Wikipedia talk:Abuse reports/Archive 2

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Contents

New process of reports

When my new archival bot is up and running for this page, all the reporting and actioning process will be changed.

  • When you have successful actioning (such as IP range banning), you add the {{ARA|a}} template followed by a summary and your full signature ({{ARA|a}} Banned IP Range 127.127.x.x ~~~~) to the end of the report and the bot will archive it.
  • When you are rejecting a request, you add the {{ARA|r}} template followed by your signature ({{ARA|r}} ~~~~) and the bot will archive it.
  • If you wish to add a clerk note to any request, you can add {{ARA|n}} followed by your note and your signature. The bot will not action on this template.

A update will be posted here when the bot is running successfully, therefore will need immediate changing to this new process. Extranet is now E talk 06:36, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

This process will need to start as at 2:00 UTC today in order for bot trials to begin. Use the process templates above and the bot will automatically archive them for you. E talk 01:27, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

Joining project for wrong reasons?

User:Summers95926 appears to have put his name here because of cited material from the Nora Greenwald article which he wished to have removed. His comment says "investigating use of material not cleared with article subjects." If I understand the point of this project, then he doesn't.--SarekOfVulcan 15:32, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Backlog - hardly worth making reports

The backlog here is so large, I see reports that are several months old, and some seem to indicate a level of urgency (such as an IP range with 40 sockpuppets in it). Does posting a report here do any good, or is it just to archive information about past abuse? -Amatulic 19:49, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

I am finally starting to work my way through a lot of the abuse reports. We are developing a system that will help with this (using bots) and we will hopefully get through them all in a few weeks (at least start the process of investigating or rejecting). We are always looking for new volunteers to help so if you would like to help in this project, just let me know and I would be glad to sign you up. -Andrew4010 23:21, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
Doesn't one need administrator privileges to take action on these? What would I do as a regular user? -Amatulic 00:06, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
No, any user can help. We simply follow simple procedure found here: Wikipedia:Abuse_reports/Guide_to_abuse_reports. - Andrew4010 00:44, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

New alerts

Should we ask people to give a reason sign their additions to the new alerts section, just as is done with WP:AIV ?AndrewRT(Talk) 20:19, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

<-- The following are examples of how to report a vandal on this page. Please copy and paste an appropriate example to the very bottom of the page. Anonymous Users (IP addresses): * {{IPvandal|IP address}} brief reason for listing (keep it short) ~~~~

Why five?

in light of the recent news about vandalism from certain well known companies, should we relax the rule about 5 blocks?

In some cases you could argue that investigation is worthy after just one case of vandalism! AndrewRT(Talk) 20:25, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Clearing backlog

I figure it's time to breathe some life back into this process, so I'm clearing out the backlog by rejecting cases where the vandalism has stopped, and accepting cases where the vandalism is still continuing. If any of you would like to help, I'd appreciate it! --Darkwind (talk) 00:22, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

204.10.221.252 (talk · contribs · block log)

I'm not sure how to post this, or whether this has already been investigated, based on the message on the talk page and a mention in the block history. This IP has provided vandalism for several years, and has had a dozen blocks, most recently for 3 months in April. There was vandalism activity today (three articles). I'm not sure if the previous "last warning" from a few weeks ago was recent enough to ask for AIV, so I added a new one and am posting it here to see what should be done. Rigadoun (talk) 20:43, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

A report to AIV doesn't seem to be necessary at the moment since the vandal has stopped for the moment (perhaps because the school day is over? This seems to be an education-related IP address). Based on the LARGE number of blocks in the IP's history, the activity today, and the fact that this is most likely a school, I'd accept this for investigation and possible reporting to the school if you open a new abuse alert by following the new alert instructions on the main page.
Also, in a case like this, with such a large history of vandalism on this IP, you could probably report this IP (or any other with a similar history) to AIV at any time the vandal is active, even without warning. --Darkwind (talk) 21:44, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Bot system

I've been using the bot templates as I've been clearing the backlog, and now that I've fixed my signature (d'oh), it seems to be working rather well.

The one exception to that is the bot doesn't work well with the table layout of the open cases currently being used, and after actioning an open case, one still has to come and remove the rest of the table from the open cases section. Since all of the information in the tables can be found on the report itself, one click away, I propose removing the tables and just listing the wikilink to the subpage for the case in the appropriate section.

Since I seem to be the only project member active recently, I'm just going to be bold and convert the main page to that format now. We can always revert if there's a reason not to that hasn't occurred to me. --Darkwind (talk) 22:20, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Notification of indefinite block of an IP

I posted this to WP:AN and someone recommended I inform WP:ABUSE. I have indefinitely hard-blocked 75.139.45.247 (talk • contribs • info • WHOIS) per request of the Technical Services Supervisor - Shelby County Schools. A request was made at my talk page and I followed with an e-mail to verify (the request as well as the sender's identity) and to ask about soft-block vs. hard-block. The response confirmed the request and further requested a hard-block. Please advise if I should forward the confirmation e-mail somewhere for future reference. Also advise if I should take any further action or modify the block in any way. Thank you. —Wknight94 (talk) 13:59, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

According to some of the archived discussions from this talk page, it looks like such requests are supposed to be sent to info-en AT wikimedia.org so OTRS can have a permanent record of the request and handle it through their procedures (office action, whatnot). However, that might be out of date; I'm not an admin so I don't really know if there's a more current procedure for an organization requesting a block. As for why we at WP:ABUSE need to be informed, I assume that's in case there's an open abuse report on that IP, which there is not at this time (there ought to be a header on the IP's talk page whenever there's an open abuse report). Thanks for keeping us in the loop, though! --Darkwind (talk) 18:36, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
Now that I think about it, perhaps you should forward the e-mail from the school board to OTRS at that address for record keeping just in case, and make it clear the block is already in place. --Darkwind (talk) 18:38, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
Okay, sounds like a plan. Thanks! BTW, an arbitrator suggested that the block be lifted in a month or so. —Wknight94 (talk) 18:49, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Template idea for noncompliant abuse reports

Generic message

Thank you for making a report at Wikipedia:Abuse reports. Unfortunately, this IP has not been blocked enough times, and therefore does not merit an abuse report. Next time, please make sure that the IP in question has been blocked at least five times in recent history.Thank you. VivioFateFan (Talk, Sandbox) 21:37, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

Username included message

Thank you for making a report about 127.0.0.1 (talk · contribs · block log) at Wikipedia:Abuse reports. Unfortunately, this IP has not been blocked enough times, and therefore does not merit an abuse report. Next time, please make sure that the IP in question has been blocked at least five times in recent history.Thank you. VivioFateFan (Talk, Sandbox) 21:42, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

Conclusion?

What do you think about it I tried to modularize it around the not-aiv one.

The current code to use this is: {{Subst:User:VivioFateFan/at|Username|Additional information}}. Username and "Additional information" are both optional, see page User:VivioFateFan/at for details. VivioFateFan (Talk, Sandbox) 21:42, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

Holidaysburg Area School District Vandalism

After noticing vandalism to a page I watch, I checked the IP's contributions page and found it to be a source of frequent, and blatant vandalism. Considering that the IP belongs to the Holidaysburg Area School District, I am posting here to request a soft block be applied to the IP. A warning of the possibility of this and the procedure for doing so are already posted on IP's talk page. Thank you!

--TarrVetus (talk) 20:01, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Racist abuse from IPs

The policy states that IPs must have 5 blocks before being reported here. My question is, if an IP (168.216.25.250 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • WHOIS • RDNS • trace • RBLs • http • block user • block log)) is registered to an elementary school, and that IP address keeps adding the N-word, can it be reported anyway? It seems like such editing would result in a suspension or other disciplinary action by the school and I would think they would want to know about it. Thoughts?--Old Hoss (talk) 19:08, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

  • Probably not. However, you could contact the school yourself if so desired, there is no policy against directly filing abuse reports with the ISPs (in this case, the school). I suppose they have the five blocks policy because ISPs are more likely to respond to a complaint regarding an account which has been blocked various times. But who knows, some ISPs are less tolerent than others, so if you feel the school should be notified, be bold and contact them yourself. GO-PCHS-NJROTC (talk) 21:43, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
    • But please remember that ISP reporting is generally a last resort. GO-PCHS-NJROTC (talk) 00:43, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Proposed template change

I'm proposing an additional category in the Template:Editabuselinks to reduce the number of posts at WP:AN and WP:AN/I, please feel free to comment here User:Mbisanz/TemplateSandbox. MBisanz talk 13:09, 5 January 2008 (UTC)