Wookieepedia:Vandalism in progress

This is Star Wars Wiki's page for reporting acts of vandalism in progress.

The purpose of this page is to provide a reporting function for Wookieepedians who notice acts of ongoing or repeated vandalism.

For those familiar with Wikipedia, this page and the corresponding talk page will serve as a simplified combination of the VIP and AIV pages.

Please add vandal reports under the appropriate heading, "Current IP alerts" or "Current RU alerts," in the following format:

Current Date

Followed by a description of the act(s) of vandalism, and your signature (by typing ~ ).
 * Subsequent details should be added under the initial report in this form.

Always preview the page before submitting your report to avoid problems with formatting.

This page is subject to changes in content and format as our userbase grows and our reporting process evolves.

IP addresses
Please report vandals who are operating under anonymous IP addresses. Newer reports should be placed at the top of the section.

Current IP alerts
December 1, 20005

, has contributed nothing but nonsense really, insists on recreating the Bastard Castle article. Might not be actual vandalism, but quite annoying. Also is a somewhat controversial Wikipedian - User:Shultz - who has been blocked at least once from there. Needs to be watched. --Azizlight 16:04, 30 Nov 2005 (UTC)

November 29, 20005

I've noticed a number of edits in the same pattern made by what I assume is the same anonymous - 86.128.89.11, 86.128.151.166 and 86.128.153.190. A Whois search shows that these are all BT Internet IPs, and I suspect, since BT operates dynamic IPs, all the same user.

All these edits have been made in defence of Star Wars Technical Commentaries material, primarily, I think, in counter to places where I've made previous edits. The difficulty is that I'm not exactly without an opinion here (and to make matters worse, two of the three tranches of edits are on a page that's currently suspended pending a Wookiee war involving me) but I thought I should bring it up to get other people's POVs. I'm happy to explain where I think the source is unambiguously wrong in all these cases - and happier still if people can clean the bias out of what I write!!

If this is a troll, banning the 86.128.x range might exclude other legitimate users, though (BT is one of the UK's biggest ISPs). *frowns* But if the admins can pull a search on that range, it may turn up other interventions.... --McEwok 00:08, 30 Nov 2005 (UTC)
 * That isn't really vandalism. More of an edit war involving anons. QuentinGeorge 05:25, 30 Nov 2005 (UTC)
 * Your judgement's better than mine, QG. Thanks for looking into it. --McEwok 02:31, 1 Dec 2005 (UTC)

November 27, 2005

, minor vandalism, added obscenities to the Anakin Skywalker and Obi-Wan Kenobi pages. I fixed the Anakin Skywalker page, but the Kenobi article still needs a revert.--Knightfall 21:50, 27 Nov 2005 (UTC)

, deleted content and added obscenities to the Ailyn Vel article and talk page. --Azizlight 04:39, 27 Nov 2005 (UTC)

November 25, 2005

, minor vandalism, plus seems to be gone, but still. &mdash; Silly Dan 21:14, 25 Nov 2005 (UTC)

November 24, 2005

,, , , posted Ninjara and related (fanon), and keept deleting VFDs and adding more "info". --Thinortolan 14:42, 24 Nov 2005 (UTC)

blanked a paragraph in Jedi Exile without explanation. I reverted and asked him not to do so in the future, but he blanked it again (reverted by Starkeiller). - Sikon [ Talk ] 14:14, 24 Nov 2005 (UTC)
 * This paragraph has once again been removed, this time by . - Sikon [ Talk ] 16:15, 28 Nov 2005 (UTC)

November 19, 2005

This guy came back as soon as the IP block expired and once again overwrote fanon with his fanon about the repeatedly-deleted "Legacy class star destroyer." Need a re-ban ASAP.

November 17, 2005

Making bogus articles. Kuralyov 02:58, 18 Nov 2005 (UTC)

November 16, 2005

Vandalised the Category:Comics section, the Military stub page, and added a bunch of dubious edits to pages about the GAR. Kuralyov 00:59, 17 Nov 2005 (UTC)

Additional garbage from one of yesterday's vandals: Ewok, Grand Ewok Civil War. &mdash;Darth Culator  (talk)  22:44, 16 Nov 2005 (UTC)

November 15, 2005

Vandalism: sistros, faya. (Bell Sympatico DSL user, Hamilton Ontario.) &mdash;Darth Culator   (talk)  04:12, 16 Nov 2005 (UTC)

Fanon, vandalism (Adelphia cable user, Bainbridge Ohio) &mdash;Darth Culator   (talk)  23:17, 15 Nov 2005 (UTC)

November 10, 2005

is back again and up to his old tricks. Please consider banning this guy. jSarek 10:55, 10 Nov 2005 (UTC)

November 8, 2005

vandalized Mando'a. I reverted it.

Makes nonsense edits.

Steath vandalized numerous planet articles, created fanon planets and systems such as Blimph system, Gork and Zog.
 * Seconded. He's posting nonsense, but I don't have enough original source material to conclusively disprove his more obscure edits. &mdash;Darth Culator   (talk)  03:47, 9 Nov 2005 (UTC)

Registered Users
Please report vandals who are operating under registered usernames. Newer reports should be placed at the top of the section.

Current RU alerts
November 26, 2005


 * Maybe it's vandalism, maybe it isn't, but this user has returned to add species to legitimate articles, apparently at random. &mdash; Silly Dan  15:24, 27 Nov 2005 (UTC)

November 26, 2005


 * Here we go again! &mdash; Silly Dan  01:48, 27 Nov 2005 (UTC)

November 24, 2005


 * I strongly suspect this is 68.1.163.241 with a RU and possibly a proxy. The MO is exactly the same. StarNeptune 06:32, 24 Nov 2005 (UTC)
 * Seconded. Some of Hatheway's edits are reasonable, but too many of his or her contributions consist of unsourced substubs, adding random creatures to legitimate articles, and other things which imply either total confusion or deliberate vandalism.  Check the history of Corellia for examples.  &mdash; Silly Dan  01:14, 25 Nov 2005 (UTC)
 * This user is either a child who don't understand that this site is not made to random play with, or a twisted vandal who understand that aggresive vandalism is blocked fast and try to confuse mixing a few legitime edits with a bunch of less noticeable chaos. By the Living Force, ban this monster ASAP. --Thinortolan 14:00, 29 Nov 2005 (UTC)

November 21, 2005

User:McEwok has been deleting canonical information about Imperial ship-classifications (which were provided with multiple sources) three times from the Ship Classification article. VT-16 22:00, 21 Nov 2005 (UTC)
 * I beg to differ. VT-16 is adding extra classifications to the standard ship-designation system on Ship Classification; these designations may be canonical in themselves, but they cannot be added to that system, which is complete in itself as defined in canon sources. I am merely doing my best to retain the accuracy of the information on the page by removing them. In spite of my repeatedly attempting to explain the difference between a single canonical designation and a specific canonical system of designations on Talk:Ship_Classification and User_talk:McEwok, he repeats his rewriting of the article. I know I'm not the best person to be trying to maintain sanity here, but I am doing my best to represent the canonical material accurately. He is the one vandalizing the page. That said, I am well aware that my attitude on this topic is impassioned and perhaps rather stern. I would appreciate the guidance and advice of more level-headed people in improving the page. --McEwok 22:19, 21 Nov 2005 (UTC)
 * It is not a complete system, as it does not contain the canonical Imperial terms added in recent publications, as well as from older sources (though erronous they may be on other matters). Whether or not the 'Star' part of the article is kept, I do not care, as this is a different matter and according to the wording, a different "problem". Removal of canonical Imperial terms from the 'Imperial classification' section constitutes vandalism. Its as simple as that. McEwok's personal dislike of certain sources not-withstanding. Let me once again iterate, these are additions made to the system, not changes. And even if they did constitute changes, they would be from canonical sources. Which I know McEwok appreciates more than anything else on this site. VT-16 06:24, 22 Nov 2005 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure this dispute constitutes vandalism. The dispute should be resolved on the page's discussion page. If the reverts keep happening, I'll lock the page until such a consensus is reached. Keep in mind that all canonical information can be included in an article, and newer sources generally override the old if there is a conflict. - QuentinGeorge 06:47, 22 Nov 2005 (UTC)
 * If you look at the history-section, you'll see that I didn't change the list, I added to it from multiple sources, both new and old. It's not my fault another contributor hasn't read these or liked them. That is supposed to be irrelevant, isn't it? I also noted his removal of subjective points I made in the article to supplement or counter his. Classy. VT-16 09:40, 22 Nov 2005 (UTC)
 * Regardless of who's at fault, I strongly suggest this be moved to a relevant talk page so as not to continue cluttering this page, which should be kept as sparse as possible so admins can find vandalism quickly. jSarek 10:43, 22 Nov 2005 (UTC)
 * Okay. Moving this back to Talk:Ship_classification. I'll rebut the claims made above by VT-16 over there, under Continued from "Vandalism in Progress" --McEwok 14:00, 22 Nov 2005 (UTC)

November 16, 2005

User:DreadLock has been vandalising the main page and several others in the last few minutes. Adamwankenobi 15:20, 16 Nov 2005 (UTC)

November 11, 2005

Has been warned twice against posting nonsense on his talk page. Still posting nonsense. &mdash;Darth Culator  (talk)  04:13, 12 Nov 2005 (UTC)

November 5, 2005

SuperShadoh was blocked by QuentinGeorge. IPs in case an admin wants to make a range block (please understand range blocks before you do): 67.140.152.0, 67.140.149.188, 71.28.229.99, 71.28.230.0. Angela (talk) 00:47, 6 Nov 2005 (UTC)
 * If I'm reading the range blocking page on Meta right, and if the Whois info is accurate, you'd want to block 67.140.144.0/20 and 71.28.224.0/21, taking out this Alltel DSL POP in Elizabethtown, KY. &mdash;Darth Culator   (talk)  04:09, 6 Nov 2005 (UTC)