Wikiquote:Vandalism in progress/Archive/7
Request permablocking its that Dragon Ball vandal/sock. SOMEBODY must put a stop to him! Thank you. Malarka
Persistent returning vandal, another sock of a banned user, edit warring and disrupting other editors. RareBread687
(sighs) yet another sockpuppet of a vandal that has been recently attack this wiki.
Request permablocking practically vandalized dozens, if not hundreds of articles by now. Illegitimate Barrister 05:40, 23 January 2015 (UTC)
This user keeps vandalizing the Star Wars: Episode III – Revenge of the Sith page by removing the dialogue between Anakin Skywalker and Padmé Amidala. AdamDeanHall (talk) 00:01, 17 February 2017 (UTC)
- This doesn't qualify as Vandalism in progress. There seem to be an ongoing dispute about a quote, which significantly exceeds Wikiquote:Limits on quotations. -- Mdd (talk) 00:11, 17 February 2017 (UTC)
This IP is flooding Wikiquote's Recent changes with vandalism and creating numerous fake user pages with sock templates. I just asked stewards at IRC to temporarily block him, but it might take a while. ~ DanielTom (talk) 11:11, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
- Blocked. ♞☤☮♌Kalki·†·⚓⊙☳☶⚡ 15:22, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
- Funny names, made me chuckle. But, I'm glad he's blocked. The Wikiquote better for it. Illegitimate Barrister 03:05, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
- Men in Black (film). Final warning here. —ATinySliver/ATalkPage 21:21, 10 May 2015 (UTC) — repeat nonsense added to
- Done, blocked. – Illegitimate Barrister 04:52, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
etc, etc. Unregistered user at above IP addresses continuously and repeatedly vandalizes The Legend of Korra by adding pages and pages of weird stuff and reverting edits any time it's fixed
Unregistered user from the July 12 report appears to be up to their old tricks. On further examination, it looks like they're still going with the IP addresses that were reported on the 12th as well.
He vandalized all the "Star Wars" pages by removing the lines, including the line from the 2004 DVD version of Star Wars Episode V: The Empire Strikes Back. AdamDeanHall (talk) 14:20, 14 August 2015 (UTC)
Report 22 August 2015Edit
- Mdd (talk) 18:15, 14 November 2015 (UTC)
, so far I cannot find a single source of the quotes he added. --
- I'm afraid all his addition is a hoax. For example,Frances Cornford. Nor the book nor the publisher the database of the Library of Congress doesn't know. A similar service in Japan, CiNii Books doesn't know them either. Can anyone in the UK ask the same query on an equivalent reliable book catalogue in the UK? --Aphaia (talk) 18:38, 14 November 2015 (UTC)
I tried, and the sources do in fact exist! I have checked to see if they really do exist, and they do. The sources showed up, and I'm a bit confused as to why you did not find them. This is a friendly IP, who hates hoaxes, but this seems legit, folks. This seems to be a case of obscure sources, not vandalism, or a hoaxer. PS, could there be a auto-sign feature for IP addresses, or something?
--188.8.131.52 (talk) 18:58, 14 November 2015 (UTC)—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 184.108.40.206 (talk) 19:01, 14 November 2015
- What do you guys think to ask CU/Steward the underlying IP of the user in question? --Aphaia (talk) 19:08, 14 November 2015 (UTC)
- I reverted Frances Cornford (for reason, see its talk). For Ken Kutaragi cnn.com has no reference in 2009 as claimed neither. Another prausible hoax. --Aphaia (talk) 04:06, 15 November 2015 (UTC)
IP vandal 220.127.116.11Edit
Vandalism only account. Obviously you can tell from contribs. ---Atcovi (Talk - Contribs) 20:48, 8 March 2016 (UTC) https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/NIGHTMAREB4
- And probably associated: https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Fartboy718 ---Atcovi (Talk - Contribs) 20:52, 8 March 2016 (UTC)
- Done by Kalki. – Illegitimate Barrister, 20:41, 23 March 2016 (UTC)
- Well, it was a 1980 film. I do not believe this is vandalism: the user has shown good faith by including both the original 1980 film and a later reedited DVD version in the article, which you reverted.
My own opinion is that I can see no good reason, in an article about the notable 1980 film, to pay any attention to tweaks in re-releases at all. This should be discussed in a civil manner without crying "vandalism". ~ Ningauble (talk) 16:53, 7 November 2016 (UTC)