Jump to content

Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/Mikequfv

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Mikequfv
Shortcut: WP:LTA/MIKE
Original name(s)Mikequfv
Wikilifespan2016 – present
Known IPsSee confirmed accounts section
Physical locationCanada
InstructionsSuspected socks should be tagged and reported to sockpuppet investigations for confirmation. When reporting, please link to this long-term abuse report. When the active abuse has been taken care of, please update this report with the latest information.
StatusActive

Basic information

[edit]

Mikequfv (talk · contribs · block log · arb · SPI confirmed)
Comprehensive edits analysis
First indeffed in 2016 for disruptive changing of climate infobox colors and now WP:LOUTSOCKs using IPs geolocating to Canada. Repeatedly changes weatherbox precipitation coloring from standard green to blue across numerous city articles without any regard to community input and warnings from other editors despite being reverted and blocked every single time.

Targeted areas, pages, themes

[edit]

See pages listed at [1], [2], [3]

Habitual behavior

[edit]

Around 2016, Mikequfv was indeffed for disruptive changing of weatherbox colors, such as changing the original blue snow coloring to green and changing the precipitation coloring from green to blue on some articles. This user justifies these edits as "fixing eyesores"; however, the long-standing use of green for the parameter has been used for nearly a decade, being commonly agreed that green as the parameter color creates a visual contrast between the blue cold temperatures above the row and the blue snow coloring below. The problem is that once the precipitation parameter is set to blue, than every single line between the cold temperatures and precipitation days (and sometimes humidity) becomes the same color, and creates this unsightly wall of solid blue – as seen here [4]. Since then, Mikequfv has primarily used IPs geolocating to Canada to continue these disruptive edits. Oddly enough, this user seems to be okay with this. On some other articles however, they changed the snow coloring from the original blue to green - saying things like "slight adjust" and "match" in their edit summaries. As many other editors recognize this problem, all the changes the IP made were reverted, even leading to a temporary block. However, this user evaded their block by IP-hopping on completely new IP addresses, effectively making any range block useless. Some methods this user has made to obtain new IPs have been using devices in public places (such as Greater Victoria Public Library in the case of 199.60.109.110 and 199.60.109.125) and likely mail servers (as with 64.114.18.188).

Cases

[edit]

User:CrazyBoy826/Target pages of recent IPs

Other notes

[edit]

Edit summaries include:

  • "adjusted for better looks"
  • "altered for better looks and reduce eyesore"
  • "blue rain because not enougg rain"
  • "blue precip for better look"
  • "Why all green? Some green is enough"
  • "added content"

Comments by Soap

[edit]

One thing I latched onto right away is that this person only goes to the pages of cities with interesting climates. For example, the wettest city in Alaska, the warmest city in British Columbia, and cities on the cusp of two or sometimes three different climate types. They have repeatedly made a color change on a city with no snow and almost no rain, such that their change was literally invisible, just because ... I guess .... they like that city's climate.

If they've been doing this sort of thing with "boring" climates, I (or we), haven't noticed it yet. Thanks, —Soap— 13:18, 29 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Okay I'll say it ... Since we are blocking the IP's after discovering their edits, should a registered user who makes the same edits also be blocked? Is this about the content of the edits, or the person behind them? This is a binary content dispute in which all edits are either in favor of one side or the other. There is currently no consensus at Template_talk:Weather_box#Mass_changes_of_blue/green_for_precipitation and there is no neutral third path to follow.
The IP seems to pick up both sides of the dispute according to their personal preferences, or perhaps just their whims. I understand that that, at least, sets him apart from us registered users. But the content of our edits is the same as his since even a reversion of an IP edit is the same as a restoration of a different IP edit. Thanks, —Soap— 13:55, 9 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The person behind this has absolutely violated WP:SOCK and WP:EVASION, as well as having absolutely no regard for community collaboration. Although the nature of this vandal's edits are not as serious than, say other LTAs, the clear disregard for Wikipedia policies is what creates a huge disturbance. 24.68.2.110 has received plenty of warnings since June 2018 regarding mass-changing weatherbox coloring without consensus, and has even been told by other editors that their coloring changes are not deemed an improvement and should be discussed, rather than re-added. However, even after being blocked, this guy has been IP-hopping and making the exact same sort of edits as 24 ever since, which is obviously not the appropriate course of action to take in content disputes. So in response to your questions, registered DUCKS should also be blocked for block evasion and sock puppetry, even when there is no set consensus for weatherbox coloring. Violating Wikipedia's core policies with mere WP:IDONTLIKEIT reasoning by no means should be tolerated. ɴᴋᴏɴ21 ❯❯❯ talk 09:31, 10 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Okay thanks. I am uncomfortable using the term abuse for someone whose edits are, to a layman, indistinguishable from those of the people who revert him. So long as we are blocking for sockpuppetry only, rather than the content of one's edits, I have no reason to oppose this project, but I think the problem is minor and the IP editor will soon find the required legwork to be too tiresome to keep up. I stand by my earlier claim that this person had been editing logged-in for months even while they were messing with the colors on their IP, but the account I named will likely never edit again, so I will let that issue go as well. —Soap— 21:28, 10 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Update

I think we wore him out. The original filer of this case removed it from the active cases list, so is this really still pending approval or should we just let it go? —Soap— 23:03, 19 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Seems he's still at it and we may have simply tired of listing the new ones. I still think this is a trivial matter so long as he only goes to the pages that have the most interesting climates. —Soap— 06:07, 2 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
They appear to have moved and are now at the University of Western Ontario, see my comments at WT:LONGTERM. (I forgot there was a dedicated page for them) Beeblebrox (talk) 21:47, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed and suspected IP addresses

[edit]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Long-term_abuse/Mikequfv&oldid=1241214403"