Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/Blocks & protections
From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Shortcut: COM:AN/B or COM:AN/P
| Administrators' noticeboard sections | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Vandalism post | watch To report vandalism |
Attention post | watch To request administrator attention |
User problems post | watch To report problems you are experiencing with other users |
Blocks & protections post | watch To discuss blocks and protections |
Other post | watch |
|
| Other resources: Need help? Try the FAQ!, or the Help desk! Have an idea or suggestion? Tell us at the Village pump! ! Need a check user? see the CU request page | |||||
|
||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
This page is for any user to discuss blocks and protections. Please feel free to add comments. Remember to sign and date all contributions, using "~~~~", which translates into a signature and a time stamp.
Admins: once you've dealt with a request, please make a note, so that other admins don't waste time responding to it.
Contents |
[edit] Gay pornography vandal
The User banned on Wikipedia as the "Gay pornography vandal" and who inspired this Block here on the Commons is once again vandalizing and obsessing over gays and pornography here on the Commons. Could we please have another IP range block? --DavidShankbone 03:36, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
- Maxim & I have blocked the two active IPs for a while. I am not a fan of range blocks so for now I am not prepared to place one. If it gets worse then there are plenty of competent admins here to deal with it. Can I urge folk not to feed the trolls - if we starve them then as a species they die out! --Herby talk thyme 06:47, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
<personal threat removed>
-
- I've started range blocking with these now - in my view the disruption is increasing & is time wasting. I'm using /24 ones for a day & only having checked the range for legit contributions - thanks --Herby talk thyme 12:02, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
- Still blocking /24s but if anyone is bored with this a short block (1 day max?) on 72.76.0.0/20 is probably pretty safe, cheers --Herby talk thyme 13:30, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
- I've started range blocking with these now - in my view the disruption is increasing & is time wasting. I'm using /24 ones for a day & only having checked the range for legit contributions - thanks --Herby talk thyme 12:02, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
What's going on here. What's with all the removing of comments? Rocket000 17:47, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
- The IP is trolling. Nishkid64 (talk) 18:10, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
- Yeah, I was just informed of it. Thanks. Actually, I edit-conflicted with you removing the comment. Rocket000 18:13, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
- Regrettably I think we may need to look at 72.76.0.0/16. It is a toss up - disruption v closed access. If folks have issue with/want info on range blocks please email me etc etc. This is a trolling **** who is an interruption to our work here. Offline mostly now - flak/issues/criticism to me by all means but please don't feed trolls & don't stop legit people from contributing. Thanks to all for the help --Herby talk thyme 21:41, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
- Yeah, I was just informed of it. Thanks. Actually, I edit-conflicted with you removing the comment. Rocket000 18:13, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
Ok - enough 72.76.0.0/16 now blocked for a period - will catch up in the morning! Cheers --Herby talk thyme 23:00, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Thoughts
Ok - thanks to all who helped out dealing with this. The problem with range blocks is there may be collateral damage. In practice there are virtually no legitimate edits from the range this troll is using so my natural reluctance to range block has been overcome. However they still need to be kept as tight as possible.
That preferably means /24 which blocks 256 IPs. Taking examples from above 72.76.1.0/24 will block 72.76.1.0 to 72.76.1.255. However this stalker was ranging over the whole of 72.76. so I placed a 72.76.0.0/16 block. This takes out 65K Ips! However they then moved to 72.68 as a range hence the continuing idiocy. The IP is dynamically allocated and to get a new one they need to reboot their router (which takes time) until they get an unblocked IP (hence periods of peace & quiet).
We need to weigh up the "cost" of wide range blocks against protecting admin (& other pages). I don't like protecting pages anyway but actually all that happens is they edit another page (as they did after this one was protected for the third time). It would be good to get other peoples views on this idiot intrusion on our work (I'm feeling polite at present!) - cheers --Herby talk thyme 07:31, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
- In terms of persistence, hostility and utter lunacy, this goes way beyond other cases of wikistalking that I've come across, and I think beyond what we can and should address by ourselves. Unless this individual gets themselves checked in somewhere where they'll make sure they get their medication, I can only see this escalating from here. Has anyone contacted law enforcement or at the very least Verizon? (From my experience, abuse@verizon.com redirects to /dev/null, so a more personal and direct approach would be needed.) —LX (talk, contribs) 07:46, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
This IP never creates accounts, right? (is violating WP:BEANS...). Softblock, with account creation enabled, a bigass range...give them no chance. Create a template (eg. {{ShankboneBlock}} or something like that), and use that as the block message. It should state clearly what's going on ("jerk in your neighbourhood is harassing one of our best contributors") and explain that you can create an account, but you can't edit from this range as an anon. Worth a try? giggy (:O) 08:05, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
- I'd like to point out that despite this person's claims, I don't know who they are, which is why this person is unable to give you any information about me outside of what is publicly available on the Internet to everyone. They are taking their cues from the Wikipedia Cyberstalking article, which includes false victimization and false accusations. They are your run-of-the-mill cyberstalker. In fact, they are an encyclopedic example. They have been trolling gay pornography articles for over a year, which is why they are known as the "Gay pornography vandal" on Wikipedia:List of banned users. They have attacked at least five or six editors on Wikipedia. --DavidShankbone 14:07, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
-
- I agree with a range softblock, account creation disabled. Unfortunately, this will have to do for some time. We could have a template for IP range blocks, but let's not make it specific (deny recognition). Patrícia msg 14:22, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
- Fully support. As I've outlined on my talk page, there are few to no contributions (at least anonymously) from the entire 72.76.0.0/16 range that is not from this person. I would fully support AO/ACB. I know the person used another smaller range; I cannot talk about that range in as much detail. However, I support a range block for several months, as the trolling has been persistent. Anyone can request unblock to create a new account if necessary, as the template ought to state. Patstuart (talk) 21:17, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
- I agree with a range softblock, account creation disabled. Unfortunately, this will have to do for some time. We could have a template for IP range blocks, but let's not make it specific (deny recognition). Patrícia msg 14:22, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
Just created User:Giggy/Shankbone Template as a potential block template (I think that's the idea that's getting support! :). Feel free to comment on it here or on its talk page, and feel free to edit it too. giggy (:O) 09:15, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
- Works for me & thanks. Use it on the next blocks I place would be my thoughts, cheers --Herby talk thyme 09:21, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
- Probably better to move to Template: namespace first (suggested location was {{ShankboneBlock}}). giggy (:O) 09:28, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Image:Lambeau-field.jpg
Full-protection for Image:Lambeau-field.jpg please. It is currently being transcluded on over a thousand pages on the English Wikipedia because it is part of this high-risk, fully protected template. Thank you! « Gonzo fan2007 (talk ♦ contribs) 21:46, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
- Semi protected editing, full protected moving, watchlisted. Will jack up if necessary and if blocking won't cut it (highly unlikely - we generally full protect in cases of upload wars and the like). Hope this helps. Cheers, giggy (:O) 11:43, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
- Thank you very much, that will do great! Cheers. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk ♦ contribs) 07:48, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Image:Plan.gif
Please protect per #Image:Icon.jpg above. -- RHaworth 14:02, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
Done, thank you. →Christian.И 15:19, 30 April 2008 (UTC)- I did Image:Plan.jpg, too. Walter Siegmund (talk) 15:43, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Template:Creator
I rarely ask for full protection for something (guess it's a product of being non-admin): but this page seems to have well over 10000 inclusions. The documentation is now offloaded to a /doc subdirectory. Please protect this. Patstuart (talk) 19:33, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Unprotect category "Galleria degli Uffizi"
Category:Galleria degli Uffizi needs to be unprotected. An admin protected it to keep up a dubious warning about pics taken without consent. --Rob 14:38, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
