too. Thanks -- Herby talk thyme 20:11, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Why? This IP does only vandalism in the period of half year. It belongs to United Arab Emirates, considering that the edits don't look like human-done and DNSstuff says it might be an "exploitable server", I will block it longer. Considering possible profits and losses, I don't think we have many potential editors from the Emirates. --Derbeth talk 20:23, 4 December 2006 (UTC)


 * OK I'm learning - thanks -- Herby talk thyme 20:27, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

208.189.247.147 ( talk | email | contribs )
Has been adding nonsense to Astronomy/Luminosity despite a warning. --140.252.3.207 04:19, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Blocked for one day which will probably calm things down. -within focus 06:51, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Minus ( talk | email | contribs )
Adding nonsense all over the place
 * Blocked forever, helping clean up now. -<font color="#000000">within <font color="#7A7A7A">focus 07:04, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Several of us here have come together and destroyed everything the user did in just a few minutes. Thanks to everyone who helped. -<font color="#000000">within <font color="#7A7A7A">focus 07:17, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Derbeth/WK - anyone take me up on checkuser thought on Hung lo/Hi and this one, first two same piccy and all three same time?? -- Herby talk thyme 20:05, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
 * PS given the pages Skeet targeted worth a look there too? -- Herby talk thyme 20:07, 6 December 2006 (UTC)


 * A. Skrou yet another vandal of the same type. I think and agree that checkuser on these accounts is definetely warranted. I blocked and reverted vandalsm. --<span style="font: bold 10pt 'courier new', comic, sans, ms;"><font color="midnightblue">dark [[Image:Yin yang.svg|12px]] lama 01:21, 7 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Definitely the same person. Looking at some of the templates these idiots created I see that they created the same 'mumfun' image which I saw earlier tonight.  Whatever IP address created these accounts has got to be blocked.  Now it's finally time for bed. Xania 01:37, 7 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Definately not the same people. Different IP addresses for each. I've blocked the source IP addresses for 1 day each, but this is a distributed attack. --Whiteknight (talk) (projects) 01:40, 7 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the check anyway, we'll just need to stay alert! -- Herby talk thyme 08:08, 7 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Me feel stupid now. At least it's quieter now. Xania 11:14, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Another mumfun
Sorted quite a bit - may still be damage (bit early here). Pretty please a long block on account creation after check user - same stuff and targets. Will look more when awake! thanks -- Herby talk thyme 08:54, 8 December 2006 (UTC)


 * I take it you are referring to Mumble err umm ( talk | email | contribs )? Would this be a case where checkuser tools would come in handy; checking the user IPs (tools allow that, right?) and see if these match. --Swift 02:10, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

== Miracle Worker Number 16 ( talk | email | contribs ) ==

And another mumfun attempt. Is there anything that can be done about this - getting predictable. I've sp'd some of the templates again and been round with the broom -- Herby talk thyme 08:13, 9 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Well, in the section above, I asked if someone with checkuser could see which IP address the mumfum vandal came from. If they can, then we could block editing and user creation coming from that address. Whiteknight has checkuser, right? I'll check who is and ask for their help on their talk pages. --Swift 20:10, 9 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Made checkuser for this one and Mumble err umm. Mumble err umm was using the same IP as A. Skrou. I blocked the IP for one week. Unfortunately, both accounts (Miracle's and Muble's) are from different parts of the US so I assume use of infected computers. --Derbeth talk 20:39, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Wellspring ( talk | email | contribs )
More Mumfum, reeking havoc. --Iamunknown 07:06, 10 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Cleaned up, for now. Iamunknown 07:10, 10 December 2006 (UTC)


 * And blocked indefinetly. --Swift 07:15, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

And another mumfun Canadian 153 ( talk | email | contribs ) dealt with I think. Is there anything we can do about this infestation!? -- Herby talk thyme 10:38, 10 December 2006 (UTC) PS methodology appears to be page moves now? -- Herby talk thyme 10:40, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Both checked by Whiteknight. One of the IPs was used by "strech-vandal" on Wikipedia. --Derbeth talk 20:16, 11 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Do you think you could possibly spell it right? It ends with M, not N. MumfuM. -- Jersey Cow 01:26, 13 December 2006 (UTC)


 * User account Jersey Cow has been blocked for vandalism of the same variety. Xania 02:00, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
 * I should add that I blocked Jersey Cow for actual vandalism and not the comments the user made above. Xania 10:59, 13 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Checked by Whiteknight. Nothing suspicious with his IP. --Derbeth talk 11:49, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Zim Bobwe ( talk | email | contribs )
Usual stuff usual time etc etc (blocked obviously but???) -- Herby talk thyme 08:22, 11 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Checked by Whiteknight. --Derbeth talk 20:16, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

== I am Jimbo Wales mother fucker ( talk | email | contribs ) == Username ... -- MichaelFrey 17:58, 13 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Good call. I blocked this account on site. No sense waiting to see if he vandalizes anything or not. --Whiteknight (talk) (projects) 18:48, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

69.109.162.124 ( talk | email | contribs )
http://en.wikibooks.org/w/index.php?title=United_States_Government/The_Three_Branches&action=history
 * seems to have given up but thanks all the same -- Herby talk thyme 09:09, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Wilcomblunderdich ( talk | email | contribs )
Mumfum one - plenty of page moves - checkuser please and vigilance -- Herby talk thyme 11:50, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

BTW - new game is triple page moves (!) so read the damage before trying revertions or you may find you are getting into trouble (of course I am not speaking from personal experience <g>) -- Herby talk thyme 12:20, 17 December 2006 (UTC)


 * IP from the US. Interesting, it was used by an another "mumfum" on 7th December. Blocked for three months a year. Checkuser stores information only for a limited period of time. History of blocks on this IP shows my note from 4 October saying it was a source of vandal account (another lesson for us, make verbose block summaries ;-). --Derbeth talk 13:07, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Пенис ( talk | email | contribs )
A bunch of Mumfum page moves --Az1568 06:48, 18 December 2006 (UTC)


 * care too - a few double moves. I've reblocked to indefinite BTW.  Checkuser please on this one Derbeth - thanks -- Herby  talk thyme 08:01, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
 * these moves look quite "unfixed" to me (quite a number of circular redirects to look at/delete if another admin gets to it before me) - still a mess around and I'm not available for a while for that kind of work - sorry -- Herby talk thyme 08:04, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Nothing interesting in the IP but blocked it for 3 days anyway. --Derbeth talk 10:40, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Cal Dreamin ( talk | email | contribs )
Mumfum page moves. --Az1568(Talk) 07:09, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Done BTW -- Herby talk thyme 09:38, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
 * "Checkusered", nothing interesting. --Derbeth talk 12:04, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Flo Gitt ( talk | email | contribs )
Mumfum vandal--Az1568(Talk) 07:15, 24 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Indefinitely blocked by User:Swift. --Az1568(Talk) 07:40, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Source IP has been used recently twice to create vandal accounts. Blocked for longer time. --Derbeth talk 09:54, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Vladimir B. ( talk | email | contribs )
Mumfum vandalism --Az1568(Talk) 07:33, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Blocked by User:Swift.--Az1568(Talk) 08:16, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Checkusered, same IP address as a known good-faith user. I have little reason to suspect that this user has "turned to the darkside", more likely a dynamic or shared IP. --Whiteknight (talk) (projects) 16:40, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

Brian Barbera ( talk | email | contribs )
Active now, seems to be a sock puppet of someone already ticked off for being banned / reverted. Webaware 01:28, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
 * I've blocked for a day. its fine by me if another admin decides to extend it if longer is approperate --<span style="font: bold 10pt 'courier new', comic, sans, ms;"><font color="midnightblue">dark [[Image:Yin yang.svg|12px]] lama 01:35, 29 December 2006 (UTC)


 * My view - I think checkuser would be good, I've cleared some strange redirects that were left and if it had been me.... Peace to you DL but I think this is a vandal only account (not sure I would want to wait for the next lot) - there appear to be no sensible contributions - other views? -- Herby talk thyme 08:13, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
 * This study comes to mind: http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/0515/p13s01-stct.html His behavior is interesting because he may be interpreting (what I interpret as) Wikibookian's good faith efforts as grouchiness, and then reacting to it in a response that is not productive. That is one theory. If he keeps it up, can you just ban for a week, then a month, then 3 months, then year? I'm too nice. --Remi0o 08:32, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Agreed but worth looking at w:User:Brian Barbera too -- Herby talk thyme 08:56, 29 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Made checkuser. Nothing suspicious. I blocked this account infinitely. I don't belive this guy came here in good faith looking at his edits. --Derbeth talk 22:42, 29 December 2006 (UTC)