Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    Report active, obvious, and persistent vandals and spammers here.

    Before reporting, read the spam and vandalism pages, as well as the AIV guide. To submit, edit this page and follow the instructions at the top of the "User-reported" section. For other issues, file a request for administrator attention.

    Important!
    1. The edits of the user must be obvious vandalism or obvious spam.
    2. Except for egregious cases, the user must have been given enough warning(s).
    3. The warning(s) must have been given recently and there must be reasonable grounds to believe the user(s) will further disrupt the site in the immediate future.
    4. If you decide that a report should be filed place the following template at the bottom of the User-reported section:
      • * {{Vandal|Example user or IP}} Your concise reason (e.g. vandalised past 4th warning). ~~~~
    5. Requests for further sanctions against a blocked user (e.g., talk page, e-mail blocks) should be made at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.
    6. Reports of sockpuppetry should be made at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations unless the connection between the accounts is obvious and disruption is recent and ongoing.
    This noticeboard can grow and become backlogged. Stale reports are automatically cleared by MDanielsBot after 4–8 hours with no action.
    You can subscribe to a web feed of this page in either RSS or Atom format.

    This page was last updated at 19:21 on 30 May 2024 (UTC). Purge the cache of this page if it is out of date.



    Reports[edit]

    Bot-reported[edit]

    User-reported[edit]

    Comment: I don't see any vandalism there. And reported after one first-level warning? signed, Willondon (talk) 17:23, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Willondon: As I explained, I wasn't aware of the rampage this user was on until after I left the warning. Had I seen all those edits first, I'd have started with a first-and-final. The vandalism itself is lowkey but it's very, very familiar to me because I patrol pending changes and there are tons of articles in the South Asian topic area that are under that level of protection. At Raja Pervaiz Ashraf, they removed the ethnic descriptor "Punjabi" from the lede even though Ashraf is unambiguously, uncontroversially Punjabi. South Asia has a long, ugly, ongoing history of hatred and bias over differences in race, religion, class, money, politics, and more and accordingly, BLPs like this (relevant to India and Pakistan and, to a lesser extent, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh) regularly get attacked.
    Also, this anonymous editor has made several unexplained date changes, mostly to living persons' birth dates. That's not always going to be problematic but it's a red flag every single time. They've stopped since I left them a second-level warning but I doubt it'll last. City of Silver 18:14, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]