Wikipedia:Requests for investigation/Archives/2006/05

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Warning This is a discussion archive created in May 2006, though the comments contained may not have been posted on this date. Please do not post any new comments on this page. See current discussion, or the archives index.

Contents

[edit] IP addresses

  • 68.239.87.12 (talk • contribs • WHOIS • RDNS • RBLs • block user • block log) -- User appeared today and began removing links to material I wrote for think tank where I work, claiming it was original research. Request investigation. I have edited hundreds of pages and seldom add a link to my own work. Others have added links to my work as well. Not always me. This matter has been through arbitration - I try to follow the guidelines. (My outside world identity is Chip Berlet. I apologize for being a magnet for controversy.// Cberlet 23:10, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
  • comment All three links in question were to writings by Chip Berlet hosted on the publiceye.org website. All three were added to Wikipedia articles by User:Cberlet. Read the rules: "Because of neutrality & point-of-view concerns, a primary policy of Wikipedia is that no one from a particular site/organization should post links to that organization/site etc. Because neutrality is such an important -- and difficult -- objective at Wikipedia, this takes precedence over other policies defining what should be linked. The accepted procedure is to post the proposed links in the Talk section of the article, and let other - neutral - Wikipedia editors decide whether or not it should be included." 68.239.87.12 02:49, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
  • comment the second User:Cberlet has again restored the links to his own articles in violation of the above rules. More generally, writings from Chip Berlet and Political Research Associates are questionable as sources on Wikipedia given his peculiar world view, a mutant version of post-1960s identity politics which often veers into an extreme anti-populism analysis. He also continues to be obsessed with keeping old and now irrelevant controversies alive by taking jabs at other groups on the left he had disagreements with, e.g. with the Christic Institute. Is there any way Use:Cberlet can be directed not to edit any articles on people or groups that he is known as a critic of in real life? It seems that NPOV and basic ethics would demand it. 68.239.87.12 03:11, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
Response: Michael Ruppert. Added critical material written by Norman Solomon, stored on publiceye.org with permission of Solomon. see diff: [1]. Other link was to online review of articles by many other authors.--Cberlet 03:14, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
Response: Conspiracism. Created page after conspiracy theorists repeatedly place text on Wikipedia wrongly claiming that I had invented the term. Page identified scholar who actually had popularized the term. See: [2]. Survived vote for deletion.--Cberlet 03:17, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
Response: Christic Institute. Added first alternative POV to what was a puff piece on this controversial group. My monograph--published in print form--is one of the few published extensive discussions of the Christic Institute--and text added to Wikipedia primarily cites former Christic client with serious criticism. Prior to my addition, entry failed to mention that Christics's "most high-profile case" had been dismissed by a judge and that the clients had complained about Christic's handling of the case.--Cberlet 03:23, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
Summary. I have edited hundreds of pages, and before I link to a page at <publiceye.org> I search for other pages that can be linked.--Cberlet 03:25, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
  • 64.142.89.105 (talk · contribs · logs · block user · block log) constantly changes articles about bands that have proper nouns for names. For instance, a passage in the Guns N' Roses article said "Guns N' Roses is" (correct) and he changed it to "Guns N' Roses are" (incorrect). The vandal suggested we discuss it on the Guns N' Roses talk page. We did so and concluded with proper evidence that "Guns N' Roses is" is the correct wording. However, when we go back to revert the changes 64.142.89.105 has made, he reverts back immediately and calls us vandals that should discuss the situation further. He then threatens to report us to Wikipedia, despite the fact that he has been blocked and banned from Wikipedia numerous times for doing the exact same thing. Please prevent him from further trolling and vandalizing Wikipedia. TheNewMinistry 19:51, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
    • Objection - TheNewMinistry has been refusing to discuss his changes on talk page when I asked him to stop changing "Guns N' Roses are" back to "Guns N' Roses is". I have been trying to prove to him that "Guns N' Roses are" is actually correct. 64.142.89.105 20:02, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
    • That's a lie - the situation has been discussed in full on the talk page, but 64.142.89.105 ignores that fact. TheNewMinistry 20:20, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
you should talk BlueGoose (talk · contribs · logs · block user · block log) <-- Sockpuppet, if you're going to use sockpuppets to 1) nominate and article, then 2) revert war over the font size of the tags you've added, then I don't see how using multiple IPs is any more or less deceptive--172.167.140.146 06:08, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
IPs are AOL, suggest user of them registers one account, BlueGoose was given a short block for use of sockpuppets. Petros471 08:54, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
  • 71.254.0.15 (talk · contribs · logs · block user · block log) -- Vandalized Belle Boyd and damaged the article in some way that prevents me from opening it and reverting - Foxfire 1.5.0.3 hangs up; need admin assistance // David 06:52, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
    • Done (with rollback, then reverted further back to what looks like the last good version. Petros471 10:21, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Registered users

  • User:Billy574 - Billy574 has repeatedly vandalized the user page User:Oscarthecat. I've reverted several times, but this person is fairly persistent. I'll leave it up to you.--P-Chan 20:06, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Nikeman916 (talk · contribs · logs · block user · block log) - Images added to several articles with text apparently inviting votes for some competition; I have reverted the changes, but would welcome another opinion. Vandalism/inexperience/self-promotion... or is there really a Wikipedia photo competition going on that I'm not aware of??? // Charivari 03:43, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
    • No there isn't, but seems to have stopped so no further action for now. Petros471 14:06, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
  • WR-Recruiter (talk · contribs · logs · block user · block log) -- Username and lone edit suggest loyalty to Wikipedia Review, so this could possibly be a reincarnation of a previously banned user. 69.117.11.27 22:19, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
    • Been indef blocked. Petros471 14:04, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Czestochowa (talk · contribs · logs · block user · block log) -- Just appeared. But I reverted a few insertions of spam links (to something in a blog) by User:130.88.13.207 today, which I first noticed as [3]; the pattern does look like a continuation of the same thing. There is some subtlety; observe [4], which inserted an error into a URL that I had just reverted to; followed by [5] which reinstates the URL I just deleted. I could just revert these pages, but perhaps there is a more appropriate action (e.g. could these links be blocked?) Notinasnaid 12:46, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
    • You can request for URLs to be blacklisted, but I don't think there is any need here, as seems to have stopped. Petros471 13:57, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Redjax888 (talk · contribs · logs · block user · block log) -- He is editing an article talk page, Talk:Bob Brinker, as if it were the article, changing headings and significantly editing, changing, removing previous editor's comments. He seems to be doing it out of ignorance of WP guidelines, though to promote his POV. An IP has done this previously, probably same person, and now this newly registered user is making the same edits. I posted a note on user's talk page, and have (Confession coming, please absolve me) reverted him 3 times within 24 hours. I couldn't find any WP policy I could quote, telling him not to edit other people's comments on an article talk page. What should I do next? // ॐ Priyanath 03:01, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
    • Redjax888 continues to remove other people's comments from the Talk:Bob Brinker page - see Talk:Bob Brinker history. He has done it seven times now, and possibly more under an IP. He has received four requests/warnings on his talk page User_talk:Redjax888, from two different editors, including a last warning. A 24 hour block would be most appropriate, I think. ॐ Priyanath 17:14, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
    • Redjax888 seems to be back deleting content with his AOL IP address 172.194.65.210

The information posted on the web site they keep deleting exposes a massive cover-up by Bob Brinker summarized here http://investment.suite101.com/discussion.cfm/7/86-94#message_9 . Is there a way to hard code that information into the page? WikiHelperUSA 23:48, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

      • Redjax888 was blocked for 24 hours on 21 May, and seems to have stopped since then. Petros471 13:53, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Appears to be a content dispute rather than actual vandalism. I'm attempting to mediate. Request another opinion though. Although, recommend further investigation to the sockpuppetry claims below. ^demon[yell at me] /22:24, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Appears to be a content dispute rather than actual vandalism. I'm attempting to mediate. Request another opinion though. ^demon[yell at me] /22:24, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Icewindfiresnow (talk · contribs · logs · block user · block log) — Keeps incorrectly changing the spelling of "Mithral Hall" to "Mithril Hall" in order to promote his band, which is Mithril Hall. ⇒ JarlaxleArtemis 02:57, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
    • I've given another warning. I'll issue a block if they continue with no response. Petros471 19:49, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
      • Icewindfiresnow edited the page again on 17 May 2006, without edit summaries or use of the talk page. --140.32.18.3 19:47, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
  • RockmanX (talk · contribs · logs · block user · block log) He has been incorrectly crediting himself and tagging the pictures he uploads as being the creator of different pictures, including this one and this one when in fact they are copyrighted pictures taken off of other websites. I called him on this and he became very hostile. The Styles Clash 04:19, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
    • Has stopped editing for now, but still need to check all the images he's uploaded. Petros471 13:06, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
      • All images are now either deleted or up for deletion. Petros471 19:05, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
  • OutRider2003 (talk · contribs · logs · block user · block log). OutRider2003 has on four occasions removed a free image from the Dalip Singh page and replaced it with a copyrighted image that claims fair use "in the absence of a free alternative". My arguments against this course of action have been somewhat flippantly rebuffed, with OutRider2003 erasing my comments from his talk page. I have warned him that his actions verge on vandalism but this does not appear to have deterred him. McPhail 21:12, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
    • Filed 3RR report on the Administrator's Noticeboard here. --ZsinjTalk 18:02, 16 April 2006 (UTC)
      • This person seems to be blanking everything someone says on their talk page immediately after they put it there. Chuck 16:01, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
        • Archived as old report. Please report again with specific diffs if there is still a problem. Also make sure 'free' images really are free. Petros471 13:50, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
Comment- With the new arrangement of these pages, I'm not sure if I've put this in the right place, or if something like this needs to be reported at all. However, I felt this case was slightly less benign than most, as the user is obviously fairly familiar with Wikipedia and tried to impersonate Jimbo. Please leave me a message that says something to the effect of "you put this report in the right place" or "this was an absolute waste of time; in the future, please do this..." Thanks. :o) EWS23 | (Leave me a message!) 21:34, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
Has been indef blocked for impersonation. Petros471 19:11, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Mannaseejah (talk · contribs · logs · block user · block log) This user keeps putting all these strange, drug induced words and images on Manna and the talk page. He's been asked to stop, but refuses. He's convinced that Manna is psychadelic mushrooms and keeps writing about how if you take the drug you will see God. this has been long term abuse. he even states on his user page that this is his ultimate mission. Sparsefarce 00:15, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
    • Has now received a three day block. Petros471 10:13, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
  • PUBHOUSE (talk · contribs · logs · block user · block log) -- I think this is probably a reincarnation of banned user Rovoam (talk · contribs · logs · block user · block log), as his only edit was to vandalize the Rovoam section of WP:LTA on 4/26. (On a side note, no one reverted his vandalism until I did so today, so this is why I did not report this to AIV.) 69.117.7.84 05:59, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
    • I've indef blocked. Petros471 10:21, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
Tooj (talk · contribs · logs · block user · block log)
Toojbert (talk · contribs · logs · block user · block log)
Toojdwin (talk · contribs · logs · block user · block log)
Username117 (talk · contribs · logs · block user · block log)
Username77 (talk · contribs · logs · block user · block log) Repeatedly uploading this image from a family website and substituting it for images in articles including (but not limited to) Rush Limbaugh, Geek, North Korea, etc. Pattern of abuse has been going on since late April [6]. OhNoitsJamieTalk 22:36, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
  • All have been blocked. Petros471 09:44, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
    • All except original Tooj117 account that is. Leaving here for a bit to check for return. Petros471 20:08, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
      • Archived. Report Tooj117 again if needed. Petros471 14:39, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Dynomites (talk · contribs · logs · block user · block log) -- This user will not allow any changes to the digg.com article that remove any of the sprawling, citationless criticisms against the site. Does full reverts either immediately or the following day, against attempts by multiple users (including myself) to clean the article up and reduce it's slant. Responds almost exclusively via the history comments if at all, with lines like "what guidelines?" // relaxathon 05:38, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
    • Has been indef blocked. Petros471 13:39, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Aquatraveller (talk · contribs · logs · block user · block log). He's made slews of vandalous redirects to Augusta, Georgia (under other usernames, too, but I can't see them). Could someone block him (maybe), or at least speedy all the harmful redirects? Thanks. Matt Yeager ♫ (Talk?) 22:35, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
    • All vandalous redirects to the article have been deleted or tagged for speedy deletion. --ZsinjTalk 01:56, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
The vandal continues with his vandalism in every article he removes the word NAZI from NAZI germany. This causes the problem that when you click on the word germany you come to the germany of today page and not nazi germany. He has done this in many articles if not all that he has seen. Also where there is no link he still removes the word nazi. Which can be seen here http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Battle_of_K%C3%B6nigsberg&diff=49776482&oldid=49751473 The he says he removes it because other battle boxes dosent have it. Well that is because he has removed it from the other boxes. He has removed it from other boxes and then says look at the other boxes. He contiunes with his changeing of sourced figures without stateing any source for example here http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Battle_of_Kiev_%281941%29&diff=49954899&oldid=48309290 and as always he minimizes axis losses and maximizes allied ones just as he has done in many other articles. And now he has started with grammatical vandalism which can be seen here http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Anglo-Soviet_invasion_of_Persia&diff=49834302&oldid=49251690 (Deng 21:38, 24 April 2006 (UTC))
Deng was posting about Kurt on Woohookitty's talk as I recall, check there also for info. ~Chris {t|c|e} 21:17, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
This user is the subject of a request for comment, see Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Kurt Leyman. Petros471 14:29, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Mines45 (talk · contribs · logs · block user · block log). Mines45 has targeted several professional wrestling articles, most frequently Amy Dumas. Despite opposition, Mines45 has continually reverted to a version that contains misspellings and other errors. Mines45 has yet to provide a single edit summary in over four months of editing, and has not responded to several messages left on his or her talk page. Mines45 is dogmatically restoring his or her own edits despite opposition and refuses to justify these edits. McPhail 14:54, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
    • Followed up with a message on the user's talk page. --ZsinjTalk 15:48, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
      • Mines45 has resumed editing the pages in question, again without edit summaries or use of the talk page. McPhail 15:25, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
        • I have given a final warning on the user's talk page. Admin intervention would be nice. --ZsinjTalk 17:39, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
          • Mines45 has one again blanked his or her talk page and edited the articles in question. McPhail 19:13, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
            • Is there any chance of getting intervention from an administrator? Mines45 continues to unilaterally edit the Amy Dumas page, and is now making controversial edits to Torrie Wilson. McPhail 18:02, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
            • Mines45 is now blocked for a week. Petros471 16:57, 18 May 2006 (UTC).
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../r/e/q/Wikipedia%7ERequests_for_investigation_Archives_2006_05_0120.html"