Wiktionary:Vandalism in progress

This page is intended to get administrator attention quickly when dealing with current instances of vandalism. List new alerts at the top of the list in the following manner:

* {{vandal|username or IP}} Brief reason why, preferably a link to a vandalized page. ~~~~

Don’t include the User: prefix in the template!

Please do not add cases older than two to three hours. Denied requests will have an explanation added here, and be kept for one to seven days before being removed. Thank you for helping us keep an organized Wiktionary!

Admins: Please remove performed blocks.

New alerts

A little context: this a major part of the address space for a national mobile-phone provider, covering the entire US. Apparently there's no reliable way to pin a vandal down to a specific section of the address range, so a decision was made to block everyone. IMO, a decision to block this huge of an area should only be done after full discussion and consensus in the Beer parlour.
Full disclosure: I don't use my phone to access this site, but if I did I would be included in the block.
That said, there's nothing to stop us from blocking any part of the address range without undoing Qehath's action- I have done so many times. Chuck Entz (talk) 21:53, 7 November 2021 (UTC)
@Chuck Entz: I see, I wasn't aware. I assume that's also the reason why some of the other ranges I've reported haven't been banned, right?
Reading this, I've got the impression that you wouldn't be included in the block since it's possible to block only anonymous users from such ranges, right? I guess in the end it comes down to a trade-off but as long as Wiktionary has the capacities to manually patrol every single unautopatrolled edit (do we?) leaving these ranges open doesn't cause a lot of damage. Fytcha (talk) 22:10, 7 November 2021 (UTC)
I was just pointing out that I'm in that address range, not that I would actually be unable to edit. I always edit logged in, and even if the block were extended to logged-in users, I'm IP-block exempt. Admins always have ways to get around any block- the only way to get a block to stick is to first remove the admin rights. Fortunately, it only very rarely comes to that. Chuck Entz (talk) 22:23, 7 November 2021 (UTC)
      • Reblocking locally is pointless when we could just undo the local exemption of the global block. It'll have the same effect anyway. — surjection??⟩ 09:33, 8 November 2021 (UTC)

Persistent

This IP has been removing readings of Vietnamese Han characters (mostly chữ Nôm readings) - More than 200 entries are affected. Can an admin revert all edits that are revertable? I will check and update these readings using this format, but it will take some time. KevinUp (talk) 22:40, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
I'm on it, though there don't seem to be any of these edits outside of the /20 block, and I'm only going back to February, which is when this started. Chuck Entz (talk) 01:08, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
Done, and blocked. I reverted all the edits I mentioned that weren't followed by any one else's edits, except for a few that showed no net removal of characters (slight tweaks in spelling, capitalization, etc.). It's quite telling that almost none of their edits added to or maintained character counts, but there were lots that left the entries with fewer characters- in one case, 133 characters fewer. Chuck Entz (talk) 01:44, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
Thank you for dealing with this issue. The 3 month block gives adequate time for me to look through all 206 entries that are affected. @Suzukaze-c Perhaps it is time to convert deprecated {{vi-hantu}} to {{vi-readings}} (4815 entries). The older template has limited functionality. KevinUp (talk) 17:09, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
@Chuck Entz This IP is once again removing readings from Vietnamese Han characters after the previous ban expired. KevinUp (talk) 02:20, 8 September 2019 (UTC)
And I once again reverted everything I could and blocked them. This time I went further and undid all of their edits that couldn't be rolled back but could be undone- that was most of their edits. Chuck Entz (talk) 05:17, 8 September 2019 (UTC)
@KevinUp: what about 14.162.163.208 (talkcontribswhoisdeleted contribsnukeedit filter logblockblock logactive blocksglobal blocks)? Chuck Entz (talk) 14:41, 7 November 2019 (UTC)
@Chuck Entz: Yes, same pattern of removing Vietnamese readings without explanation. I've reverted the edits made. KevinUp (talk) 16:34, 7 November 2019 (UTC)
@Chuck Entz Same activity (removal of Vietnamese readings) from these IP: KevinUp (talk) 00:05, 28 December 2019 (UTC)
123.24.173.198/16 (talkcontribsglobal account infodeleted contribsnukeedit filter logpage movesblockblock logactive blocks)
14.248.72.240/16 (talkcontribsglobal account infodeleted contribsnukeedit filter logpage movesblockblock logactive blocks)
I had already reverted most of 123.24.173.198 (talkcontribswhoisdeleted contribsnukeedit filter logblockblock logactive blocksglobal blocks). I've now reverted, undid or fixed by hand all of the other removals by both ranges, and range-blocked for 3 months. I left their capitalization edits alone. Chuck Entz (talk) 03:36, 28 December 2019 (UTC)
  • AndrzejbanasJr. (talkcontribsglobal account infodeleted contribsnukeedit filter logpage movesblockblock logactive blocks) I've really had it. I've been attacked messaged by this user across several wikis who is canvassing me to edit the horror film article. Now they have done it via Wikitionary as well as being blocked by several sock puppets on Wikipedia. I find it really upsetting that they are using my username here as well, but like, no one across several wikis seems to be able to ban him outright. I don't know what to do. I don't plan on editing my own talk page here, so if a lock could be put on it to stop new users or IPs from posting on it, I would be eternally grateful. Andrzejbanas (talk) 01:55, 3 January 2022 (UTC)
    @Andrzejbanas: I've banned them indefinitely. Do you want to have your talk page deleted? Fytcha (talk) 02:03, 3 January 2022 (UTC)
    I've had it deleted on other talk pages, but they have come back. So if you'd like, but I feel like it just makes them think they didn't get their message across, and they find a new account and post there again. :/ Andrzejbanas (talk) 02:04, 3 January 2022 (UTC)
    I deleted and protected. Sorry that this person is harassing you here and at en.wq (and possibly elsewhere!); let me know how I can help. —Justin (koavf)TCM 03:01, 3 January 2022 (UTC)
Sorry to undo the edit, byt an editor said this user does not exist on wikitionary. Did I misstype or something? or can you explain these user contributions? here? Andrzejbanas (talk) 02:02, 3 January 2022 (UTC)
@Andrzejbanas: A dot was missing in the username. I've fixed that and re-added your report. Fytcha (talk) 02:04, 3 January 2022 (UTC)
Oof. My bad. Thank you so much. :) Andrzejbanas (talk) 02:04, 3 January 2022 (UTC)
@Andrzejbanas: You're welcome :) If you change your mind on the deletion thing, you can add {{d}} to your talk page at any time. Fytcha (talk) 02:10, 3 January 2022 (UTC)
DydsixydsJr. (talkcontribsglobal account infodeleted contribsnukeedit filter logpage movesblockblock logactive blocks) --Fytcha (talk) 18:29, 4 January 2022 (UTC)